Forgotten
Active Member
Only because most people are ignorant of how much subways really cost. Who wouldn't want gold and diamonds if they were free or cheap?
|
|
|
- Thread starter denfromoakvillemilton
- Start date
kEiThZ
Superstar
Are the tunneled portions of Eglinton really all that cheaper than a subway? You can build subways for cheap too if you put them on the surface and run them on hydro ROWs for example. Cheap or expensive is relative.
Also, there's a bit of the laws of large numbers. $1 billion for subway in Scarborough is a lot. But when you spread it out over decades and over a million households, it's not as big. Though I will grant that the opportunity costs are significant.
Lastly, there's a fairness issue. You can't tell Scarborough residents who pay taxes in the 416 that a subway for them, that is simply a natural extension of a line that's already there, and has been promised for decades, is a bridge too far and then build one to Vaughan which is even further and in an area where ratepayers won't be supporting the TTC.
BurlOak
Senior Member
I think subway is less expensive than underground LRT. The tunnels are smaller due to the lack of pantographs. The LRT vehicles must be stronger and heavier to be crashworthy since they run in traffic. And of course there is no rule that says that subways must be 150m long - they could be the same length as LRT.
In fact, if Eglinton would have been build as ALRT, which is even smaller diameter tunnels, then the fully grade separated (DM to Kennedy elevated) line from Mount Dennis to Malvern would have been the same cost or less expensive than the Transit City plan that ran in the median.
mpd618
Active Member
Seconding this. Waterloo Region is on track to open a proper modern LRT line by 2017, by which point it will already have a fair amount of transit-oriented development at stations. Certainly after that point it will be much more difficult to argue against LRT out of ignorance in the GTA.
Dan416
Senior Member
Short answer is no.
But LRT's reputation is damaged by the slowness of the current streetcar network.
If you've ridden trams in other cities, you'd know the slowness isn't inherent to the technology.
But LRT's reputation is damaged by the slowness of the current streetcar network.
If you've ridden trams in other cities, you'd know the slowness isn't inherent to the technology.
timio
Active Member
Some people may dispute this.
Solid Snake
Active Member
If the ridership numbers are accurate, it is hard to believe that their LRT would have more ridership than Pittsburgh LRT which is a city over 2 millions citizens.
Adjei
Senior Member
They can dispute it all they want, it's getting built.
ssiguy2
Senior Member
The LRT image in Toronto is permanently damaged but that has nothing to do with the technology but rather how Toronto was implementing it.
Toronto wanted LRT to create some suburban avenue that will never materialize and in doing so too k the "rapid" out of so called rapid transit TransitCity concept. It thought you could have streetlights everywhere, trains having to wait for advanced green lights and stations every 300 meters and still call it rapid transit. Improved transit certainly but not even remotely rapid and it won't entice any new riders. For the cost of Toronto LRT, people want a much faster way of getting around and not some pie in the sky dream of turning Finch into Queen.
LRT is also getting a bad name because the reason why most cities starting building LRT in NA is because they are an affordable alternative to expensive subways but Eglinton is coming in with high subway prices for the lowest capacity of all 4 potential grade separated systems of Metro, SkyTrain, Monorail, or LRT. It is also building far to many stations along the route which has meant not being able to grade separate the entire line. Miller did this on purpose to appease his influential union supporters. Miller, even if he had all the money in the world to finish Eglinton. still would have had 10 feet at grade. Just enough to guarantee that the line can't be automated and hurt his union voting base.
This report is a very scathing and damning one and it's about time that the TTC and Metrolinx's incompetence and unaccountable costs and plans were held to account.
Toronto wanted LRT to create some suburban avenue that will never materialize and in doing so too k the "rapid" out of so called rapid transit TransitCity concept. It thought you could have streetlights everywhere, trains having to wait for advanced green lights and stations every 300 meters and still call it rapid transit. Improved transit certainly but not even remotely rapid and it won't entice any new riders. For the cost of Toronto LRT, people want a much faster way of getting around and not some pie in the sky dream of turning Finch into Queen.
LRT is also getting a bad name because the reason why most cities starting building LRT in NA is because they are an affordable alternative to expensive subways but Eglinton is coming in with high subway prices for the lowest capacity of all 4 potential grade separated systems of Metro, SkyTrain, Monorail, or LRT. It is also building far to many stations along the route which has meant not being able to grade separate the entire line. Miller did this on purpose to appease his influential union supporters. Miller, even if he had all the money in the world to finish Eglinton. still would have had 10 feet at grade. Just enough to guarantee that the line can't be automated and hurt his union voting base.
This report is a very scathing and damning one and it's about time that the TTC and Metrolinx's incompetence and unaccountable costs and plans were held to account.
Solid Snake
Active Member
I expect Hudak and the PC to use this report a foundation for his transit platform.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
Considering that Hudaks cornerstone to his plan is to sell off property that has already been sold, I somehow doubt it.
Adjei
Senior Member
The guy is utterly clueless.
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
Common sense revolution 
ksun
Senior Member
This.
The need to wait for traffic lights and more importantly tight spacing is why I am lukewarm about the LRT (and transitcity for that matter). We need rapid transit, and Eglinton in my understanding, will not be rapid. I have never seen another city with equally tight spacing between subway stations, not to mention our streetcars. Paris with several times of our density doesn't seem to space their stations that tight.
And also, I am not in favour of a system where people will wait in the open or semi open stations for a train to arrive, considering how cold and long our winters are. The stations have to be fully enclosed and heated in the winter. Otherwise, it is a NO for me as it reduces the comfort dramatically and will force people to drive a car instead.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
Guess you don't use the Davisville or Rosedale subway stations. They're not enclosed. Many other lines in the world are the same way.
As for the intersections, it'll depend on the proper installation and operation of the transit priority. Toronto has not done it correctly... yet.