LRT in Jerusalem

[vero95]

here is an example of the LRT project that went wrong

A month and a half after the completion of the first stage of Jerusalem's transportation overhaul, passengers' anger and frustration seem to be rising faster than the speed of the capital's railway cars.

Thousands of passengers pass through this station every day, though this high spot is exposed to the winter chill and the summer sun. There is no protection against rain, and puddles drench the benches.

"They promised that a train would come every four minutes, but there's nothing in sight until at least 10 minutes go by," said Hadad.
http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/jerusalem-residents-hold-demonstration-over-light-rail-problems-1.414981
I wonder if we get a similar level of frustration here. personally I doubt because the majority will keep driving their cars anyway

[neutral]

Puddles huh?

[Marcanadian]

http://www.myfacewhen.net/uploads/239-oh-look-its-this-thread-again.jpg

[NorthYorker]

here is an example of the LRT project that went wrongWould you be so kind to clarify why do you think that those are LRT-specific problems, and not ones which could pop up within any public transportation system? TIA.

P.S. I'm surprising they are building LRT in Jerusalem. The lay of the land is not rail-friendly (Jerusalem is a mountain town, to put it simply). The very fact they're doing it is an ample proof that Light Rail offers significant advantages over buses...

[Tornado F2]

Would you be so kind to clarify why do you think that those are LRT-specific problems, and not ones which could pop up within any public transportation system? TIA.

P.S. I'm surprising they are building LRT in Jerusalem. The lay of the land is not rail-friendly (Jerusalem is a mountain town, to put it simply). The very fact they're doing it is an ample proof that Light Rail offers significant advantages over buses...

Wouldn't electric-powered buses on a dedicated lane make more sense in Jerusalem, given the vulnerability of rail tracks to sabotage/terrorism?

Edit: Interesting to see today's date in the Hebrew calendar: Nisan 18, 5772, right alongside the modern Christian-era date.

[neutral]

Wouldn't electric-powered buses on a dedicated lane make more sense in Jerusalem, given the vulnerability of rail tracks to sabotage/terrorism?

I don't know, the passengers seem more worried about puddles and those notorious middle east winters.

[vero95]

Would you be so kind to clarify why do you think that those are LRT-specific problems, and not ones which could pop up within any public transportation system? TIA.

P.S. I'm surprising they are building LRT in Jerusalem. The lay of the land is not rail-friendly (Jerusalem is a mountain town, to put it simply). The very fact they're doing it is an ample proof that Light Rail offers significant advantages over buses...

what do you mean? subways have no problems with weather conditions, no?
also, people complained about mixing different modes of transit. if they use streetcars to close the loop, you will need to take 4 of them if you wanted to get from bloor subway line to sheppard subway line (bloor->SRT->streetcar->sheppard), no? do you think it's very convenient?

[NorthYorker]

Wouldn't electric-powered buses on a dedicated lane make more sense in Jerusalem, given the vulnerability of rail tracks to sabotage/terrorism?There's one big problem with busways in Jerusalem - there's no space. If you look at the map, it basically built to move folks in and out of downtown, and you can hardly imagine how crowded downtown Jerusalem is. That's where capacity advantage of LRT comes handy (I wonder if they considered Subway, and why they decided against it).

[Tornado F2]

There's one big problem with busways in Jerusalem - there's no space. If you look at the map, it basically built to move folks in and out of downtown, and you can hardly imagine how crowded downtown Jerusalem is. That's where capacity advantage of LRT comes handy (I wonder if they considered Subway, and why they decided against it).

Yes, that's something that can't be changed without destroying the historic significance of the older parts of the city. That will be the reason why they are still dependent on buses. But on the LRT route itself, where presumably there was space (anybody have a map?), perhaps a trackless option might have been a better choice?


I don't know, the passengers seem more worried about puddles and those notorious middle east winters.

That's actually a good thing. That means the terror threat has now eased enough for normal problems like that to take the forefront, at least among the younger crowd.

[Tornado F2]

BTW, obvious reason for not building subways in Jerusalem: every excavation will result in an archeological dig which will result in unpredictable delays.


Just out of curiosity, anybody know what's the least expensive (yet civilised) way to visit Jerusalem? I'd love to see the place someday. So much history and religious-significance there.

[vero95]

BTW, obvious reason for not building subways in Jerusalem: every excavation will result in an archeological dig which will result in unpredictable delays.


Just out of curiosity, anybody know what's the least expensive (yet civilised) way to visit Jerusalem? I'd love to see the place someday. So much history and religious-significance there.


I bet that's the reason. it's the same in Rome

[Tornado F2]

I bet that's the reason. it's the same in Rome

It's probably similar in most major cities in Europe that have existed for millennia. Cities built on top of cities on top of cities. I recently came across interesting info online regarding still-existing structures and facilities beneath the street of my football club's city - Manchester. As indicated by its name, to those in the know, it dates back to Roman times. Obviously Rome and especially Jerusalem go back even further. Barcelona is probably the oldest city I've been to so far, with Roman remains near the gothic cathedral (and no doubt elsewhere too), and even those preceded by Carthaginian and Phoenician remains. Yeah, Barcelona is supposedly centuries (at least) older than Rome.

Surprisingly, Barca does have an extensive subway/metro system: http://www.barcelona-tourist-guide.com/en/maps/barcelona-metro-map.html

Manchester, on the other hand, has gone with LRTs ("trams") along with its pre-existing bus and rail network. http://www.tfgm.com/journey_planning/maps.cfm

BTW, here's the Jerusalem route. Looks to be longer than I realised. Electric buses would obviously be much slower.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_1v6tZ-805AE/TMV8NgIjOWI/AAAAAAAAB8c/psNxWiW10VM/s1600/Map_Line1.jpg

[sunnycnm5]

it is important to note that it is near impossible to build underground in Jerusalem so they had little choice for selecting the LRT. Additionally, if you don't know Israeli's, they are extremely fast paced and don't like waiting around (in fact, the concept of a line doesn't really exist there). They are also extremely vocal and politically inclined. Just things to keep in mind when analyzing this situation and comparing it to Toronto.

[NorthYorker]

paid for by the american taxpayer. I'd like to see a proof of this statement (and am sure it would not be provided).
what do you mean? subways have no problems with weather conditions, no?Would you actually read the stuff you copy-paste here, you would notice that LRT operations are unaffected by weather conditions, complaints are around non-sheltered stops (which are exactly as they would be for a bus). Besides, this winter in Israel is a real bummer weather-wise, it seems that Jerusalem had Toronto winter and we enjoyed one similar to Jerusalem.

people complained about mixing different modes of transit. This is not LRT-specific issue, this is how you build the network.
if they use streetcars to close the loop, you will need to take 4 of them if you wanted to get from bloor subway line to sheppard subway line (bloor->SRT->streetcar->sheppard), no? do you think it's very convenient? Both Stubway and SRT are costly mistakes of days past, but it is no reason to cling to them. I kinda hope that eventually they will link Sheppard East LRT and SRT replacement to be a single route, which will bring some semblance of rhyme or reason into the system.

BTW, obvious reason for not building subways in Jerusalem: every excavation will result in an archeological dig which will result in unpredictable delays.Yeah, cut-and-cover would be a nightmare, but bored tunnel at 50 m depth can be an option.
Just out of curiosity, anybody know what's the least expensive (yet civilised) way to visit Jerusalem? I'd love to see the place someday. So much history and religious-significance there.I found hostels there are surprisingly civilized. Mind you, I was in my mid-20 back then. However, the real issue is price of tickets to fly there and back, and it would drain you $1200 per person bare minimum. Today the cheapest option is flying through Kiev with Aerosvit, they have non-stops to Toronto and Lot and you don't need a transit visa.

[vero95]

Would you actually read the stuff you copy-paste here, you would notice that LRT operations are unaffected by weather conditions, complaints are around non-sheltered stops (which are exactly as they would be for a bus). Besides, this winter in Israel is a real bummer weather-wise, it seems that Jerusalem had Toronto winter and we enjoyed one similar to Jerusalem.
would you actually think before you post? if subways are not affected by the weather, there would be no problems they experience in Jerusalem had they built subways


This is not LRT-specific issue, this is how you build the network. Both Stubway and SRT are costly mistakes of days past, but it is no reason to cling to them. I kinda hope that eventually they will link Sheppard East LRT and SRT replacement to be a single route, which will bring some semblance of rhyme or reason into the system
what do you mean by subway and SRT are costly mistakes of the past? if you mean the sheppard line, it's not subway-specific issue since any mode of transport would be considered a failure if it was stopped in the middle of the destination. why are you so sure the proposed streetcars are not going to be a failure if everything is a failure for you :facepalm:

[Tornado F2]

Yeah, cut-and-cover would be a nightmare, but bored tunnel at 50 m depth can be an option.

I found hostels there are surprisingly civilized. Mind you, I was in my mid-20 back then. However, the real issue is price of tickets to fly there and back, and it would drain you $1200 per person bare minimum. Today the cheapest option is flying through Kiev with Aerosvit, they have non-stops to Toronto and Lot and you don't need a transit visa.

- Wouldn't it be funny if they struck oil there in the process. (Yeah, I know, wrong direction). Or the Ark of the Covenant. :)

No doubt deep subways might be an option in the future, if they can afford them. A better option might be to just stop Jerusalem's expansion and develop surounding cities instead. I know Jerusalem is considered special for so many reasons, but I can't imagine it can be expanded much further without serious infrastructure problems or the loss of its character.

- Thanks for the info. Ukraine - another place worth a visit. It's a shame I'm not a gambler as winning the lottery is the only way I could visit all the places I'd like to see.

[plymouthhater]

Just out of curiosity, anybody know what's the least expensive (yet civilised) way to visit Jerusalem? I'd love to see the place someday. So much history and religious-significance there.

Youth Hostels are pretty inexpensive in Israel. Back in the early 80's I toured around Israel - youth hostels were $7 a night and included free breakfast.

http://www.iyha.org.il/eng/

http://www.hihostels.com/dba/country-Israel-IL.en.htm

[NorthYorker]

would you actually think before you post? I try to, thank you for advice.
if subways are not affected by the weather, there would be no problems they experience in Jerusalem had they built subwaysI'll explain gain, slowly and metodically. You are Ford's supporter, after all, everything should be explained in very simple words to this bunch. Jerusalem LRT had no weather-related operating problems, period. It operated through the worst winter the place experienced for some years. What you call "problems" are complaints from riders who don't know how to dress according to the weather and get cold while waiting for a car.

what do you mean by subway and SRT are costly mistakes of the past? if you mean the sheppard lineI took pain making "T" in sTubway bold in my message, and you still managed to miss it. Yes, Einstein, I meant Sheppard line. And it was a mistake exactly because it was wrong allocation of scarce resources available, not because something is inherently wrong with a subway.
why are you so sure the proposed streetcars are not going to be a failureI'm not sure, but at least they have a chance. However, I'm a bit spooked by the idea of trying to explain to you, vero95, why "systems" work and "sTubways to nowhere" fail, but I'll try nonetheless.
Toronto LRT plans (formerly known as TransitCity) do have this systematic approach, which is AWOL in Ford's plans. When I look at LRT idea, I see where dough is coming from, what needs will be covered by the project, how different parts of the system interact with one another.
Ford's "stubway to Victoria Park" is essentially "let's bury as much money as we got and think later". You see, vero95, last 20+ years I earned a living by building information systems for my clients, and I get nauseous immediately after I read "dig now, think later".
- Wouldn't it be funny if they struck oil there in the processYou know why Moses led Hebrew around for 40 years? He was looking for a spot which has neither water nor oil. Wasn't easy in this area :)
A better option might be to just stop Jerusalem's expansion and develop surounding cities instead.That's exactly what they are doing. Western terminus of the LRT is where "the" Jerusalem ends. LRT is fed by commuters from outer boroughs, separated by mountain ridges from "The City".

I know Jerusalem is considered special for so many reasons, but I can't imagine it can be expanded much further without serious infrastructure problems or the loss of its character.As I said, mountainous character of the area eases concealment of those modern boroughs. On top of that they have a bylaw that everything built in the city should be clad in local "Jerusalem stone". So new buildings blend easily into the landscape.

[Tornado F2]

You know why Moses led Hebrew around for 40 years? He was looking for a spot which has neither water nor oil. Wasn't easy in this area :)

Nice one. :) Though he did find water, which is scarce in the region.

I wonder why he didn't just follow the coast? It would have been a lot quicker. God mustn't be a Charlton Heston fan. :)

Actually, there's a scene for a spoof movie: Moses leads the Israelites up a beach, only to run across the head of the Statue of Liberty. :lol:

[plymouthhater]

You know why Moses led Hebrew around for 40 years? He was looking for a spot which has neither water nor oil. Wasn't easy in this area :).

The funny thing is now they have found oil and natural gas in the Mediterranean:
http://www.jpost.com/NationalNews/Article.aspx?id=201439
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/139163

Moses didn't do so bad afterall.

[konfusion666]

I bet that's the reason. it's the same in Rome

uh, there is a subway in rome, i took it a few years ago.


It's probably similar in most major cities in Europe that have existed for millennia.

I dunno, most of the major capitals I visited had extensive underground subway systems, usually combined with some sort of LRT-like train for the suburb-type areas.

[i6s1]

Hundreds of cities have lrt, why use isreal as a example?

Puddles.

[Tornado F2]

I dunno, most of the major capitals I visited had extensive underground subway systems, usually combined with some sort of LRT-like train for the suburb-type areas.

As I said, Barcelona has one, as does London of course.

[Tornado F2]

The funny thing is now they have found oil and natural gas in the Mediterranean:
http://www.jpost.com/NationalNews/Article.aspx?id=201439
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/139163

Moses didn't do so bad afterall.

Whoever said he did?

He was just a typical guy and didn't stop to ask directions. :lol:

[vero95]

uh, there is a subway in rome, i took it a few years ago.
one line. many sites were discovered while they were building it. they stopped expanding it. I am not sure if that was the reason but possibly



I dunno, most of the major capitals I visited had extensive underground subway systems, usually combined with some sort of LRT-like train for the suburb-type areas.
LRT or GO-like train? but I agree you need an extensive subway system

[vero95]

I try to, thank you for advice.I'll explain gain, slowly and metodically. You are Ford's supporter, after all, everything should be explained in very simple words to this bunch. Jerusalem LRT had no weather-related operating problems, period. It operated through the worst winter the place experienced for some years. What you call "problems" are complaints from riders who don't know how to dress according to the weather and get cold while waiting for a car.
I took pain making "T" in sTubway bold in my message, and you still managed to miss it. Yes, Einstein, I meant Sheppard line. And it was a mistake exactly because it was wrong allocation of scarce resources available, not because something is inherently wrong with a subway. I'm not sure, but at least they have a chance. However, I'm a bit spooked by the idea of trying to explain to you, vero95, why "systems" work and "sTubways to nowhere" fail, but I'll try nonetheless.
Toronto LRT plans (formerly known as TransitCity) do have this systematic approach, which is AWOL in Ford's plans. When I look at LRT idea, I see where dough is coming from, what needs will be covered by the project, how different parts of the system interact with one another.
Ford's "stubway to Victoria Park" is essentially "let's bury as much money as we got and think later". You see, vero95, last 20+ years I earned a living by building information systems for my clients, and I get nauseous immediately after I read "dig now, think later".You know why Moses led Hebrew around for 40 years? He was looking for a spot which has neither water nor oil. Wasn't easy in this area :)That's exactly what they are doing. Western terminus of the LRT is where "the" Jerusalem ends. LRT is fed by commuters from outer boroughs, separated by mountain ridges from "The City".
As I said, mountainous character of the area eases concealment of those modern boroughs. On top of that they have a bylaw that everything built in the city should be clad in local "Jerusalem stone". So new buildings blend easily into the landscape.

subways to nowhere fail and so would planes, trains and automobiles, Einstain. stop them in the middle of the destination and then complain about poor ridership :facepalm: if you were fired for incompetence in the middle of a project (which I see is quite possible based on lack of logic in your posts), that project would also be a failure :facepalm:
LOL at systematic approach. what kind of approach is that to put streetcars everywhere, example: between a subway line and an SRT line :D
btw, you must be aware that the average speed of those streetcars will be 22kmh. that's 50% lower than the lowest average speed of LRTs in other cities in NA. when you design your systems, do you care about the performance? a big percentage of projects fail because they are not usable due to the performance issues

[NorthYorker]

I wonder why he didn't just follow the coast? It would have been a lot quicker. Traditionally it is interpreted as a deliberate decision by Moses to let the old generation die out. You see, Moses led relatively tame group out of Egypt. 40 years later Canaan had been conquered by young wild desert warriors who grew up with spear and war club for toys...
The funny thing is now they have found oil and natural gas in the MediterraneanTo tell you the truth, I've heard those "We found oil" announcements in Israel for last 20 years, and so far nothing came out of it. I'm skeptical about those too...

subways to nowhere fail and so would planes, trains and automobiles, Einstain. stop them in the middle of the destination and then complain about poor ridership :facepalm:Exactly! That's why you don't start building before you secured funding to stretch the line to some area which can be made into transportation hub. Even Lastman's stubway, despite being largely a prestige pet project, had been built with this consideration in mind (it didn't work, Sheppard/Don Mills didn't become a hub, but that's another story). Just extending it to Vic Park would solve zero problems, Vic Park intersection has no space for transit hub. As far as ridership issue is concerned, I'm yet to see a serious research predicting subway-worthy ridership on Sheppard line, even if it is extended to the Scarborough Town Center. And, last but not least, it is "Einstein", not "Einstain". You once again failed miserably in your attempt at being "educated and sarcastic". Just remember that big foreign words and names are not for you.
if you were fired for incompetence in the middle of a project (which I see is quite possible based on lack of logic in your posts), that project would also be a failure :facepalm:Once again you amply proved your inability to think logically. Assuming that I did fail my duties to a customer and had been let go, it does not say anything about potential failure of the whole project. Although, on second thought, it kinda does. If incompetents are weeded out, a project's chances to succeed do raise, not decline. So your example is not only irrelevant, it is logically wrong.
when you design your systems, do you care about the performance?Sure, but it is balanced by a project's budget. I would not recommend a mainframe for a database server, if there're like 5 low-volume users...

[MrBriggs]

I would not recommend a mainframe for a database server, if there're like 5 low-volume users...

If this database is not blazing fast, people will just not use it! They would rather print everything and do searches manually than to use a database that doesn't bring results at the speed of thought... just like people would rather be stuck in traffic than to get into an LRV because its speed won't reach an arbitrary number vero95 set.

[NorthYorker]

you must be aware that the average speed of those streetcars will be 22kmh. Average speed of Yonge subway is 32 km/h (it takes 1/2 hour to travel 16 km from Finch to Union), so 22 does not sound too bad. I'd say you're lucky to travel as fast along Yonge in a car...

[vero95]

Exactly! That's why you don't start building before you secured funding to stretch the line to some area which can be made into transportation hub. Even Lastman's stubway, despite being largely a prestige pet project, had been built with this consideration in mind (it didn't work, Sheppard/Don Mills didn't become a hub, but that's another story). Just extending it to Vic Park would solve zero problems, Vic Park intersection has no space for transit hub. As far as ridership issue is concerned, I'm yet to see a serious research predicting subway-worthy ridership on Sheppard line, even if it is extended to the Scarborough Town Center. And, last but not least, it is "Einstein", not "Einstain". You once again failed miserably in your attempt at being "educated and sarcastic". Just remember that big foreign words and names are not for you.

I should have stopped after "Exactly!". you perfected agreeing and disagreeing at the same time (flashy is also good at it). if you agree any system would be a failure if there are no fundings to finish it, why do you insist it's a subway failure?
some problems with your logic I see :confused:



Once again you amply proved your inability to think logically. Assuming that I did fail my duties to a customer and had been let go, it does not say anything about potential failure of the whole project. Although, on second thought, it kinda does. If incompetents are weeded out, a project's chances to succeed do raise, not decline. So your example is not only irrelevant, it is logically wrong. Sure, but it is balanced by a project's budget. I would not recommend a mainframe for a database server, if there're like 5 low-volume users...
a project could be a failure for many reasons. one is if it's over budget and it would be if a client fired you for incompetence. if you think firing you only makes a project successful, put it on your resume and do not forget to mention that you know how to spell Einstein :facepalm:

[konfusion666]

one line. many sites were discovered while they were building it. they stopped expanding it. I am not sure if that was the reason but possibly

2 underground lines. It will take you to most of the popular tourist destinations except for the Vatican which will be a 15 minute walk. Don't know about reason to not expand it, but other "ancient" cities in Italy (i.e. Naples; founded in 900BC) also have subway systems. Naples also has more than 1 underground line.

Paris has an extensive subway, London has the BEST subway, Berlin has a decent subway, etc.



LRT or GO-like train? but I agree you need an extensive subway system

usually LRT for inner suburbs, GO-like train for outer suburbs and exurbs, following the London example.

[NorthYorker]

I should have stopped after "Exactly!"You know, may be you should not have participated in the discussion in the first place, if you're unable to consider different aspects of the problem. I agreed with the part of your statement which did make sense. However, it does not mean that your narrow-sighted worldview makes sense as a whole

you perfected agreeing and disagreeing at the same time (flashy is also good at it). Isn't it natural? Those of us who are capable of looking at a problem from different angles are pretty comfortable agreeing with some statements about the problem and disagreeing with others. Too bad you are unable to get it.

if you agree any system would be a failure if there are no fundings to finish it, why do you insist it's a subway failure?Sorry, pal, but I never insisted that subways are inherently bad. Quite the opposite. Being the city boy from the former ComBloc, I'm very used to public transit and comfortable with it. I was just questioning is subway appropriate for Toronto's financial situation and transit requirements.
some problems with your logic I seeAre you channelling Yoda now?

if you think firing you only makes a project successful, put it on your resumeThank you for your advice, I did (kinda). Among other things, I built my professional reputation on a fact that I'm not afraid to tell customers if my services are not needed for them in this particular moment. For example, if they have heavy DB/-based system and they hire me for a system analyst role, I would not hesitate to tell them that I would not be too useful for them in developer's capacity, being an Oracle guy.

[Tornado F2]

Traditionally it is interpreted as a deliberate decision by Moses to let the old generation die out. You see, Moses led relatively tame group out of Egypt. 40 years later Canaan had been conquered by young wild desert warriors who grew up with spear and war club for toys...

Yeah, I was just kidding about following the coast. The journey had to be a challenge for the people in order for them to prove their worthiness and increase their toughness. After all, what happened when Moses decided to take a brief break and go rock climbing? After his encounter with the Burning Bush he descended the mountain and found them all worshipping craven images and false gods again. At that point he/God thought, "sod 'em all, we're taking the unscenic, generation-long desert route home". Smart move really.

[vero95]

Thank you for your advice, I did (kinda). Among other things, I built my professional reputation on a fact that I'm not afraid to tell customers if my services are not needed for them in this particular moment. For example, if they have heavy DB/-based system and they hire me for a system analyst role, I would not hesitate to tell them that I would not be too useful for them in developer's capacity, being an Oracle guy.

sorry, buddy, but there is no logic in what you are saying. they would not be able to fire you if you did not accept the job so you explanation that you are honest and do not accept a job for which you are not qualified does not make sense
systems are not designed for that particular moment. if you were professional as you claim to be, you should know that.
I am a bit tired of your lack of logic. there are many posters like you whom I have to explain basics and it's not fun for me any more

[vero95]

Isn't it natural? Those of us who are capable of looking at a problem from different angles are pretty comfortable agreeing with some statements about the problem and disagreeing with others. Too bad you are unable to get it.

no, it's not natural to everyone but it's natural to sleazy politicians

[NorthYorker]

After his encounter with the Burning Bush he descended the mountain and found them all worshipping craven images and false gods again. Yeah, leading Jews is as easy as herding cars :) :) :)

they would not be able to fire you if you did not accept the jobSigh... I've tried to explain, but you didn't get it :( They could have hired me as System Analyst and later on offer me something like Development Lead role for a DB/2-related project, at which point I would let them know that they would be better off hiring DB/2 guru.

systems are not designed for that particular moment. No they're not. However, they are designed using best available load predictions, and there's no prediction that Sheppard would reach subway-worthy load in next 30 years.

[vero95]

2 underground lines. It will take you to most of the popular tourist destinations except for the Vatican which will be a 15 minute walk. Don't know about reason to not expand it, but other "ancient" cities in Italy (i.e. Naples; founded in 900BC) also have subway systems. Naples also has more than 1 underground line.

Paris has an extensive subway, London has the BEST subway, Berlin has a decent subway, etc.


is it 2 in Rome? OK. I used the subway there but forgot how many lines they had. yeah, London is pretty good but from all I've seen I liked Munich the most



usually LRT for inner suburbs, GO-like train for outer suburbs and exurbs, following the London example.
LRTs are OK but not everwhere like they are trying to do in Toronto. I agree for outer suburbs they need heavy rail systems. LRTs are too slow if they are mixed with traffic

[vero95]

No they're not. However, they are designed using best available load predictions, and there's no prediction that Sheppard would reach subway-worthy load in next 30 years.

actually the pembina report (which is very pro LRT) predicts densities in the sheppard area to reach subway levels by 2031
if you close the loop, you will get additional boost in ridership so it may not be 30 years as you say

[boblobob]

actually the pembina report (which is very pro LRT) predicts densities in the sheppard area to reach subway levels by 2031
if you close the loop, you will get additional boost in ridership so it may not be 30 years as you say

not quite.

the existing sheppard line does not reach pembina's (low-ball)floor for subway density, and the then-proposed extension does an even worse job of not reaching it at all. page 9. also note the asterisks, pembina tries to inflate the projection by comparing jobs+people to the people only floor for transit modes, and they still don't get there.

vero, really. all this time and you still insist on this?

http://pubs.pembina.org/reports/making-tracks-2012.pdf

[vero95]

not quite.

the existing sheppard line does not reach pembina's (low-ball)floor for subway density, and the then-proposed extension does an even worse job of not reaching it at all. page 9. also note the asterisks, pembina tries to inflate the projection by comparing jobs+people to the people only floor for transit modes, and they still don't get there.

vero, really. all this time and you still insist on this?

http://pubs.pembina.org/reports/making-tracks-2012.pdf

102 vs 115. is that a show stopper for you? :facepalm:
we are talking about densities only, no? I mentioned that the ridership is not only density dependant. if you finish the damn line and close the damn loop, you will see ridership growing, no?

[boblobob]

102 vs 115. is that a show stopper for you? :facepalm:
we are talking about densities only, no? I mentioned that the ridership is not only density dependant. if you finish the damn line and close the damn loop, you will see ridership growing, no?

in your post, you made a specific, no doubt unintentionally mis-informed, claim that the pembina reports say that the sheppard density will reach subway level densities. the report doesn't appear to say that.

thanks for trolling.

[vero95]

in your post, you made a specific, no doubt unintentionally mis-informed, claim that the pembina reports say that the sheppard density will reach subway level densities. the report doesn't appear to say that.

thanks for trolling.

like you would make a decision based on those numbers
114 people per hectare = LRT
115 people per hectare = subway
:facepalm:
I told you you would get additional ridership from closing the loop, no?

[boblobob]

like you would make a decision based on those numbers
114 people per hectare = LRT
115 people per hectare = subway
:facepalm:
I told you you would get additional ridership from closing the loop, no?

the reason one might want to make a decision based on numbers is that these numbers in the pembina reflect the cost-recovery thresholds with the current transit funding arrangements in ontario. i don't know about you, but i'd prefer my tax dollars to not be wasted.

once more, as has been explained a number of times, the potential for some additional ridership on a subway line (something never in dispute by any party including the ttc) is that it does not equate to cost-recovery for that line. however, the existing ridership and potential ridership increases on an lrt on sheppard/eglinton/finch do equate to cost recovery for that mode of transit. i.e. two people can be equally served by a scion iq taxi or a porsche panamera taxi, and in fact the panamera can hold more people and more people may even want to use it because it is a panamera, but the increased cost of operating that panamera will not covered from fares alone (premium fuel and ceramic brakes don't come cheap).

so again, if one is content with losing money hand over fist, then it makes sense to build a subway on sheppard. but that means bus routes, etc, have to be cut elsewhere in order to run that subway line. transit lines do not exist in isolation. they exist in systems and networks. if the sheppard line causes the ttc to lose money (which it is), that means fares must either rise (which it has with great protest), other taxes must be implemented (which the current city of toronto executive has consistently voted against doing), or the costs must be made up by reducing or cancelling service on other ttc routes (which is already happening in part due to the under-performing sheppard stubway). reduce service to build an under-performing subway, or increase fares and taxes to build an under-performing subway? that was the choice before city council.

you clearly have the intellectual vigour to articulate your preferred option, i.e. all transit should be underground, travel faster than cars, and be only built when we have all the money for it, regardless of: operating costs/people that need improved service right now/absence of a funding plan/repeated political rejection of a funding plan. that's okay. that's fine.

but please stop resorting to misstatements and misreadings to defend your preference. frankly, it's beneath you. it's okay that you prefer subways. it's okay you prefer subways on sheppard, finch, and eglinton. it's okay that you prefer a downtown relief line subway. it's okay that you feel commuters from outside toronto should have greater subway options to get into and around the city for work. it's okay that you feel residents within toronto should have greater subway options to get around the city. i feel that they should too. however, the discussion is taking place in the non-abstracted context of a committed $8 billion funding envelope to improve transit connectivity in toronto. so for me, and many others i suspect, the question is whether it makes sense to spend that money to get as much benefit to as many people as possible in the near term while mitigating long-term operating budget consequences for the ttc, or to benefit as few people as possible over the long term while maximising long-term operating budgeting consequences for the ttc?

also to keep this on topic of the thread: jerusalem.

[LostInTruth]

Vero95 thread

Always wanted to do that lol:razz:

[vero95]

the reason one might want to make a decision based on numbers is that these numbers in the pembina reflect the cost-recovery thresholds with the current transit funding arrangements in ontario. i don't know about you, but i'd prefer my tax dollars to not be wasted.

once more, as has been explained a number of times, the potential for some additional ridership on a subway line (something never in dispute by any party including the ttc) is that it does not equate to cost-recovery for that line. however, the existing ridership and potential ridership increases on an lrt on sheppard/eglinton/finch do equate to cost recovery for that mode of transit. i.e. two people can be equally served by a scion iq taxi or a porsche panamera taxi, and in fact the panamera can hold more people and more people may even want to use it because it is a panamera, but the increased cost of operating that panamera will not covered from fares alone (premium fuel and ceramic brakes don't come cheap).

so again, if one is content with losing money hand over fist, then it makes sense to build a subway on sheppard. but that means bus routes, etc, have to be cut elsewhere in order to run that subway line. transit lines do not exist in isolation. they exist in systems and networks. if the sheppard line causes the ttc to lose money (which it is), that means fares must either rise (which it has with great protest), other taxes must be implemented (which the current city of toronto executive has consistently voted against doing), or the costs must be made up by reducing or cancelling service on other ttc routes (which is already happening in part due to the under-performing sheppard stubway). reduce service to build an under-performing subway, or increase fares and taxes to build an under-performing subway? that was the choice before city council.

you clearly have the intellectual vigour to articulate your preferred option, i.e. all transit should be underground, travel faster than cars, and be only built when we have all the money for it, regardless of: operating costs/people that need improved service right now/absence of a funding plan/repeated political rejection of a funding plan. that's okay. that's fine.

but please stop resorting to misstatements and misreadings to defend your preference. frankly, it's beneath you. it's okay that you prefer subways. it's okay you prefer subways on sheppard, finch, and eglinton. it's okay that you prefer a downtown relief line subway. it's okay that you feel commuters from outside toronto should have greater subway options to get into and around the city for work. it's okay that you feel residents within toronto should have greater subway options to get around the city. i feel that they should too. however, the discussion is taking place in the non-abstracted context of a committed $8 billion funding envelope to improve transit connectivity in toronto. so for me, and many others i suspect, the question is whether it makes sense to spend that money to get as much benefit to as many people as possible in the near term while mitigating long-term operating budget consequences for the ttc, or to benefit as few people as possible over the long term while maximising long-term operating budgeting consequences for the ttc?


do you understand that having minimal funds is just one of the arguments when making a decision. it's not the only argument. saying that we have to go with this and not with that because we have no money is really stupid.
you should select what's appropriate. if something is not appropriate but cheaper (but still very expensive), it does not make sense to spend on it either. do you understand that?



also to keep this on topic of the thread: jerusalem.
fair enough. do you think the problems in Jerusalem will not be repeated in Toronto?

[flashy_mcflash]

do you understand that having minimal funds is just one of the arguments when making a decision. it's not the only argument. saying that we have to go with this and not with that because we have no money is really stupid.
you should select what's appropriate. if something is not appropriate but cheaper (but still very expensive), it does not make sense to spend on it either. do you understand that?


You have decided ARBITRARILY, with NO DATA, that LRV's are inappropriate. They are more than appropriate if you actually know how numbers work.

[NorthYorker]

do you think the problems in Jerusalem will not be repeated in Toronto?I'd like to know what problems are you talking about? The article in Haaretz mentions the following:
1. Proof of payment problems during transfers to and from LRT (not applicable in Torono; if there's an area perefected by the TTC, it is black magic of those transfer tickets).
2. Problems with bus route adjustments (not applicabel in Toronto, since LRT will just replace the existing bus routes, plus our system is a grid anyway, unlike mad labyrinth of Jerusalem bus routes).
3. LRT western terminal open to elements. I believe those issues are already being addressed in Jerusalem (article does mention light shelter being built) and am hoping the TTC would be smart enough to have something similar to covered SRT/subway stations they were building for decades.
4. Delays due to threat of terrorism. This stuff, as much as I hate the thought, we might have, but it is even worse issue for subways.
5. Passengers being unhappy. This is the issue we're definitely gonna have, LRT, Subways, or StarTrek-style beaming...

[vero95]

You have decided ARBITRARILY, with NO DATA, that LRV's are inappropriate. They are more than appropriate if you actually know how numbers work.

no, you decided they are appropriate because there is no money to build and support subways

[vero95]

1. Proof of payment problems during transfers to and from LRT (not applicable in Torono; if there's an area perefected by the TTC, it is black magic of those transfer tickets).

2. Problems with bus route adjustments (not applicabel in Toronto, since LRT will just replace the existing bus routes, plus our system is a grid anyway, unlike mad labyrinth of Jerusalem bus routes).
assuming there are no problems with payments, there are still problems with transfers. if you wanted to get from the bloor line to the sheppard line, you would need 3 transfers: bloor->SRT->streetcar->sheppard. I do not know about you but it does not sound right to me


3. LRT western terminal open to elements. I believe those issues are already being addressed in Jerusalem (article does mention light shelter being built) and am hoping the TTC would be smart enough to have something similar to covered SRT/subway stations they were building for decades.
I would like to see those shelters


4. Delays due to threat of terrorism. This stuff, as much as I hate the thought, we might have, but it is even worse issue for subways.
delays can be due to accidents or traffic as well. those streetcars can't operate at high frequencies due to interactions with the traffic. their speed also needs to be limited because of that. even at peak times you will not see them more frequent than every few mins. subways would be able to ride every min. even in the tunnel the frequencies will be dictated by the frequencies above the ground so every few mins. the whole advantage of the tunnel will be therefore lost. riderships could be high on the eglinton line but those streetcars will be a bottleneck both due to frequencies and capacities


5. Passengers being unhappy. This is the issue we're definitely gonna have, LRT, Subways, or StarTrek-style beaming...
what's important is councillors will spend their money. spending the money asap is the biggest issue right now

[boblobob]

dsaying that we have to go with this and not with that because we have no money is really stupid. you should select what's appropriate. if something is not appropriate but cheaper (but still very expensive), it does not make sense to spend on it either. do you understand that?


fair enough. do you think the problems in Jerusalem will not be repeated in Toronto?

i need shelter. i would like a baller 40-room mansion, but can only afford a 4-bedroom home. i need shelter. using your example, i should remain and make-do in a studio apartment until i can afford a 40-room mansion when a 4-bedroom home would meet my current and future needs and would be a significant improvement over my current shelter. this is basically what you are saying.

to my mind, you have yet to clearly demonstrate in what way an lrt is a wholly inappropriate mode of transit for the proposed routes as opposed to the current bus service beyond speculation about the potential for careless passenger vehicle drivers to crash into moving lrts and pedestrians being run over as they rush to catch the lrt. why aren't these drivers crashing into buses? why aren't these pedestrians being massacred by cars as they rush to catch their buses now?

the lrt issues in jerusalem from the article provided, and further research, appear to have little to do with the technology itself, customer demand / appropriateness of the mode, or cars driving into lrts as they do with customer service issues, connectivity issues with the bus network, and concerns as to the status of east jerusalem. and guess what, they are expanding it because it's such a failure.

we get it. you don't want lrt in toronto. but enough with the misstatements and misappropriations of fact to make your case.

[flashy_mcflash]

no, you decided they are appropriate because there is no money to build and support subways

Wrong again. It was decided they are appropriate because they carry the amount of passengers that the line has and will have into the foreseeable future.

[vero95]

i need shelter. i would like a baller 40-room mansion, but can only afford a 4-bedroom home. i need shelter. using your example, i should remain and make-do in a studio apartment until i can afford a 40-room mansion when a 4-bedroom home would meet my current and future needs and would be a significant improvement over my current shelter. this is basically what you are saying.

to my mind, you have yet to clearly demonstrate in what way an lrt is a wholly inappropriate mode of transit for the proposed routes as opposed to the current bus service beyond speculation about the potential for careless passenger vehicle drivers to crash into moving lrts and pedestrians being run over as they rush to catch the lrt. why aren't these drivers crashing into buses? why aren't these pedestrians being massacred by cars as they rush to catch their buses now?

the lrt issues in jerusalem from the article provided, and further research, appear to have little to do with the technology itself, customer demand / appropriateness of the mode, or cars driving into lrts as they do with customer service issues, connectivity issues with the bus network, and concerns as to the status of east jerusalem. and guess what, they are expanding it because it's such a failure.

we get it. you don't want lrt in toronto. but enough with the misstatements and misappropriations of fact to make your case.

buses are much safer than LRTs. buses can stop much faster. that's the fact. you should know that stuff if you claim you are a city planner

[vero95]

Wrong again. It was decided they are appropriate because they carry the amount of passengers that the line has and will have into the foreseeable future.

do you think building a tunnel to see a streetcar every few minutes is appropriate? :facepalm:

[flashy_mcflash]

do you think building a tunnel to see a streetcar every few minutes is appropriate? :facepalm:

Sure, why not? We can't have them on the roads or Blob will devour us all.

[vero95]

Sure, why not? We can't have them on the roads or Blob will devour us all.

right :facepalm:

[boblobob]

buses are much safer than LRTs. buses can stop much faster. that's the fact. you should know that stuff if you claim you are a city planner

it's true. buses can generally stop faster than rail vehicles. pneumatic tyres on roadway have a greater friction coefficient and metal wheels on metal rails. it's physics.

so then why are you advocating for more subways in toronto when we know what failure to stop can mean for peoples' lives right here in toronto? shouldn't you then be advocating for more buses everywhere with the $8 billion? or does brt not provide enough capacity to address the current and projected densities along the council-approved lrt routes?

[NorthYorker]

assuming there are no problems with payments, there are still problems with transfers. if you wanted to get from the bloor line to the sheppard line, you would need 3 transfers: bloor->SRT->streetcar->sheppard. I do not know about you but it does not sound right to me


I would like to see those shelters


delays can be due to accidents or traffic as well. those streetcars can't operate at high frequencies due to interactions with the traffic. their speed also needs to be limited because of that. even at peak times you will not see them more frequent than every few mins. subways would be able to ride every min. even in the tunnel the frequencies will be dictated by the frequencies above the ground so every few mins. the whole advantage of the tunnel will be therefore lost. riderships could be high on the eglinton line but those streetcars will be a bottleneck both due to frequencies and capacities


what's important is councillors will spend their money. spending the money asap is the biggest issue right nowSo you failed to name a single Jerusalem LRT problem which is applicable to Toronto.
/thread

[vero95]

it's true. buses can generally stop faster than rail vehicles. pneumatic tyres on roadway have a greater friction coefficient and metal wheels on metal rails. it's physics.

so then why are you advocating for more subways in toronto when we know what failure to stop can mean for peoples' lives right here in toronto? shouldn't you then be advocating for more buses everywhere with the $8 billion? or does brt not provide enough capacity to address the current and projected densities along the council-approved lrt routes?

I was suggesting more lanes and more buses (express buses for example). it would be much cheaper than building streetcars
I think you missed that

[vero95]

So you failed to name a single Jerusalem LRT problem which is applicable to Toronto.
/thread

that's the moment when they would fire you as a db contractor: you can't grasp all system's problems

[boblobob]

I was suggesting more lanes and more buses (express buses for example). it would be much cheaper than building streetcars
I think you missed that

i must have missed it. i would love to see the post where you made that assertion. so now that you feel brt is better than streetcar, is it better than lrt? given your preference for brt along finch sheppard and eglinton how do you address the immediate issue that brt does not provide sufficient capacity to meet current and projected population and jobs densities along the proposed routes?

[NorthYorker]

that's the moment when they would fire you as a db contractor: you can't grasp all system's problemsI asked you to list problems named in the article which are relevant to Toronto. You miserably failed, offering your usual incoherent ramblings. There are at least three threads already where your factless musings are being discussed, I don't want to turn this one into fourth. The facts are like this: you claimed that Jerusalem LRT is a failure but failed to prove that Jerusalem's problem are relevant for Toronto or inherent to LRT. Now you're turning into your customary ad hominem.

[no_username]

The Jerusalem LRT and buses are run by separate private companies. I suppose the lesson is not to privatize transit.

[Deadmau555]

SUBWAYS, We Want SUBWAYS!

[vero95]

i must have missed it. i would love to see the post where you made that assertion. so now that you feel brt is better than streetcar, is it better than lrt? given your preference for brt along finch sheppard and eglinton how do you address the immediate issue that brt does not provide sufficient capacity to meet current and projected population and jobs densities along the proposed routes?

I was saying that many times: if you have money do not build it. do not waste money on expensive temp solutions that does not make sense. streetcars in the tunnel do not make sense (unless the tunnel is really short) and so do streetcars between SRT and a subway. if you have no funds and need a temp solution, brt is much cheaper

[vero95]

I asked you to list problems named in the article which are relevant to Toronto. You miserably failed, offering your usual incoherent ramblings. There are at least three threads already where your factless musings are being discussed, I don't want to turn this one into fourth. The facts are like this: you claimed that Jerusalem LRT is a failure but failed to prove that Jerusalem's problem are relevant for Toronto or inherent to LRT. Now you're turning into your customary ad hominem.

I listed them but if you say I did not I am OK with your interpretation :facepalm:
you've made no valid point so far so I would waste my time fighting with you

[vero95]

The Jerusalem LRT and buses are run by separate private companies. I suppose the lesson is not to privatize transit.

an interesting take on this problem. are you saying it would not have happened if transit were public?

[boblobob]

I was saying that many times: if you have money do not build it. do not waste money on expensive temp solutions that does not make sense. streetcars in the tunnel do not make sense (unless the tunnel is really short) and so do streetcars between SRT and a subway. if you have no funds and need a temp solution, brt is much cheaper

so then, what are the differences in your mind between creating a right-of-way for buses for brt and creating a right of way for light rail vehicles for lrt? keeping in mind that: brt does not have the capacity to serve existing and projected demand, but lrt does; brt requires wider right-of-way than an lrt does; and that you need many more buses and drivers to run a brt than you need trainsets and operators for lrt.

how is lrt considered a temporary solution if projected demand and population+jobs density along the toronto council-approved lrt routes does not approach the demand or capacity for a subway? why would you be building a subway where none is required and where buses do not provided enough capacity to address demand and population+jobs density?

[vero95]

so then, what are the differences in your mind between creating a right-of-way for buses for brt and creating a right of way for light rail vehicles for lrt? keeping in mind that: brt does not have the capacity to serve existing and projected demand, but lrt does; brt requires wider right-of-way than an lrt does; and that you need many more buses and drivers to run a brt than you need trainsets and operators for lrt.

how is lrt considered a temporary solution if projected demand and population+jobs density along the toronto council-approved lrt routes does not approach the demand or capacity for a subway? why would you be building a subway where none is required and where buses do not provided enough capacity to address demand and population+jobs density?

could you provide any source?

[NorthYorker]

I listed themNothing you listed had been coming from the article you brought here claiming it supports your view. The Jerusalem LRT story is absolutely unrelated to what you claim.
are you saying it would not have happened if transit were public?It absolutely would not have happened if both systems are run by the same company. However, it could have happened during transfer between two public systems, so issue of ownership is secondary here.

[vero95]

Nothing you listed had been coming from the article you brought here claiming it supports your view. The Jerusalem LRT story is absolutely unrelated to what you claim.It absolutely would not have happened if both systems are run by the same company. However, it could have happened during transfer between two public systems, so issue of ownership is secondary here.

aren't those streetcars in Toronto replacing buses? do the existing buses cover the same lines that those proposed streetcars will? if not, aren't people going to have to transfer possibly few times (example: bus->streetcar->another bus) to get to the same destination?

[vero95]

The Jerusalem LRT and buses are run by separate private companies. I suppose the lesson is not to privatize transit.

that's your conclusion? that privately run transit is bad?

[NorthYorker]

aren't those streetcars in Toronto replacing buses? do the existing buses cover the same lines that those proposed streetcars will? if not, aren't people going to have to transfer possibly few times (example: bus->streetcar->another bus) to get to the same destination?Your musings are spread across several different threads. I would prefer to keep this one dedicated to particular issue of Jerusalem's LRT experience and it's relevance to Toronto.

[vero95]

Your musings are spread across several different threads. I would prefer to keep this one dedicated to particular issue of Jerusalem's LRT experience and it's relevance to Toronto.

so are yours except you make no sense in any of those threads :facepalm:

like with the response above even if it was clear in the article that merging buses and LRTs in Jerusalem is a challenge

The most challenging aspect of the city's new transportation grid is the need to connect the existing bus network to the light railway system. In this first phase, the routes of 22 bus lines have been altered. In many cases, passengers need to ride multiple buses and the light rail to reach their destination, even if one bus ride did the trick beforehand or the journey is just a few kilometers.

why do you think it's not related to Toronto?

[NorthYorker]

why do you think it's not related to Toronto? Because none of schemes proposed for Toronto, be it Subway, LRT or busways, alter the fundamentally grid-like layout of our network. You want to use subway to replace 85 Sheppard East. I happen to think that LRT is more appropriate, giving that we only have dough to replace 2 km of it with a subway and most of it with LRT. Current Toronto debates are not about fundamental changes in the layout, so Jerusalem's problems (caused by the very changes in network we're not doing) are irrelevant to us. If you used to need to transfer to and from 85 to get from point A to point B, you'll be as likely to transfer to and from either LRT or Subway (actually, assuming that your point A is along Don Mills and point B is East of VicPark, you are ADDING a transfer by building subway to VicPark and stopping it there for a lack of funds).
I'm not sure if you understood, but I've tried to avoid some of bigger words...

[vero95]

Because none of schemes proposed for Toronto, be it Subway, LRT or busways, alter the fundamentally grid-like layout of our network. You want to use subway to replace 85 Sheppard East. I happen to think that LRT is more appropriate, giving that we only have dough to replace 2 km of it with a subway and most of it with LRT. Current Toronto debates are not about fundamental changes in the layout, so Jerusalem's problems (caused by the very changes in network we're not doing) are irrelevant to us. If you used to need to transfer to and from 85 to get from point A to point B, you'll be as likely to transfer to and from either LRT or Subway (actually, assuming that your point A is along Don Mills and point B is East of VicPark, you are ADDING a transfer by building subway to VicPark and stopping it there for a lack of funds).
I'm not sure if you understood, but I've tried to avoid some of bigger words...

but if you go with streetcars on sheppard, you will need to transfer a lot. I already explained that to you. that's the problem with mulitple transfers, sigh :facepalm:

[virgilaug]

Let them enjoy it till it blows up.

[NorthYorker]

but if you go with streetcars on sheppard, you will need to transfer a lot.Not a single extra transfer if you compare it with Ford's original plan. Might be fewer, actually. So, as usual, your musings are not relevant to actual Toronto situation and only applicable to some fantasytown.

[no_username]

that's your conclusion? that privately run transit is bad?

Just using your type of logic.

You can start another thread to discuss whether private transit is a good thing or not. Don't know if anyone will bother to discuss it though.

[vero95]

Just using your type of logic.

You can start another thread to discuss whether private transit is a good thing or not. Don't know if anyone will bother to discuss it though.

it's a union "logic" not mine

[vero95]

Not a single extra transfer if you compare it with Ford's original plan. Might be fewer, actually. So, as usual, your musings are not relevant to actual Toronto situation and only applicable to some fantasytown.

:facepalm: