[syn]

What is the Star's agenda, exactly??

Why would the Toronto Star, as an organization, be against a subway extension that made sense?

Are there any facts that The Star has cited that are in dispute?

 

[Cobra]

What is the Star's agenda, exactly??

Why would the Toronto Star, as an organization, be against a subway extension that made sense?

Are there any facts that The Star has cited that are in dispute?

I'm pointing out that they dig harder on one issue over the other. Why have they been silent on the findings that Skytrain was always the right technology for Eglinton? Why was Skytrain ignored? Why was the ridership potential pushed down to meet LRT? C'mon.

If we're all in agreement of building transit the right way, let's be consistent here. Eglinton should have been Skytrain and the opportunity to merge it to the SRT using new trains was there. but whatever

 

[syn]

I'm pointing out that they dig harder on one issue over the other. Why have they been silent on the findings that Skytrain was always the right technology for Eglinton? Why was Skytrain ignored? Why was the ridership potential pushed down to meet LRT? C'mon.

If we're all in agreement of building transit the right way, let's be consistent here. Eglinton should have been Skytrain and the opportunity to merge it to the SRT using new trains was there. but whatever

That wasn't a unanimous finding by any stretch - and they weren't silent about the possibility nor findings. That's completely false.

https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/20...g_move_is_the_wrong_move_think_tank_says.html

https://www.thestar.com/news/city_h...ed_transit_among_metrolinxs_alternatives.html

https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/tr...ter_elevated_transit_isnt_always_smarter.html

https://www.thestar.com/news/city_h...h_is_worse_than_any_of_the_options_james.html

https://www.thestar.com/news/city_h...eads_and_rethink_this_transit_mess_james.html

Anytime The Star presents a factual look at the SSE with data to support it the only response we get is that they're 'biased', a claim which has been proven false when it comes to the SSE.

Can you actually address the content of the article?

 

[Cobra]

That wasn't a unanimous finding by any stretch - and they weren't silent about the possibility nor findings. That's completely false.

https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/20...g_move_is_the_wrong_move_think_tank_says.html

https://www.thestar.com/news/city_h...ed_transit_among_metrolinxs_alternatives.html

https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/tr...ter_elevated_transit_isnt_always_smarter.html

https://www.thestar.com/news/city_h...h_is_worse_than_any_of_the_options_james.html

https://www.thestar.com/news/city_h...eads_and_rethink_this_transit_mess_james.html

Anytime The Star presents a factual look at the SSE with data to support it the only response we get is that they're 'biased', a claim which has been proven false when it comes to the SSE.

Can you actually address the content of the article?

I don't argue the lack of facts, however, there should have been more editorials/pressure on skytrain and more information given to the population regarding that. A few articles here and there pales in comparison to the busload of pro-LRT articles.

 

[syn]

So you're basically saying you want more SkyTrain articles because you personally want a SkyTrain.

You're complaining about The Star being biased, but only because they're not biased in a way that suits you.

Why would they report on a fringe possibility that was never really endorsed by any official agency?

If you read through the Neptis Foundation report, it's quite clear that why it wasn't taken as seriously. It calls for canceling the DRL, while keeping a 2 stop Yonge Subway extension to Richmond Hill.

It certainly didn't endorse any kind of Scarborough subway.

The Star is reporting on the two final options that were considered - the LRT and the subway. They're reporting on the subway now because it's been reduced to one stop, the cost has ballooned (and will continue to) and there are councilors that feel it should be questioned.

It's real news, and I'm quite glad the public is being informed of the facts by a source that's far more impartial than Rob Ford was, or than Doug Ford or John Tory are.

If you don't argue the facts, then how can you dismiss these SSE articles that demonstrate serious cost and planning issues as nothing more than an 'agenda'?

 

[Cobra]

So you're basically saying you want more SkyTrain articles because you personally want a SkyTrain.

You're complaining about The Star being biased, but only because they're not biased in a way that suits you.

Why would they report on a fringe possibility that was never really endorsed by any official agency?

If you read through the Neptis Foundation report, it's quite clear that why it wasn't taken as seriously. It calls for canceling the DRL, while keeping a 2 stop Yonge Subway extension to Richmond Hill.

It certainly didn't endorse any kind of Scarborough subway.

The Star is reporting on the two final options that were considered - the LRT and the subway. They're reporting on the subway now because it's been reduced to one stop, the cost has ballooned (and will continue to) and there are councilors that feel it should be questioned.

It's real news, and I'm quite glad the public is being informed of the facts by a source that's far more impartial than Rob Ford was, or than Doug Ford or John Tory are.

If you don't argue the facts, then how can you dismiss these SSE articles that demonstrate serious cost and planning issues as nothing more than an 'agenda'?

Putting aside the rest of the recommendations they brought forward, they are right on Eglinton

• Why wasn't Skytrain studied?
• Why are we using a technology that wouldn't unlock the full potential of the line? They demonstrated that Skytrain speed and being fully grade separated would have attracted easily double what the LRT is projected to attract.

You want to talk facts, why aren't you acknowledging that there was political interference here to make sure an LRT at grade was to be built on the edges of Eglinton. There's nothing transparent about SSE planning, but Transit City wasn't either. This is YNSE all over again where they purposely left out LRT and just went straight to subway...Some politician's pet project over what's right for the city...It's laughable

 

[syn]

Putting aside the rest of the recommendations they brought forward, they are right on Eglinton

• Why wasn't Skytrain studied?
• Why are we using a technology that wouldn't unlock the full potential of the line? They demonstrated that Skytrain speed and being fully grade separated would have attracted easily double what the LRT is projected to attract.

You want to talk facts, why aren't you acknowledging that there was political interference here to make sure an LRT at grade was to be built on the edges of Eglinton. There's nothing transparent about SSE planning, but Transit City wasn't either. This is YNSE all over again where they purposely left out LRT and just went straight to subway...Some politician's pet project over what's right for the city...It's laughable

It was.

https://www.thestar.com/news/city_h...ed_transit_among_metrolinxs_alternatives.html

http://www.metrolinx.com/en/regiona...ses/Benefits_Case-Eglinton_Crosstown_2009.pdf

I'm pretty sure the Skytrain was not projected to attract double what the LRT is. The report indicates a 25% increase based on their analysis.

In any case, if this is truly the way to go, then why not simply upgrade the current RT?

Why waste any money on a subway, clearly a colossal waste of money, as the reports by The Star are pointing out?

 

[gweed123]

In any case, if this is truly the way to go, then why not simply upgrade the current RT?

That WAS the preferred option until Transit City came out (upgrading to ICTS Mark II that is). Then it magically became LRT. Both decisions (LRT and subway) were politics trumping technical analysis IMO.

 

[rbt]

Then it magically became LRT.

It wasn't magic; there was a decision to extend it simultaneous with the rebuild. Turns out, LRT at surface level is cheaper than elevated Skytrain and with an extension the LRT was cheaper (roadway median north beyond McCowan.

Of course, as soon as extension became grade separated the technology should have been re-evaluated again.

 

[Cobra]

That WAS the preferred option until Transit City came out (upgrading to ICTS Mark II that is). Then it magically became LRT. Both decisions (LRT and subway) were politics trumping technical analysis IMO.

@syn
How people are quick to forget about the 1st flip flop. Had they followed the TTC initial recommendation, we woudn't be arguing here and $3.5B could have been used to connect and grade separate Eglinton or go straight to DRL. Let's also not forget that it was during that first flip flop that Miller/Giambrone thought that Transit City a.k.a "dumping more people on existing subway lines" was a higher priority than the DRL itself.

 

[syn]

@syn
How people are quick to forget about the 1st flip flop. Had they followed the TTC initial recommendation, we woudn't be arguing here and $3.5B could have been used to connect and grade separate Eglinton or go straight to DRL. Let's also not forget that it was during that first flip flop that Miller/Giambrone thought that Transit City a.k.a "dumping more people on existing subway lines" was a higher priority than the DRL itself.

This has been covered repeatedly in this thread. The plan you've suggested would've blown the budget for other transit projects. That's why it wasn't adopted.

There are transit needs all over the city, not just Scarborough.

The Transit City plan certainly wasn't perfect, but it did include lines (including a 'lite' DRL) that would alleviate pressure on the YUS line.

 

[Cobra]

This has been covered repeatedly in this thread. The plan you've suggested would've blown the budget for other transit projects. That's why it wasn't adopted.

Like what? Finch? Let me tell you something about Finch. I actually love the LRT plan on Finch, however, no one will make me believe that in the medium term, there wasn't a cheaper way to speed up Finch. I used to live there so let me tell you what the TTC could have done:

• Express Branch. Crazy that there was (maybe still isn't one)
• Reserved lanes. (why wasn't this ever done? Paint got that much expensive?)
• Articulated buses (Crazy it took that long for the TTC to get them)
• BRT (Finch West is large enough for that and then some)

A combination of the above would have speed up Finch drastically, same for Sheppard East for that matter.

There are transit needs all over the city, not just Scarborough.

SRT needed to be replaced/upgraded after years of neglect. Sure the TTC plan might have been more expensive but it was still the right thing to do.

The Transit City plan certainly wasn't perfect, but it did include lines (including a 'lite' DRL) that would alleviate pressure on the YUS line.

You mean "half assing" the most important project in the city? Not perfect is a huge understatement. Flawed vision would be more accurate. How in the world would Sheppard East be a higher priority than DRL is truly beyond me.

Or just that... a political move to woo parts of the city that weren't to happy with his administration.

 

[syn]

What an alarming lack of perspective. Transit along the Finch corridor is arguably the worst in the city. Why should they have to deal with a band-aid solution when Scarborough already has functional and reliable rapid transit?

Do you not see how silly it is to support the SSE, while suggesting Finch can wait because there's a cheaper solution available than an LRT?!

The RT doesn't need to be upgraded, people want it upgraded based on emotion.

I was on the King Streetcar late Sunday night last week...and it was full. No seats available.

It's quite common for me to ride the RT outside rush hour and have an entire car to myself.

Transit City addressed transit in 'high priority' neighbourhoods. Far from perfect, but a legitimate attempt to improve transit across the city. The The Spadina Extension is ridiculous given the need for the LRT, but generally speaking Transit City had some merit.

The SSE has none whatsoever.

 

[Cobra]

What an alarming lack of perspective. Transit along the Finch corridor is arguably the worst in the city. Why should they have to deal with a band-aid solution when Scarborough already has functional and reliable rapid transit?

Yet you were satisfied with Transit City band Aid for a DRL alternative...

The RT was falling into ruins...fyi

Do you not see how silly it is to support the SSE, while suggesting Finch can wait because there's a cheaper solution available than an LRT?!

Who said I support the 1 stop subway. I supported the 3 stop plan, not 1 stop plan. I said that they should have listen to the TTC and upgrade the current system when they had the chance, even if it meant delaying Finch and Sheppard, which by the way could have been improved in the meantime very easily until funds for LRT was again available.

I was on the King Streetcar late Sunday night last week...and it was full. No seats available.

Because the city lacked the backbone to stand up to cars and businesses until now (still debatable)

It's quite common for me to ride the RT outside rush hour and have an entire car to myself.

So we should have not upgrade the SRT based on such small samples of the few times you had the car to yourself?

Transit City addressed transit in 'high priority' neighbourhoods. Far from perfect, but a legitimate attempt to improve transit across the city.

Or win votes in parts of the city hostile to Miller at the time. I dare you to find a single experts that would put Transit City ahead of the DRL. I double dare you! lol

The Spadina Extension is ridiculous given the need for the LRT, but generally speaking Transit City had some merit.

It had merits POST-DRL Long. Until then, you're just dumping more people on the already overcrowded Line 1.

The SSE has none whatsoever.

3 stop, yes.
1 stop is madness
Best solution? Eglinton merged to SRT

 

[BurlOak]

I'm pointing out that they dig harder on one issue over the other. Why have they been silent on the findings that Skytrain was always the right technology for Eglinton? Why was Skytrain ignored? Why was the ridership potential pushed down to meet LRT? C'mon.

If we're all in agreement of building transit the right way, let's be consistent here. Eglinton should have been Skytrain and the opportunity to merge it to the SRT using new trains was there. but whatever

SkyTrain was ingnored - by City and Provincial planners.

Here's a couple of more outsiders who preferred SkyTrain.

http://www.neptis.org/sites/default...eptis_schabas_report_dec_2013_finaljuly23.pdf

http://skytrainforsurrey.org/2012/0...uing-this-technology-and-not-lrt-on-eglinton/