The Mad Navigator
Banned
Transit City is NOT solely for working commuters. It was meant to serve and connect neighbourhoods that didn't have any higher order form of transit before.
|
|
|
- Thread starter 299 bloor call control.
- Start date
Transit City is NOT solely for working commuters. It was meant to serve and connect neighbourhoods that didn't have any higher order form of transit before.
ssiguy2
Senior Member
To me TC was never about the technology but rather value for the dollar. A $900 million Sheppard LRT is not. It is not rapid by any stretch of the imagine. If Toronto wanted bus ROW for higher capacity and reliability the they could have built a ROW Bus lane. Using ariticulated buses all they have to do is reserve the middle lanes for bus-only routes. A complete different coloured lane workd extremely well in US cities. They could have just just painted the one lane each way with TC type stations and bob's your uncle. It would have cost a tenth of TC, travel as fast, be as reliable but save a cool $800 million for true rapid/mass transit.
kEiThZ
Superstar
I don't see it as more for less. I see it as more for more. I am getting to where I want to go, faster, and with fewer transfers. Thats' valuable. And who says it can't happen in a lifetime. Take the money spent on the SRT extension to Malvern, the SELRT and the proposed SMLRT (not even touching Eglinton). Right there, you have enough to finish the BD line to STC and extend the Sheppard subway till at least Agincourt.
Why not? Isn't this the "original" LRT line. It was supposed to be a segregated LRV ROW. And now it's going to become the showpiece for what LRT can do in Toronto. Till Eglinton is up and running, it'll be the only grade-separated, fully segregated LRT line in Toronto.
If that's the excuse, then tell me how they can justify the European utopian vision they have for Sheppard East, especially east of McCowan? If it didn't work along the SRT corridor, why does it suddenly become immensely more magical on Sheppard? What makes you think 4 storey buildings and sidewalk cafes are going to be popping up along Sheppard in Malvern?
The one bright side in the whole plan. The flip side of the decision to convert to LRT is that tens of thousands of Scarborough residents will continue to be faced with an unnecessary transfer at Kennedy everyday, and Scarborough Town Centre will be left as the only urban growth centre and transport hub in the 416 without a subway, probably limiting its growth over the long run.
Right. A Bloor-Danforth subway extension to STC would take decades to reach potential? Please. And if we are going to have this debate, pray tell what justifies the ridership for the proposed SMLRT line. Take out the Eglinton portion (which really should be combined with the Eglinton LRT to begin with....another flaw in TC) and let me know if there's enough for BRT, let alone LRT. Are you going to suggest that the multi-km stretch through Morningside Park generates enough ridership to justify hundreds of millions in LRT construction?
Funny, they plan on using the same vehicles. And the recent proposals and presentations by the TTC suggested that it will be "LRT" in the future. The only difference I see is grade separation. And since when does that fact alone define the mode? So if it's on a bridge and has three cars its not LRT but if it runs in the middle of the street with 2 cars it is? Hence forth the SRT will be LRT. That's not me talking. That's Metrolinx and the TTC.
Last edited:
Second_in_pie
Senior Member
I just have one question for all the TC suppourters:
Are you actually questioning over a century of transit planning that has garnered nothing but astounding results? If you look at the scorecard, subway works. It's a system that is needed in any big city. Toronto doesn't have a subway system. For what it's worth, it has two subway lines. And if you look at almost any city that has LRT, LRT is built to fill in the gaps for subway service. Are you actually saying that these gaps in Toronto's system are essentially the entire city outside of the narrow Yonge-University-Allen and Bloor-Danforth corridors?
If that's going to be how you build the city's and the region's transit, it will miserably fail. Transit City is a band-aid solution. It might help things for a bit, but it won't take long after the LRTs are built that they've reached their capacity, ridership and development potential. And once that happens, we'll just have to spend money on subways anyways. We'll either basically write over all the LRT construction that TC did, or we'll put RT on stupid corridors, like a subway on Lawrence instead of Eglinton, or Victoria Park instead of Don Mills.
Perhaps it will actually be nice to have LRTs. Obviously there will be improvements over current busses. But I certainly won't want to clean up the mess when we actually have to build real higher order transit because the LRT network is reaching it's limits. That's a glaring reality that Transit City avoids.
Are you actually questioning over a century of transit planning that has garnered nothing but astounding results? If you look at the scorecard, subway works. It's a system that is needed in any big city. Toronto doesn't have a subway system. For what it's worth, it has two subway lines. And if you look at almost any city that has LRT, LRT is built to fill in the gaps for subway service. Are you actually saying that these gaps in Toronto's system are essentially the entire city outside of the narrow Yonge-University-Allen and Bloor-Danforth corridors?
If that's going to be how you build the city's and the region's transit, it will miserably fail. Transit City is a band-aid solution. It might help things for a bit, but it won't take long after the LRTs are built that they've reached their capacity, ridership and development potential. And once that happens, we'll just have to spend money on subways anyways. We'll either basically write over all the LRT construction that TC did, or we'll put RT on stupid corridors, like a subway on Lawrence instead of Eglinton, or Victoria Park instead of Don Mills.
Perhaps it will actually be nice to have LRTs. Obviously there will be improvements over current busses. But I certainly won't want to clean up the mess when we actually have to build real higher order transit because the LRT network is reaching it's limits. That's a glaring reality that Transit City avoids.
kEiThZ
Superstar
^ To be fair, the assumption is that the LRTs will never be overcrowded. And to some extent I do agree with that assumption. Eglinton might see a lot of ridership. But lines like Sheppard East past Agincourt and the SMLRT excluding Eglinton will never be over-crowded.
Aside from that, I am betting most people really don't care about the long term consequences of current transit developments, because it won't impact them. They'll probably be long since be retired by then and won't be using transit on a regular basis during peak hours.
What I don't understand is the implicit assumtpion of TC that demand will be more evenly distributed, that we won't end up with choke points, etc. I am doubtful the issues at Yonge/Bloor will suddenly disappear because there's some new tram lines in the burbs.
Aside from that, I am betting most people really don't care about the long term consequences of current transit developments, because it won't impact them. They'll probably be long since be retired by then and won't be using transit on a regular basis during peak hours.
What I don't understand is the implicit assumtpion of TC that demand will be more evenly distributed, that we won't end up with choke points, etc. I am doubtful the issues at Yonge/Bloor will suddenly disappear because there's some new tram lines in the burbs.
Last edited:
GraphicMatt
Looking forward to a FRESH START for Toronto
Transit City absolutely is a band-aid solution and we'll need the DRL more than ever after it's built. If it's built.
The only proposed TC route that could potentially hit capacity within the next few decades, and the tunnel is being built to subway specs just for that reason.
Do you think people who support TC are under the belief that Transit City is all the transit construction the city needs right now?
Second_in_pie
Senior Member
By the way that they all say that LRT is more than adequate enough as a transit solution, I think that many of the TC supporters do think that LRT is all the city needs (except for a DRL.) Eglinton will be just fine as LRT. Sheppard is just fine as LRT. Don Mills is just fine as LRT. These aren't the case. Real rapid transit is needed. If all the money can't be coughed up at once, there's no need to complain: that's how transit works. You can't just build it all at once and expect it to work perfectly. The only way that the transit deficit can be solved is with a gradual construction of the transit system. And that is, for the most part, Subway along lines like Eglinton, Sheppard and Don Mills. Extra RT lines and LRTs can come later.
If all you will complain about is money, then perhaps people like niftz should stop saying that LRT is god and subways are many times too expensive for the city. That kind of needless filler is unneeded and unhelpful. Yes, the TTC builds subways very expensively. But many other places have proven that RT (and even subways) can be built for less, using things as simple as simpler stations or different forms of construction. So then how could we make our subways cheaper instead of complaining and going to a system that's not strong for the city's future needs? If you're actually saying that subways would be better than LRT for a lot of these routes, why isn't that the discussion?
If all you will complain about is money, then perhaps people like niftz should stop saying that LRT is god and subways are many times too expensive for the city. That kind of needless filler is unneeded and unhelpful. Yes, the TTC builds subways very expensively. But many other places have proven that RT (and even subways) can be built for less, using things as simple as simpler stations or different forms of construction. So then how could we make our subways cheaper instead of complaining and going to a system that's not strong for the city's future needs? If you're actually saying that subways would be better than LRT for a lot of these routes, why isn't that the discussion?
kEiThZ
Superstar
Pretty much. As SIP pointed out, I think most TC supporters envision very, very limited subway expansion. Basically the DRL and maybe Yonge North. Isn't that the whole argument behind TC? That we can't afford anything else so we have to settle for trams everywhere? That we get 5km of LRT for every km of subway so that automatically means we should always be building LRT, because we don't have any corridors that meet the TTC's magical threshold for grade separated heavy rail. If we're wrong, then tell us where you and other TC supporters think additional subways should be built.
For my part, I personally don't think all of TC is bad. I just think we could do better, and that we should address priorities as they exist. LRT certainly has a place in Toronto's transit framework. I just don't agree with how Transit City prioritizes things. If you had $8 billion, would an LRT on Sheppard East be the first route on your list to go?
Last edited:
Justin10000
Banned
Subway to STC: At least 1.2 Billion, and around a decade to plan, design, and build. SRT Conversion to LRT: Around $350 Million, 3-4 years, and will double capacity, and be part of a network for Scarborough. Sorry dude, keep on dreaming. A subway to STC is not happening, and shouldn't happen for the near future.
Is the SRT in it's current form LRT? You get a gold star if you know the answer.
Justin10000
Banned
The sad thing is, I honestly think they are under this belief.
hbl33
Active Member
TC is to robust subway system as Starbucks to gourmet coffee.
Is it just me or whole TTC is now a figurine of antique transportation?
Does Miller know how the current streetcars work?!!?
Does only money has to come in mind over decision in choosing LRT or subways? (oh well, Miller is a thief too)
There seems no valid reason for choosing LRT over HRT on already overburdened streetcars. At least none for long term.
Is Queen and Dundas streetcars still worth the keep after 50 years when overcrowded?
Shouldn't Finch areas soon be need for subways soon around couple of decades later?
No plan of rapid transit along Steeles Ave?
No complete streetcars throughout all lengths of Harbourfront today?
There should have been DRL (at least around downtown segments), the Original Queen St. Subway (separate, not part of currently-being-debated-DRL), Sheppard and Eglinton Subways, with B/D beyond STC and YUS completed as a loop by now. Completing TC is another century step back from today. After completing its long-proposed subways, then LRT may be a viable addition.
For now as long as this trend goes while TTC goes dysfunctional with TC, Sauga and Brampton will get their first full LRT by then.
Is it just me or whole TTC is now a figurine of antique transportation?
Does Miller know how the current streetcars work?!!?
Does only money has to come in mind over decision in choosing LRT or subways? (oh well, Miller is a thief too)
There seems no valid reason for choosing LRT over HRT on already overburdened streetcars. At least none for long term.
Is Queen and Dundas streetcars still worth the keep after 50 years when overcrowded?
Shouldn't Finch areas soon be need for subways soon around couple of decades later?
No plan of rapid transit along Steeles Ave?
No complete streetcars throughout all lengths of Harbourfront today?
There should have been DRL (at least around downtown segments), the Original Queen St. Subway (separate, not part of currently-being-debated-DRL), Sheppard and Eglinton Subways, with B/D beyond STC and YUS completed as a loop by now. Completing TC is another century step back from today. After completing its long-proposed subways, then LRT may be a viable addition.
For now as long as this trend goes while TTC goes dysfunctional with TC, Sauga and Brampton will get their first full LRT by then.
kEiThZ
Superstar
Really? So Sheppard took a decade to plan, design and build? Did the TYSSE take a decade to plan, design and build?
And for the price of the SRT conversion, pray tell where you are getting your numbers from? According the Metrolinx SRT Benefits Case Analysis (page 2, option 3), conversion to LRT and extension of the elevated ROW to Malvern Town Centre will cost 1.404 billion. We might save a bit by cutting short at Sheppard. But there's no way it's only $350 million. In fact the BCA lists straight conversion to ART Mk II at $450 million. And conversion to LRT involves disruption for as much as 2 years. It would have cost about the same to extend subway to STC and would have had a significantly shorter service disruption.
Your snark isn't going to improve your crediblity at all. What does it matter what the current dying system is? According to the TTC and Metrolinx the coming system is defined as LRT. It's defined as LRT in the Metrolinx BCA. And it's certainly defined as LRT here:
http://www.toronto.ca/involved/projects/scarborough_rapid_transit/pdf/2010-04-12_pic5_1of4.pdf (See slide 11)
Are you in the habit of using definitions other than what every government agency and operator involved in a project use? Again, I ask you. Please tell me how the upcoming SRT will not be LRT. Do you draw the line at grade separation? Do you draw the line at the number of vehicles? Please feel free to explain how you split hairs.
Last edited:
kEiThZ
Superstar
And why not? I have yet to see a full-fledged TC supporter describe what should be built or done above and beyond TC and the DRL.
SunriseChampion
Senior Member
The most public proponents sure as hell do.
GraphicMatt
Looking forward to a FRESH START for Toronto
Who? Seriously. Name one person.