Gah I read that article yesterday. Is this person totally out of it, or has he just never taken the TTC and believes we shouldn't be wasting money where we could be widening roads or building highways?
Hells yes.
And here are my reasons why:
1) As a former pro subway nut, I've opened my eyes to LRT as a transit mode. Just because we don't get subways built does not mean it's the end of the world.
2) LRT can work if it's implemented and maintained properly. Other cities have done it, why can't Toronto? (This does concern me because the city's success rate of implementing LRT/streetcars in ROWs is less than stellar)
3) Subways are more expensive to build here because of the methodology used by the City and the TTC. Hiring private consultants and sub-consultants to do the majority of the work, using TBMs instead of cut and cover to excavate the tunnels, overbuilt stations, and let's not forget that there's always cost overruns with any large scale transit infrastructure project.
4) Have you ever ridden on an LRT line in Europe by chance? If you haven't, I suggest you do. The T3 line in Paris is one that I recommend highly. Beautiful trams, the ROW has grass plantings between the tracks, you don't have to wait to board the vehicle when it arrives, and it's a smooth and comfortable ride!
5) Subway station spacing versus LRT station spacing. Clearly, LRT stations are more closely spaced (500m on average) than subway stops (minimum of 1km? I'm not exactly sure), leaving better access points for more residents (if they travel by foot).
6) Better for businesses and tourists. What better way for potential clients to see businesses along a street than LRT? A subway isn't going to accomplish that beneath the ground. And please don't say bus service would suffice because it's just not comparable to LRT in this case.
Anyhow, those are my points. Correct me if you think I'm wrong on anything, but I think I'm fairly justified with them.
What fun
1/2. Actually, it kind of does. LRT
does not replace subway in any way shape or form. You can't have several much needed subway routes and just say "LRT'll do the job good enough and it looks pretty too!!" If you look at most of the other cities that use LRT (especially the hallowed European /ones that do,) you'll realize that LRT is
not used as a subway replacement! LRT is used as a supplementary transit service, essentially acting as a super-bus thing for getting people to the already dense subway and rail networks.
If you're talking about places like Edmonton and Calgary, I hate to break it to you, but that's not the LRT we're talking about! Edmonton and Calgary both use almost fully grade separated LRT lines that run as metro systems.
And if you're talking about Pheonix and other American cities, I'll remind you that these LRTs have done nothing to stem car dependence in them. Any "success" by LA's LRTs has to be taken with the fact that they're a metropolis of over 15 million people, of whom a vast majority are fully car dependent. In reality, LA's LRTs have actually done minimally. A good start for the city, but not as much as could be done, and should not be a basis for doing the same in Toronto.
3. "Subways are more expensive because we like to build them expensively, therefore LRT is better." Does this logic even make sense to you? The TTC could easily build subways using reasonably-sized stations and alternative building methods, which could easily put the cost of subway at $200m/km with TBMing, and even lower if you're going to elevate, trench or cut and cover some bits, which could easily be done on a route like Eglinton.
4. Yes I have, and it's very pretty. But I notice that a lot of people use Paris' subways too! In fact, it might just be harder because it's underground, but it'd seem like tonnes of more people use Paris' subway than the LRTs!
![Eek! :eek: :eek:]()
It's very pretty, but shouldn't aesthetics come second to... you know, actually making a network that gets people around as efficiently as possible? I agree, it'll be nice to have some LRT along some corridors in the city and region (not that TC is going to be making them particularly pretty,) but it'll also be nice to be able to get around the city quickly in a system that can handle the city's needs.
6. It seems pretty obvious that you're just going for the longshot right now. I don't think that a tourist going along a Sheppard LRT would suddenly get out and walk into a nice looking shop they saw while going by. I certainly haven't done that in my LRT travels. If you're talking about inner-city LRT like maybe on Queen or something, yes, totally! There've been a few times I've gotten off the Queen streetcar to check out a cool shop. But when you're talking about LRTs far flung out into the suburbs, it's quite unlikely that any tourist would be riding it in the first place, and if they were it'd be for a specific reason.
The business one just seems kind of silly to me. Do you know of anyone who actively looks for clients by driving down a street in search of stores to press into clientship? If so, then yes, he can just take the bus anyways. If he'd rather look for those shops than be whisked along in a subway, then he can easily do that.