[johnwood]

the cost of having LRTs instead of subways is big. first of all the economic costs would be due to gridlock of increased traffic because of the LRTs. the maintenance costs of LRTs is more expensive due to erosion of the track because of weather. the cost of subways is cheaper in the long run than LRTs. People in the city want subways and not LRTs, so give them what they want and they are attainable if a plan is in place to pay for them. The population grows at about 1 million and will be about 10 million, the same as chicago in about 50 years, so LRTs will not cut it. If Toronto is going to be a world class city it needs world class transit. The current subway will not sustain the future population of toronto and the current subway is already tiny and is beyond its capacity. When i think of torontos subway i think of a small train on a small track much like this train in this video. grow up karen stinks.
[video=youtube;ePmD6bQqev8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePmD6bQqev8&feature=related[/video]

 

[RC8]

BMO, while the article is reasonable, it does miss one point; new transit lines downtown would get much larger amounts of riders, and improve the efficiency with which people around the city can move. New subway lines in the suburbs by themselves will be mostly white elephants in places that don't have the densities required to justify or maintain them.

I believe downtowners are more than willing to pay higher taxes if it means improvements to transit in general. At the moment, downtowners are paying more to support the car-based infrastructure of the suburbs, than suburbanites are paying to support the TTC. That's what it boils down to at the moment - the situation is not really equal.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Tim Hudak wants the province to ignore city council and just build Subways.

From The Star, at this link:

TTC: Tim Hudak urges Dalton McGuinty to overrule Toronto council on subways

Rob Ferguson Queen's Park Bureau

Premier Dalton McGuinty should overrule Toronto city council’s transit plans despite its Monday machinations that dealt another setback to Mayor Rob Ford’s push for subways, says Progressive Conservative Leader Tim Hudak.

Calling subways a “once-in-a-generation†investment, Hudak told reporters Tuesday that McGuinty is wrong to insist the province will follow council’s lead on transit plans when provincial taxpayers are contributing $8.4 billion.

“This is the biggest infrastructure project in Canada…let’s do it right,†added Hudak, who was a member of the former Mike Harris Conservative government in 1995 that ordered digging stopped on an Eglinton subway line.

Now he’s pushing for the Eglinton light rail transit line, to be buried the full length. Right now plans are for it to be underground from Black Creek Drive in the west end to Laird Drive in Leaside, then run above ground eastward from there.

Council is also yet to decide whether to extend the Sheppard subway underground or extend it by light rail.

“I know there’s an ongoing battle at city council over this issue,†Hudak acknowledged. “There is a strong, compelling provincial interest here. Gridlock is among the worst in North America.â€

Despite his push for subways, Hudak said “there’s no more money†from the province than the $8.4 billion already earmarked to improve Toronto transit.

Many city councillors have said the money will be better spent on more light-rail lines to help more riders across the city, particularly on congested suburban bus routes.

McGuinty should direct the provincial transit co-ordination agency Metrolinx to play its “strategic role†and build underground so light rail lines don’t impede traffic, the Tory leader said.

His push for subways will be the subject of a vote in the Legislature on Tuesday afternoon.

The call for McGuinty to trump Toronto council comes as Hudak has said municipalities should have more say over projects like nearby wind turbine installations, but he wouldn’t specify any detailed criteria for when the provincial government should trump municipal interests.

Why don't we build subways for everyone who wants them?

We all want Subways, don't we? So lets build them for everyone who wants them? Who doesn't want Subways? Let's start with Tim Hudak's riding, Niagara West – Glanbrook? Wouldn't they want a Subway? In fact, let's build a Subway in the whole Niagara peninsula! We could even put a Subway from St. Catherines to Fort Erie. Just make sure it does not go to the surface, or it might upset Tim Hudak (or Rob Ford when he visits Niagara Falls). It could even go under the vineyards and flowerbeds, don't want to disturb the scenery. Who cares that a Subway is not needed where the riders will make the operation cost inefficient. Just build it because everyone wants it in their neighbourhood, ignoring the operation costs.

Sorry, Tim. Just because we all want Subways, does not make it a logical choice. World-class cities are still building subways, but in their downtowns, going to the surface outside the downtown. Where they are building rapid transit outside the downtown, they turn to light rail as the logical choice.

 

[BurlOak]

Eglinton needs a subway long before Sheppard. Sheppard can wait.

If I make an analogy to the road network:

1) Highway 400 southbound turning into Black Creek Drive is similar to Sheppard Subway switching to Sheppard East LRT.
2) Highway 400 southbound extending all the way down to the Gardiner is similar to a Sheppard Subway extension.
3) Highway 400 southbound turning into Black Creek Drive until St. Clair, and then turning back into a Freeway down to the Gardiner is similar to the Central burried Eglinton LRT, at-grade median LRT and the Scarborough LRT to Malvern.

 

[Northern Magus]

World-class cities are still building subways, but in their downtowns, going to the surface outside the downtown. Where they are building rapid transit outside the downtown, they turn to light rail as the logical choice.

Yep, and overground rail too.

If Hard-Right Hudak and Rube Fraud are so enamoured with rapid transit, why aren't they leveraging our existing rail corridors?

Why instead do they insist on wastefully building a gravy train?

 

[gweed123]

Yep, and overground rail too.

If Hard-Right Hudak and Rube Fraud are so enamoured with rapid transit, why aren't they leveraging our existing rail corridors?

Why instead do they insist on wastefully building a gravy train?

If they put their effort behind converting the GO system into an S-Bahn-like system, they'd have my backing 100%.

 

[nfitz]

the cost of having LRTs instead of subways is big.

I've always heard otherwise, but let's go through the points.

first of all the economic costs would be due to gridlock of increased traffic because of the LRTs.

Why would moving passengers from cars to transit, with virtually no loss of car lanes, create gridlock? That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. No one has ever suggested that less people driving in the same space would create gridlock. How do you do that?

the maintenance costs of LRTs is more expensive due to erosion of the track because of weather.

That's just absurd. Weather erodes the track? All those volcanic ash falls?

the cost of subways is cheaper in the long run than LRTs.

How can that possibly be? They cost about 7 times more per kilometre, and have similiar replacement life cycles. If they lasted 7 times longer, then perhaps you would break even, if inflation was 0 ... Can you point to any evidence to support such an unusual opinion?

People in the city want subways and not LRTs, so give them what they want and they are attainable if a plan is in place to pay for them.

They also ALL want to win the $1-million lottery. You can't give anyone what they want. And even Rob Ford, has only promised a few people a subway. Most get nothing - like those in Etobicoke.

The population grows at about 1 million and will be about 10 million, the same as chicago in about 50 years, so LRTs will not cut it.

Grows at about 1-million a what? A year? A decade? The time it took it for you to make up that statistic?

If Toronto is going to be a world class city it needs world class transit.

And yet you are pushing a scheme that would get us, what, another 2-km of subway a decade?

Do you have actually have any real facts to support your beliefs, or is some kind of competition to make up the most oddball, nonsensical facts.

 

[Palma]

I

Grows at about 1-million a what? A year? A decade? .

Exactly, Considering that Census Canada has shown that in the last 10 years Toronto's population has grown less than 270,000 so no way 10 million in the next 50 years especially when you consider the large baby boom generation will be dying

 

[rbt]

If they put their effort behind converting the GO system into an S-Bahn-like system, they'd have my backing 100%.

Mine too. A $8B investment into GO ($6B capital, $2B operations subsidy) could boost their ridership beyond 500M trips per year within 2 decades.

 

[BMO]

Exactly, Considering that Census Canada has shown that in the last 10 years Toronto's population has grown less than 270,000 so no way 10 million in the next 50 years especially when you consider the large baby boom generation will be dying

And yet, The Toronto Region has grown by more than 3M....(rolls eyes)

 

[BMO]

And yet you are pushing a scheme that would get us, what, another 2-km of subway a decade?

Do you have actually have any real facts to support your beliefs, or is some kind of competition to make up the most oddball, nonsensical facts.

So you think we should just not fund transit after the initial $8B? Last time I checked Stintz and her backing, have NO funding plan after the initial $8B whatsoever. As much as the province loves to just toss money at Toronto (probably less so after this whole debacle). They must keep a regional perspective on transit expansion, which means, if Toronto wants to boost local service or improve local corridors, it must fund it on its own.

And for someone who seems to act all righteous about facts, rarely do I ever see you cite any sources or reference any article links to support your own rebuttals. Especially the 2km of subway a decade, and the 7 times more expensive quotes you just spat out...Last time I checked LRT cost 134/km compared to subway which costs 335/km http://www.blogto.com/city/2012/02/how_does_each_toronto_transit_plan_stack_up/ But let's keep exaggerating things on the left why don't we

 

[BMO]

double post**

 

[BMO]

BMO, while the article is reasonable, it does miss one point; new transit lines downtown would get much larger amounts of riders, and improve the efficiency with which people around the city can move. New subway lines in the suburbs by themselves will be mostly white elephants in places that don't have the densities required to justify or maintain them.

I believe downtowners are more than willing to pay higher taxes if it means improvements to transit in general. At the moment, downtowners are paying more to support the car-based infrastructure of the suburbs, than suburbanites are paying to support the TTC. That's what it boils down to at the moment - the situation is not really equal.

I think what everyone is missing, is that people only use transit to go downtown, because transit is the easiest way to get downtown. Having to take a bus out to the suburbs is a very very bad experience. I've personally had to take the bus everyday for the past 4 yrs on the 60Steeles west, and it is just not a good environment. Fights constantly break out because the buses are too full.

You also say that subways to the suburbs will be white elephants, yet where do most ppl who work downtown come from? Every suburban who goes downtown must go back home afterwards. If you've ever had the experience of taking the Yonge line on a regular basis up to Eglinton or Sheppard, you would clearly see how often the sheppard and Eglinton platforms are packed with ppl transfering from the sheppard line (or bus routes in Eglinton's case) onto the Yonge line.

Every time a car driver purchases gas, out of that 80% tax, a portion is used to pay for roads and highways. Last time I checked Transit users do not pay for gas. Ppl who never use transit also, have to pay for transit through their taxes...Last time I checked, more ppl in teh GTA use cars than transit to get to work...so who's subsidizing who? I don't smoke, yet I subsidize ppl who have lung cancer from smoking through my taxes, even though they do pay higher taxes on purchasing the tobacco. I really don't see the point on blaming who subsidizes who, etc. You get nowhere.

I don't think the downtown population is willing to pay for improved transit, since they tend to mostly stay downtown, they probably don't see the point funding something, at higher cost to them, that they likely will never use. Yet, ppl in those suburban areas would use it everyday, as well as use the same transit that people downtown use. Hence why the challenge of commuting in the suburbs is not borne by all Torontonians, a greater proportion of it is borne by those in the suburbs. Suburbanite see increased funding in the suburbs for transit as an investment in improving their commute, whereas downtowners see increased funding for transit in the suburbs as a negative investment in their commute since it clogs the downtown system.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

BMO:

The buses wouldn't be this full if you are distributing the passengers at multiple points instead of dumping them at the one interchange station. As to the issue of subsidy - well, if one doesn't subsidize public transit, good luck with driving anywhere.

I think this whole downtown vs. suburb thing is less prevalent then you made it out to be - something like the DRL benefits all when you consider a good chunk of riders on YUS live in the suburbs.

AoD

 

[nfitz]

So you think we should just not fund transit after the initial $8B?

Yes. Why wouldn't they. The Ontario Government has already made it clear that the money after the initial $8B would be provided based on the Metrolinx investment strategy that are required to release in 2013.

Last time I checked Stintz and her backing, have NO funding plan after the initial $8B whatsoever.

Why do they need one. It's already funded through 2020, and the post-2020 funding would be through the Metrolinx as discussed above.

And for someone who seems to act all righteous about facts, rarely do I ever see you cite any sources or reference any article links to support your own rebuttals.

Given how frequently all these things have been cited lately, it would be an insult to anyone paying attention to source everything to death. Obviously surface LRT doesn't cost $134 million a km ... I don't know why you'd say suggest such a thing. You've deliberately used underground LRT which costs about the same as subway (not surprising given the larger tunnel) to mislead. Shame on you!