W. K. Lis
Superstar
The next TTC meeting includes: TRANSIT CITY UPDATE – PROJECT APPROACH.
The recommendations include:
The recommendations include:
|
|
|
- Thread starter 299 bloor call control.
- Start date
W. K. Lis
Superstar
One or two big problems the planners of Transit City for the Jane and Don Mills LRT face is the narrow roadway, especially in the southern parts of the lines.
I wonder if they have looked (don't know about making it an option though) at sharing a right-of-way for the light rail vehicles. Click on this link for a look at a video on how Amsterdam deals with narrow roadways and their light rail vehicles.
The rails do come close together, but no switches between the rails.
I wonder if they have looked (don't know about making it an option though) at sharing a right-of-way for the light rail vehicles. Click on this link for a look at a video on how Amsterdam deals with narrow roadways and their light rail vehicles.
The rails do come close together, but no switches between the rails.
sixrings
Senior Member
I have seen this LRT system personally in Amsterdam. However when I was there the sections that crossed over where in VERY tight coridors. Also from what I remember the trains slowed down considerably. Im not saying it couldnt work but how it was used in Amsterdam seems quite different then how we would want to use the lrt.
For instance... Amsterdamn spacing was really tight together and the train moved pretty slow. Also the LRT was running through sections of the city which were pretty much PEDESTRIAN only zones.
We on the other hand want spacing more inbetween bus stop spacing and subway spacing moving at a decent speeds. We on the other hand want the train used on the same streets as cars.
For instance... Amsterdamn spacing was really tight together and the train moved pretty slow. Also the LRT was running through sections of the city which were pretty much PEDESTRIAN only zones.
We on the other hand want spacing more inbetween bus stop spacing and subway spacing moving at a decent speeds. We on the other hand want the train used on the same streets as cars.
andrewpmk
Senior Member
Can you imagine how slow the Jane streetcar line would be if it had single track sections? The existing buses would probably be faster because streetcars would constantly get stopped waiting to pass.
I expect that if the Jane LRT actually gets built, it would make more sense to have the narrowest sections operate in mixed traffic because at least then streetcars wouldn't have to wait to pass each other. More likely, of course, Jane will be downgraded to BRT given that it has the lowest projected ridership of all the Transit City lines except Waterfront West.
I expect that if the Jane LRT actually gets built, it would make more sense to have the narrowest sections operate in mixed traffic because at least then streetcars wouldn't have to wait to pass each other. More likely, of course, Jane will be downgraded to BRT given that it has the lowest projected ridership of all the Transit City lines except Waterfront West.
sixrings
Senior Member
A BRT makes no sense since theres already an express bus..
Second_in_pie
Senior Member
Jane should be a BRT from Steeles to Eglinton. Eglinton RT should be extended to Jane, so people don't have to go all the way down to the B-D to access the RT. That way, there'll still be a constant route along Jane, but there won't be the spacial problems that the LRT currently faces.
Again, each mode has a place in the big picture. LRT isn't the solution to all problems, and Jane is an example of where it doesn't work because it just doesn't work. Jane does need better service, but LRT just won't work.
I hope Transit City is somehow delayed and the new mayor restructures transit priorities and creates an actual network that makes sense. I'd be willing to attend a few demonstrations on Sheppard if it slows things down
Again, each mode has a place in the big picture. LRT isn't the solution to all problems, and Jane is an example of where it doesn't work because it just doesn't work. Jane does need better service, but LRT just won't work.
I hope Transit City is somehow delayed and the new mayor restructures transit priorities and creates an actual network that makes sense. I'd be willing to attend a few demonstrations on Sheppard if it slows things down
threnody
Active Member
Jane should be a BRT from Steeles to Eglinton. Eglinton RT should be extended to Jane, so people don't have to go all the way down to the B-D to access the RT. That way, there'll still be a constant route along Jane, but there won't be the spacial problems that the LRT currently faces.
Again, each mode has a place in the big picture. LRT isn't the solution to all problems, and Jane is an example of where it doesn't work because it just doesn't work. Jane does need better service, but LRT just won't work.
I hope Transit City is somehow delayed and the new mayor restructures transit priorities and creates an actual network that makes sense. I'd be willing to attend a few demonstrations on Sheppard if it slows things down
How does BRT take up less road space than LRT? In either case you have to set aside lanes for transit vehicles, and as I understand it LRT takes up less space because the vehicles are on rails and thus the lanes don't need be as wide. If there is no ROW then it's not BRT, it's just an express bus.
There has been talk of only building Jane north of Eglinton, where the road is wider, and running it as a branch of the Eglinton LRT.
Second_in_pie
Senior Member
Because then you can just run regular busses perhaps? If they want to run a full service on Jane, they'd either have to knock down some houses, tunnel the line through the lowest density and demand area, or make Jane one way or transit-only. Because I can assure you, nobody's going to let the LRT turn into a streetcar when it runs out of space. A BRT would give Jane the exact same speeds, and wouldn't have the problem of stopping halfway down the line.
Juan_Lennon416
Senior Member
AnnetteMeetsJane
Active Member
Any underground section for a Jane LRT has been ruled out due to cost according to the TTC planner about a week ago. He also made a criptic comment about funding not having been secured, which I took to mean that the future of the upgrade is in the balance. Apparently, they plan to bring a concrete plan to the community in late Spring/summer 2010.
AmJ - Who is fed up of going the "long way round" to YorkU because the service to York is limited to a few hours a day.
Fresh Start
Banned
Running in exclusive bus lanes, with TSP and pre-board fare-collection? I didn't think so.
Jane north of Eglinton is 36 metres across. Dedicated bus lanes for Bus Rapid Transit only requires 23 metres at maximum, difference of 13 metres, enough width to sustain 2 driving lanes per direction for motorists. And that's with a passing lane. Without the dedicated passing lane, two 3.5 metre across bus lanes could easy well be created in the centre of the street through the elimination of a dual left-hand turn lane and by narrowing the general-purpose lanes. Thereby whereever one bus lane's free from oncoming traffic, buses can overtake those ahead of them in the queue if that stop's not requested, saving those already on board commuting time. The medians which separate the busway from the general-purpose lanes, can be landscaped. So TC LRT is really setting no benchmark in terms of neighbourhood beautification nor creating an Avenue. BRT's just as capable:
At Jane's narrowest stretch between the Weston-Galt Subdivision and Hwy 400, various techniques such as sidewalk reduction or keeping the line completely grade separated (elevated) through this stretch, beginning from its own bridge crossing of the rail corridor then running side of roadway, can be implemented. A proper "station" can exist at Lawrence Avenue whereby the 52 bus passenger pick-ups/drops-off riders below thereafter they ascend stairwells from SW/NW corners of the intersection, and enter the platform waiting area through turnstiles; with somewhat simpler platform structures constructed at the Trethewey/Denison, William St and Church/Maple Leaf stops.
Sparing this one segment however, the roadway can more than accomodate BRT no differently than of LRT. And BRT comes with it its own added benefits such as better operating efficiency when calculating passengers per revenue hour, subsidy per passenger mile and subsidy per passenger. Buses on bus-only lanes with traffic signal preemption move at their designed speed without being subject to undue traffic interference. Under these circumstances, you can put a transit unit down the right of way every few seconds rather than every few minutes as with railed transit. This means that more passengers can be moved per hour than ever possible with road-median streetcars. And the articulated buses as seen used by Mississauga Transit and YRT's VIVA BRT system can carry upto 150 riders per trip. Believe or not, some BRT systems in Europe and Latin America are capable of carrying greater than 250 rider per trip via coupling another carriage onto an artic for an even longer vehicle.
It's a pity, crying shame really, that buses have been demonized to such an extent in North American connotation that the public continues to underappreciate its value and underestimate its potential to match and even surpass rail transit in every way imaginable. It doesn't take flashy, limited-scope, one-shot multibillion-dollar infrastructure projects to make transit usage faster, more reliable and more convenient. It only takes political will, drive to instill change and carry that momentum right through to assist the public as soon as possible.
kettal
Banned
Imagine driving one of those Amsterdam trams. Talk about a high stress job!
Hank
Active Member
The shared-track sections in Amsterdam are generally very short (often just over a narrow bridge or for a distance of about two tram-lengths through a narrow pedestrian area). They're also the exception rather than the norm; probably 99% of the tram network is in its own track. It would be much more difficult to have shared sections that are much longer than a couple of tram-lengths without having to have a very highly regimented schedule.
kettal
Banned
You ranted for so long here without explaining how a BRT requires any less road width than an LRT. Am I missing something?
And are you proposing an elevated busway on Jane street? Seriously?
Second_in_pie
Senior Member
Oh, well if you really want to know, it's that the Jane bus can continue as one route down to Jane Station, with the real fast BRT bits only going down to Eglinton. If you want to go down to Bloor, just stick on the bus till you're there. If it were LRT, the street would either have to be ripped up just to put in streetcar tracks, or it would have to go above ground or below ground which costs a lot of money. The idea is that you can have a continuous route with BRT in some of it, and the fact that people can continue their trip along a real Eglinton RT means they don't have to wait through poor service between Eglinton and Bloor.
I'm actually impartial to Jane. Whether it be LRT down to Eglinton and bus for the rest, BRT down to Eglinton, LRT and then Undergrond/Elevated LRT to Bloor, or a full blown Jane Subway, I think they all fit their niches and would work well, if that makes any sense whatsoever. But this would be another one of those projects that'd be good to stick the dike with some fodder, like some shoulder bus lanes, limited stops or Articulated busses, and then see what it needs after the network's more complete 10 or 20 years from now.