AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Not particularly hung up over TC considering the room for improvement, but I would be a little hesitate to claim one "make sense" when one can spend to 2.5B one stop extension to STC.
AoD
Last edited:
|
|
|
- Thread starter denfromoakvillemilton
- Start date
Not particularly hung up over TC considering the room for improvement, but I would be a little hesitate to claim one "make sense" when one can spend to 2.5B one stop extension to STC.
AoD
kEiThZ
Superstar
The problem as I see it, is that we are now driven by one metric (stops per dollar). This utterly ignores the actual desires of most transit riders (not just in Scarborough). If opponents want to can the subway, the way to win public support is to show them how much LRT will speed up their overall commute. The pro-LRT camp hasn't done much of that. The pro-subway camp doesn't bother with that, because most people intuitively believe that subway is faster.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Need I remind you that most transit riders are not from Scarborough, and the pot of money is limited - why should the said individuals receive an inordinate amount of investiments vs. say South Etobicoke? And on that matter, the eastern end of Scarborough is well into Mississauga territory distance-wise applied to the west end - and I don't see a similar proportion of transit investment by dollar value. Two hours commutes isn't restricted to Scarborough, as you know.
AoD
ssiguy2
Senior Member
I think I was very much in reality.
Miller was completely ideological.............LRT or nothing. VIVA BRT or Miss Transitway, elevated or tunneled subway, or at grade subway and/or RER were completely out of the question as was using current existing corridors. It was at grade LRT down the middle of the road or nothing. Demographics, urban environment, speed, reliability be damned............Torontonians were going to get LRT and only LRT whether they liked it or not.
He had the downtown votes and was eager to get more suburban ones which is why it was a suburban focused system without one inch of expansion south of Bloor except for the West Lakeshore which was still geared more towards Etobicoke South.
This is a true system with connectivity where as TC was a bunch of different lines on a map. These expansions will mean one seat from Pearson to UTS, Kipling to STC, and Mount Dennis to Kennedy via Union. The fewer the transfer the easier the system is to ride and more pleasant to travel on.
Miller was completely ideological.............LRT or nothing. VIVA BRT or Miss Transitway, elevated or tunneled subway, or at grade subway and/or RER were completely out of the question as was using current existing corridors. It was at grade LRT down the middle of the road or nothing. Demographics, urban environment, speed, reliability be damned............Torontonians were going to get LRT and only LRT whether they liked it or not.
He had the downtown votes and was eager to get more suburban ones which is why it was a suburban focused system without one inch of expansion south of Bloor except for the West Lakeshore which was still geared more towards Etobicoke South.
This is a true system with connectivity where as TC was a bunch of different lines on a map. These expansions will mean one seat from Pearson to UTS, Kipling to STC, and Mount Dennis to Kennedy via Union. The fewer the transfer the easier the system is to ride and more pleasant to travel on.
crs1026
Superstar
This was the downfall of the plan. It felt like old-school socialism where everyone is scrupulously given exactly the same amount of mediocrity. That isn't a criticism of LRT, but the value proposition for LRT was not as clear back then. It's gratifying to see that the public reaction to the new Crosstown East and West has been much warmer than the apathy that TC received.
A major strength of the TC plan was its emphasis on a metric that said that X% of Torontonians would live within Y meters of a LRT line. That's how the network got to be so far flung, the whole intent was for it to have value to the most people. Unfortunately, living near a line isn't useful if it goes someplace other than where you are going. If everyone is going to the same place (e.g. downtown) then you end up with a volume that LRT doesn't handle....and you have to consider heavier rail, which TC refused to do.
I haven't seen this metric used in the Scarboro debate, and it would be interesting to do so. Quite possibly, the subway extension would score poorer than the LRT plans. Certainly, when the 'sensitive' neighbourhoods that Crosstown East will serve are listed, it becomes apparent that not everyone in the East was getting their share out of the subway extension. For all their claims of caring about the "little guy", the Fords moved us away from any real focus on social equity. It's good to see the Keesmaat regime putting the spotlight on this.
- Paul
I agree with you mostly. Transit City's design parameters were "LRT down the middle of the road unless it's absolutely not possible, and then we'll tunnel it". No thought was given to alternate configurations like trenching, elevating, side of the road, or fly-unders at intersections. It also made little effort to bundle lines together into service patterns that actually made sense.
Just look at examples like Eglinton West (Richview corridor was completely ignored), Leslie & Eglinton (south side alignment would have maintained total separation until Don Mills), Eglinton East (elevating and combining the Eglinton LRT with the Scarborough LRT), Jane south of Eglinton (totally unworkable and could have been built as a branch of Eglinton), Don Mills LRT (should have been built as the DRL south of Eglinton), and oh yeah, NO DRL.
What is being resurrected now is pieces of pieces of Transit City. They're being recombined and altered in a way that makes sense from a transit planning and service perspective, as opposed to a social engineering perspective.
nfitz
Superstar
Where are you getting this? He got the Spadina subway extension to Steeles, with he and his executive committee supporting it; and not just 6 km of tunnel with a single station, but 4 new stations in Toronto.
During his first time, he pushed for the Sheppard subway extension, but it was clear that no one was going to fund it.
He and Giambrone were also the first politicians to start talking about the downtown relief line; though they did say that it shouldn't be started until 2018 ... if only.
He also pushed BRT, particularly on Kingston Road and to York University.
I don't know why you persist in this LRT or nothing fiction. Simply because LRT has been pushed in places where no one in their right mind would build subway, doesn't mean that you can ignore that he pushed subway where it was appropriate.
GenerationW
Senior Member
So you're claiming that the Sorbara subway would have had no stations up to Steeles without Miller's intervention? Good one!
That $8 billion Miller got would have easily funded Sheppard in his second term. As for his first, most of what I've read on the subject suggests that Miller was ambivalent towards Sheppard. Add to that the hostility to Sheppard exhibited by Giambrone at TC meetings, and I can only conclude that Miller never had much genuine interest in Sheppard.
Miller and Giambrone as DRL warriors is another good one. Too bad they cared nothing about the DRL until the Yonge extension talk heated up in 2009-10, and they refused to even acknowledge its existence in Transit City. Their one and only interest in the DRL was as a means to delay Yonge. They also never said anything about starting DRL construction in 2018.
Jonny5
Senior Member
Another dozen posts or so and we'll be hearing from the Toronto nonresidents about how Transit City was literally horse drawn trolleys at a cost of $100 Billion
nfitz
Superstar
I'm saying without a clear consistent direction from the city, it wouldn't have happened. If we'd have had the kind of backtracking and flip-flopping as under Ford and Tory, it would never as progressed as quickly.
Giambrone had no involvement during the first term. Then Miller ran and won on the LRT platform instead. And suddenly, funding appeared.
I didn't construction in 2018; I said starting in 2018. Which is also what Giambrone said - "TTC to consider relief line by 2018, chief says"
denfromoakvillemilton
Senior Member
Look, bickering aside, Transit City came back 10 years after it first started. Toronto might actually have elite transit by 2030 at this rate.
EastYorkTTCFan
Senior Member
um that channel doesn't exist anymore on youtube
GenerationW
Senior Member
Progressed quickly -- another good one. Actual construction didn't start until four+ years after that March 2006 press conference.
There's no evidence to suggest Ford or Tory or anyone else as mayor back then would have made a whit of difference to the number of stops.
Writer says 2018, Giambrone quote references 2020. "Consider" also leaves open the possibility of doing nothing at all. Regardless, we'd still be at least three years behind where we are now.
Fact remains that Miller and Giambrone were never DRL warriors.
ssiguy2
Senior Member
I don't think this is a "comeback" of Transit City and certainly will never be pitched that way or it will never see the light of day.
I do, however, think it is using some of the positive aspects of TC {and yes there were some} and at the same time learning from it's shortfalls.
TC had 2 main issues..............lack of grade separation, no downtown coverage, and a disconnected system that resulted in endless transfers. This plan gets rid of most of these problems as ST is grade separated and is an complete loop, Crosstown becomes one long line instead of being split up offering both quick crosstown travel nut serving local areas well, and a BD extension to STC at a more realistic price.
TC is not resurrected but this plan is learning a lot from it so as to build on it's strengths and yet avoid many of it's pitfalls.
I do, however, think it is using some of the positive aspects of TC {and yes there were some} and at the same time learning from it's shortfalls.
TC had 2 main issues..............lack of grade separation, no downtown coverage, and a disconnected system that resulted in endless transfers. This plan gets rid of most of these problems as ST is grade separated and is an complete loop, Crosstown becomes one long line instead of being split up offering both quick crosstown travel nut serving local areas well, and a BD extension to STC at a more realistic price.
TC is not resurrected but this plan is learning a lot from it so as to build on it's strengths and yet avoid many of it's pitfalls.
kEiThZ
Superstar
Who pissed in your cornflakes?
I was talking about the gap between public wants for transit and how it's executed and the metrics being used. I'm not talking about the same level of investment in Scarborough as say the downtown core. And I specifically said that the issue with perception of said metric was not just a Scarborough problem. 2 hr commutes are equally bothersome if you live in Rexdale for example.
The challenge with using a stops per dollar metric is that it ignores what matters to most commuters: the total length of their commute. There are places where LRT helps here (like along the very long east-west corridors) and there are places where it won't (like say if I live on Ellesmere in Scarborough).