Apologies if I'm coming off defensive at all haha, I'm not opposed to perpendicular seating. I just think the response to perimeter seating on here has been a bit less-than-logical

Northern Light said:
I would prefer a model that assumed a few standees, rather than packed-in conditions in rush hour.
Click to expand...

Unless the entire concept of the 9-5 workday disappears, we're always going to have peak ridership periods that contain some degree of crowding. We certainly need to alleviate the crush loads that passengers have been forced to endure in the recent past, but the idea that we could or even should build a transit system where rush hour consists of "a few standees" is a bit crazy in my eyes lol
 
Allandale25 said:
^ the Speaker may have ruled that out of order, or require 2/3rds since this term of Council already adopted the Ontario Line route as part of its deal with the province. Can't remember the date and don't have the item number handy.
Click to expand...
I don't think simply asking questions would change anything. Also, isn't the city limit on revotes 1-year, not the whole term?
 
^ Totally agree asking questions wouldn't change anything, I was more commenting on @Adjei's comment which I interpreted as literally going about to the DRL South plan. I think you're right about the 1 year part.
 
Adjei said:
They can go back to the DRL alignment when they pay for it themselves..
Click to expand...

That's the fun part. We likely won't know who will be paying for the Ontario Line until it launches; just as we still don't know who will be paying for Eglinton. We know the private partner will be billing Metrolinx, and that the TTC is expected to pay some amount (completely unknown even by the TTC) to Metrolinx.

If Metrolinx decides to charge the TTC $8/trip for passengers using the Ontario Line (actual fee from private partner will likely by distance, CDPQ will be charging $0.50 to $0.72/km/passenger for REM trips) then that'll really suck for TTC financially. If they charge TTC $1/trip then Metrolinx will be kicking in around $7/trip.

TTC might be required to pay nothing, part of operations, all of operations, part of capital, part of capital maintenance (like tunnel/station maitenance), or even the entire "F"inanced portion + operations + capital maintenance. The provincial gas tax being clawed back via Presto fees isn't promising

Politically, at the city, there are expectations the province will step up and cover the bulk of all these costs. However, I wouldn't be surprised if high potential Eglinton/Finch/Ontario Line fees were used to strong-arm Toronto into a region wide fare-by-distance fare schedule.
 
Last edited:
allengeorge said:
blog.metrolinx.com

Metrolinx Press Room

Find the latest Metrolinx news, project updates and more.
blog.metrolinx.com
Click to expand...
people need to embrace the fact that elevated transit is a very cost effective way to construct metro lines in a city. The stygma of blocking out sun and "eyesores" can be eliminated with good planning of landscape and
being informative on the benefits vs defaulting to subways.
 
cplchanb said:
people need to embrace the fact that elevated transit is a very cost effective way to construct metro lines in a city. The stygma of blocking out sun and "eyesores" can be eliminated with good planning of landscape and being informative on the benefits vs defaulting to subways.
Click to expand...
I don't think that's the issue. The issue is that the province is insisting that they be above ground in a dense downtown area, but very deep underground in a very undense suburban area that has massively-wide road-right-of-ways.

On Eglinton, it would surely be cheaper to just put the track at-grade in the middle of the road, and grade-separate the Royal York, Islington, Kipling, and Martin Grove intersections with Eglinton. It doesn't give you the built form thy city wants, virtually creating an Eglinton expressway to Scarlett.
 
cplchanb said:
people need to embrace the fact that elevated transit is a very cost effective way to construct metro lines in a city. The stygma of blocking out sun and "eyesores" can be eliminated with good planning of landscape and
being informative on the benefits vs defaulting to subways.
Click to expand...

Yes, if only the org putting this up is actually consistent about this strategy. Until then, you and I both know this"blog" is marketing BS.

AoD
 
allengeorge said:
blog.metrolinx.com

Metrolinx Press Room

Find the latest Metrolinx news, project updates and more.
blog.metrolinx.com
Click to expand...

“You get some light above grade, the views you get are much different and there is a non-claustrophobic type environment, a lot of customer experience attributes that get improved when you are in the open air”

LOL!

Why do we need the SSE then? We can just enhance or replace the current above ground solution with an improved one. That would appear to be the 'world class' thing to do.

The Metrolinx blog is like a parody account.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top