Yes and no ... you see the political clout behind a project such as transit city because it can help *everyone* ... even though we all know extending some of these LRT lines into the 905 is beyond ridiculous (and on the list of priorities .... it probably shouldn't even be on it).

It's harder to support a DRL because it doesn't provide direct support for the ENTIRE region. Although, again we know, in reality it does in many ways.
 
taal said:
Yes and no ... you see the political clout behind a project such as transit city because it can help *everyone*
Click to expand...

Speak for yourself. Raise your hand if in the past week, you have had to let at least one subway train go by before boarding because it was too full for you to get on. Imagine what the subway will be like a few years from now when the TTC is carrying 200 million more riders per year on the existing, non expanded subway system.

If Transit City at least proposed new LRT lines into downtown it wouldn't be so bad. Take the Don Mills line down to Ryerson or Yonge and Queen. Continue the Jane line down to the Lakeshore and then into Union Station. Just do something - anything - to improve rail service into downtown.
 
I think the interim solution is improving GO service to take the pressure off of the subway lines - but it all comes down to a fare issue and we all know where the roadblock lies
 
Chuck said:
Speak for yourself. Raise your hand if in the past week, you have had to let at least one subway train go by before boarding because it was too full for you to get on. Imagine what the subway will be like a few years from now when the TTC is carrying 200 million more riders per year on the existing, non expanded subway system.

If Transit City at least proposed new LRT lines into downtown it wouldn't be so bad. Take the Don Mills line down to Ryerson or Yonge and Queen. Continue the Jane line down to the Lakeshore and then into Union Station. Just do something - anything - to improve rail service into downtown.
Click to expand...

I'm not quite sure what you're getting at Chuck ...

I completely agree. I was trying to give a reason why we didn't see any / more routes that served the area that needs it the most ... downtown! particularly the east /west southern corridors.
 
taal said:
I'm not quite sure what you're getting at Chuck ...

I completely agree. I was trying to give a reason why we didn't see any / more routes that served the area that needs it the most ... downtown! particularly the east /west southern corridors.
Click to expand...

One word: DRL.
 
Yes yes yes, I 100% wholeheartedly agree ... and always have! X100!

Don't even get me started how most of metrolinks projects are leaning toward the;
overbuilt side == over spend side == (less projects && screwed up priorities)

Even parts of transit city are iffy .....

But please, don't forget the power of politics and given that I think it could have been even worse.
 
doady said:
Well the 416 did vote certain politicians, didn't they?
Click to expand...

The 416 did not vote for Miller and a few select cronies based on a campaign to discard existing transit plans and rewrite the official plan. Keep in mind that only 13% of Toronto residents actually voted for Miller in the last election, and only 1/44ths vote for each particular councillor...how many of these tiny groups base their vote on transit policy?

Still, few people will not vote for Miller next time because of transit policy, even after various MoveOntario/Metrolinx/Transfer City developments since the last election. The vast majority of people don't care, or do care somewhat but not enough to seek out information. They assume politicians and municipal experts know better...but when they dismiss subway projects with substantial popular support on the grounds of cost and then turn around and propose almost $10B worth of LRT lines, it doesn't take a bloodhound to sniff out something rotten. There's more to transit than subways, of course, but instead of copying the success of something like the 190 Rocket and improving transit, saving time and many billions of dollars, buses are condemned (they don't spawn cafes and galleries).

The process may not be perfect in York Region, but it is better. At least transit lines in York are planned with a clear purpose...why on earth, for example, might we need a tunnelled streetcar on Jane when a similar couple of km of tunnelled streetcar on Dufferin would serve at least twice as many people and relieve a more dysfunctional bus route? Why is Morningside getting an LRT line and not far busier and more congested routes like Lawrence? If York Region proposed a billion dollar Denison or Dufferin LRT line because it ran through priority neighbourhoods, they'd be laughed at, and rightfully so.
 
Sure because they don't have priority neighborhoods :) at least not to our extreme.

I'd argue that project to Vaughn center is a mistake by York region just the way the Jane street LRT is. Then again, you can't blame them for playing off other extension, if Toronto will build it to Steeles they might figure why not bring it the rest of the way.

Anyway, it's not that bad ... Finch / Eglinton / Waterfront West/ Sheppard / maybe Don Mills ... are not BAD choices (the method to implement them may be though). The real problem is that there are a few other routes that should have taken priority.

I've never understood Jane, why are they not building it on Dufferin ... te busiest bus route in the city? Is it not possible on the route ... I'll tell you one thing, Dufferin just north of the CNE already has streetcar tracks on it :).
 
scarberiankhatru said:
The 416 did not vote for Miller and a few select cronies based on a campaign to discard existing transit plans and rewrite the official plan. Keep in mind that only 13% of Toronto residents actually voted for Miller in the last election ...
Click to expand...
That's a little disingenious isn't it. Miller got an overwhelming 57% of the vote in 2006, and his main rival got only 32%. Compared to the previous (2003) election where Miller only got 43% of the vote, compared to 38% for his rival. There's no evidence to suggest that the majority of people who didn't vote, would have voted differently.

The official plan revisions were well underway before Miller became mayor in 2003, and the Surface Transit Priority Network was added well before the 2007 election, which calls for "reserved or dedicated lanes for buses and streetcars". There's only minor tweaks since then.

Surely the increased support for Miller between 2003 and 2006 indicates that people aren't up in arms about this plan.

Let's have debate here on the issues, rather than federal-style poisoning the discussion with misinformation and blatant untruths.

----
I also should add, that Transit City is the progression of the TTC's Ridership Growth Strategy released in March 2003, when Mel Lastman was mayor. It called for surface rapid transit corridors on many of the same corridors that Transit City is now using. Incidentally that March 2003 document discussed the new City Plan in the past-tense, referencing a 2002 date for it. The truth is, this has all been slowly building since amalgamation.
 
Last edited:
Thank you for pointing out the above ...

Moreover, I'll bet the majority of the population has nothing against Metrolinks. They see it as transit improvements, the specific details aren't necessary. Sure some may wonder why a few downtown projects don't have higher priority or the necessity of the VCC extension. Other then that I reckon most of the general population in the GTA is content with the plan (likely this was achieved by the "a little for everyone approach").
 
Anth said:
Again with the 416/905. One only needs to stand outside Kipling or Finch for five minutes to see how many "905ers" take the subway on a daily basis. Perhaps a survey of dealership plate covers in commuter lots would convince you? Or the constant all-day stream of MT and YRT buses?

As for the DRL, it would be a major network improvement that would benefit all riders. That it would be "indirect" for many is irrelevant, though as a Mississaugan I assure you the benefit would be quite direct for the populous west end that never seems to get the mindshare it deserves, especially when it comes to transit planning.
Click to expand...

It's the optics of it....a line that touches the 905 is something a politician can show off at the next election. How would a DRL help any 905 politician? Or is there a better reason why the DRL is at the 'back of the bus' on Metrolinx's radar?

That being said, this is not necessarily a bad thing. Beggars can't be chooser. I for one, am grateful that some subway construction is happening. Given the history of Toronto, it could just as easily be no metrolinx, no subway and no plan....
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top