[duty free]

The prob

So,it could have been around as long as the existing subway.

The problem isn't a lack of ideas, it is a lack of construction.

The problem has always been a lack of continuous contruction, planning and funding.

Even now with more projects being built simultaneously than ever before, we still don't know what exactly we're building next. Once a project breaks ground, the next phase, extensions or new projects should already be known to the public. Right now we're guessing. Will Line 4 be extended east and west? What about the Ontario Line? Are we going to finally build something on Jane? What about Eglinton East and so on?

With one off projects it's impossible to retain the knowledge and expertize that makes continuous construction possible. With a lack of consistent funding it's easy for the next government to whimsically cancel the previous government's projects/proposals.

 

[JSF-1]

The prob

The problem has always been a lack of continuous contruction, planning and funding.

Even now with more projects being built simultaneously than ever before, we still don't know what exactly we're building next. Once a project breaks ground, the next phase, extensions or new projects should already be known to the public. Right now we're guessing. Will Line 4 be extended east and west? What about the Ontario Line? Are we going to finally build something on Jane? What about Eglinton East and so on?

With one off projects it's impossible to retain the knowledge and expertize that makes continuous construction possible. With a lack of consistent funding it's easy for the next government to whimsically cancel the previous government's projects/proposals.

This is certainly a problem. Metrolinx likes the produce grand plans but they have no teeth because there is no legislation or political backing behind them. You can argue that Transit City was the last truly comprehensive plan this city had that actually had political backing behind it. While LA isn't the greatest model to follow in some regards I absolutely love how their transit plans (e.g Measure M) aren't just fancy drawings, or projections, or nice to haves, but are actual fully thought out and costed plans that have political backing and are even legislated at the municipal and state levels. Not only does this ensure that the plans are actual built to the best of everyone's abilities but it also ensures that everyone knows what is going on and institutional knowledge can be created and shared between projects without there being massive decade long gaps between projects. Of course this only really works because California is effectively a one-party state controlled by the Dems so there is no fear of a future government coming in and repealing the legislation. I think the closest we ever got to this was Network 2011 since while it didn't have legislated protection, by that point the PC's had been in power for like 40 years and Davis was willing to spend money hand over fist on transit expansion. Of course once Davis retired it all went to hell. I believe had Davis not retired and the PC's not been taken over the Harris era lunatics we would be in a far better position.

 

[micheal_can]

The prob

The problem has always been a lack of continuous contruction, planning and funding.

Even now with more projects being built simultaneously than ever before, we still don't know what exactly we're building next. Once a project breaks ground, the next phase, extensions or new projects should already be known to the public. Right now we're guessing. Will Line 4 be extended east and west? What about the Ontario Line? Are we going to finally build something on Jane? What about Eglinton East and so on?

With one off projects it's impossible to retain the knowledge and expertize that makes continuous construction possible. With a lack of consistent funding it's easy for the next government to whimsically cancel the previous government's projects/proposals.

Yes. I have always thought that we should have continuous construction.Stop not when the ridership will drop, but when there is a lack of any built up areas. So, for instance,.... and yes it is crazy, Yonge line would be at least in Newmarket by now has that initial construction been continued. We already have the TBMs. Instead of burying them, refurbish them and keep going onto the next reasonable phase. Build it like we built the transcontinental line. We sent surveyors out, then crews to clear the land, then crews to build the rail base. Then lay track. They did not do one full section of all of it and then move to the next section. We could do transit much the same way. It would provide good paying long term high skilled jobs. That is the single reason why any infrastructure project takes forever, whether it be rail, road, or other infrastructure.

 

[T3G]

Found the ELL AREE TEE fanboy.

Question: by posting crap like this, do you honestly think you legitimize your argument or cause people to take you seriously?

You didn't find an LRT fanboy (why the infantile caps lock and the spelled out words?), what you found is an adult skeptical of the Fordian doctrine that subways are the only legitimate form of rail transportation, and who is interested in a frank and adult exchange of ideas. If you want to be a child about it, a Discord subway fan server or Instagram group chat may be more your speed. There is no reason why being skeptical of subways to suburbia should mean people are subjected to insults and ageism just because they don't share your view points.

This goes for you and anyone else on this forum who thinks that insults are a replacement for discussion. If your argument was worth anything at all, you wouldn't need to childishly attack those who disagree with you.

 

[Bojaxs]

Hahahaha the arrogance of Miller is astounding….for all the huffing and puffing he did about Transit City, I would expect him to be at the ribbon cutting ceremony and then ride the LRTs so people could give him a dose of reality.

I’m just glad Toronto saved itself by not diving 100% into this “TrAnSiT cITy” nonsense…..I always found the project timid, underwhelming and completely inappropriate for a city this size and stature. The frustrating part is that Toronto wasn’t always timid…..Post War Toronto up until the 80s, Toronto thought bold and big: the Yonge subway, Metro Toronto consolidation, the CN Tower, SkyDome, Pearson expansion, and the PATH system. These were built at a scale that matched the city’s growth. But starting in the late 70s and 80s, economic shocks, neighbourhood activism, and high-profile cancellations like the Spadina Expressway made ambitious projects politically risky. (For the record, I don’t oppose neighbourhood activism and am glad they got all the expressways cancelled, but the reaction by City Hall was way over the top). Restraint became a civic virtue, and caution hardened into ideology by the 1990s and early 2000s…..right by the time Miller became mayor.

Toronto was already a massive, diverse, international metropolis, but City Hall still operated with “Toronto the Good” instincts: risk-averse, obsessed with appearances, and cautious about anything that might upset the status quo. Transit City was the logical endpoint of that mindset: surface LRTs constrained by signals and intersections, sold as “pragmatic” and safe, but fundamentally mismatched to Toronto’s real needs. Miller may have believed in them…..or at least believed that appearing cautious was the right way to govern a city still psychologically uncomfortable with its own size.

The contrast with younger generations is stark. Late Gen X, Millennials, Gen Z, have only ever known Toronto as big, busy, and international. They don’t compare it to anywhere else; they just expect it to work….I was so happy when I heard people clowning Line 6….calling it a streetcar (because that’s exactly what it is) and how underwhelming it is…..I heard these conversations all on opening weekend:

- this should have been a subway
- how much did they spend on this?
- why are we stopping at signal lights?

And yet there are people on this forum who will go to the grave defending this ELL ARE TEE nonsense…..I guess some of you are from Millers generation as well….too timid and small minded…..unable to comprehend what Toronto has become. With Miller’s type of mentality, Line 1 would have never gone north of Eglinton and Line 2 would have ended at Woodbine and Keele.

With all due respect, the sooner this lot die off the better (not literally, but influentially). Hopefully this new generation of Torontonians who are unapologetically bold will force big city problems being addressed with big city solutions.

You said it all.

I'm never good at compiling my thoughts. I often struggle on this forum as to how to put into words my frustration. But you've done a good job of summing up my sentiments.

It's not enough to just say "I hate Line 6 cause it's slow". I hate Line 6 because it's a manifestation of all the poor transit choices over the last 15-20 years made by city councilors and politicians who thought they knew better than the general public and refused to build subways.

- "Let's build an underground LRT instead."
- "Lets add more stations on the GO lines within Toronto"

Often times the pro-LRTs only argument against subways is that "they're expensive". Well of course they're expensive, they're the best form of mass transit a city can have.

Also, Line 6 is a classic example of how Metorlinx and transit planners in Ontario focus too much on the big things, and often neglect the little things. Congrats! You built an LRT! But you forgot TPS, and why are the tram doors being left open at every station? etc., etc. This makes it seem as if our transit systems are being planned, built. and operated by people who don't actually use transit.

Having taken two trips to London earlier this year and seeing how the trains, underground, Overground, Elizabeth Line, DLR and buses all work in tandem with each other really highlighted to me the sorry state of transit in Toronto. In fact, I find myself now becoming more interested with transit across the U.K. and other European countries rather than continue to follow transit in Toronto & Ontario as a whole because it just puts me in a bad mood.

This obsession Canadian cities have with trying to run low floor LRTs as light metros needs to come to an end! Line 5 will be an abysmal failure! Calgary seriously needs to reconsider their choice of using low floor LRTs on the future Green Line, and I don't even know what the hell Ottawa is suppose to do!

And yes, Ontario needs a new "Bill Davis". A Conservative who isn't afraid to think big.

 

[Jac.]

To be honest, this line is taking so long to open I might forget about it when it actually does...

 

[smallspy]

So what is stopping the line from opening now?! ,Any insider info?

I don't know specifics, but to consider....
- Trains are still running on the line.
- Crews are still working inside at selected stations
- No official opening date for revenue service has been announced

That tells me a couple of things, especially when considering previous line openings we've dealt with here in Toronto:
- Whatever work that is being done is not on the ROW or any of the infrastructure required to actually run trains (rails, power, lighting, signalling, tunnels, etc.)
- In spite of Substantial Completion being met, there are still small issues that are serious enough to prevent the opening of the line to revenue service, and either their quantity or their complexity is enough to prevent the supply of an opening date

If I had to hazard a guess, the issues stem with things like elevating devices or lighting or life safety systems. Things that would affect the public from using the system (and particular in an emergency), but not necessarily the much more limited number of operating and construction crews.

Dan

 

[Northern Light]

I don't know specifics, but to consider....
- Trains are still running on the line.
- Crews are still working inside at selected stations
- No official opening date for revenue service has been announced

That tells me a couple of things, especially when considering previous line openings we've dealt with here in Toronto:
- Whatever work that is being done is not on the ROW or any of the infrastructure required to actually run trains (rails, power, lighting, signalling, tunnels, etc.)
- In spite of Substantial Completion being met, there are still small issues that are serious enough to prevent the opening of the line to revenue service, and either their quantity or their complexity is enough to prevent the supply of an opening date

If I had to hazard a guess, the issues stem with things like elevating devices or lighting or life safety systems. Things that would affect the public from using the system (and particular in an emergency), but not necessarily the much more limited number of operating and construction crews.

Dan

To my understanding, and you can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the express direction from the Mayor's office was that Line 5 was not to open without the surface section being faster than the bus it replaced.

If that is in fact the case, there will need to be programming changes in the TSP, in some operating protocols and in the line schedule and staffing.

****

Budgetarily speaking, the line is budgeted for full operation from January 1st. Needless to say it will not be operating at that time. But that is the fiscal assumption baked into this year's budget.

 

[Bojaxs]

Video does a good job of explaining how trams are good on their own for certain corridors, but shouldn't be used in areas where a subway or metro would be more preferable. Such as Line 5 in Toronto.

 

[crs1026]

Well, happy Boxing Day. Here's a little history from the early 2000's, showing various public points of view around transit planning from the decade before Transit City. The point being, visions were much more modest and an expense of even one Billion dollars was much more dramatic and politically controversial. Subways were simply not seen as affordable.
As the Miller article underlines, the Province's decision to cut transit funding in the Eves-Harris years left transit planners scrambling for ideas that were fundable.
After Transit City, the intense debate especially over Scarborough LRT versus subway, and the utter randomness of decisionmaking in the Ford era, had the effect of loosening the political appetite for spending, One might that the pendulum has swung way way over. It's certainly notable how the political slant that sat with the tightest purse strings is now willing to spend very loosely.

- Paul

29 April 2002

May 6 2002 Page A21

17 March 2003

17 Jan 2005

 

[smallspy]

To my understanding, and you can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the express direction from the Mayor's office was that Line 5 was not to open without the surface section being faster than the bus it replaced.

If that is in fact the case, there will need to be programming changes in the TSP, in some operating protocols and in the line schedule and staffing.

I have not heard that. That's not to say it's not true - but if it is word of it has not gotten down to the lower layers of management or even the operating crews yet.

But it does raise several questions to me. As it sits right now, the surface section of the line is already faster at certain times of the day (and those times happen to coincide with the periods of time when the line would be busiest).

Are they trying to make it faster at all times? Because that's a fool's errand, and simply not possible.

If they are waiting to set up some sort of more aggressive TSP on the line, and the current project is not going to have at least an answer to what can be done until the spring, does that mean we're going to be waiting until at least that time before we can ride the line?

Dan

 

[crs1026]

If they are waiting to set up some sort of more aggressive TSP on the line, and the current project is not going to have at least an answer to what can be done until the spring, does that mean we're going to be waiting until at least that time before we can ride the line?

Dan

One would hope that if staff returned to Council and the Mayor's office with a clear and achievable plan to execute said improvements, with timeline, the line could be opened as is - and those improvements would happen in. reasonable time thereafter.

- Pul

 

[Bordercollie]

One would hope that if staff returned to Council and the Mayor's office with a clear and achievable plan to execute said improvements, with timeline, the line could be opened as is - and those improvements would happen in. reasonable time thereafter.

- Pul

I would think that they don't want revenue service trains until everything is worked out.
They need to come up with a plan. (Don't have one yet)
They need to implement it which probably requires re-programming the signals
Testing and teathing until it works
30 days burn in where it works as desired
That's why I said June.

 

[crs1026]

I would think that they don't want revenue service trains until everything is worked out.
They need to come up with a plan. (Don't have one yet)
They need to implement it which probably requires re-programming the signals
Testing and teathing until it works
30 days burn in where it works as desired
That's why I said June.

We are past the point where some unknown issue blocked putting parts of the line in service before the rest.

At first glance - If we are now at the point where surface operation is the critical missing element, it seems possible to open the line from Mount Dennis to the first above ground turnback point. That might mean retaining the Eglinton East bus, but the west bus could be eliminated and some surface routes realigned. And public acceptance (delight) with the underground portion would flow.

I know nothing of TSP, but intuitively I would think its rollout would have individual elements tied to specific intersections, plus a more general tweaking of the traffic signal integration along Eglinton, and possibly along north south streets. The former strikes me as easy to plan and execute ie just implement one or two intersections per week until all are modified. Whereas the latter strikes me as a much more complicated task, possibly requiring modelling ahead of time and then iterative tweaks until the whole route is optimised.

The risk of rushing things would be a sudden and unfavourable change in road flow with obvious new examples of congestion or gridlock because the existing optimised signal integration is disrupted. The mayor may be taking the smart course by not rushing to a piecemeal implementation that enrages motorists and provokes pushback. We all know where that might end up....#EtobicokeBloorBikeLanes.....

And rolling out the underground, and having it work well quickly, while leaving the surface part visibly problemmatic, does not leave the public with confidence that LRT works.

So maybe the strategy has to be, take some more time and get it all working well before any of it opens. This is excruciating, but maybe it's essential or we will not see more surface LRT proposed in the GTA.

- Paul

PS - having said that, the growing realisation that TTC and City staff were inclined to just open the line without TSP, and let the whole line plod along in mediocrity.... gets me more angry with every passing day.

 

[Westey]

You said it all.

I'm never good at compiling my thoughts. I often struggle on this forum as to how to put into words my frustration. But you've done a good job of summing up my sentiments.

It's not enough to just say "I hate Line 6 cause it's slow". I hate Line 6 because it's a manifestation of all the poor transit choices over the last 15-20 years made by city councilors and politicians who thought they knew better than the general public and refused to build subways.

- "Let's build an underground LRT instead."
- "Lets add more stations on the GO lines within Toronto"

Often times the pro-LRTs only argument against subways is that "they're expensive". Well of course they're expensive, they're the best form of mass transit a city can have.

Also, Line 6 is a classic example of how Metorlinx and transit planners in Ontario focus too much on the big things, and often neglect the little things. Congrats! You built an LRT! But you forgot TPS, and why are the tram doors being left open at every station? etc., etc. This makes it seem as if our transit systems are being planned, built. and operated by people who don't actually use transit.

Having taken two trips to London earlier this year and seeing how the trains, underground, Overground, Elizabeth Line, DLR and buses all work in tandem with each other really highlighted to me the sorry state of transit in Toronto. In fact, I find myself now becoming more interested with transit across the U.K. and other European countries rather than continue to follow transit in Toronto & Ontario as a whole because it just puts me in a bad mood.

This obsession Canadian cities have with trying to run low floor LRTs as light metros needs to come to an end! Line 5 will be an abysmal failure! Calgary seriously needs to reconsider their choice of using low floor LRTs on the future Green Line, and I don't even know what the hell Ottawa is suppose to do!

And yes, Ontario needs a new "Bill Davis". A Conservative who isn't afraid to think big.

It's a lot easier to be a "Bill Davis" type leader when the deficit is $2.9B (2.3% of GDP) and debt is $22B (15% of GDP). (I actually liked Frost and Robarts better).
When Harris came in, it was deficit of $10B (3.3% of GDP) and debt of $91B (30% of GDP).
When Harris and PC's left, deficit was 1.3% of GDP and debt 27.5%.
When Wynne and Liberals left, deficit was 0.9% of GDP and debt 40%.
(all #'s by AI, so they are not verified).
Ford seemed to ignore fiscal reality, and spend massively on things, including transit.
Likely the next Premier will have to clean up Fords mess so transit spending likely will reduce.

All in all, it seems that spending on transit and gov't spending are not correlated well. Whenever they spend, they spend frivolously.
And the best strategy is to be fiscally sound to be able to afford the things you need.