[44 North]

It's hard to compare the same argument of "build it and they will come" between LRT and an unjustified multi-$Billion heavy rail subway. The issue isn't black and white like that IMO. Yes, the SELRT isn't justified by Toronto standards, but it is for NA/Worldwide.

I agree with Jaye. LRT is attractive, railed transit that will appease the masses significantly more than BRT. BRT does have the capacity for the foreseeable future, but then we'd be facing the issue of the suburbs being ignored for transit investment...not that that's ever going to go away. So I think it's a sensible investment for political reasons to go full-bore into something that's slightly more than adequate, as opposed to just plain adequate (or grossly wasteful like a suburban subway). Reason: appease the masses before the DRL hogs the limelight for decades to come.

 

[Dan416]

It's hard to compare the same argument of "build it and they will come" between LRT and an unjustified multi-$Billion heavy rail subway. The issue isn't black and white like that IMO. Yes, the SELRT isn't justified by Toronto standards, but it is for NA/Worldwide.

I agree with Jaye. LRT is attractive, railed transit that will appease the masses significantly more than BRT. BRT does have the capacity for the foreseeable future, but then we'd be facing the issue of the suburbs being ignored for transit investment...not that that's ever going to go away. So I think it's a sensible investment for political reasons to go full-bore into something that's slightly more than adequate, as opposed to just plain adequate (or grossly wasteful like a suburban subway). Reason: appease the masses before the DRL hogs the limelight for decades to come.

Meh. Sheppard is the last place I'd build an LRT. If you're not going to finish the Sheppard subway, don't bother doing anything.

There are plenty more less controversial streets that can use LRT, like Finch, Eglinton, Don Mills, Jane...you know, streets that don't already have rapid transit.

 

[ssiguy2]

LRT is attractive but we are talking value for the dollar.

To use another example just at nearby Cleveland's new Healthline BRT. It has been a huge success and is infuriating the LRT lobby. It was built at around 30% of the forcast price of a similar LRT but was implemented quickly and allowed for public art, wider sidewalks, bike lanes, and parkettes which the LRT price did not. It has been open just 2 years and already ridership on the line is up 80% on what was already Cleveland's busiest bus route as it goes down Cleveland's Euclid Ave. The street had definately seen better days and those wanting streetcar/LRT continually stated that it would not lead to the TOD that rail would. Have they ever been proved wrong.

The Healthline has kick started the resurgence of Euclid as Cleveland's "main drag". Condos, at street retail, pedestrian traffic..........everything that people like Miller say is only possible with LRT. Even in a city with a housing collapse and huge vacant land areas like Cleveland is seeing a soaring population al0ong the line and rising apt & condo prices.

What makes this line even more amazing is that it is in a US city. The streetcar/LRT lobby continually cries that Americans will never take a bus and only rail will get them onto transit but The Healthline has proved them completely wrong. It has also had great effects on the total transit system as ridership on Cleveland LRT and subway lines are up 25% over the last 2 years.

Toronto should get moving on BRT for Finch and Sheppard. This was the one area that I agreed with with Ford.......Finch should be BRT but so should Sheppard. The money saved could be used to make the one line that needs total grade separation the true rapid transit corridor it needs to be.........Eglinton.

Toronto is going to be spending $2 billion on what will result in improved local service and nothing even remotely close to rapid transit.

 

[gweed123]

ssiguy2 is bang on. Yes, LRT would be nice, there's no doubt about that, but spending $2 billion on two halves of 2 corridors when that same amount of money could be spent improving transit on ALL of Finch, all of Sheppard East, and significant portions of Jane and Don Mills to boot.

People just want a fast and effective feeder line to the subway network. If BRT provides the same speed and reliability as LRT does, for a fraction of the cost, why not?

And BRT seems to be working just fine for York Region, and they're planning on building a lot more of it. I guess no one told them that they should hold out for LRT or bust...

 

[nfitz]

ssiguy2 is bang on.

He might be bang on for a low ridership corridor such as the HealthLine in Cleveland. It has less than 15,000 riders a day. It's hard to find even a BRT line in the Big Move with ridership that's projected to be this low. The Finch West LRT is over 70,000 in 2031. The Don Mills LRT over 120,000. Even Sheppard East is over 45,000.

 

[gweed123]

He might be bang on for a low ridership corridor such as the HealthLine in Cleveland. It has less than 15,000 riders a day. It's hard to find even a BRT line in the Big Move with ridership that's projected to be this low. The Finch West LRT is over 70,000 in 2031. The Don Mills LRT over 120,000. Even Sheppard East is over 45,000.

The Jane LRT is projected to be below 3,000 pphpd. Don Mills is only that high because of the segment south of Eglinton, which any reasonable transit plan would include as part of the DRL. I only consider the DMLRT to be north of Eglinton.

Finch West can be handled with BRT for now, but will need to be upgraded before 2031. Do all of Finch as BRT now, and then upgrade the western segment of Finch West to LRT when funds are available/ridership warrants.

As for Sheppard East, well 3,100 pphpd in 2031 speaks for itself...

 

[Jaye101]

It's hard to compare the same argument of "build it and they will come" between LRT and an unjustified multi-$Billion heavy rail subway. The issue isn't black and white like that IMO. Yes, the SELRT isn't justified by Toronto standards, but it is for NA/Worldwide.

I agree with Jaye. LRT is attractive, railed transit that will appease the masses significantly more than BRT. BRT does have the capacity for the foreseeable future, but then we'd be facing the issue of the suburbs being ignored for transit investment...not that that's ever going to go away. So I think it's a sensible investment for political reasons to go full-bore into something that's slightly more than adequate, as opposed to just plain adequate (or grossly wasteful like a suburban subway). Reason: appease the masses before the DRL hogs the limelight for decades to come.

Makes perfect sense to me.

Meh. Sheppard is the last place I'd build an LRT. If you're not going to finish the Sheppard subway, don't bother doing anything.

There are plenty more less controversial streets that can use LRT, like Finch, Eglinton, Don Mills, Jane...you know, streets that don't already have rapid transit.

The status quo along Sheppard would just stagnate the ridership of the Sheppard subway, and waste an opportunity to prime a corridor for a future subway extension. An investment needs to be made to encourage intensification along Sheppard.

The Jane LRT is projected to be below 3,000 pphpd. Don Mills is only that high because of the segment south of Eglinton, which any reasonable transit plan would include as part of the DRL. I only consider the DMLRT to be north of Eglinton.

Finch West can be handled with BRT for now, but will need to be upgraded before 2031. Do all of Finch as BRT now, and then upgrade the western segment of Finch West to LRT when funds are available/ridership warrants.

As for Sheppard East, well 3,100 pphpd in 2031 speaks for itself...

I'd rather my city invest in LRT today rather than 30 years down the line. It's an investment. It will appreciate property values. It will attract more riders. It will help support a transit network.

ssiguy2 is bang on. Yes, LRT would be nice, there's no doubt about that, but spending $2 billion on two halves of 2 corridors when that same amount of money could be spent improving transit on ALL of Finch, all of Sheppard East, and significant portions of Jane and Don Mills to boot.

People just want a fast and effective feeder line to the subway network. If BRT provides the same speed and reliability as LRT does, for a fraction of the cost, why not?

And BRT seems to be working just fine for York Region, and they're planning on building a lot more of it. I guess no one told them that they should hold out for LRT or bust...

York Region has a significantly lower density than Suburban Toronto. With your rational they should just keep conventional bus routes as that can handle the demand with articulated buses. Same thing goes for Peel and in Waterloo where they are also building an LRT. Just keep your regular bus service. That's good enough. So why spend the extra capital?

That's your position. It's unambitious, and it's too conservative to support significant growth.

 

[nfitz]

The Jane LRT is projected to be below 3,000 pphpd.

Yes, but it's still over 50,000 per day.

Don Mills is only that high because of the segment south of Eglinton, which any reasonable transit plan would include as part of the DRL.

Fair enough, but the other LRT lines are still much, much higher than this Cleveland BRT.

As for Sheppard East, well 3,100 pphpd in 2031 speaks for itself...

The subway was forecast to be only 5,900 pphpd in 2031. Still these are big numbers compared to Cleveland.

 

[gweed123]

I'd rather my city invest in LRT today rather than 30 years down the line. It's an investment. It will appreciate property values. It will attract more riders. It will help support a transit network.

So while the other corridors are waiting for LRT funding they should be stuck with regular bus routes? Why not give more corridors that need a service boost NOW a decent service boost, instead of giving only parts of a couple selected corridors a service boost beyond what they need, while leaving other corridors high and dry?

I'd much rather see 4 well functioning BRT lines in the city than a couple LRT lines that are overkill for the time being.

York Region has a significantly lower density than Suburban Toronto.

Does it though? When you take away nodes like NYCC and STC, the density isn't really all that different. Of course when you factor in all the undeveloped land in YR, of course. But when you look at the density of the built up areas, minus the two density nodes in eastern Toronto, it really isn't all that different.

With your rational they should just keep conventional bus routes as that can handle the demand with articulated buses. Same thing goes for Peel and in Waterloo where they are also building an LRT. Just keep your regular bus service. That's good enough. So why spend the extra capital?

You missed my point. My point is that the type of infrastructure and service that should be built should be in line with the demand. Right now, the majority of Sheppard East doesn't have the demand for LRT, and even when it's "avenueized" in ~20 years, it's barely into the low end of LRT viability. Why would we waste money building a piece of infrastructure that isn't even going to be close to reaching a point where the added infrastructure cost won't even be needed for another 30 years?

Right now, there are a lot of corridors that would be viable for BRT NOW. We have the money sitting in 2 LRT projects where 2/3 of that capital is being wasted on infrastructure capacity that isn't needed. Put that money to use in places where it could actually benefit people NOW.

That's your position. It's unambitious, and it's too conservative to support significant growth.

2 LRT lines is ambitious, but 4 BRT lines which combined would actually carry more people than the 2 LRT lines combined is unambitious? I don't really get that one...

And won't support significant growth? Tell that to the people who are building a new downtown in Markham centred around a BRT line (actually technically 2 BRT lines, 1 is there now and 1 is planned). I'm sure they'd love to hear that they're not being ambitious enough, and that they can't build until they get LRT, because BRT isn't good enough...

Yes, but it's still over 50,000 per day.

A medium load spread out over an entire day is perfect for BRT. What kills BRT is when there's a large influx of passengers during peak hours (like in Ottawa, where it's over 10,000 pphpd). Outside of rush hour, a Transitway bus every 3-5 minutes works beautifully.

Fair enough, but the other LRT lines are still much, much higher than this Cleveland BRT.

No doubt, but the Cleveland BRT is also very much at the low end of the BRT ridership spectrum. It's as much of a showcase of how many people BRT can handle as the Scarborough-Malvern LRT would be a showcase of how many people LRT can handle.

The subway was forecast to be only 5,900 pphpd in 2031. Still these are big numbers compared to Cleveland.

I know, but I'm not arguing for the subway . In fact, I'm arguing for going in the other direction. Many people are saying that the subway option is too expensive and would be a waste of capacity when LRT would do just fine. I'm arguing that LRT is too expensive and would be a waste of capacity when BRT would do just fine.

 

[BurlOak]

I know, but I'm not arguing for the subway . In fact, I'm arguing for going in the other direction. Many people are saying that the subway option is too expensive and would be a waste of capacity when LRT would do just fine. I'm arguing that LRT is too expensive and would be a waste of capacity when BRT would do just fine.

Agree 100%

 

[BurlOak]

In that case, the extended Scarborough LRT needs to be somehow connected to the future Conlins Yard.

To create such connection, I would consider a branch of Scarborough LRT that splits off the main line at Sheppard / Progress, and runs in the middle of Sheppard to Meadowvale (and perhaps the Zoo).

The ridership of that branch would be light, but it would bring rapid transit to the most remote north-eastern part of 416.

Can the SRT (interlined with Eglinton LRT of course) have only the yard at McCowan in the East and at Kodak in the West. If the One City plan had no problems with only the Kodak yard for the entire Eglinton line, then I figure it may be possible to have 1 small yard and one large one.

Also, is the grade separation of GO/Sheppard the only "SELRT" work that has been awarded yet - I think so.

This may mean that the BRT option could still be available.

 

[ssiguy2]

Little more investigation into BLine:
According to Wikipedia the 13km #99 UBC/Broadway BLine is the busiest bus route in NA with 50,000 daily boardings. Remember that does not include the still running #9 Broadway bus which is for more local service. I didn't know this but frequency has greatly increased and runs every 2.5 minutes in morning rush hour and 4.5 minutes til early evening. All this for just {at the time} about $1 million per km.

 

[gweed123]

Little more investigation into BLine:
According to Wikipedia the 13km #99 UBC/Broadway BLine is the busiest bus route in NA with 50,000 daily boardings. Remember that does not include the still running #9 Broadway bus which is for more local service. I didn't know this but frequency has greatly increased and runs every 2.5 minutes in morning rush hour and 4.5 minutes til early evening. All this for just {at the time} about $1 million per km.

Now: (AADT)
Finch West: 38,100
Finch East: 45,200
Sheppard East: 27,100
Jane: 39,300
Don Mills: 40,800

(Source: http://www3.ttc.ca/About_the_TTC/Transit_Planning/Surface_Ridership.jsp)

Projected in 2031 with LRT: (converted from Yearly to AADT)
Finch West: 63,561 (4,500 pphpd)
Sheppard East: 38,082 (3,100 pphpd)
Jane: 43,013 (3,000 pphpd)
Don Mills: 107,945 (5,000 pphpd)

*Unfortunately the Metrolinx RTP Backgrounder only had peak counts and yearly counts, with no AADT, so I had to convert. If anyone knows a more accurate way of converting from one to another, please let me know.

So of the 4 LRT lines being talked about here, only 2 will actually exceed the current 50,000 AADT that the B-Line currently carries. And one of those two (Don Mills), factors in the section south of Eglinton, which most reasonable plans include as part of the DRL, and not the DMLRT). If that lower section is chopped off, the DMLRT is likely to be below 50,000 AADT as well.

If BRT can work just fine on a much more constricted ROW than most of the suburban arterials we're talking about here, can handle the projected ridership, and can be built for a fraction of the cost, why not go for BRT instead?

 

[sixrings]

If BRT can work just fine on a much more constricted ROW than most of the suburban arterials we're talking about here, can handle the projected ridership, and can be built for a fraction of the cost, why not go for BRT instead?

I think you are ignoring or dont want to admit that Toronto is a very different place than Ottawa. I say this in regards to perception. In Ottawa (MY PARENTS live at 700 sussex and my brother just outside of Rockcliffe, So I have an idea about the area) people are more practical. When I say they are practical I mean that in a way maybe Toronians should really be like. But the fact is we are not. Instead Ottawa maybe because of its weather doesnt have very many high end cars. Even in my parents building I dont think there is one ferrari or Bentley. Instead everyone is fairly conservative with a BMW or a Porsche. In my mind thats dang practical for rich people. Clothing is the same. The Holt Renfrew there is pathetic, there is a really small tiffanys and it just appears that people in Ottawa spend there money on different things then status items like mcmansions, clothes, or fancy dancy cars. Instead they prefer to bike and camp. Torontonians for the most part think of camping in a cabin. ANyways Im not saying there is anything wrong with Ottawa because I love it but it is vastly different then Torontonians. I also note that you lived downtown Toronto before moving to Ottawa. So ill assume that when you were in Toronto you pretty much walked everywhere so like alot of transit geeks you probably didnt spend your whole life on transit.. I love transit btw despite being in walking or biking distance from alot of things which limits my actual ttc use. Well this is the thing that I think miller did recognize even though he may not have said it. Busses are "perceived" in Toronto as for the Poor People. That may be wrong but its the truth. Most of the high end people in Toronto live within subway walking distance or streetcar distance. The bus is then regarded as ghetto. It is why the Kiss and Rides are jam packed at rush hour. No one hates the subway but people LOATH the BUS. If Toronto wants to get people out of their cars they are going to need to offer a mode of transit that appears more luxurious than a BUS. Maybe the Bus and BRT could work. But that wouldnt mean that Torontonians who had a choice between cars and busses would convert to transit. Isnt that the goal? To get more riders? Toronto cant afford Subways everywhere so they decided on LRT in hopes that its service its image would get Toronotonians out of their cars.. Thats pretty simple to me. But then again I lived in the farther parts of Toronto growing up and I can remember once I got to the subway it was a dream. It was just a nightmare getting their. Im sure alot of Torontonians have that same experience. The problem lies that once people have enough money to choose they give up the nightmare bus ride and simply drive.

 

[innsertnamehere]

it's funny because I find that the bus is much less loathed in toronto than other north american cities. many cities see the bus as if it is their only option to get somewhere, it is best to cancel the trip.