[sixrings]

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.

Well its not as bad as other american cities but its still pretty bad. Theres no way I think that Torontos view of the bus is anywhere near how Ottawa feels about the bus. Im sure with 20 years of BRT service that image might change. But Image once its ruined is hard to get back. I think the Busses in Toronto makes all most everyone at one point or another who rides them question if it really is "The Better Way"

BTW I posted my comment. Then 5 mins later my wife walked in. She looked frustrated. Asked her if she had a bad day at work. "I hate the F**K**G BUS!!!!!!" Apparently she just had a bad commute..

 

[gweed123]

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.

Fair enough. Yes, I did live downtown when I was in Toronto, but I had friends that lived out in the suburbs, and I had places I needed to get to in the suburbs. I may not have rode the system out there every day, but I rode it enough to get a pretty good grasp on what the situation was.

Let me ask you this: Do you really think there is that big of a difference between suburban 416-ers and 905ers? Same lifestyle, same shopping habits, it's just that suburban 416ers are slightly closer to downtown.

If what you're saying were true, suburbanites would not have embraced services like VIVA, Züm, and soon to be MiWay once the Transitway is operational. These services have succeeded, despite regular local routes in these areas having abysmally low ridership. Why is that? It's because people don't hate buses, they hate SLOW buses.

People in Toronto avoid buses like the plague because in some cases you could probably run faster. They're slow. They're crowded. They take forever to get where you want to go. However, services like the Beaches Express have shown that people will gladly take (and pay a premium for) a bus service that gets them where they need to go quickly.

Again: people don't hate buses in general, they just hate TTC buses because they're slow and take forever to get anywhere. VIVA has created a pretty decent ridership base from basically nothing before it came to being. Ditto with Züm. They did this by offering a service that was significantly faster and more frequent than the local service that it replaced, and at a decent cost. York Region upped their game when it came to transit, and people starting taking it.

Offer a VIVA-type service along Finch, and I can almost guarantee you'd see a 10% spike in ridership within a year, maybe even more than 10%, because that corridor has a pretty large amount of latent demand on it. If you can cut the travel time down by 20-30%, I think you'd see the perception of the Finch West bus change dramatically.

 

[sixrings]

This POST is going to sound terrible. But It goes along with the BUS is for "POOR PEOPLE" Ideology. I do agree with what you are saying about ZUM and VIVA and MIway. However Id like to suggest that the clientele often on these busses are often significantly better off then people in the outer 416 busses. It is not only the bus being slow dirty rough ride full of rude drivers that make the Bus the least desirable forum of transit but it is often the people who are on them as well. Truthfully I am sure that part of the reason the bus drivers attitude are often so rude versus how considerably better the streetcar drivers customer service is because of the extra abuse these drivers get from some of the outer 416 grittier riders. It is why I believe in the ghetto areas like Jane and Finch the Bus drivers are 99% likely to drive by you if you are running for a bus. It isnt that they are trying to keep on schedule instead it is that they are deliberately trying to have the least amount of passengers which would reduce the possible confrontations. In the end this just makes the riders hate the drivers more and the cycle gets worse and worse.

I get your point about other bus systems getting riders but I do think there is a slight difference.

BTW Id also like to see the numbers from the viva miway and zum users to see what the percentage of them is whom are students. TheN iD like to compare those numbers with the TTC figures % wise. It could just be that the people in 905 who are using the bus is because they simply cant afford a car yet. Im thinking we want people to ride the bus even if they can afford a car. Thats the real goal. The ttc shouldnt be the last resort but the first.

 

[gweed123]

Well its not as bad as other american cities but its still pretty bad. Theres no way I think that Torontos view of the bus is anywhere near how Ottawa feels about the bus. Im sure with 20 years of BRT service that image might change. But Image once its ruined is hard to get back. I think the Busses in Toronto makes all most everyone at one point or another who rides them question if it really is "The Better Way"

BTW I posted my comment. Then 5 mins later my wife walked in. She looked frustrated. Asked her if she had a bad day at work. "I hate the F**K**G BUS!!!!!!" Apparently she just had a bad commute..

Yes, I may be biased because I've seen what a well functioning BRT service can do. I've ridden both TTC buses and OC Transpo buses extensively, and I can tell you that regular route OC Transpo buses are not all that different from TTC buses. They're a pain. Going home, it used to take me 20 minutes from downtown to Baseline Station, and then another 10-20 depending on the local bus route to get home, which is about 1.5 kms from the station. On nice days I would walk it, just to avoid the local route.

People in Ottawa are a lot like people in Toronto: they have no problem taking the Transitway routes or the Express routes, but they avoid local routes as much as possible. The suburban Park n Ride lots are packed every morning with people driving to the nearest Transitway station just to avoid taking the local route from their house to the station (sound familiar?).

Speed and reliability (whether perceived or actual) I think play a bigger role in whether or not people will voluntarily take transit, compared to technology choice. Given the choice between the Transitway or the old streetcar service that used to run along Wellington, the vast majority of people would take the Transitway. Why? It's faster and more reliable.

Technology choice may be the tie-breaker, but speed and reliability are the deal-breakers. Give people a service that is speedy and reliable, and most of them won't care what type of technology it is.

 

[gweed123]

This POST is going to sound terrible. But It goes along with the BUS is for "POOR PEOPLE" Ideology. I do agree with what you are saying about ZUM and VIVA and MIway. However Id like to suggest that the clientele often on these busses are often significantly better off then people in the outer 416 busses. It is not only the bus being slow dirty rough ride full of rude drivers that make the Bus the least desirable forum of transit but it is often the people who are on them as well.

Fair enough, but how is building an LRT along Finch West for example going to change that? It's still going to be the same clientele, just in a different vehicle. The only thing that will make it better is that you won't be on the vehicle as long because it'll be a shorter trip. Unless of course the LRT forces rents in apartments adjacent to the LRT line up to a point where poor people can no longer afford them, and they're driven someplace else (and back onto a bus). That's a byproduct of land use planning and social housing projects, not of the buses. The buses didn't create the poor people.

BTW Id also like to see the numbers from the viva miway and zum users to see what the percentage of them is whom are students. TheN iD like to compare those numbers with the TTC figures % wise. It could just be that the people in 905 who are using the bus is because they simply cant afford a car yet. Im thinking we want people to ride the bus even if they can afford a car. Thats the real goal. The ttc shouldnt be the last resort but the first.

Interesting correlation. But the student enrolment at most universities in the GTA has been increasing at a much slower rate than the ridership on suburban BRT system has been. How were the car-less students getting to school before? If they were already on transit, they wouldn't be counted in the % increase in ridership.

Students also do a lot of off-peak travel, so a lot of them would show up in the AADT counts, but not the peak hour counts.

But yes, it would be interesting to get on a VIVA or Züm bus at 8am and see how many of the people on the bus are wearing suits, and how many are university-aged people carrying backpacks (and probably wearing sweatpants).

 

[sixrings]

All i know is when I use the GO BUS I dont feel Poor... Also dont feel poor on MEGABUS but I do feel poor on Greyhound. Truthfully alot of it is cleanliness and newness of vehicles. But I cant count on a bazzilion new busses nor can I count on cleanliness. TTC is DIRTY everywhere.

Im going to Assume that the way LRT will change the "Clinetele" is by creating development opportunities. Obviously no matter what the TTC will always struggle with this but the more middle class upper class people you get on the system the more it will be perceived as a good way to travel. Also the "haves" tend to get their way when they file complaints or offer suggestions.. Which is why the system needs to encourage more of these users.

 

[snowystar]

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?

And note that the 99 B-Line is only one of the routes that travel on Broadway. Local routes on Broadway includes the #9 (entire length) and #14 (western half). The 8, 16, and 17 also travel one or two blocks on the busiest segment.

The actual ridership on the 3 routes are:
99 - 54,350 weekday; 16,642,000 annual
9 - 25,300 weekday; 8,298,000 annual
14 - 17,550 weekday; 5,766,000 annual

Source

 

[gweed123]

All i know is when I use the GO BUS I dont feel Poor... Also dont feel poor on MEGABUS but I do feel poor on Greyhound. Truthfully alot of it is cleanliness and newness of vehicles. But I cant count on a bazzilion new busses nor can I count on cleanliness. TTC is DIRTY everywhere.

Im going to Assume that the way LRT will change the "Clinetele" is by creating development opportunities. Obviously no matter what the TTC will always struggle with this but the more middle class upper class people you get on the system the more it will be perceived as a good way to travel. Also the "haves" tend to get their way when they file complaints or offer suggestions.. Which is why the system needs to encourage more of these users.

Doing that kind of defeats the purpose of building LRTs in order to serve "priority neighbourhoods" or whatever term the city uses, doesn't it, haha? 'Serve em by forcing the people who need the service, out'.

 

[gweed123]

And note that the 99 B-Line is only one of the routes that travel on Broadway. Local routes on Broadway includes the #9 (entire length) and #14 (western half). The 8, 16, and 17 also travel one or two blocks on the busiest segment.

The actual ridership on the 3 routes are:
99 - 54,350 weekday; 16,642,000 annual
9 - 25,300 weekday; 8,298,000 annual
14 - 17,550 weekday; 5,766,000 annual

Source

Wow, that's pretty impressive. I knew the B-Line ridership was high, but I didn't realize the entire corridor was that high. Funny, the local 9 bus carries almost as many people as the Sheppard East bus does. Kinda makes me laugh when people on here say things like "well the BRT service would need passing lanes, and that's too expensive to build, so we should just build LRT instead". Obviously a corridor with significantly higher ridership than either Finch or Sheppard is making due with local and rapid transit routes overlapping.

 

[Rainforest]

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.

I'd like to question the notion that getting people out of their cars should be the primary goal of transit expansion.

Reason: the growing road congestion will take care of that. More and more people are becoming captive riders, not because they cannot afford a car, but because they cannot afford to spend hours in traffic jams.

In that view, transit expansion should focus on: 1) increasing capacity, in order to absorb those new riders; 2) adding more fully or partly exclusive lanes for transit vehicles; 3) improving the service for existing riders who support the system both through the fares and through their taxes.

That means: LRT when necessary, but not necessarily LRT.

Furthermore, the Transit City style LRT lines are actually more capable of improving capacity and helping people who would take transit anyway, rather than attracting choice riders. Imagine someone who lives in the eastern section of Sheppard East, and takes a 45-min bus ride to Don Mills subway. With LRT in place, that person will be able to reach the subway in 35 min instead of 45. For someone who takes transit anyway, it is a noticeable improvement. But if a person drives to Don Mill subway today, and it takes him 20 min, will he trade it for a 35-min LRT ride? I doubt it.

If the goal is attracting choice riders, then the focus must be on more rapid transit (but that might not be affordable).

Im going to Assume that the way LRT will change the "Clinetele" is by creating development opportunities. Obviously no matter what the TTC will always struggle with this but the more middle class upper class people you get on the system the more it will be perceived as a good way to travel. Also the "haves" tend to get their way when they file complaints or offer suggestions.. Which is why the system needs to encourage more of these users.

I feel uneasy about expectations of LRT creating "development opportunities" by the mere fact of its presence and regardless of the local context. It is not enough to have nice and modern transit vehicles at your doorstep; in order to boost the appeal of a location, those vehicles must actually go where many people want to go, and get there in a reasonable time.

That can, and hopefully will, work in some places. But I doubt that eastern sections of Sheppard qualify, simply because they are way too remote from all job centres.

 

[Rainforest]

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.

One City was a concept, not a detailed plan. I doubt that they had a chance to sort out the technical details, such as the yard space requirements.

McCowan might actually be a better yard for Scarborough LRT (compared to Conlins), as it is closer to the most heavily used part of the line. But I am not familiar with its geometry. It is possible, for example, that all tracks there are too short to store the new 3-car, 90-m trains.

 

[Rainforest]

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)

A strong case can be made for building Finch West as LRT from the beginning; to avoid disrupting the street twice in 20 years.

A case can be made for LRT on Jane (between Eglinton and Steeles). Although the projected ridership can be handled by BRT, the advantage of LRT is that the vehicles can share the Eglinton tunnel and reach Eglinton West subway, or go to Yonge. Buses cannot use that tunnel, and would have to either turn back at Eglinton and create an extra transfer, or run to Bloor in mixed traffic.

Moreover, Jane has width issues between Eglinton and Wilson; it means that a properly built BRT might not be that much cheaper than LRT.

On the other hand, for Don Mills - assuming that DRL subway is extended to Eglinton, but its extension beyond Eglinton is deemed impractical - BRT might be a pretty good choice. From Eglinton and all the way up to Finch, Don Mills is already a 6-lane street and the outer lanes are already designated as HOV. So, introducing a BRT is mostly a matter of repainting the lanes and changing the signage.

Obviously, the above 5,000 pphpd projection is for the section south of Eglinton (that should be served by DRL). North of Eglinton, the demand on Don Mills is likely to be similar to Jane.

For Sheppard East, BRT could be a viable option; but there are two issues. First is the connection to the subway terminus. LRT can dip under the 404 to reach Don Mills subway, but the buses cannot do that easily, and will have to go with mixed traffic. I don't see an easy solution for that, short of extending the subway further east.

The second issue is access to Conlins Yard if Sheppard has no LRT. Though this one is easier to resolve: either by combining an in-median BRT with non-revenue LRT tracks between Progress and Conlins, or by running a revenue-service branch of Scarborough LRT along the eastern part of Sheppard.

 

[gweed123]

A strong case can be made for building Finch West as LRT from the beginning; to avoid disrupting the street twice in 20 years.

But is that worth having LRT on 1/4 of Finch and leaving the other 3/4 with buses in mixed traffic? The ridership on the Finch East bus is actually higher, but if LRT is built on the western half of Finch West, that's going to leave the Finch East riders crammed.

I'm not saying that LRT is necessarily a BAD option, I'm just saying that BRT along more of Finch is a much more equitable option. Run BRT on the entire corridor first, and then look at what sections need upgrading. It's not like the BRT investment is wasted, because:

-The right-of-way will already have been expanded
-The intersections will already be wide enough (only minor reconfigurations necessary)
-The sidewalks and everything won't have to be replaced

And realistically, once every 20 years is about right for a roadworks project. Maybe not ripping up the entire street, but usually some sort of reconfiguration is done in that timeframe.

A case can be made for LRT on Jane (between Eglinton and Steeles). Although the projected ridership can be handled by BRT, the advantage of LRT is that the vehicles can share the Eglinton tunnel and reach Eglinton West subway, or go to Yonge. Buses cannot use that tunnel, and would have to either turn back at Eglinton and create an extra transfer, or run to Bloor in mixed traffic.

Moreover, Jane has width issues between Eglinton and Wilson; it means that a properly built BRT might not be that much cheaper than LRT.

The interlining is definitely a plus to the LRT, but in my mind that isn't worth the extra billion that LRT would cost.

With respect to running to Bloor in mixed traffic, I suggest you take a look at Montreal Road in Ottawa's Vanier neighbourhood. What they've done is turned the outside lanes into peak period buses only lanes, to be used for general traffic and/or parking outside of that time. I would venture to say that that would be the best solution for Jane between Eglinton and Bloor.

Between Eglinton and Wilson, what I would suggest is queue jump lanes at intersections to begin with, and then gradual road works projects to expropriate/widen at selected areas where there's a bottleneck. North of Wilson, go with full curb side BRT lanes. It may not be the best solution south of Wilson, but it'll do, and will still generate significant time savings. The road works projects can be spread out over a period of about 5 years, to minimize their impact on the capital budget. Maybe coordinate them with some other infrastructure projects (pipe replacements, etc).

On the other hand, for Don Mills - assuming that DRL subway is extended to Eglinton, but its extension beyond Eglinton is deemed impractical - BRT might be a pretty good choice. From Eglinton and all the way up to Finch, Don Mills is already a 6-lane street and the outer lanes are already designated as HOV. So, introducing a BRT is mostly a matter of repainting the lanes and changing the signage.

Obviously, the above 5,000 pphpd projection is for the section south of Eglinton (that should be served by DRL). North of Eglinton, the demand on Don Mills is likely to be similar to Jane.

In my opinion, implementing a full BRT on Don Mills from Eglinton to Sheppard (at least) would be a great way of demonstrating how well it can work. The most expensive part of the project would be the upgraded shelters. A few cans of paint, a few new signs, and putting those new artics to good use. If the City wanted to, they could have a full BRT up and running on that corridor in less than a year. Use it as a pilot project for how/if it should be implemented on other suburban corridors.

For Sheppard East, BRT could be a viable option; but there are two issues. First is the connection to the subway terminus. LRT can dip under the 404 to reach Don Mills subway, but the buses cannot do that easily, and will have to go with mixed traffic. I don't see an easy solution for that, short of extending the subway further east.

The second issue is access to Conlins Yard if Sheppard has no LRT. Though this one is easier to resolve: either by combining an in-median BRT with non-revenue LRT tracks between Progress and Conlins, or by running a revenue-service branch of Scarborough LRT along the eastern part of Sheppard.

The subway terminus is definitely an issue. What I would try first is rush hour buses only lanes from Consumers to Don Mills. The area is going to be backed up for cars anyways, but at least that would get the buses moving. In the medium term, it would push a Sheppard Subway extension to Victoria Park up the priority list. Another option of course is to widen the overpass (I think it's actually 2 structures, 1 for each direction).

With Conlins Yard, as was mentioned earlier, there is the possibility of keeping McCowan open as a secondary yard, and use the Kodak yard as the primary yard for both the ECLRT and the SLRT. If Conlins needs to be used, yes the two options that you mentioned would work well.


You've raised some great points Rainforest. Naturally, with any plan you're going to get some snags, but I don't think that any of the concerns that have been raised here are really 'show-stoppers'. I'm liking this discussion though!

 

[11th]

With the demand on Sheppard during rush there isn't going to be an overwhelming number of LRVs. It takes one ~10 second signal to get an LRV through an intersection if it doesn't have to stop. This will not disrupt transit on cross streets.

Remember, buses have signal priority technology as well now. So both routes benefit from there being less transit vehicles moving through various intersections. That's if they use Transit Signal Priority, at all.

Do you have an exact number for the number of LRVs? 10min frequency?
and it takes more than 10 seconds : at least ~20 seconds for pedestrian countdown; ~4 seconds for the all-red phase. Traffic flows best with long green-phase.

 

[Jaye101]

One 10 second signal can get an LRV through an intersection. The 20 seconds of countdown are irrelevant, full transit priority would take into account the time the light takes to safely change with the distance of the LRV approaching the intersection. If a LRV is approaching the intersection from a distance the light would not have just changed, because if the vehicle was approaching, the light would hold until the LRV clears the intersection. If the LRV approaches mid phase a transit only signal can allow an LRV to clear the intersection before returning to the next general traffic phase (10 seconds).

The only time Transit Priority Signaling would cause a problem for cross streets is if there is an excessive number of transit vehicles. Such as on Spadina and St Clair. This is why full transit priority isn't activated on these routes. It would disrupt traffic flow. This isn't the case for Toronto's next generation of LRVs, they're larger, therefore less vehicles. Allowing for more priority over general traffic.