GTA Transit Thread

[Andrewjm3D]

Originally Posted by miketoronto

Sure riding on a larger train in its own lane is nice. But its not worth the cost of not building true rapid transit, which this city desperately needs.

The Sheppard East bus for example operates pretty well. They have the local service, and they have the ROCKET service which provides limited stop service.
Transit City.
If we are going to spend money, then it should be real rapid transit.

So like so many have been asking Ford, I'll ask you. Where the hell will the money come from to fund three new subway lines? According to you, using the 8.4 billion on 6 stops in Scarborough is worth screwing over the rest of the city.
Under the Stinz/Council plan the LRT will be buried where it needs to be. Shepard will be studied for the completion of the north cross town subway completion, and Finch will get a much needed full LRT. And the best part of the renewed TC plan is that the DRL will be reopened for discussion. That's the highest priority subway needed as it will relieve the Yonge line not ad to it like Ford's pie in the sky plan.

Yesterday was such a great day for transit in the city of Toronto. Welcome back Transit City!

[miketoronto]

Originally Posted by Andrewjm3D

So like so many have been asking Ford, I'll ask you. Where the hell will the money come from to fund three new subway lines? According to you, using the 8.4 billion on 6 stops in Scarborough is worth screwing over the rest of the city.

First of all, this is not a poor country. If the will was there, we would have way more transit money.

Now as for how to spend the money, I would fund the Eglinton-Crosstown line as a fully grade separated transit line with elevated sections(like Skytrain) where it can be done. Anyway money saved from elevated portions
can be applied to other transit projects.

But I would rather see one good quality transit project then fund three half assed transit projects.

As for Finch. I would get the TTC to reschedule buses in that corridor. There would be the following

FINCH WEST LOCAL BUS
FINCH WEST LIMITED STOP BUS SERVICE, stopping only about every km at major streets
FINCH-HUMBER EXPRESS, operating from Humber College to Downsview Station

That would fix the issues on Finch overnight.

Yesterday was such a great day for transit in the city of Toronto. Welcome back Transit City!

Depends how you look at it. We will be spending $8 billion on a plan that hardly improves commute times, will take people forever to get places, and hardly shifts anyone onto public transit.


I would like to know how we have gone backwards. We went from building true rapid transit, to this obsession in the last 10 years to building at grade slow transit projects. Can you imagine if we did this in the 60's-90's. Our transit ridership would be dismal.
It is a weird ideology that North American cities seem to be stuck on. And transit is going to suffer, if not now then in the future, when ridership does not materialize.

Look at this. Paint dries faster than this thing travels. No wonder the ridership is low and the community has called for the return of the old express bus network.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rT3kYpf4-f4

[osmo]

Originally Posted by miketoronto

First of all, this is not a poor country. If the will was there, we would have way more transit money.

Now as for how to spend the money, I would fund the Eglinton-Crosstown line as a fully grade separated transit line with elevated sections(like Skytrain) where it can be done. Anyway money saved from elevated portions
can be applied to other transit projects.

But I would rather see one good quality transit project then fund three half assed transit projects.

As for Finch. I would get the TTC to reschedule buses in that corridor. There would be the following

FINCH WEST LOCAL BUS
FINCH WEST LIMITED STOP BUS SERVICE, stopping only about every km at major streets
FINCH-HUMBER EXPRESS, operating from Humber College to Downsview Station

That would fix the issues on Finch overnight.



Depends how you look at it. We will be spending $8 billion on a plan that hardly improves commute times, will take people forever to get places, and hardly shifts anyone onto public transit.


I would like to know how we have gone backwards. We went from building true rapid transit, to this obsession in the last 10 years to building at grade slow transit projects. Can you imagine if we did this in the 60's-90's. Our transit ridership would be dismal.
It is a weird ideology that North American cities seem to be stuck on. And transit is going to suffer, if not now then in the future, when ridership does not materialize.

Look at this. Paint dries faster than this thing travels. No wonder the ridership is low and the community has called for the return of the old express bus network.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rT3kYpf4-f4

Steve Munro has broken down Finch in great detail, it is a complex route with many route destinations other then Downsview as most people assume. The Route in total has outgrown Bus use, they come at 3min-5min headways during rush hour which virtually just creates a mess. The TTC literally can;t add any more buses, how do these buses maneuver in and out? how do they load and unload if they need to share stops. Finch needs LRT, it has the ridership to support it easily.

Subways are ideal if there is a plan to pay for them. This would involve The Feds and Province to get there act together. It will never happen under Harper and I will be an old man before it does. The only subway project that is in critical need is the DRL. People need to understand that this Eglinton Project will push need for the the DRL EVEN MORE, people also need to understand the feeble Metrolinx knows this and won;t implement funding sources until parts of the GTA can see some results before thier eyes. If people see shovels in the ground or new lines opening they will be more open to funding further expansions down the road if they are a step up from what is being built now.

And how fast do you expect these things to go? The Toronto Subway only goes 10km faster than LRT. If you want speed you need to put up ugly barriers like they have in Calgary, Calgary C-train goes pretty much as fast as our Subway does...

http://youtu.be/gqoezxlzMRE

.... but do you want your streets to look like this?


Skytrain systems are equally as ugly, why doe people underestimate the power of fixed - at grade - rail systems? They prove time and time again to be the most economically appealing and lucrative, equal to or even moreso than Subways.

The C-train is a ugly system. The infrastructure is imposing and creates carriers at-grade. Sure its fast as hell but we are not Europe where we can run at high speeds with residents being smart and cautious about how they walk.

Its funny as we sit as nobody's questioning reports which we're created by industry experts. You can question where the routes we're intended for Transit City but the math as far as demand and costs go was well thought out, plus Transit City went hand in hand with growth and planning regulations. Contrast this with Fords unfunded and unbased Subway plan, which has no logical rationale whatsoever. I knew from the very start his Eglinton plan would die a slow death as the Don River was set as a major issue the first go around. hell the TTC still does not even know what to with the Western Section past Black Creek for similar engineering issues.

The Eglinton LRT will dump demand onto Yonge pushing up the need to build a DRL from Don Mill... which would then justify the early Don Mills LRT project to link to the Sheppard Subway.

Until the demand or money shows up all one can do is talk a lot of smoke. Subways won't get built until the demand or cash comes up,

The only subway projects that are critical NOW are:

- Sheppard West Link to Downsview
- DRL

The TTC knows this, Industry experts know this, and Planning experts know this.


............ More C-train:

Look at this thing GO! Compare this to how slow are TTC trains are forced to slug above ground!
http://youtu.be/bRKUc7pMGXE?t=5m26s


This Example in Seattle is a close to what we will see on Eglinton! Still goes about quickly!
http://youtu.be/Tk435DpRRFg

[Andrewjm3D]

Originally Posted by miketoronto

First of all, this is not a poor country. If the will was there, we would have way more transit money.

You don't think the will is there? You don't think we all want subways? You need to come back to reality Mike. Just because Canada is rich is not an excuse to build subways to places such as Etobicoke along finch if the density at present or in the future doesn't warrant it. Judging by your comments you are no doubt a Ford voter and supporter.

If you wanted serious compromises to the TC plan then you should have been voicing your concerns with Him demanding he give in a little and not push for a plan that will just waste money.

Just like a Fordy or a Ford supporter you're spreading false facts around like they are truth. Either you don't know what you're talking about, or you're just making up things to back your argument. The only thing you said thanke makes any sense and is a good argument to bring up with council is that maybe they could elevate sections through Scarborough.

(btw, I was at City hall yesterday, and this is where I got my facts, from the experts that were there being questioned by the left and right)
FACT - The TC plan will take 40,000 cars off the road
FACT - The TC plan will service 400,000 more Torontonians
FACT - The TC plan will be looking to lock in annual funding from the province and feds
FACT - Subway maintenance and running costs are far higher then LRT
FACT - We all want subways, We all want flying cars, we all want a billion dollars but we know (well most of us) you can't always get what you want
FACT - Fords plan would cost us $100,000 or more in fines, and drop the entire 8.4 Billion in one small section of Scarborough.

Maybe your fedora is still too tight mike.

[nname]

Originally Posted by osmo

Skytrain systems are equally as ugly, why doe people underestimate the power of fixed - at grade - rail systems? They prove time and time again to be the most economically appealing and lucrative, equal to or even moreso than Subways.

The C-train is a ugly system. The infrastructure is imposing and creates carriers at-grade. Sure its fast as hell but we are not Europe where we can run at high speeds with residents being smart and cautious about how they walk.

I guess this is the attitude in Canada and US... If its just a couple minutes slower, its good enough. How it look would be more important than how it functions.

This is in great contrast compared to some Asian cities. For major cities, anything that have at-grade crossing would be unacceptable, and they are willing to elevate rail lines with 10-20 tracks in the middle of city centre, just to improve efficiency. They are willing spend billions to design new trains and improve tracks to reduce travel time by maybe 5 min off from a 3 hours tip, and they design the system to be as reliable as possible. In Japan, if your train is running late, you can request a delay certificate; if you train is running really late (as in 10-15min), you can get a full refund. Whereas here, 10-15min late would be considered 'normal'.

I guess having something that looks better here is more important than functioning as a transportation tool...

Originally Posted by osmo

This Example in Seattle is a close to what we will see on Eglinton! Still goes about quickly!
http://youtu.be/Tk435DpRRFg

umm... I don't get this.. are you claiming that it is running fast? or you meant something else?

If you got a sense of speed.. in the video, the train is actually running at a top speed of 50km/h after its fully accelerated (after the pocket track ends) and before reaching the elevated section. At the elevated portion, the train speed up to about 80km/h.

And I don't think many would consider 50km/h top speed to be anywhere close to 'rapid'. Although the stations for Transit City are so close together that the top speed doesn't really matter that much here...

[miketoronto]

Originally Posted by Andrewjm3D

You don't think the will is there? You don't think we all want subways? You need to come back to reality Mike. Just because Canada is rich is not an excuse to build subways to places such as Etobicoke along finch if the density at present or in the future doesn't warrant it. Judging by your comments you are no doubt a Ford voter and supporter.

Umm who said I wanted a subway on Finch?? I want Eglinton to be a subway, and I want Sheppard finished as a subway.

In fact bring back to the Network 2011 plan.

Finch does not need a subway. In fact all Finch needs is improved bus service, with limited stops, bus lanes in sections, and off board fare payment. Sort of like a VIVA system.

And I am not a Ford voter. Just because I do not support Transit City does not mean I support Ford.

(btw, I was at City hall yesterday, and this is where I got my facts, from the experts that were there being questioned by the left and right)
FACT - The TC plan will take 40,000 cars off the road
FACT - The TC plan will service 400,000 more Torontonians
FACT - The TC plan will be looking to lock in annual funding from the province and feds

$8 billion is a lot of money to only remove 40,000 cars.

FACT - Subway maintenance and running costs are far higher then LRT
FACT - We all want subways, We all want flying cars, we all want a billion dollars but we know (well most of us) you can't always get what you want
FACT - Fords plan would cost us $100,000 or more in fines, and drop the entire 8.4 Billion in one small section of Scarborough.
Maybe your fedora is still too tight mike.

[/quote]

Quality over quantity. One good grade separated line along Eglinton from Etobicoke to Scarborough would provide more benefit than multiple slow LRT lines.
I really don't understand why this is so hard to grasp by the the pro LRT people. How about we did not build the Yonge subway. We could have provided way more LRT by not having a subway anywhere. Oh wait, the subway serves more people than just the area around it.
And that is how Eglinton would operate. It would be a regionally significant service.

[miketoronto]

Originally Posted by osmo

If you want speed you need to put up ugly barriers like they have in Calgary, Calgary C-train goes pretty much as fast as our Subway does...
.... but do you want your streets to look like this?

Calgary does LRT right, and the majority of the LRT system is in rights of ways to the side or behind roads. Only a small section is in the middle of the road.
And this brings up the point. Modern LRT as it was planned when these systems started in the 70's, was not designed to go down the middle of roads.

LRT is supposed to use old or new railroad rights of ways, tunnels in sections, above ground sections, etc. But the majority of LRT that has been a success does not operate down the middle of roads for any great length.

We are moving away from what LRT was meant to be.

Its funny as we sit as nobody's questioning reports which we're created by industry experts. You can question where the routes we're intended for Transit City but the math as far as demand and costs go was well thought out.

I don't trust the industry experts in this case. You can make a report say whatever you want. And I feel ideology has taken over instead of sound planning when it comes to the Transit City debate. I can not believe any expert who says the Bloor-Danforth subway is under capacity.

Contrast this with Fords unfunded and unbased Subway plan, which has no logical rationale whatsoever.

It pains me to stand up for Ford. But his plan is not stupid. His plan was to finish a subway network that was planned to be open last year, called Network 2011. Building Eglinton(a longer version under Ford) and Sheppard, basically completes a big part of Network 2011. Its not some stupid off the wall idea.

Until the demand or money shows up all one can do is talk a lot of smoke. Subways won't get built until the demand or cash comes up,

Thank goodness we did not have people thinking like this 30 years ago, or Toronto would not have any rapid transit.

You create demand. If you wait for it to come, it almost never will come to transit, as people want an attractive service to take.

This is not 1950 anymore, where people had to use transit as there was no alternative, and therefore high ridership routes had to be upgraded to subway.

In this day and age, you build the transit to build demand.

WHY THE OBSESSION WITH FINCH

I would also like to know what the obsession with Finch West is. The Finch West bus is not even the busiest route in the system. There are other bus routes which carry thousands more people a day than Finch West.

Even Finch East carries more people than Finch West. But Finch East has proper service, with local and limited stop. So why is this not done on Finch West, is the question.

[Tony]

Originally Posted by nname

I guess this is the attitude in Canada and US... If its just a couple minutes slower, its good enough. How it look would be more important than how it functions.

This is in great contrast compared to some Asian cities. For major cities, anything that have at-grade crossing would be unacceptable, and they are willing to elevate rail lines with 10-20 tracks in the middle of city centre, just to improve efficiency. They are willing spend billions to design new trains and improve tracks to reduce travel time by maybe 5 min off from a 3 hours tip, and they design the system to be as reliable as possible. In Japan, if your train is running late, you can request a delay certificate; if you train is running really late (as in 10-15min), you can get a full refund. Whereas here, 10-15min late would be considered 'normal'.

Why do people even bother spending so much time comparing a North American city with an Asian, or even European one to make their arguments one way or another!!!

Has anyone who does this argument even been to that glorious European City or that awesome Asian City? The Cities were completely built at a different time with a completely different design and density. We don't have the crowded 1-2 lane streets in Europe where everyone lives in a 4th storey flat above a butchershop or cafe. We don't live in the uber-compact built form that is Tokyo! Our cities were designed around cars to make it easy for cars to get around. They weren't built before the advent of cars!

Transit usage and requirements in this day and age are completely based upon built form. Since we already f'd our's up to accommodate car use with wide roads, spaced out buildings, parking lots, low density single-detached home, malls and strip plazas.. how could you even expect to justify the construction of a subway along some of the wide sprawly streets we have?

Oh but what if we didn't build the Yonge subway because of people with no vision like you says Mike. Tell me, how was the economy back when they built that subway line? Here's a hint: Post-War Boom Time. We had tonnes of jobs,tonnes of $, a family can afford to live off of a single income, the 2nd and 3rd world were not competing for our jobs, the baby-boom was on... optimism EVERYWHERE, from all levels of gov't to the citizens.

Compare that with what vision people have now, and the 4-year vision our leaders now have.

If we ended up blowing all the money just to bury the remainder of Eglinton LRT, who's going to give us more money to do anything else in the City after it's done?


The Province? HA! You know how the voters outside of Toronto will feel about spending more money in the City they love to hate, especially right after a few billion was already dumped in here and we spent it all on one project. NO Political Will.

The City? Where exactly is this money going to come from? Sure we could reinstitute the Car Tax, keep the property transfer tax, maybe make some new taxes...is that enough $ to build more subways? Definitely not. Would the very voters who put douchebag in power support more taxes? Definitely not! NO Political Will.

The Feds? As if they care about public transit at the municipal level. It's not their jurisdiction, unless of course it's related to something of national interest - like the Pan Am games, the Olympics. No Political Will.

Burying a few stations at the expense of other lines is not good city building. Burying a few stations and leaving the rest of the city to sit under-serviced with no foreseeable funding for the next 10-15 years is utterly stupid.

[miketoronto]

Originally Posted by Tony

Has anyone who does this argument even been to that glorious European City or that awesome Asian City? The Cities were completely built at a different

Transit usage and requirements in this day and age are completely based upon built form.

Tony, I would recommend the book Transport for Suburbia. Transit usage is not based as much on built form as one would think. It is built more about putting out an attractive service. Its a great read and talks about Toronto's transit success story, because we expanded buses, and subways into the suburbs when everyone said it would not work. And it worked beyond expectations.

Also as he shows in the book, we are not that far off from European cities. European cities are not as dense as people think, once you get out of the central cores in most cases.

I was just in Italy, and while the housing is denser in Italy, the roads are just as wide if not wider than here, in the new areas. Europe actually accommodates the car very well.

But like my friend said who has lived in Germany. They have outstanding roads for cars. But they also have outstanding public transit. So while people can drive if they want, many choose transit, because the service is so attractive and fast.

Same happened in Zurich. Everyone was switching to cars. Zurich made a commitment to improve transit, by expanding it into the suburbs. They have totally reversed car usage rates and transit is winning.

Tell me, how was the economy back when they built that subway line? Here's a hint: Post-War Boom Time. We had tonnes of jobs,tonnes of $, a family can afford to live off of a single income, the 2nd and 3rd world were not competing for our jobs, the baby-boom was on... optimism EVERYWHERE, from all levels of gov't to the citizens.

I think the economy is an excuse to be honest. What better time to spend money and put people to work building subways and other major projects?

This country, province, and city has money. They just have to stop cutting tax to billionaire companies.

The money has come for jails. If transit was a priority the money would flow.

The City? Where exactly is this money going to come from? Sure we could reinstitute the Car Tax, keep the property transfer tax, maybe make some new taxes...is that enough $ to build more subways? Definitely not. Would the very voters who put douchebag in power support more taxes? Definitely not! NO Political Will.

A dedicated tax in the city would for sure allow rapid transit construction of all kinds at a stead rate of say 2-3 km a year.

Burying a few stations at the expense of other lines is not good city building. Burying a few stations and leaving the rest of the city to sit under-serviced with no foreseeable funding for the next 10-15 years is utterly stupid.

The other areas can be provided with limited stop bus service, pre boardings for fares, etc. It would provide the same benefit as these LRT lines.

You could provide more benefit with express buses on the highways if you want to get down to it.

I am not against LRT. I am against Transit City LRT, because it takes LRT and does not provide any of the benefits which LRT was created for.

Calgary and Edmonton did LRT right. $8 billion for a local glorified streetcar is what I call a waste of money.

Check out the NYC MTA Select Bus network. That is all we need on major suburban bus corridors at the moment.

Eglinton and Sheppard are regionally significant cross town travel corridors. They are meant to provide rapid transit across the city for more than just the people who live in the area. I feel that is way more of a benefit than LRT lines which are going to barely attract anyone to transit.


I am not backing down from my view. The LRT crowd I think is very hostile and does not want to hear the other side at all. And I can tell you right now, that the projected ridership on Transit City, does not justify $8 billion dollars.


This is what LRT is supposed to be built like.
http://www.westlrt.ca/contentabout/route_animation.cfm

[osmo]

Calgary and Edmonton built forms mirror are suburban built forms. How about New Jersey and their success with LRT? They have spawned billions in construction activity. You can't compare at all Toronto to any Euro Center AT ALL! Please look at North American examples in LRT for ideas on how it can work here.

And the "vision" thing is getting tired. Why do people forget that Bloor was still a streetcar line when Yonge was tunneled, why do people forget that Yonge itself was a streetcar line also. When demand exceeded what the lines could handle they were converted.

As much praise as some give Calgary understand that the rest of the system is quite akward, our bus system is far more superior to theirs. I do agree that separating the LRT provides higher speeds but then you miss out on economic and building potentials. Eglinton on itd East end is somewhat built out, the most space to where people want to go is in the middle of the road. Once you start messing around with that you see ridership drop as the route gets further away from where they want to go. Yes transit needs to be appealing by can't Toronto folks quit being spoiled for once? There are a long list of Cities whom would kill to have our "problem" and would gladly take our Streetcar,LRT,Subway,Bus system in a heart beat. Yes transit needs to be appealing to attract riders but it first and foremost neeeds to go places people want/need.
And why so much attention on Finch? Don't burn your lip with you starbucks. Typical Toronto snob comment. That route is complete hell, buses are always packed and short turning, it is easily the most F-up route in the system. The TTC has done all it can to fit sardines into those cans, any more buses or "fixes" makes the problem even worse. It is supper elitist to ignore Finch, which is why councilmen like Gorgio are complete shills as these are the areas they serve but yet still want to throw them under the bus. It is the only route which far beyond capacity in a rational world this would be looked at for an upgrade first. Many low income residents live along that corridor, many commute to all sorts of places in Peel or York, the School, plus downsview all sorts of trip destinations exist, having an at grade system which can't be altered in the future would help trips and help spur development along the bleek corridor.

The attention now is that Scarb gets the shaft... But I am sorry they voted in that clown whom stalled TC which if old plans were intact would of seen Scarb see shovels in the ground for the SRT fix for the Pan-am games.

Snobby people in Toronto think Subways will cure their obsession with NYC and make us world class. Our attitude is what holds us back not the amount of Subway lines or skyscraper we have. Large cities have a-z in terms of transit options, they have to as you can only build smart cities if you put the best technology in the best places that can support it. Why does nobody like to talk about LDN, Tokyo or Paris LRT lines? Or the LRT proposal in NYC? Cities are broke and you rip up streets to build Subways anymore without residents calling for your head. Times have changes LRT has proven to get the job done, and is high quality transit. People need to accept this and welcome and opportunity to expand the system when the numbers make sense.

Network 2011 would be great! But again lawmakers can talk out the ass all they want and draw lines on a map but until FUNDING IS IN PLACE and FIXED, they are talking sh*t and nothing will get built. Toronto needs to get projects built then have a set stream of revenue for transit via tolls and congestion charges, possibly even a City sales tax. You need to be able to justify these with results. Maybe now if Stinz can put Mayor aspirations aside and once a Transit Plan is finalized start holding Metrolinx and the province acountable for being slow and the revenue generation plan since Ford is to much of a bafoon to carry this out. Ford is stuck with her as commish so she might as well go balls to the wall and get Transit going right, if she is capable of this she would be a legendary city builder in my opinion.

[yaletown_fella]

Again, what would be so wrong with building somthing exactly like the Canada Line system on Eglinton with elevated and buried sections in appropriate areas? It would be faster than an LRT.

[miketoronto]

Originally Posted by yaletown_fella

Again, what would be so wrong with building somthing exactly like the Canada Line system on Eglinton with elevated and buried sections in appropriate areas? It would be faster than an LRT.

I think that would be a great idea, and it was built a lot cheaper. The cost and time to construct things in Toronto is completely out of whack. Vancouver is a great model to follow for rapid transit expansion. And Vancouver has seemed to get it right, that you need fully grade separated transit to provide rapid transit.

[nname]

Originally Posted by Tony

Why do people even bother spending so much time comparing a North American city with an Asian, or even European one to make their arguments one way or another!!!

Has anyone who does this argument even been to that glorious European City or that awesome Asian City? The Cities were completely built at a different time with a completely different design and density. We don't have the crowded 1-2 lane streets in Europe where everyone lives in a 4th storey flat above a butchershop or cafe. We don't live in the uber-compact built form that is Tokyo! Our cities were designed around cars to make it easy for cars to get around. They weren't built before the advent of cars!

Well, I'm just talking about the perception of time, and the attitude toward transit planning, not comparing specific rapid transit lines. Yes, cost is also an important issue there, but for those cities, what comes up next after cost is "functionality". I don't see "functionality" being placed that high in the priority list here in North America. I guess this is probably how those places ended up with many elevated line.

And if you really want to compare the cities... well, most of those Asian cities does have rural areas where you see nothing but detached single family homes, farmlands, large roads, etc. But still, rapid transit lines running through the area are fully grade separated, either elevated or at-grade (and elevate the roads that cross the line), so they can breeze through the area at 120km/h. In fact, Taipei is just planning a new LRT line in the outer edge of the city, which is mostly rural (note: LRT in Asia stands for "fully grade-separated intermediate capacity system")

And regarding to the line itself, I never support bury the entire thing, nor I support running the middle portion with at-grade crossing with most of the line already grade separated. If it was me, I would say build the line elevated from Kennedy to Victoria park, then at-grade in the middle of street, duck under Sloane, build new SPUI for Don Mills and trumpet interchange for Lesile, and close all other at-grade crossings. Elevate again before Laird, tunnel after Bayview, and elevate again after meeting Spadina subway. The entire line would automated with short trains and high frequency. I'm sure this would save even more than the TC plan.

[miketoronto]

Originally Posted by osmo

Calgary and Edmonton built forms mirror are suburban built forms. How about New Jersey and their success with LRT? They have spawned billions in construction activity.

NJ's Hudson-Bergen Light Rail is about the same length as Calgary's LRT, yet it only carries something like 45,000 riders a day, compared to Calgary's close to 300,000. This despite serving a larger population, and a much more dense CBD and NYC area.
It is a good start, but the NJ system is hardly heavily used.

And why so much attention on Finch? Don't burn your lip with you starbucks. Typical Toronto snob comment. That route is complete hell, buses are always packed and short turning, it is easily the most F-up route in the system. The TTC has done all it can to fit sardines into those cans, any more buses or "fixes" makes the problem even worse. It is supper elitist to ignore Finch

Excuse me, I happen to live on the outskirts of the city. I live like 5 minutes from Finch East.

I deal with transit everyday and understand how slow and crowded it is, and that is why I understand that Transit City will bring no benefit to the outskirts other than maybe a comfy seat.

The fact of the matter is that the TTC has not done anything to improve the bus service on Finch West.

Finch East has limited and local service, etc. Finch West has non of this.
TTC has not tried off board fare payment, etc, like NYC is doing on their busy bus routes.

The TTC has as I said, done nothing to fix Finch West bus service. Why does Humber College not have a direct rocket bus from the subway to Humber College? Seneca gets that on the Finch East.

What about the Dufferin bus, which handles more people than Finch. Why no improvements there.

Finch made the news, but it is hardly the dire situation it is made out to be.

Why does nobody like to talk about LDN, Tokyo or Paris LRT lines? Or the LRT proposal in NYC?

These cities are building LRT after they have already built extensive rapid transit networks. It should also be noted that Paris is building a huge elevated and subway rapid transit network in their suburbs now, which links into the LRT lines.

A transit system needs everything. That is not the debate here. The debate is that we are not building the kind of rapid transit which the outskirts need.

And how are cities broke? Vancouver is building rapid transit, Calgary is building grade separated LRT, along with countless other cities.
The fact is the money is there if the government wants it there.

Anyway I can tell you Transit City LRT will be a waste of money. I live out here in the outskirts and I actually talk with people. People are not excited about Transit City, because it offers no speed over the current bus. Once people hear Transit City is not like Calgary with wide stop spacing, crossing arms, etc, they fall out of favour for Transit City.

My sister was one of them. She was all excited about Transit City, because she used Edmonton's LRT. Once she heard it was not going to be like Edmonton, she stopped supporting it.
Like most people ask out here. "Why would you want to sit on the LRT for 45 minutes, when the bus takes the same amount of time, and I can drive the same distance in 10 minutes".

[Wharn]

Originally Posted by Tony

Has anyone who does this argument even been to that glorious European City or that awesome Asian City? The Cities were completely built at a different time with a completely different design and density. We don't have the crowded 1-2 lane streets in Europe where everyone lives in a 4th storey flat above a butchershop or cafe. We don't live in the uber-compact built form that is Tokyo! Our cities were designed around cars to make it easy for cars to get around. They weren't built before the advent of cars!

That's not actually entirely true. A lot of cities in continental Europe were destroyed during World War II (especially in Germany and Poland), so technically they were only "built" in the last 60-70 years. With some exceptions (such as Kyoto), modern Japanese cities are completely different from their Imperial counterparts, which were largely burned to the ground by American firebombing. Same thing in Korea, actually: Seoul was in ruins by 1953.

The only reason why those cities are so dense is because they are all located in densely populated countries where land is at a premium, so it makes more sense to build up than out. Age has little to do with it.

[Tony]

Originally Posted by miketoronto

Also as he shows in the book, we are not that far off from European cities. European cities are not as dense as people think, once you get out of the central cores in most cases.

I was just in Italy, and while the housing is denser in Italy, the roads are just as wide if not wider than here, in the new areas. Europe actually accommodates the car very well.

Great! Now is there a subway running through these areas? Are these areas in any way comparable to , let's say... Eglinton Ave. east of Laird, in terms of built form, pedestrian friendliness?

But like my friend said who has lived in Germany. They have outstanding roads for cars. But they also have outstanding public transit. So while people can drive if they want, many choose transit, because the service is so attractive and fast.

Same happened in Zurich. Everyone was switching to cars. Zurich made a commitment to improve transit, by expanding it into the suburbs. They have totally reversed car usage rates and transit is winning.

Nobody is saying don't build attractive and fast public transit to the suburbs. We're just saying that burying the LRT east of Laird is completely unnecessary. If your perverse perception that the only type of attractive and fast transit is a subway (or in this case, simply a buried LRT), then that's your problem. It's not everyone else's problem and it's certainly not everyone else's strange cult-like obsession as you imply it to be.

I think the economy is an excuse to be honest. What better time to spend money and put people to work building subways and other major projects?

This country, province, and city has money. They just have to stop cutting tax to billionaire companies.

The money has come for jails. If transit was a priority the money would flow.

Yeah, welcome to reality. Like I said, no political will!

I am not against LRT. I am against Transit City LRT, because it takes LRT and does not provide any of the benefits which LRT was created for.

Calgary and Edmonton did LRT right. $8 billion for a local glorified streetcar is what I call a waste of money.

Explain.

[M II A II R II K]

He's talking about it the LRT having to be in the median of the road instead of the middle with rail crossings at streets.

[miketoronto]

Tony,
About the LRT thing. What I meant is, LRT was created to bring rapid transit to places that may not be able to build subways, or where a subway was not justified.

These first LRT's like Edmonton were designed to provide a rapid transit level of service, using old railroad right of ways, tunneled sections(usually street running downtown), and even new railroad rights of ways.
These system ran in the middle of the streets for small sections if at all.
In Calgary's case it is a small section that does.
In the case where they do run in the middle of the street, they have fencing, crossing arms, and full priority.

Even if you look at Calgary's newer South LRT. It uses a mostly new railroad corridor that is off the main roads.

Transit City LRT is not really "LRT". It is limited stop streetcar service.

[Andrewjm3D]

Rob Ford has failed spectacularly. And his ongoing campaign of alienation has done the residents of Toronto—not just the ones who live downtown, but all of us—a tremendous disservice. Rhetoric reinforcing this notion of a rift between the suburbs and downtown has grown stronger and more explicit over Ford’s first year as mayor; during this week’s transit debate, it broke completely out into the open. Giorgio Mammoliti, Doug Ford, Rob Ford—they all lined up to tell us how Scarborough was getting screwed by selfish downtowners, that suburbanites were being turned into second class citizens forced to settle for second class amenities.

Don’t believe them.

The claim that council’s vote on transit was just the most recent case of longstanding downtown entitlement run amok is false for numerous reasons, but here are some of the most important:

Subways are not co-extensive with downtown Toronto. There is a subway stop at Yonge and Finch; there is none at Bathurst and Queen. It is an act of gross geographic misrepresentation to say that subways run downtown and not elsewhere. In fact, they run a lot of other places, and don’t exist in most of downtown.

The subways we’ve built most recently are furthest from downtown. For a variety of reasons, some of which have more to do with political jockeying than principled planning, transit development in the last three decades has been concentrated in the outer portions of Toronto. Downtown has not seen any new major infrastructure go in since well before amalgamation and the constitution of our current municipal governance structure.

Downtown councillors don’t hold a majority in council. Toronto city council breaks up into four community councils, each of which deals with a different part of the city: Toronto and East York, Scarborough, North York, and Etobicoke York. There is no universally agreed-upon understanding of what exactly counts as “downtown,” but for political purposes, these community councils provide as good a set of boundaries as we are likely to get. Of the 44 councillors in Toronto, 12 are included in the Toronto and East York group—27% of the votes on council.

If and when the LRT lines are built, the suburbs will have better transit infrastructure than much of downtown. Most of downtown relies on streetcar service running in mixed traffic. It is slow and frustrating, but fantasies of the Downtown Relief Line aside, it is the best we can do on narrow, busy streets. Should, say, Finch actually get the LRT it has just been (re)promised, area residents will benefit from higher capacity vehicles running at higher speeds in dedicated lanes. Finch will have better transit than Queen or Dundas or College. That’s not a complaint—with the busiest bus route in the system, Finch certainly needs it as fast as we can possibly lay the track—but it does put the lie to the notion that the best infrastructure is a downtown perk.



Those are the facts! Bitch all you want Transit City haters but the best transit deal for the city has won by according to Fords math "An overwhelming majority".

[miketoronto]

I was out with a friend last night and the Transit City debate came up. This friend is your average citizen who does not worry about these things or know much about transit, etc. She just uses it.

Anyway she was like "I know what LRT is". And she went on to say it is like the LRT system she used in Manila.

That was her vision of LRT.

She she found out Transit City was going to operate in the median of the road, have stops every 500 meters, and not full priority over cars, she did not like the idea.

There really is a misunderstanding on what LRT means to Toronto.