News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 8.9K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.1K     0 

Which transit plan do you prefer?

  • Transit City

    Votes: 95 79.2%

  • Ford City

    Votes: 25 20.8%
  • Total voters
    120
nfitz said:
John Sepulis???

You clearly no nothing, and you've been listening to the rantings of someone who would be mortified if he knew you had identified what he said publicly.

An engineer would loose his licence if he were falsify the results to keep the client happy.

To suggest such criminal activity seems bizarre.
Click to expand...

Engineers have no say in the planning of transit routes. It's these planners who have been falsifying ridership projections for Eglinton (and even Sheppard) so that LRT made more sense. Are you going to tell me that in the past 20 years since Eglinton was getting a subway line ridership has fallen? If anything, in Toronto - one of the fastest growing cities on the continent - ridership would be booming.

What I believe the TTC has done is that by using LRT projections - they don't take into account those who would be swayed by taking the subway. Subways tend to catch far more casual riders, or those who would leave their car behind, than any sort of LRT. That might be the answer everyone is looking for.
 
Filip said:
Are you going to tell me that in the past 20 years since Eglinton was getting a subway line ridership has fallen? If anything, in Toronto - one of the fastest growing cities on the continent - ridership would be booming.
Click to expand...

Please read the previously provided link. No one is saying ridership has fallen, just that there wasn't subway demand in the first place.

What I believe the TTC has done is that by using LRT projections - they don't take into account those who would be swayed by taking the subway. Subways tend to catch far more casual riders, or those who would leave their car behind, than any sort of LRT. That might be the answer everyone is looking for.
Click to expand...

I take it then you haven't bothered to actually read the projected demand studies and what they took into account?

I'm sure you are right and that people who have been in the transit industry for years, having been trained and educated in their methodologies, just didn't think to account for induced demand for a subway. I hope you'll pass on this great insight to the TTC so those fine folk can improve their knowledge and hopefully do a better job next time.
 
Filip said:
Ugh ok, time to quote my friend's dad who's the head structural engineer for the TTC, once again because you are too dense to read it beforehand.

Basically, they will tell consultants/experts what they want,
Click to expand...

A structural engineer is falsifying information? We better go all above ground LRT if that is the case because we don't want subway tunnels collapsing on people.
 
Just to be clear: we are seemingly mature and rational adults arguing against someone who believes that Toronto's most recent transit plan is "satan's plan", cooked up by corrupt and lying engineers & planners who hate this city. (His friend's dad told him as much.)
 
Rainforest said:
1) Such interferences surely will happen, but on the other hand, both the civic LRT proponents and the manufacturers of light rail vehicles are free to run their own ad campaign.

2) Actually it does not have to be a set of polls on each corridor and each technology choice. The transit plan can be made by a panel of experts, and then approved on the referendum as a package. Or, the government pay appoint 2 or 3 panels to create competing plans, and then one of them wins the referendum and becomes the official plan.

The main point of the whole exercise is not to derive the best technical solution from the public opinion, but to give the official plan some immunity to the political tides.



I like the idea of experts appointed by the councils for a fixed term, and staggering any changes in the board. Indeed, that can be easier done than running a referendum.

But I see an issue with the board composition as you proposed it. Of those 14 members, 8 appointed by regions will care very little about any transit lines within Toronto, unless that line connects to their own transit. So, changing just 2 members from Toronto can totally change the whole board's take on TTC's lines.
Click to expand...

Valid concerns. I agree that the political tides need to be negated, well as much as they can be.

My thought process behind the regional approach is just that: it's regional. The guy from Durham isn't focusing just on Durham, and the guy from Toronto isn't focusing just on Toronto. Sometimes it takes an outsider's perspective on things to come up with something different. All of the people involved would be experts, so they would be able to look at the numbers, the ridership projections, and plan on a regional scale, not a micro scale. Transit City makes little effort to connect logically to the areas outside of Toronto (SELRT is a perfect example).

The end result from everyone planning in their own little box and then coming together afterwards vs everyone planning the entire thing together from Day 1 I would imagine would be a very different result.
 
Filip said:
Engineers have no say in the planning of transit routes. It's these planners who have been falsifying ridership projections for Eglinton (and even Sheppard) so that LRT made more sense.
Click to expand...
Planners aren't given the scientific or mathematical training to do transportation demand modelling. These are normally done by Transportation engineers; and that's what I've seen in the Appendices of various TTC reports.
 
Filip said:
Ugh ok, time to quote my friend's dad who's the head structural engineer for the TTC, once again because you are too dense to read it beforehand.

Basically, they will tell consultants/experts what they want, they will fabricate ridership projections by falsifying data and then sell it to the public. You don't go from subway ready corridor in the 80s to LRT for the next 20 years just like that, unless some plague took out half of Toronto. The TTC could release studies saying that teleportation is the best option on this corridor beating out everything if they wanted to.. It's that asinine.
Click to expand...

You sound like someone from a conspiracy story lol

No, no, no!

It's more basic then that....

I said it before and I'll explain it AGAIN...
Pay attention people

A)You can make studies say whatever you want them to say if you change the criterias...
What's the difference between RTES and Transit City's EA?
Why one report says subway is just common sense and the other says it's over kill.

ANSWER
Although they both studied Sheppard East of Don Mills, the difference lies here

RTES= Don Mills to SCARBOROUGH TOWN CENTRE
TC EA= Don Mills to THE ZOO


Don Mills to SCARBOROUGH TOWN CENTRE
-STC is and with a subway, will be the Eastern Hub of the whole Eastern GTA.

-STC connected to the Yonge line would massively attract people from North and East Scarborough making their bus trip shorter by taking the Sheppard line instead of staying on the bus to go south or to go to Finch

-STC connected to Yonge would attract a lot of people from Durham using the GO Bus. I work at Sheppard Yonge and there’s lots of them coming from the east. They could just get off at STC from the 401.

-It would attract and convince drivers to park at STC instead of driving.

-Lots of YRT bus routes would have shorter trips by just going south instead of driving to Finch…Shoter Commute and more ridership

Don Mills to THE ZOO

The LRT would attract ridership on the corridor, no doubt about it…
-LRT would attract ridership from people near the corridor already using public transit

-By not going to STC, you just counted out A LOT OF RIDERSHIP out of the equation.

-Suburban drivers won’t stop driving for an LRT. Anyone thinking otherwise is living in a dream world. Even if some of them would be willing to park their cars and take the LRT, it’s not going to STC but the ZOO, so why bother?

-Suburban commuters working in North York from Durham and York will continue to use the Go or VIVA and YRT to Yonge and won’t bother transferring to Toronto’s LRT

-Adding an extra transfert at Sheppard-McCowan that didn’t exist with the 190 express.


CONCLUSION

Both camps were right!

1)Don Mills to SCARBOROUGH TOWN CENTRE= Subway
Subway on that route makes sense and LRT makes no sense

2)Don Mills to THE ZOO= LRT.
A subway on that route makes no sense so LRT is the solution

But I ask…which route makes more sense to begin with?
 
Filip said:
Engineers have no say in the planning of transit routes. It's these planners who have been falsifying ridership projections for Eglinton (and even Sheppard) so that LRT made more sense.
Click to expand...

Uhh, okay....
 
Ansem said:
But I ask…which route makes more sense to begin with?
Click to expand...
Ultimately both ... they are different routes ... with LRT built, subway can stop at Victoria Park, Agincourt, and then cross south of the 401.

However RTES didn't predict ridership on the Sheppard subway that LRT couldn't have handled. It's not that the prediction about ridership has changed much ... it's the cut-off for when to switch to subway, with the advent of the higher capacity LRT routes.
 
Ansem said:
I was always a fan of

Subway= Don Mills to STC via Agincourt
LRT=Agincourt to the zoo
Click to expand...
Though given the densities along Sheppard East of there, a LRT to Malvern from STC seems like a much, much better plan.

Hopefully we can still somehow get what you suggest though. Because really, any LRT west of Agincourt will just end up being a waste of money somewhere.
 
Hmm that's a good idea too. Finish the Sheppard Subway from Don Mills to STC, and then build the SELRT from STC to the Zoo or wherever.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top