[SlickFranky]

Yonge is indeed very lively. Yonge also grew up on streetcar service. For subway-only Yonge visit the segment from Lawrence to Sheppard. Or just visit Sheppard E. Take a stroll down those friendly streets and get back to me.

The theory behind building a broad LRT network is that it encourages friendly, contiguous, medium density development, wherein people can walk and bike to most destinations. Long term this built form means you don't have to travel as far for work and play, so actual speed becomes less important. In this theory LRT/trams can serve as the local street grid, whereas subways work as the transit equivalent of expressways.

The real argument is whether or not you believe in this theory of urbanism.
If you do, subways may serve the current needs, but a broad LRT network serves as part of a strategy to change those needs.
If you don't agree, then yes, we should build 100s of kms of rapid transit to serve the low density disaster we've built ourselves into.

 

[hbl33]

The problem with T.O. is that the city area is quite large; it's no average Euro city with small city area size, higher density throughout the whole city. The density nodes are spaced far apart from one to another. The long arteries with varied levels of medium to high-densities are plentiful and are too much for streetcars to serve. Jane, Vic Park and Bathurst all have varied levels of densities, with Bathurst's high-rise clusters from Lawrence to Steeles; the Don Mills & Jane Strip; Eglinton has large clusters of high-rises from west end, medium-density between Dufferin and Bayview and again high-rises in the east corridor. Taking Sheppard bus from NYCC to Scarborough TC is unreasonably long, and is distant.

A subway would make sense since there are also development potentials along the artery. The subway not only encourage intensification around the corridor, but also alleviate the automobile traffic from NYCC to STC; it leaves more room for street beautification with less traffic interference (due to shift in numbers from car drivers to transit riders); and of course, getting from point A to B. Fewer budget is needed to be spent on increasing bus feed to subway lines, something streetcars cannot do itself (still need to deploy more buses or excess streetcars on surface routes, to overfill capacity).

About Yonge line growing from tram to metro line, yes, although that dates back to over seven decades ago. When the capacity skyrocketed, TTC soon upgraded from street rail car to an underground metro that is today (cut & cover with a little tunnel boring). That old method for upgrading a fully-realized TC to a subway-level is gonna take over a millenium! (my emphasis)

Subways can use light rail and a smaller car or a heavier rail with genuine subway cars. Ditto for streetcars (can use light rail, or a heavy rail, each with respective size of rail vehicles).

These are all streetcars!

LRT on surface:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9c/Lrt7770.JPG
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/35/Resized_DSC02542.JPG

HRT on surface:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8a/Keihan800-hot-ksm.jpg

There is nothing wrong with LRT itself; it should only apply to short roads with medium or high density in that corridor. Longer routes (Sheppard, Eglinton, perhaps Jane) would be more feasible with subways. No streetcars running along Bloor street (it has B/D) and look at how lively it is (as much as Yonge St.)!

 

[Fresh Start]

Great map Fresh Start. It looks basically like our SOS map. Maybe we should use it on the SOS website?

As a fantasy map, I'd extend Sheppard west to Downsview, and I'd add in the Yonge extension, and bring the DRL north to Sheppard, and extend Bloor to Dixie at the very least or go all the way to MCC (which I realize isn't on the map).

Um, who said that I was finished yet? This is just the first phase. You should be pleasantly surprised with the next map (and yes, Mississauga will be included in it).

Thanks for all the great feedback and suggestions guys.

 

[Acting Minor Traitor]

Yonge is indeed very lively. Yonge also grew up on streetcar service. For subway-only Yonge visit the segment from Lawrence to Sheppard.

Actually, the Yonge streetcar went as far north as Glen Echo/Yonge Boulevard, back when it was still the North York border. North of that your comment holds, though, as it does for Sheppard. Far as I'm concerned it should've been LRT from the start - for the amount spent on the current stubway we'd likely have gotten significantly more LRT track mileage.

 

[SlickFranky]

Actually, the Yonge streetcar went as far north as Glen Echo/Yonge Boulevard, back when it was still the North York border. North of that your comment holds, though, as it does for Sheppard. Far as I'm concerned it should've been LRT from the start - for the amount spent on the current stubway we'd likely have gotten significantly more LRT track mileage.

Lawrence to the old Glen Echo loop is not actually too bad either (it dies off practically right at that point)...I just didn't think it would read, as it's not really a major intersection these days.

 

[hbl33]

Lawrence to the old Glen Echo loop is not actually too bad either (it dies off practically right at that point)...I just didn't think it would read, as it's not really a major intersection these days.

So, T.O. would be better off having streetcars at every artery? Or a prudent, practical and logical network of subway routes? I'm just wondering...

 

[doady]

Yonge is indeed very lively. Yonge also grew up on streetcar service. For subway-only Yonge visit the segment from Lawrence to Sheppard. Or just visit Sheppard E. Take a stroll down those friendly streets and get back to me.

The theory behind building a broad LRT network is that it encourages friendly, contiguous, medium density development, wherein people can walk and bike to most destinations. Long term this built form means you don't have to travel as far for work and play, so actual speed becomes less important. In this theory LRT/trams can serve as the local street grid, whereas subways work as the transit equivalent of expressways.

I've heard this argument before. IMO, LRT is the mode that is more like the transit equivalent of expressway as it is the mode that gets in the way of pedestrian activity, being on the surface and all, and requiring a ROW.

But imo urbanism is about encourage people to get out the cars, and all the matters are the percentages. The higher the percentage of people not using the car, the higher the urbanity. You can't encourage higher density without first getting people out of their cars.

Yonge is urban because it developed during a time of low car usage, not necessarily because of the streetcar. At the time, streetcar was part of the reason for low car usage, but it wouldn't be today. Now subway is the reason, sticking with streetcar would have held Yonge back.

Why would Yonge be more urban now if the streetcar had been kept and the subway was not built? Would the ridership be as high? Probably not. Would Toronto overall be as urban as it is today if no subways had been built and transit expansion focused on streetcars? I doubt it. The ridership just wouldn't be as high.

Our bus routes already have ridership on par or better than light rail, so what is the point on so much light rail? How does any transit expansion serve the purpose of urbanity if increasing transit ridership is not the focus? Does widening roads to fit LRT make streets more pedestrian friendly? If urbanism is the focus, then increasing transit ridership should be the key priority. And I don't think LRT that mimics an already existing and very successful bus service, bus service that is already more sucessful than most light rail systems, is the best way to increase ridership and get people out their cars, and therefore not the best way to promote urbanism. I mean, if you build LRT, at least build it like other LRT systems. Most other LRT systems don't mimic bus service, they mimic regional rail and subways/metros, i.e. off street, some grade separation, etc.

 

[ssiguy2]

Transit not only serves urban areas but it can also help shape urban development. One only has to look at Sheppard from Yonge to Dom Mills or Sheppard to Finch. People will gravitate towards mass/rapid transit as it enhances their mobility and freedom. People will not moce to any area just becayuse it is on a glorified streetcar route.

 

[SlickFranky]

Oh, don't get me wrong, subways are vital for a city this size. There are a lot of people that have to move fairly great distances at decent speed. My personal commute would be torturous without the subway system. Toronto is already spread out, so we need to serve that dispersed population, and subways definitely have a place in doing so.

That being said, transportation planning is not just about transportation. Is your 'fantasy' vision another 100km of Sheppard E style streetscapes? I'll take St Clair W over that any day.

 

[kettal]

Transit not only serves urban areas but it can also help shape urban development. One only has to look at Sheppard from Yonge to Dom Mills or Sheppard to Finch. People will gravitate towards mass/rapid transit as it enhances their mobility and freedom. People will not moce to any area just becayuse it is on a glorified streetcar route.

have you ever been to Danforth east?

 

[Fresh Start]

Have you ever been, kettal?

I'd say we owe alot to the subway for intensifying the neighbourhoods surrounding them and even some distance away. Living/working closeby a guaranteed to be reliable transit service means a lot to a lot of people.

 

[Second_in_pie]

And remember that a lot of the area around the subways are considered "stable neighborhoods" by the city, and therefore developing those areas is near-impossible. Sheppard, or Eglinton, or Don Mills, could all support huge redevelopment. I'm all for pretty St. Clair-style avenues (though I doubt St. Clair is the way it is because of the streetcar,) but there's also a place for those very dense avenues. Just having 1/2 of one in the city isn't enough. And those very big and dense avenues will be what support the St. Clair style avenues throughout the city. If people have to navigate a maze of LRT lines to get to another part of the city, that has obvious drawbacks. Having Sheppard, Eglinton, Bloor, the YUS, and Don Mills as the RT backbone are basically the bare minimum.

 

[doady]

And remember that a lot of the area around the subways are considered "stable neighborhoods" by the city, and therefore developing those areas is near-impossible. Sheppard, or Eglinton, or Don Mills, could all support huge redevelopment. I'm all for pretty St. Clair-style avenues

The question is how many potential St Clair-style avenues are there? Not much: in Toronto, there's only Wilson, Lawrence East, Kingston Road (into Durham Region) are major ones (which are my choices for new light rail in Toronto, as shown on my map).

Both Eglinton and Sheppard have a lot of redevelopment potential, but Eglinton is already a mixed-use and medium density corridor, and Sheppard is meant to connect two major high density nodes.

Assuming that light rail can reshape corridors in the way the people suggest, the list of corridors in Toronto that can be reshaped by LRT is very short, so there is point of a tight-knot network of LRT solely for that purpose... there is only so much of the city than can be transformed, let alone transformed by light rail.

 

[CDL.TO]

I thought it might be a good idea to use this Inkscape of yours to try drawing some maps for SOS. Make some pretty maps. Unfortunately, this program drove me up the wall. I followed the tutorial step-by-step and the goddamn program wouldn't let me do the things the tutorial asked me to do. I drew a line, followed by some circles. I got that far. And then I had to draw more stupid lines. It asks you to make them 12 pixels wide, and 1.5x the width of the line in height. OH MY GOD something so simple never seemed so complicated. First of all, I set the width to 12, okay that's fine. Then I try to resize the line in the toolbar. Bad idea. It instantly resizes the width as well. And no, the proportions are NOT locked. I have no idea why it does this. When I try to do it manually, when I make the line shorter it suddenly decides it wants to be curvy. WTF. I don't think I've been so frustrated with a computer program since university. Such a simple step and I got stumped. And gave up. Eff that. Bye bye freeware.

Well, I used the program and followed the directions and had no problems. None. Nada. Zilch. I've used the program to make a few maps since and they look great. I've had no problems resizing lines and no problems making curved or straight lines.

I've found it easier to use and more intuitive than Adobe Illustrator. I've never used Corel so I can't compare to that.

Though I'm still confused as to why you seem annoyed that the tutorial asked you to draw "stupid lines"? Transit maps consist mostly of lines!
.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

So the Queensway must be an oasis of Jacobsonian Urban fun correct?