[LAz]

Guys... just learn from Stockholm. They are at the forefront of what is sustainable. They built metro lines before there was demand for them. They coordinated their growth along those lines. And so today they have one of the best transportation systems in the world. Car usage there is significantly less than elsewhere, even less than in cities like Berlin.

For crying out loud, these guys in Stockholm have a metro system that is like 110 km - versus our 70 km - it is 50% bigger - yet its metropolitan area is less than half our size. If that is not a slap in the face then I really do not know what is.





The reasoning that there is not enough demand is a bunch of phony baloney. Demand can be created, depending on what landuse is implemented. Sheppard has been an insane success, as ridership along the stub has increased insanely since it opened.

 

[W. K. Lis]

From George's website, here's his CYCLING—INTEGRATED WITH THE GRID FOR SAFETY plan:

CYCLING—INTEGRATED WITH THE GRID FOR SAFETY

Cycling in Toronto is important. Torontonians often choose from day to day whether to walk, drive, take transit or cycle to get where they’re going.

George Smitherman supports Toronto cyclists and will make it easier for Torontonians to choose safe cycling. His integrated transportation plan for cycling will rethink how we plan, build, take care of and use cycling routes in Toronto.

George Smitherman’s plans to make cycling safer and more efficient include:

• Time out on construction of new bike lanes on arterial roadways, but move immediately to ensure current cycling routes are safer and better maintained
  • physical separation of bikes and cars: bicycle lanes should be separated from cars with properly curbed lanes, so everyone can travel more safely
• Moving forward, expedite the expansion of dedicated bike “expressways” though hydro corridors, ravines and other non-roadways by 2015
• Increase opportunities for children to learn bike safety and rules of the road
• Better maintenance of bike routes—including year round upkeep, with snow clearance on bike expressways
• Integration of cycling into Toronto’s planning and transit, by looking at incentives and possible partnerships to build a better bike infrastructure. Toronto should consider better bike parking at TTC stations, shower facilities and other ideas that make it easier for “dual-mode commuting” (riding to a TTC or GO station and hopping on transit).

For a good goal for bicycles, here's Copenhagen's goal on Creating a Bike Friendly City.

Better than Rob Ford's idea to stop bicycles all together.

 

[junctionist]

There's a contradiction in the plan. There will be no new bike lanes on arterials but new physically separated bike lanes. Logically those would go on arterials where the safety of dedicated lanes is needed.

"Expressways" on hydro corridors is a good idea, but I'm not sure if Smitherman realizes how much infrastructure would actually be needed for those paths to be useful. Hydro corridors intersect with streets often. At every major road an signalized intersection or grade separation would be required. The intersection approach could be cheaper, but it's not really an "expressway" if the cyclist has to stop. This approach would also only work in lower density areas without many cyclists in the first place.

 

[LAz]

here's Copenhagen's goal on Creating a Bike Friendly City.

Whoah there a minute, if we are gonna mention copenhagen then must not exclude their story... - or should I say emulation of Stockholm - that they also built rail before there was demand.




This is an abosolute slap in the fact to both the pro LRT and SOS guys, especially the LRT freaks. The fact is that building a subway just about anywhere will give great results. Seriously, lets stop delaying sheppard's extension to downsview and VP.

It boggles my mind why there are no major protests and such stuff. That would get these issues into the news.

 

[Long Island Mike]

Thoughts on Chicago neighborhoods and segregation...

What the hell are you talking about? Just measure the index of dissimilarity and you will see how high it is.
http://blogs.bet.com/news/newsyoushouldknow/chicago-is-nation’s-most-segregated-city/
http://www.thechicago77.com/2009/01/chicago-is-americas-most-segregated-city/

LAz and Everyone: I found this map and information on Chicago quite interesting-I was a regular visitor to relatives there on the Southwest Side between 1973-1988 and I remember the segregation and racial polarization that it had well - I recall the unwritten but adhered to rules concerning racial "dividing lines" and I have heard that the polarization is not as bad but the racial segregation still rules-the neighborhood my
relatives lived in has become predominately black-mostly over the course of the 90s. They left Chicago in 1988 and my cousin finally left for outer suburbs in 1990.

Noticing the predominately white areas of the City I will mention the only remaining area shown on the far SW Side-adjacent to the I-57 sign on the map is a neighborhood called Mount Greenwood - Due to residency laws for City workers especially Police Officers and Firefighters that area has a large percentage of those workers among its population. It has been-and perhaps still is arguably one of the most stable neighborhoods in Chicago. I believe the two other predominately white areas have a similar blue-collar demographic...

Can you tell me how to get other information and maps like this? I am very much interested...

Mentioning Toronto thankfully has never had a history had a hard-core of segregation like Chicago has...

LI Mike






Very wrong. Check your numbers.
Toronto has about 50%.





It pains me to see that people are talking about the tree but missing the forest. On Wednesdays in LAz-land that is one of the worst crimes to commit, worse than murder.




edit/add:
What is really freaky about american cities is how bad the slums are. They're insane. In Chicago a person gets shot every day or every other day. I remember reading an article in 2005 or so that said "after 430 days nobody is shot", or something like that.

LAZ: Note above added...LI MIKE

 

[Mapleson]

Whoah there a minute, if we are gonna mention copenhagen then must not exclude their story... - or should I say emulation of Stockholm - that they also built rail before there was demand.

This is an abosolute slap in the fact to both the pro LRT and SOS guys, especially the LRT freaks. The fact is that building a subway just about anywhere will give great results. Seriously, lets stop delaying sheppard's extension to downsview and VP.

It boggles my mind why there are no major protests and such stuff. That would get these issues into the news.

The induced demand factor is one major reason I support Transit City is whatever malshapen form it takes. Just building bike lanes where not many people ride bikes, because to some extent people don't bike there because there are no bike routes. I see Transit City as meeting some if not all the needs for our generation, but will set the stage where the next generation is so used to filtering into these corridors that they will all incrementally be upgraded to subways, and the benefit of added capacity for surface traffic can be counted as a benefit. It's a bit dodge logic, but I think it's the most likely way to get from what we have now and what we want and need.

The country will take whatever shape you impose on it. Almost anyway. You just need the patience to see it through before changing course once again. If you want to talk about Canada been sustainable, we need to address our birth and immigration problems and then our tax and debt problems. Otherwise, we'll keep wanting and needing more and affording and building less.

 

[LAz]

these corridors that they will all incrementally be upgraded to subways

The tram is not rapid transit. Therefore the development that a tram can attact will be undoubtedly less than what the subway can attract. Nowhere is this more apparent than a few kilometers east from don mills on sheppard.

I also reject the idea that all these lines will or should be upgraded to subways in the near or far future. Finch having a subway? No thanks. Basically, the tramming is a short term strategy. It was used by Belgrade... they picked to expand tram lines rather than build a subway. There was the need for a subway for some 40 years, but no mayor wanted to allocate such money. It's simply too costly, and would take money away from other things. Belgrade is probably the best example of tossing subway expansion in favor of cheap alternatives that are achievable in the near future. Why would the mayor bother spending so much money? Let other generations deal with that problem. It's a sad short sighted policy.

LAz and Everyone: I found this map and information on Chicago quite interesting-I was a regular visitor to relatives there on the Southwest Side between 1973-1988 and I remember the segregation and racial polarization that it had well - I recall the unwritten but adhered to rules concerning racial "dividing lines" and I have heard that the polarization is not as bad but the racial segregation still rules-the neighborhood my
relatives lived in has become predominately black-mostly over the course of the 90s. They left Chicago in 1988 and my cousin finally left for outer suburbs in 1990.

Noticing the predominately white areas of the City I will mention the only remaining area shown on the far SW Side-adjacent to the I-57 sign on the map is a neighborhood called Mount Greenwood - Due to residency laws for City workers especially Police Officers and Firefighters that area has a large percentage of those workers among its population. It has been-and perhaps still is arguably one of the most stable neighborhoods in Chicago. I believe the two other predominately white areas have a similar blue-collar demographic...

Can you tell me how to get other information and maps like this? I am very much interested...

Mentioning Toronto thankfully has never had a history had a hard-core of segregation like Chicago has...

LI Mike

Oh man did you ever go to fat johnny's? You know, that shitty looking hot dog stand? Man, they have the best hot dogs in chicago... it's at 71st and western I think.

Asides, regarding the maps... I can not really point you in a particular direction where you can just extract lots of stuff. But, I can probably provide a few more maps. On top of that I can pretty much create whatever kind of map you want - I have had quite a bit of experience on making maps of census tracts. So if there is something in particular that you want let me now.

Bellow are two maps from the encyclopedia of chicago... I don't like the book much, but meh, I guess it has some okay stuff in it.

1980

2000

 

[Mapleson]

The tram is not rapid transit. Therefore the development that a tram can attact will be undoubtedly less than what the subway can attract. Nowhere is this more apparent than a few kilometers east from don mills on sheppard.

I'll grant your premise, but just because it has less potential that a subway doesn't reduce its own intrinsic value.

I also reject the idea that all these lines will or should be upgraded to subways in the near or far future. Finch having a subway? No thanks. Basically, the tramming is a short term strategy. It was used by Belgrade... they picked to expand tram lines rather than build a subway. There was the need for a subway for some 40 years, but no mayor wanted to allocate such money. It's simply too costly, and would take money away from other things. Belgrade is probably the best example of tossing subway expansion in favor of cheap alternatives that are achievable in the near future. Why would the mayor bother spending so much money? Let other generations deal with that problem. It's a sad short sighted policy.

You reject the idea that incremental upgrades to subway where ridership levels warrant? I don't expect Finch to have a subway in my lifetime, but I'd be sadly disappoint if the Sheppard Stub and DRL are the only new subway lines constructed this century.

Do we have the money to build all the subways we need now? If not, to build a cheaper fleshed out network isn't short-sighted, but the short-term goal of a long-term plan.

 

[LAz]

I think that high ridership levels alone being the requirement for a subway are not fair. We should not constrain ourselves by building subways only where there is extremely high demand. We should instead build up demand.

If we do not have the money for expanding the metro system then where do we get the many billions for these widespread LRT projects?

So you do not want to see only those two things in the 21st century - then ask youself about eglinton... there is this huge line that has a 13 km er so tunnel. Why not make that heavy capacity from day one, instead of limiting it to lower tram capacity? See, if we have the money to make a tram tunnel, then we bloody well have the money to make a metro tunnel instead - it would not cost much more tbh.



If we do not have the money to build what we need to build - we are not china to be able to build 100 km - or even miles - of tunnels per decade. But, because of that we ought to build less.

Our goal should be rapid transit around toronto. Trams are not the solution for certain places. On Eglinton especially. And on Sheppard. In fact, Sheppard eastwards should not be a tram all that distance. Really now, it looks like they are gonna build a tram tunnel up there too... maybe it's just me, but I find this extremely problematic, as there is reason to extent the tunnel to victoria park at the least.




Money and ridership are not the only things that we should look at. Hey, those may be quantifiable things, but there are benefits that are not quantifiable. Surely you know that disaster - aka 401 traffic jam? That is very brutal. We ought to look to be able to transport people quickly from one part of town to another. Hence we need rapid transit, and more importantly, we need to coordinate development with rapid transit. It pays off to rapid transit anywhere - I feel that it is most pressing on Sheppard, because that is a corridor where development was started and has now stopped. The gap between downsview and the line is just scary. Eastwards it would be good to take it to STC - but if we are indeed strapped for cash - then a fair compromise is to take it to VP... that is the compromise, not extending as far as one could otherwise. The compromise should not be to build trams instead, especially underground trams whose cost is almost on par with the metro.


edit/add
What startles me is how little public feedback there is. The ones in power just want to ram through things. Remember how Moses wanted to ruin new york city by building three cross manhattan highways? People rose up. We need to rise up too! We need real democracy, where people seriously participate in the planning process, rather than just be informed of what outsiders plan to do with their neighborhood.
Remember what happened in roxbury MA? A ghetto developed into something more decent though community participation in democracy - they outright rejected plans of so called experts - plans that aimed to displace them from their homes. Similarly we need this participation in toronto. Remember those save our sheppard folks? What happened to them? Did that die? We need to see how to help them to aid their organization and lead the kind of protests that jane jacobs led in new york. So what if we go to jail, it's well worth it. Communities need to have their say. People need to participate. Instead what is going on is that the public is merely informed and the plan concocted up by some bastards for their short term gains is going through... I am shocked that there are no major protests. Save our subways seems to be sleeping... save our sheppard is too flimsy... well, it'll be too late soon. We can not development by hoping that private sector funding will generate demand. It does not. We must coordinate development by coordinating transit and development. That is what transit city lacks. It is a short term goal that aims to merely create as much kms as possible. There is a lack of speed in the product of their plan, and there is a lack of coordinated development. Subway expansion on the other hand can work ANYWHERE, as long as there is coordinated development. But instead it seems that we are taking on the ideologies of the free market and libertarianism... thus we are doomed to failure.

 

[rbt]

So you do not want to see only those two things in the 21st century - then ask youself about eglinton... there is this huge line that has a 13 km er so tunnel. Why not make that heavy capacity from day one, instead of limiting it to lower tram capacity? See, if we have the money to make a tram tunnel, then we bloody well have the money to make a metro tunnel instead - it would not cost much more tbh.

This tunnel will not need capacity above 30,000pphpd (practical with 5-car tram consists [500 foot] and ATO) for a long time; and if it does both the Yonge and Spadina lines will require substantial capacity boosts.

Even with the DRL built Eglinton (both Jane and Don Mills); these 4 north/south routes would have a very difficult time handling Eglinton at maximum tram capacity.

So long as Eglinton is a feeder line (it is today and will be for the forseeable future; unless you suddenly envision dozens of 40 floor office towers appearing on it); a tram will be perfectly fine.

FYI, 5-car consists (500 foot trains) based on Bombardier per-car capacity numbers can easily reach 30,000pphpd in the tunnel using ATO.

The primary argument for HRT is rollingstock cost. Toronto Rocket trains are going to be cheaper than Eglinton LRT. Focus on that aspect but be careful when comparing against manned stations as that increases operations costs substantially.

 

[Second_in_pie]

The big problem is that Eglinton needs to be grade separated across it's entirety. Now, I don't have much doubt that Eglinton's ridership will be much bigger than the TTC expects if it was to be subway, but the point is that it's a line that needs to have RT capability to extend service into the suburbs. I'm totally ok if that comes as a preliminary Jane-Don Mills subway and then extended afterwards. The point is that the Eglinton LRT as it is now takes away that capacity for it to be a full RT line in the future. It's a lot better to build it right over 20 years than build it poorly over 10.

EDIT: Especially when a majority of the benefit of the 10 year poor job will also be realized within the first 10 years of the good one. The only difference is how it plays out in the future.

 

[LAz]

This tunnel will not need capacity above 30,000pphpd

There are a number of problems with this mode of thought. First of all, the cost difference of building the metro versus the tram tunnel is quite small. If it is such a small difference, why go for the smaller thing? It's like saying we can eliminate cancer from 50 people for 60 dollars, but for 65 dollars we could do it for 200 people...

...hence I do not understand where this fear of extra capacity comes from. Further, there is another more important issue. That is coordinating land use planning with transit planning. Do that and you can have well over 30,000 - though this number is too big, for starters.




There are no plausible cases for having a 13 km tram tunnel rather than a 13 km metro tunnel.










Subways can be successful anywhere, as long as development is coordinated with that. This made Toronto a very successful organized city by the end of the 1970s. But since then we have gone astray. This is the key thing that is missing from all these transit discussions. They can put a subway line that connects markham, and vaughan, it would work, as long as appropriate development is coordinated there - and PUSHED there by a regional government. We're idiots if we are gonna say "lets watch things grow on their own", no, screw that, we need to be the ones managing growth and coordinating it along rapid transit corridors. There is a real reason why 90% of the office space was built within a five minute walk of a subway station in toronto in the 1950s and 1960s. Along with that there was a move to put high density of people around subway stations. Do that today and you will have any subway line going anywhere successful.

Or you could be one of those free market nutjobs who say that the private sector should not be impeded in any way whatsoever.

 

[Second_in_pie]

But LAz, I hope you realize what you're saying. You're asking the government to tell people what to do! I hope you realize the absolute madness in the idea. People don't want to be told how to live, especially when it'd involve reducing their wasteful lifestyles. You should be ashamed for trying to destroy the very values and freedom that this nation is built on! What next? Government feeding stations that are only available after you work your 60 hour week quota?
Government actually doing things. Hilarious

 

[LAz]

Oh shit, sorry mon, I forgot the libertarian brainwashign that goverment fails in everything ,and that the private sector should be allowed to do whatever the hell it wants. Oh wait wait, here it is comming back to me... oh yeah... yeah... damn that drug/ideology works wonders. Say, why have we not privatized teh government yet, that too could be more efficient if put in the hands of the private sector?

My friend, it has come time to develop online selling and buying of votes. Putting private sector competition into elections will work miracles, I tell yoi! Unimpeded mobility of capital and resources must be done. We must socialize the costs and privatize the profits!!!


Blessed be he the lord milton friedman and may we all dance with the devil as he does today.







Ah, nothing like indoctrination by the dark side.

 

[Second_in_pie]

(I was being sarcastic; I think that the government actually doing something is a grand idea.)