[rbt]

Due to the bureaucracy between the three levels of government..nothing is easy in Toronto.

One of the better things about Toronto is that an idea has to survive atleast two administrations. Most of the good ones seem to survive and be implemented and the bad ones get abandoned.

Yes, things move slower and we have to put up with the problem for longer than necessary but the overall quality has a tendency to be better.

 

[ssiguy2]

"Longer than necessary"...........are you kidding?
Just go to Urbarail and look at all the expansions and new lines that are being built all over the planet and then look at Toronto. The last time Toronto was even mentioned on the sight was 8 years ago for the stubway and it will be 2015 before it's mentioned again for it's 7km extension of a suburban line. How pathetic.
The whole point is that things are very easy to do EXCEPT in Toronto where prices skyrocket in a matter of months, the city proposes new lines that nobody wants, and tries to create "rapid transit" out of streetcars that will stop every 2 blocks, have to wait for light, and allows left-hand turns to slow it down even more.
Toronto and Queen's Park could "easily" use their powers of "persuasion to use the rail corridors just as they did with GO.
This is how the rest of the planet works and why Toronto is, and will continue to, get no where.

 

[rbt]

This is how the rest of the planet works and why Toronto is, and will continue to, get no where.

Toronto works much the same today as it did in 1910. It has always been this way and likely will be for another century. Many things have been done during that timeframe and many things will be done over the next 100 years; just not in a hurry.

Having 10 projects take 20 years is just as good to me as doing one project every 2 years.


This is a bit like the Manchester versus London discussions of the mid 1800's. Manchester was, of course, the "new town" on the block with a super efficient textile industry that was picking on London for being disorganized, inefficient, and floundering all over the place.


My entire point was that your complain about Toronto moving slowly isn't new and the Toronto that exists today was created through those processes; quite obviously it is working and Toronto is getting somewhere.

 

[M II A II R II K]

Then why not treat Toronto as any other major Ontario city, and have the emphasis of getting around with the car and be done with it.

If transit is the lifeblood of the city, spend the insane amount in the short run to improve it which should add to the city's economic progress in the long run, they should consider that.

 

[ssiguy2]

The thing is that Toronto doesn't need to spend "insane amounts" of money to double it's mass transit system.
LRT is expensive but can be worth the investment as rapid/mass transit but TC was neither. It's called value for the dollar and Torontonians an weren't getting it. If you have to run ads and campaigns to try to persuade people that a system is going to be mass/rapid, comfortable, and dependable then it's not. City Hall kept saying how the people just "don't understand" how well TC will work. I can't stand that kind of condescending attitude. The whole point is that Torontonians knew all about TC and made an informed decision to rebuke it.
The reason I support Monorail is that it is THE safest transit technology, dependable, quiet, and can be built off site. That means that construction doesn't sstop in the winter, several different companies can be used for construction/development, and construction time is minimal, far shorter than any other elevated system or at grade LRT. It's tight turning abilities means it can negotiate around much of the existing underground infastructure.
Monorail would be the best option for all of Toronto's rail corridors and road mediens but can be tunneled where needed.
Monorail offers fast, mass, quiet transit that is very affordable, and can be built in a fraction of the time of most other systems. Toronto deperately needs mass/rapid transit and with the existing budget and that means Monorail.
The Japanese have known this for decades and continue to build/expand their systems. The Chinese, Indians, Malaysians, Koreans, and people of the Middle East have come to realize this and now the Brazilians are getting into the act with 110km going out to tender in Sao Paulo and the Manaus plan coming to fruition.
This is a proven technology as shown around the world and one Toronto should be emulating,

 

[Fresh Start]

Torontonians are either too stubborn or unimaginative (likely both) to consider anything other than cost-prohibitive streetcars and/or subways; meanwhile congestion and long bus commutes continue to be the norm. C'est la vie.

 

[Automation Gallery]

Torontonians are either too stubborn or unimaginative (likely both) to consider anything other than cost-prohibitive streetcars and/or subways; meanwhile congestion and long bus commutes continue to be the norm. C'est la vie.

Thats so sad..we build build build, office/condo towers, hotels, big box stores, etc. but when it comes to transportation were "Way out in left field".

 

[adma]

The Japanese have known this for decades and continue to build/expand their systems. The Chinese, Indians, Malaysians, Koreans, and people of the Middle East have come to realize this and now the Brazilians are getting into the act with 110km going out to tender in Sao Paulo and the Manaus plan coming to fruition.
This is a proven technology as shown around the world and one Toronto should be emulating,

You said earlier: "This is how the rest of the planet works and why Toronto is, and will continue to, get no where.".

Notice, when it comes to "rest of the planet", the lack of European or North American examples above.

 

[rbt]

This is a proven technology as shown around the world and one Toronto should be emulating,

Toronto is and always has been behind on transit technology. We were last to give up our streetcars, one of the last to build a subway (really, who was doing that in the 50's -- that's nuts), last to build a highway network (most was cancelled).

Heck, we're even one of the last to get into waterfront redevelopment from industrial to living space; though I'm much happier with the plans than what some other cities ended up with.

If Monorail is as good as you claim, then in 40 to 50 years Toronto will begin to invest in it once longevity, operating, and other issues have been resolved by other cities.

Toronto's only experience at being a leader rather than a follower is the SRT and nobody here wants a repeat of that.


We will, like many other cities, add a congestion tax or some other common fee/tax and mostly continue to build the things we know; plodding along the same way we have for the last 100 years. It is the local culture; low risk and only when necessary. You cannot change that culture through an online forum.

 

[hbl33]

If UTers really cared about Toronto, they would do support a transit with a transit system that is equivalent to Alpha-rated Cities around the world... Fervently regardless of the government's incompetence.
Apparently, T.O. is more like behind Gamma-status than being an Alpha-type.

 

[ssiguy2]

One of the main reasons why Monorail has not taken off in Europe is that before 1960 most of the major cities had extensive subway and commuter rail systems.
The real mass construction of Monorail hadn't happened until this decade by which time all European cities had massive subway systems in place. Toronto has tried ICTS but it's success has been limited not in small part due to an unbelievably hard transfer at Kennedy, old trains, ugly stations, and undependable service in the winter. ICTS was not the best choice for Toronto but the TTC has gone out of it's way to make it as painful an experience as possible.
SRT and SkyTrain are the same technology but there is no comparison in service delivery.
Worldwide ICTS has had limited success and outside of Vancouver it has never really taken off except in small connector lines etc. The idea of an elevated, automated, light weight system is a good one but the technology of the ICTS is an expensive one. Cities worldwide have been looking for the benefits of such a system without the technology price tag. From the excellent experiences of Japanese Monorails cities have seen that Monoorail is the system that provides ICTS benefits but much cheaper and faster to build, it is the safeist transit system in the world {which even it's detractors admit}, and yet is quiet and has a small foot print.
All cities that are constructing or planning Monorails would have looked at ICTS and seen that it is an inferior technology and a more expensive one to boot.
They say emulating some one is the greatest form of flattery and that explains the true explosion of Monorail construction and plans around the planet and ICTS going nearly no where.

 

[Second_in_pie]

So again, ssiguy, could you please explain to me why Monorail is better than subway, LRT, or ICTS? An actual list of strengths would be very welcome.

 

[The Mad Navigator]

If UTers really cared about Toronto, they would do support a transit with a transit system that is equivalent to Alpha-rated Cities around the world... Fervently regardless of the government's incompetence.
Apparently, T.O. is more like behind Gamma-status than being an Alpha-type.

Yes, because it's obvious I and a few others here don't care about Toronto and it's Transit system. Thanks for that vote of confidence!

 

[leopetr]

Toronto [was] one of the last to build a subway (really, who was doing that in the 50's -- that's nuts)

1950 - Stockholm
1954 - Toronto
1955 - Rome
1955 - St. Petersburg
1955 - Cleveland
1957 - Nagoya
1959 - Lisbon
+120 more since then

More subway systems have opened after 1954 than opened before 1954.

List of metro systems

 

[rbt]

1950 - Stockholm
1954 - Toronto
1955 - Rome
1955 - St. Petersburg
1955 - Cleveland
1957 - Nagoya
1959 - Lisbon
+120 more since then

More subway systems have opened after 1954 than opened before 1954.

List of metro systems

Good. So you do see how odd it is for Toronto to be building a "3rd world" transportation system in a 1st world country at that time.

Cleveland built a low capacity LRT system (carries something like 20,000 people per day); not exactly transit for the masses. The majority of the cities on the list, within a generation on either side (~18 years) are not 1st world.


Montreal is the only other oddball on the list; but you can see by the 70's transit was coming back into fashion again for 1st world countries so it isn't quite as odd for Montreal.