[nfitz]

Instead of stopping at every stop like the subway does, stop only at stops where passengers are waiting to board or on demand by riders.

That might help off-peak travel, but for peak travel in a 3-car train, with the length of 6 ordinary streetcars, or 8 buses? You'd likely have at least one person getting on/off at each stop. Even in a regular streetcar at rush-hour, there is rarely a stop where the streetcar doesn't stop.

 

[Electrify]

I don't see a problem running local buses alongside light or heavy rapid transit. They serve two completely different types of passengers with two different travel needs. For example, from where I am in Richmond Hill if my destination is nearby I will take the first bus which comes - whether it be a local YRT or rapid Viva. If I am heading further out, such as to the subway, I will opt for the Viva.

If a route is congested enough to warrant an investment in rapid transit, chances are there are enough passengers to support both rapid and local services.

Finally, is operating the Lakeshore GO a waste, since the Queen streetcar covers much of its territory?

 

[Voltz]

Why? The whole philosophy of Transit City was to prioritize local accessibility and community building over improving capacity, speed and mobility. It was motivated more by urban design theories rather than meeting real transportation needs. My evidence for this is that Transit City was never supported by any serious travel demand survey and regional travel model. One fine day in 2006 I just opened the papers and here was this jolly good plan to build $8 billion worth of light rail on somewhat arbitrary roads (surely some other line would take precedence over a Scarborough-Malvern LRT, but I digress...).

This philosophy was supported in practice by placing the stops at the closest intervals of any light rail system proposed for a suburban environment. To me, the stop spacing was the primary reason to oppose Transit City. I have no qualms with the mode nor even with most of the routings, even if they were not empirically supported by any evidence of [transport] need.

Stop spacing was not set in stone the day the plan was revealed, longer spacings were evaluated and found not to result in Warp 10 velocities as some are suggesting. To be against the plan because of a few unneeded stops is really doing the city disservice.


And if you are such a fan of wide stop spacings then what is your problem with the SM LRT? It had the widest stop spacings of all the surface sections including some that were more than 800 metres. Never mind the fact that its section of Eglinton is among the busiest bus corridors in the entire city and will soon be unable to support ridership demand using buses. Kingston Rd is packed with traffic and riders are often standing in packed buses all the way to Meadowvale Rd. Morningside itself has two post secondary institutions that are continuing to expand and unless you want to build another yard then it will have to go up to Sheppard.

 

[M II A II R II K]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...ght-rail-systems/article2311004/?from=2311140

 

[Dan416]

The stop spacing of TC was one of my big problems with it as well. If the stop spacing an consequently speed of the Eglinton line were identical to Bloor-Danforth, I don't think anyone has a problem with that (and it did in the tunnelled portion).

But it's a travesty to build LRT in the suburbs that makes as many stops as a bus. WTF is the point? Just run the bus, it's way cheaper!

 

[nfitz]

The stop spacing of TC was one of my big problems with it as well.

At what point did your opinion change?

 

[skylyte]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...ght-rail-systems/article2311004/?from=2311140

Sydney is doing something similar, it seems:

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/light-rail-tunnel-for-surry-hills-proposed-20120124-1qft2.html

 

[Voltz]

But it's a travesty to build LRT in the suburbs that makes as many stops as a bus. WTF is the point?

I see you are still posting nonsense about Transit City that you know it not true.

 

[M II A II R II K]

Sydney is doing something similar, it seems:

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/light-rail-tunnel-for-surry-hills-proposed-20120124-1qft2.html

If they tunnel the whole thing then they can make Eglinton a 4 car train and carry as many as a subway and then not complain about less capacity for higher costs.

 

[sixrings]

I see you are still posting nonsense about Transit City that you know it not true.

i am not normally a supporter of coruscanti cognoscente because typically hes all subway however i am pretty sure that the original lrt stop spacing was much larger before going to public consultation. its not that i dont think the public should be consulted but what can happen is that people put their needs infront of the projects. not all the time but sometimes. in this case i feel residents lobbied for more stops that benefitted them but was ultimately detrimental to the system by causing it to slow down. i think thats a fair argument. at what point would you say there are too many stops? and i also agree with the point that if you buy in the suburbs you shouldnt be expecting the same level of service as downtown users. it reminds me of a friend i know who bought a house in caledon then said hed take transit but there is no alternative. well no kidding (theres no service because it would cost tooo much to provide and because it would take forever to get anywhere.)

 

[Solid Snake]

http://www.thestar.com/news/article...ivers-more-bang-for-the-8-2-billion-buck?bn=1

 

[bardak]

Srt?

http://www.thestar.com/news/article...ivers-more-bang-for-the-8-2-billion-buck?bn=1

Note that there was nothing said about the SRT.

 

[dunkalunk]

I don't quite see the purpose of extending the Sheppard Subway if there is going to be a parallel busway 2km north running a longer distance.

In any case, it would be best to investigate all types of BRT from signal priority only to queue jump lanes to full busway. My preference would be for a curbside bus/right turn lane with dedicated right turn lanes for general traffic at major intersections.

 

[sixrings]

should the drl go up vic park or even warden now. i cant help but think that if we extend sheppard we will eventually have another transfer situation when the drl hits sheppard.

 

[Jonny5]

I see you are still posting nonsense about Transit City that you know it not true.

THIS.

Transit City was a gift from the transit gods to Scarbourough. Instead of accepting it graciously, people kicked and screamed, made up fantastic lies and waved crayon scrawled maps demanding express subways to their basements. They voted in Rob Ford. Rob #&$^!ng Ford.

Well this is what we get because of that. A Sheppard extension to Vic Park. That's it. That's all. Come back next funding cycle (around 2112). And enjoy the bus ride to Kennedy for the next century.

Scarborough is getting the subway extension it deserves. And I hate the way it's playing out. I really do. But I don't understand how people couldn't see this coming.