The Mad Navigator
Banned
Ugh... I was looking elsewhere for it, thanks.
doady
Senior Member
The "Elizabeth" station is on Lakeshore (where else could it be?).
I think stations should be added at Sherobee, Paisley, Fairview, Central Parkway, and Kingsbridge. The North Service, Queensway, and Central Parkway stations should be removed.
I like how the keep a straight alignment, but I also don't like idea of splitting the line at MCC. But it makes sense if there is a Dundas LRT as well, and/or an extension of Eglinton LRT (asuming the track gauge is the same). I think it is safe to say the idea of subway extension into Mississauga can be finally put to rest.
I like how they planing to transform the street so much. Lane reductions, on-street parking, cycling trails... overall more than I expected.
Dan416
Senior Member
Not accoding to the report. It specifically states that the line was extended southward to Port Street. So that makes the terminus at Port & Elizabeth. The question I'm asking if there's still a station at Lakeshore/Hurontario (the original terminus) because the graphic does not show it though it may be implied:
doady
Senior Member
Oh I see. It says "additional station" at Port Street, which I take to mean that the Lakeshore station has not been removed.
torontofcfan
New Member
fyi..newsletter #3 has been posted on the site.
http://hurontario-main.ca/
I just wonder how difficult obtaining funding for the project will be? Seeing as it is part of the intial 15 year plan, I could see it taking that long to start the project.
http://hurontario-main.ca/
I just wonder how difficult obtaining funding for the project will be? Seeing as it is part of the intial 15 year plan, I could see it taking that long to start the project.
Fresh Start
Banned
What you mean to say is that you'd like to have the stops shifted to the north. I'd take out the Rathburn/Hurontario stop now since the LRT/BRT is guaranteed to directly serve CCTT so two stops @Rathbrun is not necessary. That way a Kingsbridge station becomes more feasible. If the Port Credit section of the line was in a tunnel that'd be awesome, taking the light-rail tram from downtown Mississauga to the marina with no delays. Most feasible way of crossing the Lakeshore subdivision is to do it below-grade after all.
It may be that the MCC loop will only short-turn some of the trips, otherwise they wouldn't have stated that Downtown Brampton to Port Credit is a 42 minute trek. That implies it is a transfer-free commute end to end.
Yes, with this we do not need a subway to go any further west than Sherway Gardens. Dundas also does not need a LRT if that means splitting the service at Hurontario. I like the Dundas corridor how it is now with several local/express services catering to different customer niches. If I'm going to Cooksville do I really need to sit through stop after stop after stop per the Dundas local bus or do I ride the 201? What if I'm going to UTM? Or South Commons? Or Uptown Oakville, will the LRT realistically even stretch that far over? With that many route complexities it'd be hard to sell a Dundas West LRT and to that end (if not just for costing reasons alone) it is better to beef up the Dundas corridor bus services. There's space for dedicated curbside bus lanes that may or not run into much conflict with left-turners and private property entranceways (from looking at Google Earth there's quite a few ways to get around those issues). The biggest obstacle I see the Dundas service having is what happens once it enters Etobicoke. Getting from the 427 to Kipling Stn is an absolute nightmare. The solution lies in creating a road or grade separated bus-only pathway to direct MT buses to the nearest subway. This leaves Sherway Gardens as the best option for all highway-bound MT routes (11, 70, 76, 82, 89, 109, etc.) because the terminal can be built right off the highway and per access ramps. Dundas buses too can be rerouted to this hub as to avoid the gridlock through Six-Points.
The 403 Transitway also does away with the need for a Eglinton LRT as any north-to-south route that crosses Eglinton will also intercept this busway line, to travel unmitigated across Mississauga. It'd be better if the notion of cross-border transferring was done away with and have the BRT extend east along Eglinton to about Martin Grove, where I'm certain Eglinton Crosstown if built as metro could reasonably extend to.
Last edited:
Dan416
Senior Member
Grade-separating the part of Hurontario LRT in Port Credit? Have you lost all sense of reality or are you just joking? If I were to grade-separate any part of the line, it'd be near Square One. But even that I think is excessive. The Hurontario LRT is going to be long and expensive even without grade-separation, and will already provide such an improvement to the service that's there. Anyway, I really don't think grade-separation is cost-effective on this route, like, at all.
I really don't understand your obsession with redirecting routes to a further station when you'd have a closer one being built as part of the extension to Sherway. East Mall is just as convenient to access by highway as Sherway, they're both right next to the 427 with one exception: East Mall is closer to virtually all MT routes except the Sherway bus. Why would MT want to route its' buses to a further station and waste fuel to get there? Logically, routes should serve whatever station is closest so people get to their destinations faster and it's cheaper and just makes more sense.
Fresh Start
Banned
Alright, since you might actually know more than I do about the Main-Hurontario LRT, are they planning to link the LRT line directly to the existing main entrance/bus terminal at Port Credit GO Stn or are they going to keep it strictly on Hurontario then turn it west on Lakeshore? If it's the former, to link it up with Helen St, they'd have to route it below-grade at least through to Lakeshore Road cause there's no space for it at the surface.
It really is not that much further for every existing bus route that has to utilize the Highway 427 corridor as part of its routing, all of 90 seconds to navigate the entire 2 kilometre distance from Dundas to Queensway. The type bus-to-subway connection that I'm talking about could not be implemented, like, at all @East Mall Stn because of the scarce land availability at that location. And if the subway alignment is following the Milton subdivision, the station will also be 400 metres inwards from Dundas proper surrounded by industrial sprawl. If you think that the walk from Kipling Stn out to the main road is a jog now, imagine the 10 minute walks for pedestrians to get in and out of that location. And only a few bus bays could be fitted in, so the majority of MT routes would still have to use Kipling (or Sherway Gdns), even the Dundas routes.
Rather than @the East Mall the next logical stop after Kipling should be juxtaposed midway between East Mall Cres and Shorncliffe (opposite Paulart Dr behind Honeydale Mall). Another stop would not be needed until Sherway which, rather than at the West Mall, could be built proximal to North Queen/Queensway, right beside the highway. That NE corner of Sherway barely sees any of its parking spaces used so it could be acquired to build on that property a big honking bus terminal similar to Wilson, Finch, or Downsview Stns where all the regional buses could converge (GO, MT, BT, OT even YRT).
Dan416
Senior Member
The LRT will not enter Port Credit GO. It is not going on Lakeshore either. The route will stay on Hurontario until it turns onto Port Street and terminates at Elizabeth. It will operate in mixed traffic in Port Credit. You need only read the reports on the Hurontario/Main website to find this information. I see no point even calling for grade separation when parts of the route will be operating in mixed traffic.
You're right. If you're in your car and driving, 2 km is not far. But if you have buses doing it 100 times a day, that's 200 km more you're putting on those buses. Plus the fuel. And multiply that by like 300 days in a week. So that's a lot of (needless) wear and tear when you have a subway stop much closer and more convenient.
Talking about exact alignment is premature on this route. And there will never be a large regional bus terminal at Sherway. Logically, it makes no sense for all the reasons I've mentioned ad nauseam. As far "west" as Sherway might be, it's just too far south to serve Mississauga. End of story.
doady
Senior Member
The distance from Dundas/West Mall to Sherway is the same as the distance from Dundas/West Mall to Kipling, approximately 2 km. Actually Kipling might actually be closer. So not really sure of the benefit of Sherway especially considering that Kipling is further down the line. Rerouting all the buses to Sherway would result in the similar bus trip times compared to Kipling, but the subway trip times would be increased because Sherway is further up the line. And of course routing the buses to Sherway would add at least 5 minutes to all bus trips compared to East Mall (only 0.75 km from Dundas/West Mall) and at the same time add another 5 or so minutes to the subway trip as well. So a Sherway terminal would then add over 10 minutes to the trips of MT riders compared to East Mall. If you look at the way the roads are configured, the buses would have pass by East Mall station anyways to get to Sherway, a station further up the line. The buses would essentially be sending riders backwards. What is the point of that? Again, Sherway would just add 10 minutes to everyone's trips. And plus, East Mall is within an Urban Growth Centre, but Sherway is not. So it is clear which station is the optimum location for a terminal.
As for grade-separation for the LRT, I don't see it being need much on Hurontario. Downtown Brampton and the 403 crossing are probably all that will need grade separation or underground. Of course certain people will criticize any road that is wider than 4 lanes and at the same time promote on street LRT and bash subway, but the fact is it is okay for a street like Hurontario to be more than 4 lanes wide, and it doesn't need subway either.
As for grade-separation for the LRT, I don't see it being need much on Hurontario. Downtown Brampton and the 403 crossing are probably all that will need grade separation or underground. Of course certain people will criticize any road that is wider than 4 lanes and at the same time promote on street LRT and bash subway, but the fact is it is okay for a street like Hurontario to be more than 4 lanes wide, and it doesn't need subway either.
doady
Senior Member
Rathburn station is necessary for the non-CCTT LRT route to connect with the BRT routes at the proposed BRT station plus some regular routes.
Kingbridge station will never be feasible since it doesn't connect with Square One, GO BRT, MT BRT (107, 109, 110), not to mention the regular MT bus routes at Square One. If 7 and 34 terminate at Kingsbridge, then they might as well be cancelled as they do not provide any advantage over the 35 and 89, which not need a terminal anywasy since they pass through, which would make the Kingsbridge terminal completely useless. The 35 and 89 already have higher frequencies than the 7 and 34, so it is not a big deal.
drum118
Superstar
I agree with the cancelling of the 34 as I have already call for it to be replace by the 9 running from Creditview to Hurontario south of Eglinton.
As for the 7 it come a toss up depending how it operates north of Eglinton to Westwood Mall.
107 does one thing while 7 does another thing. Only after 107 has been in service for a year you can say canceling #7 is a good idea after the LRT is built.
Forget about a transit hub at Sherway as it a waste of resources but most of all riders time. Cloverdale would be the location.
Kingbridge station see more riders today than most stops on Hurontario let alone 15 years from now.
Sherway was never a good idea from day one.
Last edited:
Dan416
Senior Member
Can you see why I always get drum118 and doady confused? lol. they both say Sherway is not a good place for MT routes. They convinced me a long time ago that Sherway ultimately provides no benefit to MT routes (unless the subway goes further west). Nobody knows MT like drum and doady. Not even me! So can we finally put to rest the idea of Sherway being some kind of regional transit terminal, Fresh Start?
Fresh Start
Banned
I didn't have the time to read through the reports, that's why I asked for specifics. Now that I know how they're building it I agree that grade-separation is not needed, so we can chalk up my earlier post to not knowing all the details. Sense of reality intact… is yours?
If you don’t really know anything about bus transit and is just an armchair aficionado, it’d be wise to stop professing that you do. Otherwise you just come across as ignorant. Dedicated busways can help with speed and make buses more time-competitive. A busway system that economizes by not bypassing the bottlenecks is a waste of time. More fuel is consumed daily by having the buses stuck standing in a queue as they wait to try to enter or exit the highway (or get to the other side of it, in Dundas' case) or the 6-7 traffic lights in-between the highway and Kipling. Spending a lot of time standing around at bus stops and traffic lights will eat up more fuel than having buses run non-stop and unmitigated between Dundas St and the subway. A bus system with halfway reasonable ridership saves gas, by returning an acceptable (if not spectacular) passenger-mpg number, and by shortening trip distance.
In my experience, buses are most heavily utilized when commuters are convinced that riding it will save them time and money. You also have to figure that, practically speaking, the bus systems in most cities are in place and are not going to vanish. Thus, their fuel consumption is largely fixed even if ridership goes up — subject to minor increases for carrying extra weight, making a few more stops, and possibly adding a few extra peak-hour trips. Each additional commuter who’s convinced to switch is therefore not bumping up consumption by a gallon for gas for each 25 kilometres he rides. Rather, he is enjoying the benefit of gas that’s already going to be burned anyway, and pushing up the passenger-mpg numbers by his presence. And if more people use the service, the routes become more profitable, meaning that MT can afford to invest in more energy-efficient vehicles such as hybrid electric-diesel or CNG with better fuel economy.
Like Doady said, North Queen/Queensway to Dundas/427 is the same distance as Kipling Stn to Dundas/427, except that the former would not involve ever exiting the highway ROW for those routes today that start from Burnhamthrope northwards. It wouldn't even involve deceleration crossing from north of Dundas to south of Dundas. Rather with a road-median dedicated guideway for all bus transit down the 427, average travel speeds would actually increase getting passengers to the subway in no time (and a less than 3 minute trip on the subway to make it back to Kipling). Can we say that the trip from Kipling to the highway on-street via bus takes a mere 3 minutes? Can we say that a walk-in transfer from the main road down to the Milton subdivision around the East Mall would take 3 minutes?
I still have yet to hear a concrete, valid reason from you why rerouting several routes to Sherway (but not all) is a bad idea. But no worries, Doady's here now so you don’t have to strain any longer to try to come up with a rebuttal. This "too far south" line of thinking of yours makes no sense from a regional perspective. If your only aim is to connect people to the subway, then fine, but there are other advantages to the Sherway location as well; above all else the potential for BRT service along the Gardiner east into the downtown core. You simply want to dump everyone onto the subway then wonder why overcrowding is such a prevalent, chronic problem for the TTC. I want to diversify consumers’ options.
With mindsets like yours around that cannot think long-term sustainability yet are calling the shots, then of course Toronto/GTA will never see any better. We need land. Sherway has land. We need a major destination to anchor the end of the line at. Check! We need somewhere immediately off the 427 (not to mention the QEW) that is easy for buses from multiple areas to gain easy access to/from. Check, again! Wherever East Mall Stn winds up is inconsequential because it will not be accessible to buses without having to file down collector lanes then travel east along Dundas through mixed traffic. That alone could take several minutes. It will not be right up against the highway and if it were it’d be of zero practical use to pedestrians from the surrounding neighbourhood. The location I suggested is easy walking distance for most people in that area. End of story. Given the limited space customers may also be forced to get off the bus from Dundas and do a walk-in transfer arrangement in order to access the station/subway.
drum118
Superstar
It even bad for TTC to run buses to Sherway vs Kipling.
Cloverdale has always been a Gateway hub and that is where it should be period.
Cost for Building BRT vs LRT is about $400 million cheaper based on a 22km route less Sq One.
Lets look at somethings as the front end cost does not tell the full story.
If you carry 3,000 riders from one point, you need 40 artic buses plus 6 spares using a peak load of 75/bus. You need 3.5 drivers a day or a crew of 140 plus a supervisors. Headway would be 90 seconds.
With LRT, you need 24 LRV's carry 125 peak load riders requiring 24 plus 5 spares. You need a crew of 84 plus a supervisors. Headway is 2.5 minutes.
This tells us we are saving the cost of 56 drivers right off the bat.
If we add a 2nd car and go to 5 minute headway, we are saving 98 drivers.
Just on straight wages alone:
BRT cost $65,000 X 141 = $9,165,000 x 12 years = $109,980,000
LRT cost $65,000 X 43 = $2,795,000 x 12 years = $ 33,540,000
Total labour saving $ 76,440,000
Now there are all other cost that have to be taken into consideration on the operation side, but LRT will end up been cheaper to operate.
On the capital side.
46 bus x 10 years life cycle x $1m/bus x 3 cycle = $138m
29 LRV x 30 years life cycle x $4.5m/LRV x 1 = $140.5M plus $7m for midlife = $147.5
Total cost different $9.5m in favour of BRT Still leaving a $66.94m in saving.
For every $1 invested in transit, BRT will return $4 while LRT will return $10 in development.
The distance from the Port St to CN tracks is 20.65km bypassing Sq One and staying 100% on Hurontario.
At $30m/km for BRT, we are looking at $630m less vehicles and garage.
At $40m/km for LRT, we are looking at $840m less vehicles and garage.
Since it will take 2hrs to do a round trip how many buses and LRV's are we going to need? We know we need 40 buses at peak location every 90 seconds, therefore we need 82 buses or 50 LRV every 5 minutes.
Therefore we need 95 buses at a cost of $95m plus another $25m for the Garage for a total of $120m. For LRV's, we need 57 cars at a cost of $256.5m plus another $50m for the carhouse for a total of $306.5m.
This brings the BRT vs LRT up to $750m vs $1,146.5m.
Now to recover the full cost of building this RTP, the BRT must generate $1.8B in new development along it route while LRT must generate $1.15B.
At the end of the day LRT will recovery its cost faster while having the capacity to carry more at no extra cost.