LRT Projects

by

Safety for Lake Shore Streetcar Riders

As a followup to the Waterfront West thread, “Ed” left a long comment which really belongs in a post of its own.  My own comments follow at the bottom.

I’ve been thinking about safety for riders on Lake Shore Blvd.

Currently, there are safety islands west of Humber loop through Louisa, and east of Long Branch loop through Thirtieth. The long central part of Lake Shore has no safety islands.

It’s been my experience that motor vehicles speeding by the open doors of a streetcar is a regular occurence on Lake Shore; I suspect that it’s a likely occurence *every* run. Why?

  • suburban area; drivers not really familiar with streetcars and the door laws
  • fast traffic on Lake Shore
  • wide road

This [last point] deserves attention: drivers seem to feel that the further they are from the streetcar, the more they’re allowed to pass. On Queen itself, the prime points for cars zipping past open doors seems to be eastbound and Shaw and westbound at Ossington, where there are clear additional right-turn lanes. This is the same behaviour that leads MTO to put signs up saying “Stop for School Bus with Signals flashing BOTH DIRECTIONS” on four-lane highways.)

Note that St. Clair had safety islands for just about every stop along its wider part (roughly east of Old Weston Rd.), and the width of St. Clair is quite similar to the width of Lake Shore, taking the varying widths of both roads into account.

Finally, the long and potentially dangerous walk to and from the curb makes stops slower along Lake Shore than they would be on central-city routes with equal numbers of embarking/disembarking passengers (outer ends of the Carlton car, for example).

Is the answer putting in safety islands all along Lake Shore?

Unfortunately, the speed of motor vehicles on Lake Shore, and again a general unfamiliarity with street railways, results in safety islands being struck (delaying streetcar service!), and also the safety islands distracting drivers who then run the red light (or so I suppose — for some reason, I see a lot of red-light running on Lake Shore at intersections where there’s also a safety island, for example at Long Branch Ave.).

With go-around-either-side safety islands disappearing on St. Clair due to the ROW, they will remain only in a few scattered locations in the city (offhand: Dundas at Bloor, Bathurst at Queen, Main and Gerrard, Queen at Kingston) prompting motorists to hit the remaining ones as things they just don’t understand or are unfamiliar with.

Also, I just went and measured the lane width inside a safety island; it’s 3.0 metres from the edge of the island to the centre line. This isn’t too much of a problem with cars (though you get splashed in rain and snowy conditions) but Lake Shore also has a lot of truck traffic, particularly in the west end. Trucks are allowed a width of 2.60 metres; so two trucks meeting at 39th where there are safety islands facing each other have 80 cm *total* to miss each other and also the safety island. This is one reason I often wait at the curb, instead of on the safety island.

And I’ve seen a semi-trailer sideswipe a streetcar going in the opposite direction at 39th. Maybe significantly, the tractor had western Canadian plates. After a 6 or 8 hour shift on the 401, he made it down Brown’s Line and then just couldn’t place the rig properly when faced with an oncoming ALRV in a safety island gap?

So, what are the potential solutions?

1) Status quo/do nothing (not attractive).
2) Put in safety islands all along the route (still a problem with auto/island collisions and trucks passing centimetres from your face as you wait for the car).
3) Drastically narrow Lake Shore through lanes so safety islands aren’t necessary.
4) LRT so there is no traffic passing by the safety islands and less chance of a motor vehicle getting confused and trying to split the sides of an island, thus running into it.
5) Move to bus operations on Lake Shore.

Of these choices, I expect the locals will be in favour of:

1) These are the ones who don’t ride the TTC at all, and I have confirmation from WWLRT planning that they haven’t looked at safety issues on Lake Shore yet; certainly safety wasn’t a significant part of the LRT presentations.
5) Hey, buses are “superior, quicker” technology, right?

Personally, I’m in favour of 4) or 3). I bet the anti-LRT crowd dislikes these choices equally — even though 3) would solve a number of other issues raised in Lake Shore transportation planning workshops.

This all begs the interesting question of whether issues with access to streetcars — the walk from the curb, the vertical height to board, the width of the “safety island” and the comfort of riders on that island — can be addressed without going for a full-blown right-of-way.  (At the risk of beating a worn-out drum, better service would also shorten the length of time would-be riders have to wait on an island.)

The recent charette held by the Lake Shore Planning Council produced a lot of concerns and ideas, and although this happened after the formal cutoff for feedback to the TTC’s study, I hope that this material finds its way into the hopper.  The TTC was represented at the charette, and that’s a good sign.

Now we await an updated set of design options and, one hopes, more sensitivity and less lecturing from the TTC at public meetings.

by

Scarborough-Malvern LRT Update

I have been remiss in not reporting on the open house for the Scarborough-Malvern LRT line.  The display from that open house is available on the project’s website.

This is probably the most straightforward of the projects although it has a few interesting design features.  Most notable is the section west and north of the University of Toronto Scarborough Campus where the line will run side-of-road.  About half-way between Kingston Road and Ellesmere, the line will move from centre-of-road to side-of-road and will cross Highland Creek on its own new bridge.  From that point north and east, the line runs alongside parkland and there is no need to provide access to the property as there would be in a commercial/residential neighbourhood.

The line makes a dogleg to serve UTSC, but this is a major destination.  After turning northwest on Military Trail, the line rejoins Morningside for the run up to Sheppard.  The track layout will be designed so that Sheppard LRT trains could run through to UTSC and provide direct service between the campus and Don Mills Station.

The section on Kingston Road is a fairly standard centre-of-road LRT design with the only special feature being the triangular junction at Eglinton.

Similarly, the Eglinton section uses the standard LRT street profile.  Kennedy Station, as noted elsewhere in this blog, is the subject of a future design to integrate the subway, a relocated RT station and the Eglinton and Scarborough/Malvern lines.

The following is a comment I received after the open house from Robert Wightman, but held onto until I got around to posting this item.

Some Thoughts on The Scarborough Malvern LRT line that only goes to Morningside and Sheppard.

I attended the meeting on Bellamy Road tonight with my son and we were impressed by the presentation. The presentation for each line seems to depend on the group responsible for that line and this was the best of any that I have been to. They had all the usual boards about culturally, scientifically or ecologically sensitive area and noted that there are many in my former borough.

The detail panels about the line itself were quite detailed and showed proposed pocket tracks, bridge design, platform location etc. The entrance to Kennedy station and one other area were not finalized so they left a circle around them and said final details to be determined. They even put in two pocket tracks to turn service back to the outer end of the line “in case they decide to run some of the Sheppard Service to UTSC.” It is a lot cheaper to put in now and it also lets you turn a bad car and send it back to the barns at Sheppard and Meadowvale.

They said that all of the storage facilities would have heavy maintenance capabilities with only a few items being shipped out. The line will probably be 750 V and have centre poles. They don’t seem to need to consult with Toronto Fire Services and Toronto EMS like the Waterfront designers do. They said that you needed a pocket track for short turns and storing dead trains every 4.5 to 5 km and could not believe that they were not doing this on Sheppard East. They also thought that the SRT would be more SRT and not LRT but they said that the final decision had not been made.

They thought that construction on Sheppard would start this Fall with preliminary work on the grade separation on the Uxbridge Sub. Since the storage facilities are almost at the end of the line it can be built in stages.

All in all a good meeting.

Yes, this line definitely needs a new name.

by

A Long Day At City Hall

Tuesday, June 2 was a long day for members of Toronto Council’s Executive Committee.  Many transportation issues were on the agenda including Union Station Revitalization, Western Waterfront Master Plan, Queen’s Quay redesign, and the Gardiner Expressway replacement EA.

As if that wasn’t enough, an open house for the Scarborough RT extension took me out for a ride on the Milner bus.

This transit blogging is harder than my pre-retirement work! Continue reading →

by

Eglinton LRT Update

Planning for the Eglinton LRT continues as described in a report at the May 28 Commission meeting.  Major points in this report include:

  • Surface operation west from Keele and east from Brentcliffe with a tunnel between these two points.  The exact location of the tunnel entrance, particularly at the west end, is still under study.
  • Centre of the road alignment for the surface sections.  This arrangement is substantially cheaper than an alternative trench arrangement (similar to that used on the Yonge Subway north of Rosedale) along the north side of Eglinton in the land reserved for the Richview Expressway.
  • The carhouse will be somewhere near Black Creek.  Although not explicitly named in the report, the Kodak lands in Weston have been rumoured as a site.
  • The airport alignment and stations are the subject of an area study to deal with special considerations including two highway crossings and a future link with other regional services.
  • Future work in this project will also include connections with existing and future TTC subway and LRT services.

The next round of public consultation including updated designs will occur in June.  There will be six open houses between June 15 and 25 from 6:30 to 9:00 pm:

  • June 15: William Lea Room, 1073 Millwood Rd
  • June 17: Eglinton Public School, 223 Eglinton Avenue East
  • June 18: Richview Collegiate, 1738 Islington Avenue
  • June 23: York Memorial Collegiate, 2690 Eglinton Avenue West (at Keele Street)
  • June 24: Beth Sholom Synagogue, 1445 Eglinton Avenue West (at Allen Road)
  • June 25: Don Montgomery Community Recreation Centre (formerly Mid Scarb. CC), 2467 Eglinton Ave East
by

Sheppard East / Don Mills Station Design

The TTC has confirmed that the Sheppard East LRT will come west into Don Mills Station rather than terminating at Consumers Road, but the design at Don Mills is still under review.

Just to recap from the previous article on this topic, the preferred design at Don Mills would have seen the LRT at the same level as the subway.  The track layout would have given a staggered layout with the LRT pulling into a stub track that was cut into a lengthened subway platform (see illustration in the TTC report).  The actual track and platform layout (not shown) would have had a second platform further back for use when the stub track was occupied.

This was an alternative to both of the layout options in the EA document (see pages 6 and 7 of part 2 of the EA Report).  The first version shows a connection on the south side of the concourse level at Don Mills Station, while the second is at the same level as the subway.

For the concourse connection, it is important to note the relative position of the existing subway station and structures at its western end.  From TTC staff, I have learned that there is a potential conflict between a fan shaft and a  future north-south Don Mills LRT tunnel, but that the TTC believes this tunnel can be fitted in.  Any junction between the Sheppard and Don Mills LRTs at concourse level must deal with this constraint.

For the subway level connection, the original scheme placed the LRT platform well east of the subway station, and created a long walking transfer for passengers.  The revised design with the stub track cut into the subway platform shortens the distance by offsetting the LRT and subway tracks and reducing clearance requirements for buffer zones.

When Queen’s Park announced that the Sheppard East line would be through-routed via Don Mills to Finch, this completely changed the parameters for Don Mills Station.  TTC staff are reviewing design options for this scheme, and it will likely place the LRT station at concourse level.

The discussion by Commissioners also included a desire that any designs for this first wave of LRT lines take into account integration with the second set of Transit City lines.  At Don Mills, there is the obvious problem of how the station will operate once there is a Don Mills LRT providing through north-south service, and how combined Finch/Sheppard and Don Mills services will fit on the surface between Sheppard and Finch.

by

Sheppard LRT Don Mills Connection Unveiled, Sort Of

The TTC will consider a report this week regarding the link from the Sheppard East LRT to Don Mills Station.  The report includes (at the last page) an illustration of the design for the same-level direct transfer between the LRT and the subway.

It’s not a very good drawing and in particular it doesn’t show whether the intent is for both the subway and the LRT to use both platforms.  This has been discussed in a previous thread here.  I have asked for clarification from the TTC and will update this post when I receive further info.

The design is troublesome because of the way the car is shown ending against at a location with no overrun protection (i.e. a buffer stop and some additional track).  This will almost certainly result in a permanant slow order for cars entering the station.  Just the sort of thing we need for our new “fast” service.  Some adjustments are required.

The report brings out additional information about the predicted use of the LRT and subway lines at this interchange, of unexpected costs, and of yet another Metrolinx boondoggle:

  • About 8,500 passengers will travel between the Sheppard Subway and the Consumers Road area and they will have to transfer between the two routes.  Conversely, if the interchange were at Consumers, more people, 9,500, would have to transfer for through trips from points east to reach Don Mills Station.
  • The cost of bringing the LRT into Don Mills Station is about $120-million less than extending the subway further east.  However, …
  • The Sheppard East project budget (remember that this is the one for which funding was just announced) must be increased by $110-million to pay for the underground connection because this was not originally planned(!!!).  This is yet another example of how the TTC simply cannot publish reliable budget figures even at a time when much political capital was expended just to get project funding, and when accurate projections are important to the credibility of the Transit City plan as a whole.  How can they publish an EA in which the only connections between the subway and LRT involve tunneling, but not update the project cost estimate?
  • Metrolinx, always ready to throw a monkey-wrench into the works, would like to see continuous operation of the Sheppard East, Don Mills and Finch LRT services.  This would require a physical connection through to the Don Mills line for revenue service, not just whatever would be needed for carhouse moves between the lines.  It is self-evident that a through service will be more complex and expensive than a stub operation as now planned.  Metrolinx does not seem to have thought through the future implications of a separate Don Mills LRT nor of the possibility the Finch East line might run east of Don Mills, and they seem bent on creating immensely long routes in the name of “regional” travel.

Somehow, I hope to ride the Sheppard East LRT in my lifetime and, moreover, that this project won’t turn into another “St. Clair” with all manner of screw-ups and construction co-ordination problems along the way.

Updated 6:40 am, May 26:  David Cavlovic left the following comments, but in the wrong thread:

6:09 am:  That photo is so…so…unconvincing! Looks like someone had no idea what to do but photoshop a picture of an LRT in a chopped-off area of the Eastbound train platform.

6:10 am:  EEK. that comment should be with the next article. Need. Coffee!

by

Sheppard East LRT Funding Announced (Updated)

Updated May 19:

The question of turnback points and storage tracks on the Sheppard East LRT has come up in the comment thread on this post, and I have now received some details from the TTC.

There will be a crossover at “regular intervals” along the line for turnbacks.  As for storage tracks, there are two potential locations that were shown in the preliminary designs at public meetings.  Neither of these is confirmed yet, and their inclusion will be subject to detailed design and costing.

  • Don Mills Station (third track)
  • Malvern Garage (spur)

No three-track section on Sheppard itself is planned.

Details of the Don Mills Station configuration will be included in a report on the TTC agenda for May 28. Continue reading →

by

Analysis of 501 Queen Service Winter 2008/2009: Part II Long Branch to Parkside

In the previous installment, I reviewed the headway patterns for the 501 Queen route outbound to terminals at Neville, Humber and Long Branch.  Now I will turn to the operation of the west end of the route between Long Branch and Parkside Drive.  I used Parkside (the east side of High Park, and the continuation of Keele Street south of Bloor) as the eastern end of the measurement because it is at the end of the private right-of-way and because this avoids problems with variations caused by operations at Roncesvalles.

The charts presented here show headways (the frequency and regularity of service) as well as link times (the time needed to traverse part of the route).  Headways are important to riders because they show how predictable service will be, and they also bear on riding comfort because crowding is directly affected by regularity of service.  Link times are important for service planning because they show where and when congestion occurs, and how predictable (or not) the running time between locations will be. Continue reading →

by

WWLRT Public Meetings: Park Lawn to Long Branch

There will be two public meetings to discuss the design for this section of the WWLRT, essentially an upgrade of the Long Branch streetcar.

Monday, May 11, 2009
2:00pm-4:00pm 6:30pm to 9:00pm
Mimico Adult Learning Centre
255 Royal York Road

Tuesday, May 12, 2009
2:00pm to 4:00pm 6:30pm to 9:00pm
The Assembly Hall
1 Colonel Samuel Smith Park Drive

For further information, including the display panels from the previous open houses, please see the project’s website.

After the first round in December 2008 where many felt that the available information and proposal left much to be desired, this is described as a “re-start” of a “new consultation process”.