News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 8.8K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5K     0 

Full disclosure, it was a couple of years ago, so I do not have the exact quote. But I am pretty confident that was his answer, or at least something along those lines.

Also in his defence, he became the CEO after the decision was made to take the route along the surface. So it is unlikely he was in a position to really influence the final decision.

The entire event seemed like an exercise in TTC culture though. At best it was an explanation to the public of why the TTC does the things it does. At worst it was filled with excuses as to why suggestions from the public could not be implemented, a "we can't" attitude rather than a "we can" one. Hint: The excuse made most of the time was money.
 
TTC is run my people until Andy came alone since the 90's who march to their own beat, not at the beat of GM's.

At the same time, the Chair's of TTC have been useless as they don't hold the feet of staff to the fire to get things done as order or haven't a clue how to do thing right. The commissioners are in the same boat as the chair.

Staff keeps reinventing the wheel when there are proven items on the market at a cheaper price.

They refused to understand they are not the leader in the transit field and no one wants to follow them anymore.

Going elevate or having transit on one side of the road is a no no, and that not the way we do things. Getting transit on the side for Queens Quay and Cherry St as well the rest of the waterfront was like pulling teeth because of TTC, but it won in the end.

Andy is put on the spot as many decisions were made before he came here or as he was learning the role he is now. At time he can be his own worse enemy but not saying "this is wrong and not the right way" regardless what the mayor or council wants in the first place. He is wrong at times himself for failing to see the right path to take on various things.

Andy has a staff that long in the tooth and have put in 20-30 years who are only looking for that final pay check as they will be set for life once they get it and don't care what happen to TTC after they leave. Getting rid of those staff member can't happen overnight and will take years to do.

I saw the poor TTC culture within the first few months of 2004 to say that TTC needs a house clean from the top down. Even with the house cleaning Andy doing, I see various management that should been gone a decade ago still hanging on by a thread at TTC meeting.

Line 4 is a failure and a case how you shouldn't build a subway in the first place.

Even GO/Metrolinx has "We Can't" Attitude of TTC on various things today as well in the past.
 
And the subway service for the Scarborough branch will be every other (or even every third) 6-car train from Line 2.
 
Here’s a new piece from Spacing Toronto, on a new University of Toronto report, regarding the accessibility, or lack thereof, of the Line 2 extension plan.

It echoes a lot of what transit advocates have been saying regarding the Line 2 extension: it does little to improve transit accessibility for Scarborough residents. Some residents will still face 30 minute rides to higher order transit.

Note that 47% of trips originating in Scarborough also terminate within the borough, meaning that improving local transit in the borough should be treated with particular importance. In contrast, only 16% of trips originating within Scarborough terminate downtown (Sheppard Transit Expert Panel Meeting, March 2012).

The report goes on to conclude that the best option for improving transit in Scarborough is to build: 6 Sheppard LRT, SmartTrack, 3 Scarborough Line and the Scarborough Malvern LRT. The 62 station plan would also cost less to build than the than the 7.5 km, 3 Station, Line 2 extension plan.

This report comes soon after a Forum Research sampling concluded that 60% would prefer to build a 30 station Scarborough LRT network, over a 4 station subway extension, including 60% of Scarborough residents.
 
Last edited:
I was finally able to find the report.

Here's the number that stood out to me.

25% of Scarborough residents would be within walking distance of higher order transit if SmartTrack, Sheppard LRT, Scarbough Malvern LRT and the Scarborough RT was built. This is incredible coverage for a suburban areas. This is compared to only 8% for current plans.
 
drum118 said:
Getting transit on the side for Queens Quay and Cherry St as well the rest of the waterfront was like pulling teeth because of TTC, but it won in the end.
Click to expand...

God this really grinds my gears. EVERYWHERE else in the world you see LRT's on the SIDE of the road, NOT in the middle. It makes no sense to have it in the middle if its in an isolated Right Of Way.

You unecessarily create a barrier for traffic, and the LRT has to obey all traffic signals including left turns for cars.

Makes ZERO sense, and the TTC's reason is basically "This is how we have always done it"

Now the EA's for Eglinton/Sheppard/Finch are complete and its too late to go back and redo the EA without significant cost or delay.

We are stuck with this or nothing.
 
robmausser said:
God this really grinds my gears. EVERYWHERE else in the world you see LRT's on the SIDE of the road, NOT in the middle. It makes no sense to have it in the middle if its in an isolated Right Of Way.

You unecessarily create a barrier for traffic, and the LRT has to obey all traffic signals including left turns for cars.

Makes ZERO sense, and the TTC's reason is basically "This is how we have always done it"

Now the EA's for Eglinton/Sheppard/Finch are complete and its too late to go back and redo the EA without significant cost or delay.

We are stuck with this or nothing.
Click to expand...

Why would another EA need to be done if the LRT were to go down the side of the street? It makes no sense how changing the side of the road impacts the environemnt
 
Palma said:
Why would another EA need to be done if the LRT were to go down the side of the street? It makes no sense how changing the side of the road impacts the environemnt
Click to expand...

An EA is more about how things impact the natural environment. How it impacts social, economic and cultural environments is important too. EA's are also about being transparent, and consulting with the public and stakeholders.

Changing the side of the road might be done as an amendment. I would expect there to be ramifications on shifting LRT to one side; noise and vibration at the least. That would potentially require mitigation.
 
robmausser said:
God this really grinds my gears. EVERYWHERE else in the world you see LRT's on the SIDE of the road, NOT in the middle. It makes no sense to have it in the middle if its in an isolated Right Of Way.

You unecessarily create a barrier for traffic, and the LRT has to obey all traffic signals including left turns for cars.

Makes ZERO sense, and the TTC's reason is basically "This is how we have always done it"

Now the EA's for Eglinton/Sheppard/Finch are complete and its too late to go back and redo the EA without significant cost or delay.

We are stuck with this or nothing.
Click to expand...

There are lots of situations where side-of-the-road does make sense for a PROW. Look at what they've done on the Harbourfront, and on Cherry Street. But streets where there are lots of driveways or crossing streets are not not one of those situations, and long stretches of Finch West, Sheppard East and Eglinton certainly fit that bill.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.
 
Not many lights on eglinton west to the airport. Could side of the road work on this stretch to increase speed.
 
robmausser said:
God this really grinds my gears. EVERYWHERE else in the world you see LRT's on the SIDE of the road, NOT in the middle. It makes no sense to have it in the middle if its in an isolated Right Of Way.

You unecessarily create a barrier for traffic, and the LRT has to obey all traffic signals including left turns for cars.

Makes ZERO sense, and the TTC's reason is basically "This is how we have always done it"

Now the EA's for Eglinton/Sheppard/Finch are complete and its too late to go back and redo the EA without significant cost or delay.

We are stuck with this or nothing.
Click to expand...

Really, everywhere?

Doesn't side-of-road running create its own set of challenges in terms of interacting with road traffic?

And aside from that, the TTC's intransigence and lack of originality notwithstanding, there is also no reason that an LRT should be all central ROW or all side of the road.

The Croydon Tramlink in London was created using existing completely off-road trackage and adding central ROW and mixed traffic sections. Back in January I had the opportunity to ride the Utrecht light rail (envisioned as a sneltram or 'express streetcar') - it starts from its own platforms at the railway station and runs in a combination of a central ROW, on tracks beside the road and at one point in a heavy rail style corridor of its own.
 
University of Toronto Scarborough: Is the Scarborough rapid transit debate driving you around the bend?

Don Campbell

LRT along major east-west arterial roads make the most sense for Scarborough’s urban makeup, according to a new report on rapid transit options from the University of Toronto.

“A critical aspect that’s been neglected in recent debates on transit investments in Scarborough is the potential for land redevelopment and intensification in areas near proposed transit stations,” says U of T Scarborough Professor André Sorensen, who authored the report along with U of T Associate Professor Paul Hess.

The pair mapped land use, street networks, pedestrian access to transit stops and development potential in the corridors that could be served by the different rapid transit options under consideration for Scarborough. They suggest that building a high-capacity rapid transit line in low intensity suburban areas only makes sense if it’s possible to redevelop and intensify lands within walking distance of the transit stops.

“The best opportunities for redevelopment exist along Scarborough’s east-west arterials, such as Eglinton and Sheppard, because they have large lots, wide property frontages and currently have low intensity of land use,” says Sorensen, an urban geographer known for his studies of urban regeneration in cities like Tokyo.

Toronto’s suburbs were originally designed to resist gradual change in residential areas, notes Sorensen. There are rules against intensification, and any suggestion of redevelopment is often met with strong opposition from residents. As a result, few areas provide opportunities for significant redevelopment.

Sorensen and Hess conclude that LRT lines such as those proposed by Transit City are not only cheaper and faster to build than a subway, they also offer greater potential for spurring much-needed reinvestment in the area. By comparison city council’s plan to build the Scarborough subway extension from Kennedy to Sheppard Avenue would be expensive, accessible to far fewer potential riders from the surrounding neighbourhoods and offers much lower potential for redevelopment along the corridor.

“LRT offers a longer set of lines and is a much better fit with the existing landscape in Scarborough, including both where the population is and where the jobs are today and where they will likely grow in the future through redevelopment and intensification,” says Sorensen.

The report also says rapid transit planning has become intensely political, focusing too narrowly on routes, ridership capacity and the projected cost of various lines while neglecting important elements of how areas such as Scarborough were developed, which “sets the stage” for development and transit opportunities.

“Understandably there is considerable pressure to just start building something, but it’s more important to get these decisions right,” says Hess. “These investments will cost billions of dollars and will profoundly shape the future of urban development and potentially improve the quality of life for many who live in this area of the city.”

The top priority for Scarborough transit should be the Sheppard LRT, say Sorensen and Hess, who stress that it should begin construction right away.

“The Sheppard LRT outperforms all of the potential lines in terms of the number of residents, jobs and pedestrian network per kilometer of track,” says Hess. “It’s already been approved with environmental assessments and would be able to start carrying passengers even before construction starts on either of the two existing proposals.”
Click to expand...
 
University of Toronto calls building the Scarborough Subway and SmartTrack, "by far the worst of all five options"

Option 5, the combination of SmartTrack with the Scarborough subway extension, performs by far the worst of all five options on all measures. It is clearly a worst-case scenario, but is dangerously close to being accepted as the policy of the City of Toronto, as Mayor Tory has expressed reluctance to reconsider the decision to build the subway extension, is deeply committed to SmartTrack, and is unsure about whether the Sheppard LRT should be a priority.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top