News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.8K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.6K     0 

CDL.TO said:
I think modern light rail would get an enthusiastic response in this city if they actually proposed any.

Operationally and design-wise, Transit City has more in common with the legacy systems of Melbourne, Amsterdam, and Berlin than it does with the modern LRT systems of Calgary, Croydon, and Denver.
Click to expand...
Trams should be used for local travel and not as replacements for subways, i.e. Finch LRT. The reason I say this is because I live in Melbourne, at the moment, and have seen this setup being used quite extensively.

For instance, the long range, Route 59, 82, etc on Melbourne are ridiculously slow. You are going to be seeing 30-50 minute headways on Finch and what not. It'd be a lot more efficient to just maintain the bus service.

Trams are more fitting in areas that will be Avenue-ized ala in Europe. In this case, it'd make more sense to run the Eglinton LRT, zone the area, and intensify it further. Local commercial scenes can really develop, while for Sheppard, it'd be more residential and is not well served by rapid transit. Eglinton, on the other hand, is close to Kennedy, Warden Victoria, and other stations.

This is not possible on other lines.

These solutions make more sense at virtually identical cost.

DRL. Runs along the railway corridor up past Dundas West and Pape, and slightly within the burbs.

Extending BD to STC. Potentially cheaper than the SRT upgrade.

Extending Sheppard to STC.

Extending Sheppard to Downsview and then North along Finch, through JnF, and Rexdale, eventually to Pearson.

Long term (20 years from now):

Eglinton subway

Queens subway.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
CDL.TO said:
I'm really, really looking forward to this. I hope the roll out is successful and it's implemented on as many routes as possible.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, that is what the TTC should do, not what they are doing. But there are rumblings of this possibly happening one day.
 
Voltz said:
Unfortunately, that is what the TTC should do, not what they are doing. But there are rumblings of this possibly happening one day.
Click to expand...

The minimum requirement for this is next vehicle displays at stops. Only then can we move away from a pre-printed schedule.
 
Well they are doing it ... it'll just be a very long project.
 
Voltz, I'm glad to hear reasons why Transit City would be better, but why aren't they implementing some of those improvements right now on the lines they've already built? If the TTC can't manage headways on Spadina or St. Clair, why will it be any different on the much longer and more complex routes of Transit City?

Wider platforms than Spadina would of course be great, but I'm beginning to get worried about the width that they are making these roads. Sheppard is going to be widened even more than it already is. These roads are going to be wider than University Avenue, and that's not terribly pedestrian friendly.

The new signalling systems you mentioned are great news. I just wish we could see them on Spadina, if only as a trial to see if they offer the improvements that they promise.
 
According to the EA report, the width of Sheppard curb to curb will be 29.4 metres, or about 96.5 feet. University's about 130. Most people would be able to cross it in 20-25 seconds, but of course transit riders would be going only half way across or so.
 
The report on fare service intergration is quite interesting: http://www.metrolinx.com/Docs/Agend...rt- Fare_Integration_Service_Coordination.pdf

And it looks like TTC staff are doing everything possible to block Metrolinx intregating service: "...in December 2008, Metrolinx staff was advised that TTC senior management is not in favour of progressing any further, with the proposals related to “open door” service integration with Mississauga Transit and the YRT/VIVA Orange Route. This has essentially stopped any progress that can be made towards changing the current “closed door” policy..."

Shame that TTC seems more interested in protecting it's fiefdom than anything else. If they keep this up, perhaps Metrolinx will try and take over TTC.
 
nfitz said:
The report on fare service intergration is quite interesting: http://www.metrolinx.com/Docs/Agend...rt- Fare_Integration_Service_Coordination.pdf

And it looks like TTC staff are doing everything possible to block Metrolinx intregating service: "...in December 2008, Metrolinx staff was advised that TTC senior management is not in favour of progressing any further, with the proposals related to “open door†service integration with Mississauga Transit and the YRT/VIVA Orange Route. This has essentially stopped any progress that can be made towards changing the current “closed door†policy..."

Shame that TTC seems more interested in protecting it's fiefdom than anything else. If they keep this up, perhaps Metrolinx will try and take over TTC.
Click to expand...

TTC has had from me since 2003, a plan how MT could service Burnhamthrope as well Bloor and Dundas within Toronto Limit. It was resubmitted to TTC commissioners in 2005 with a report to come back on it and no such report has shown up to date. That same report, as well another on cross boundary was given to MTO and GTTA in 2006. We are talking about 20,000 riders a day here for the 3 routes.

Going to open boundary, MT and TTC lose 1 fare a day on those 20,000 riders or $34,000 a day.

Now if we start looking at other 905 routes connecting to 416, we are looking over $150,000+ a day and how is this going to be pickup? I'm for open boundary.

If we start adding GO in, that over $500,000 a day.

GO will never be able to handle the increase of ridership using the current system since they will get hammer worse than TTC with the open boundary system.

TTC does need to think outside the box at the end of the day.
 
nfitz said:
Shame that TTC seems more interested in protecting it's fiefdom than anything else. If they keep this up, perhaps Metrolinx will try and take over TTC.
Click to expand...

When that day comes, I'll go to Davisville on my Presto card and dance in their lobby.
 
Metrolinx has now locked down their site and removed access to the fare integration report, so I hope everyone got their copy yesterday.

Sadly, their lockdown has gone too far, to the point of breaking parts of their site, including removing access to the agenda for tomorrow's meeting altogether.

Sigh.
 
nfitz said:
I'm hoping that the incompetence that their IS staff have doesn't permeate the rest of the organizaiton ... but I guess that is a tall order.
Click to expand...
Metrolinx doesn't have an IS staff; it utilizes GO Transit staff for that. It's just a walk across the floor, after all.

However, this problem may be in the hands of Metrolinx's site development contractor.

Looks like the entire site is nonresponsive right now.

EDIT: and now it's just displaying the following:

Metrolinx.com website is undergoing maintenance. We regret the inconvenience.

The Metrolinx Board will be meeting as scheduled, on Friday, January 16 at 10 am. Metro Toronto Convention Centre 225 Front street West, Toronto North Building, Room 201 B, D &F

If you would like advance copies of the agenda and corresponding materials, please contact Andrea Crockford at 416-874-5948
andrea.crockford@metrolinx.com
 
Last edited:
I'm no IT expert, but could the rush on the fare document have crashed the site?

Could this be our fault???:rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top