[Asterix]

Tell ya what. when the Spadina extension is completed why don't you make everyone got off at Downsview, leave the station and then tell them to wait 2 or 3 minutes so they can go back into the station and take the same train up to YorkU? Seems ridiculous but that is EXACTLY the same thing. If the ridership is much lower they can always have half the trains short turn at Kennedy.

Tell ya what. Take a University train northbound in the morning rush. With every other train they make everyone get off at St Clair West and then tell them to wait 3 or 4 minutes so they can take another train up to Downsview. Seems ridiculous! Maybe it's because the ridership is much lower they can always have half the trains short turn at St Clair W.

Let's take a stroll using TC from STC to YorkU shall we?

You and how many people?

Once you've completed your train trip up to Downsview in the morning rush (having to get off and wait for another train at St Clair W), have a look at the operation of the 196 Rocket.
http://www3.ttc.ca/Schedule/schedule.jsp?Route=196N&Stop=DOWNSVIEW_STATION

Only one out of every three buses makes the run to Yonge and Sheppard. If you are standing at Downsview, you'll notice that even on those buses, there are only a handful of people coming from Yonge. The vast majority of people taking express buses to Downsview are doing so from the University line.

So even all those people going to York from anywhere near Sheppard, including all the way out to Don Mills, can only add a couple hundred passengers per hour on subway and express bus service. Yet you seem to think that beyond Don Mills to STC there are a few thousand per hour who want to head to York?

This reminds me of Doug Ford who last week claimed that in only two months on the job he had found more gravy than Thanksgiving. Yet instead of actually identifying said gravy, he wants to bring in outside consultants in 2011 to find it again. If you are going to claim there is demand to go from STC to York that justifies a subway, why not provide it instead of continuing to repeat your demand to build said subway?

If someone wants to debate great but don't just say someone is rambling when they bring up valid points whether you agree with them or not.

But that's the thing. They aren't valid points as has been explained in several posts in this thread. Continuing to repeat disproven claims or faulty logic doesn't somehow make them valid points.

 

[Electrify]

Note that your 48 km/h forecast for in-median LRT exceeds the actual speed of Sheppard subway (about 35 km/h; note that it is a fully grade-separate line with a 1500 m average stop spacing), and even the speed of Vancouver's SkyTrain (45 km/h). Frankly, such forecast is hard to believe.

In the graph presented in your link, the majority of analyzed bus routes run no faster than 22 mph even if they have only 1 or 2 stops per mile. Regarding several routes that run much faster, do they operate on highways?

I am all for rapid transit, but let's make realistic predictions.

I calculated about 40km/h average, since if you look at the route on Google Maps it includes some walking to make the trip 10 minutes rather than 8 minutes. Still, I did reduce the average speed to 38km/h since ROW doesn't equal highway speeds.

 

[lafard]

Today the trip from STC to York is scheduled to take 66 minutes if you take the BD across, and somewhere between 55-65 minutes if you go the northern route. Obviously each transfer adds significant variations, and I think most people would tend to take the southern route to avoid the variations inherrent in the bus. The YorkU extension means that on today's system that trip will take an hour.

With Transit city, it will take
9mins - SRT to Kennedy
~30 mins to Eglinton West (calculating buried and surface sections separately)
15-20 mins on YUS to YorkU.

Total time, 55 minutes, plus transfers. This is competive with the hypothetical "best case" on the existing northern route and faster than the BD.

But then again, let's ask if Sheppard ran directly STC to Downsview.
It would take probably 25 minutes to get to Downsview, plus 5-10 mins further on the US line. 35 minutes!

Is it worth spending six billion dollars to save a relatively unimportant travel pattern only 20 minutes? Even if you live on the path of the new subway - say you live at Bathurst and Sheppard, the time savings are a few minutes over the bus, which almost entirely disappears if you live away from the intersection. If you live midway between Bathurst and Downsview, in one of those many new buildings they're putting up along there, the subway makes your commute longer.

 

[Electrify]

Today the trip from STC to York is scheduled to take 66 minutes if you take the BD across, and somewhere between 55-65 minutes if you go the northern route. Obviously each transfer adds significant variations, and I think most people would tend to take the southern route to avoid the variations inherrent in the bus. The YorkU extension means that on today's system that trip will take an hour.

With Transit city, it will take
9mins - SRT to Kennedy
~30 mins to Eglinton West (calculating buried and surface sections separately)
15-20 mins on YUS to YorkU.

Total time, 55 minutes, plus transfers. This is competive with the hypothetical "best case" on the existing northern route and faster than the BD.

But then again, let's ask if Sheppard ran directly STC to Downsview.
It would take probably 25 minutes to get to Downsview, plus 5-10 mins further on the US line. 35 minutes!

Is it worth spending six billion dollars to save a relatively unimportant travel pattern only 20 minutes? Even if you live on the path of the new subway - say you live at Bathurst and Sheppard, the time savings are a few minutes over the bus, which almost entirely disappears if you live away from the intersection. If you live midway between Bathurst and Downsview, in one of those many new buildings they're putting up along there, the subway makes your commute longer.

Uhh... where did you get your times from? The TTC's trip planner says 89 minutes via SRT, and 81 minutes via the 196. 30-35 minutes by GO bus.

 

[lafard]

Trip planner? I might have gotten lucky and done the query at a time when the connections meshed perfectly, because when they don't ...
38 mins Kennedy to St George + 20 mins to Downsview (from travel time chart) + 15 minutes on the bus = 73.

 

[M II A II R II K]

If the stations are too far apart on a new line then just run parallel bus service that would at least have mostly empty busses to make the rides seem less crowded for those just using the busses.

As for the Transit City concept, transit that serves people locally and at the same time is actually rapid works in cases like the BD line where there's enough density and many intersecting bus routes to feed into it, and not to forget off the road. TC should be mostly off the road underground and in parallel ditches and stuff. And with parallel bus service if need be.

As for whether new lines are worth the money I guess they should serve additional uses like relieving other existing services too, such as the Spadina extension which not only increases the service areas but relieves the Yonge line somewhat at the same time.

 

[GraphicMatt]

Overlapping bus service is literally the last thing the TTC wants to do here. I don't think people fathom how tight the TTC operating budget is.

 

[Electrify]

Overlapping bus service is literally the last thing the TTC wants to do here. I don't think people fathom how tight the TTC operating budget is.

TTC already operates lots of overlapping express service:

Yonge St: express subway service overlapping with local bus service
Finch Ave E: Finch Rocket service overlapping with local bus service
Sheppard Ave E: Scarborough Centre Rocket and express subway overlapping with local bus service
Dufferin St N and Sheppard Ave W: York University Rocket express overlapping with local bus services
Various express branches overlap overlapping with local bus services (Steeles W/E, Jane, Kipling, etc.)
Various premium downtown express bus routes overlapping with local bus services

Just to name a few...

Besides, what do some of you guys have against faster transit service? In a city which covers as much area as Toronto proper, let alone the GTA, a "one size fits all" transit solution does not make sense. Some people may need only to travel a few blocks, while others may need to travel across the city. If you don't provide multiple transit options then those whose needs are not met will find alternatives. The difference is that those with local needs are more likely to walk or cycle, while those with longer distances are more likely to drive.

 

[Dan416]

I don't know what some people have against fast service. Don't you want people to get out of their cars? If the stops are as close together as bus stops, then what's the point of putting it on rails if it's not even saving any time? Why spend a billion dollars for negligible improvement in travel times that won't even get people out of their cars?

It doesn't have to be subway-stop spacing, but even 1 km apart I don't think is too far when you know when you get there, you won't have to wait long for a train.

I think one stop per major arterial is more than enough for LRT. Fewer stops means you can make them actual stations, heated and people will be willing to take transit in the winter.

 

[GraphicMatt]

I don't really care if people get out of their cars, honestly. Some people will and some people won't. Ridership has been growing for almost a decade now - the TTC's priorities are to increase capacity on congested routes, while improving reliability and customer service. The City's priority (as far as transit goes) is to use transit a motivator toward redevelopment in certain areas of the city, bringing in new residents and businesses and growing the tax base.

From a fiscal perspective, one of the major pros to the Transit City plan is that it provides vastly increased capacity, reliability and (yes) speed to existing bus routes without adding significantly to overall operating costs. The importance of this can't be overstated.

 

[Electrify]

I don't really care if people get out of their cars, honestly.

What about keeping them on transit after they buy a car or if they already have one?

The City's priority (as far as transit goes) is to use transit a motivator toward redevelopment in certain areas of the city, bringing in new residents and businesses and growing the tax base.

What about using transit to... you know... transport people around the city?

From a fiscal perspective, one of the major pros to the Transit City plan is that it provides vastly increased capacity, reliability and (yes) speed to existing bus routes without adding significantly to overall operating costs. The importance of this can't be overstated.

I'm not saying it won't. I am saying that 1. Is it going to improve capacity and reliability enough to make it a good value compared to articulated buses or BRT for the cost and 2. Is it going to improve performance enough compared to rapid-LRT or subways to make it worth the investment?

 

[SlickFranky]

I'm not saying it won't. I am saying that 1. Is it going to improve capacity and reliability enough to make it a good value compared to articulated buses or BRT for the cost and 2. Is it going to improve performance enough compared to rapid-LRT or subways to make it worth the investment?

So, you're asking if it's both too much, and/or not enough??? Why can't the porridge be just right? Or at the very least close enough? Is it so bad it has to sent back to the chef? You'd rather sit there waiting for your perfect porridge, stomach growling, while people at the tables around you come and go?....And all this is done knowing that the chef hates porridge, and doesn't have a clue about how to make it.

 

[Justin10000]

^Good analogy.

To go a little further with it, I say "to hell" with those who will never be satisfied, and focus on those who understand the porridge that is just right still tastes good.

 

[GraphicMatt]

What about keeping them on transit after they buy a car or if they already have one?

TTC ridership is continually growing, even in the face of fare increases and bad press regarding customer service. I believe that the biggest things limiting people from taking transit now are capacity concerns and reliability.

The person who current commutes by car and has no interest in taking transit isn't really someone we need to spend a lot of effort capturing. We're lucky enough not to be in the same position of many US cities where they need incentive programs to encourage transit use.

What about using transit to... you know... transport people around the city?

Sure, but there's always a bottom line to these things. Ultimately you have to get to the economic impact transit has, which comes in the form of businesses and homes along the routes.

I'm not saying it won't. I am saying that 1. Is it going to improve capacity and reliability enough to make it a good value compared to articulated buses or BRT for the cost and 2. Is it going to improve performance enough compared to rapid-LRT or subways to make it worth the investment?

Your question about whether the increased capital cost of LRT is worth it over BRT is a good one. It's difficult to quantify, and definitely something we could debate for several years. People throw out a lot of low per-kilometre figures for BRT, but I'm not sure they're realistic - most of the cost of the proposed LRT lines isn't tied up in wire and rails, but in the cost of widening and reconfiguring the streets. Proper BRT would have the same requirement -- actually more so as the streets would need to be wider.

I'm not sure what "rapid-LRT" means. Stop spacing is a trade-off between operating speed and what the community asks for. Overlapping bus service is a bad idea because it's a money pit on the operating side, and the city's on the hook for all of that. For subway, the calculation you need to do is this: How many extra people would ride the subway versus would ride the light rail line? How much extra would the subway cost to operate per year? Is that extra cost worth it? (For Sheppard, the answer is almost definitely no.)

 

[ssiguy2]

If the TTC's primary concern is operating costs then they should be going for an automated system. Also LRT trains have to maintain but so the tracks and overhead electrical. If operating costs are the real problem then LRT should be the last thing on their mind.