[Solid Snake]

And it didn't help that Miller described LRT as streetcars with wider stop spacing:

[video=youtube;OQ3eJwuj910]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQ3eJwuj910[/video]

Calling them subways that have the flexibility to run in a ROW, underground or elevated, with rider stop spacing and signal priority would have been far easier for the public to understand.

Miller's description was accurate if you're referring to the way Transit City was designed. You're description is also accurate but cannot be applied to Transit City except for the RT and 2/3 of Eglinton

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Miller's description was accurate if you're referring to the way Transit City was designed. You're description is also accurate but cannot be applied to Transit City except for the RT and 2/3 of Eglinton

I realize that both are accurate. But saying that it's a subway in a ROW would have been better politics for Miller.

 

[Solid Snake]

I realize that both are accurate. But saying that it's a subway in a ROW would have been better politics for Miller.

It's called lying to your citizens

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

It's called lying to your citizens

Which politicians do every day.

 

[Solid Snake]

Which politicians do every day.

doesn't make it right

 

[ssiguy2]

Of course there is the one option that would be, by far, the easiest, less disruptive, faster, cheaper to run, and save a cool billion option of simply keeping the SkyTrain tech on the current SRT.

Use the new MK111 cars which can now be articulated into one 100 meter train, heat the rails, not screw around with the cabins and let the system run automated like it is designed to, and extend the platforms as opposed to having to completely reconstruct them. No wires to put in, no rail to replace, no new maintenance and control facility to build, no new headache of station reconstruction, almost no down time, and better service.

The cool billion saved from the SRT to LRT conversion could be used to elevate the Eglinton and turn the Eg/SRT into one seamless system like it was originally intended to be.

Alas, fast, easy to build, cost-effective, and grade separated, just doesn't seem to be in line with "great city building". That's what NYC, London, Paris, San Francisco, and Berlin are such such hell holes with pitiful transit and Torontonians have the transit system that clearly all those cities can only dream of.

 

[nfitz]

Use the new MK111 cars which can now be articulated into one 100 meter train, heat the rails, not screw around with the cabins and let the system run automated like it is designed to, and extend the platforms as opposed to having to completely reconstruct them. No wires to put in, no rail to replace, no new maintenance and control facility to build, no new headache of station reconstruction, almost no down time, and better service.

Aren't they more likely to use the Innovia Metro 300? Has anyone actually built one of these yet?

And what does this give you that the Mark II didn't give you (other than more train length perhaps). They still have to rebuild the tunnel between Ellesmere and Midland; and rebuild Kennedy station to reduce the long connection.

 

[historydude2012]

John Tory has come out in favour of the re-opening the issue concerning the subway.

Edit: Apparently I can't read dates and this is actually old news.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...scarborough-subway-extension/article11608827/

 

[snowystar]

Aren't they more likely to use the Innovia Metro 300? Has anyone actually built one of these yet?

None in operation yet, but they are in production. Vancouver ordered 28 of these at slightly more than 3M per car, to be delivered in 2015.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

It's called lying to your citizens

How is it lying? Is what I said not an accurate description? LRTs do have subway-like operation with the flexibility to run at grade, below grade, elevated or in a ROW. It is at least as accurate as calling them streetcars with stop spacing similar to subways (800m) that have the flexibility to run at grade, below grade, elevated or in a ROW with subway-like operation.

 

[Solid Snake]

How is it lying? Is what I said not an accurate description? LRTs do have subway-like operation with the flexibility to run at grade, below grade, elevated or in a ROW. It is at least as accurate as calling them streetcars with stop spacing similar to subways (800m) that have the flexibility to run at grade, below grade, elevated or in a ROW with subway-like operation.

Your description is accurate and it does have very flexible modes of operation. I'm just saying that Miller's description of LRT's was specific to his own project...Transit City. Besides the RT and parts of Eglinton, they operate just like St.Clair and Spadina by not being fully grade-separated and susceptible to exterior factors (traffic) affecting the reliability of the line.

 

[innsertnamehere]

They are as susceptible to traffic as calgarys or Edmontons are. these are far different than your grandma's streetcar, they pay their fare before getting on, signal priority, multi door boarding, and further stop spacing make them very different that St. Clair or spadina. God, I thought this had been disproved already, apparently not.

 

[Ansem]

They are as susceptible to traffic as calgarys or Edmontons are. these are far different than your grandma's streetcar, they pay their fare before getting on, signal priority, multi door boarding, and further stop spacing make them very different that St. Clair or spadina. God, I thought this had been disproved already, apparently not.

I think he was making a clear distinction between Eglinton and Sheppard. Would you call Paris Tram system "you're grandma's streetcars? Of course not. But guess what, they call them "Tramways" for streetcars and the line operates just like SELRT is supposed to do.

The RT is just like London's DLR and in Europe, they don't call it "Tramways" or Streetcars.

Now, I'm fully aware that you can have a mix of both like Eglinton or other lines around the world which would still qualify as LRT... but to use the word "subway" on that kind of line is just being dishonest and even Miller in the end called Transit City "streetcars". Hell, even the Toronto Star did.

http://www.thestar.com/news/ttc/201...ar_plan_takes_speed_out_of_rapid_transit.html

James: Streetcar plan takes speed out of ‘rapid’ transit

In the wake of disappointment over the delays of some of the Transit City streetcar lines — Finch and Eglinton and one out to Malvern — proponents have been boosting the impact of the projects, sometimes with claims that are debatable.
Transit City is not a rapid transit plan. It’s an environmentally sensitive plan. There’s nothing rapid about St. Clair or Spadina. They are comfortable. They move on schedule. But they are not fast. And a streetcar line from Highway 27 to Yonge St. won’t be dashing along, either.

The first acknowledgement should be this: A streetcar network is second-best. It is being proposed because we don’t have the money to do better and our political leaders are not bold enough to tax us to generate the funds or innovative enough to seek other funding options with the private sector.

Many citizens are willing to settle for second-best because the ideal seems so impossibly difficult. But show citizens a subway building plan and the mayor can have $100 in annual licence renewal fees. There will be weeping and wailing, but the cause is just.

Yes, the plan should be accompanied by zoning changes that push intensification along the routes — carefully and sensitively, but pushed ahead, and above the howls of those who want to stand still and not accommodate a more densely populated city.

Yes, build it one station a year for 20 or 30 years.
Yes, finish the Sheppard Stub-way, east to the Scarborough Town Centre and west to the Downsview station to complete a loop with the Yonge-University and the Bloor-Danforth lines. That means we’d be able to travel around three-quarters of the city by subway, and jump off on extensions to the outer reaches.

There seems to be a desire for rapid transit along Eglinton, as well. So, go to it. And the so-called Downtown Relief line in the east-midtown may be a good idea as well.

But don’t tell us that residents in northwest Toronto are now taking three buses over two hours to get to work and hold up the proposed Finch streetcar line as a solution. Commuters may save a few minutes, but it won’t take them long to be dissatisfied with the small, incremental improvement.

Councillor Suzan Hall represents the Rexdale area and is a big supporter of Transit City. She insists on calling the Finch line an LRT, even as I insist on calling it a streetcar.

“Lower emissions and speed are the two biggest factors,†she said Monday. Ridership projections for the next 20 years along Finch will exceed bus capacity but fall well short of subways — hence LRT is ideal, she says.

Transit City proponents say subway aficionados are dreaming if they think Toronto can afford subways. On several of the proposed routes there is nowhere near the capacity needed to run a subway, they argue, and they are correct. For those routes, put in dedicated bus lanes and save the added costs of streetcars. Neither is ideal. But if you can’t get the full benefits, go the cost-effective route until you build the capacity. Going to streetcars does not improve your speed, costs more, is more disruptive, takes longer to construct and is not as flexible as dedicated bus lanes.

“If you want to get people out of their cars you have to give them more than a bus; they’ve had that experience,†Councillor Hall says. “In my conversation with people up my way, buses don’t add up.â€
That’s because they’ve been led to believe that they’re getting rapid transit. Imagine the disappointment should they find out otherwise.

This debate, of course, is almost moot now that the province has delayed the Finch line, along with Eglinton and the Malvern project.

If there is an upside to the decision — odious because it short-circuits a process that’s been approved and supported for years by the same provincial government — it gives us another chance to re-examine where our transit plans are headed.

 

[Solid Snake]

You're wasting your time Ansem. Those who live and die by Transit City will tell you that Royson James and David Miller just don't get it and the people who doesn't like the plan needs "more education"

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Your description is accurate and it does have very flexible modes of operation. I'm just saying that Miller's description of LRT's was specific to his own project...Transit City. Besides the RT and parts of Eglinton, they operate just like St.Clair and Spadina by not being fully grade-separated and susceptible to exterior factors (traffic) affecting the reliability of the line.

I agree with you here. From the information we had about TC, it definitely seemed like it would have been streetcars with slightly larger stop spacing (excluding the ECLRT). In my previous comments I was referring to LRT in general and not specifically TC.

Now that Metrolinx is in charge, I am hopeful that those lines will also have 800+M average stop spacing. That would be well within the rapid transit definition. The 400m spacing used in the preliminary Transit City plans would not have been RT.