[T3G]

Still get broken trains, disturbed people at the track level etc from time to time.

It is also susceptible to the elements, much like a grade-integrated line would.

 

[jmi22]

Full grade separation doesn't guarantee accident-free operation though. Still get broken trains, disturbed people at the track level etc from time to time.

Certainly not against having a few fast, grade-separated trunk lines across the city. But in case of Finch West, it may be the right choise to build something that's better than bus and can be build quickly first, i.e. Finch LRT. Not a trunk line, but a substantially improved local line.

And then in 20-30 years, extend the Sheppard subway west, with the route somewhere south of Finch: on Sheppard, Wilson, Hwy 401, or a combination of those. That will serve as the trunk line, running reasonably close to both the Rexdale and the Central Etobicoke.

Finch has not been built quickly it has been six years and it will open earliest next year, for a grand total of 7 years (if we are lucky). I think the insane inefficiency of Canadian construction has made everyone forget things actually can be done well for cheap. The initial stretch of Line 1 from Union to Eglinton was built in five years to give a sense of the rot that has seeped into our public works. Spain and Korea build wholly tunnelled for less money and the same/less time than we build over hyped streetcars. And we can learn from them but the political will for that is not there.

 

[nfitz]

Finch has not been built quickly it has been six years and it will open earliest next year, for a grand total of 7 years (if we are lucky).

Six? The contract with Mosaic was only signed 5 years ago - in 2018. And unlike a TTC subway is a design-build. So there's going to have to be a longer period than just constructing.

The initial stretch of Line 1 from Union to Eglinton was built in five years to give a sense of the rot that has seeped into our public works.

Spain and Korea build wholly tunnelled for less money and the same/less time than we build over hyped streetcars.

I've not been to Spain, but in Korea I recall Line 9 construction sites many years before the line opened. Reading up on it, after many years of delays, construction of Phase 1 started in April 2002, but the line didn't open until July 2009. Over 7 years.

If only Seoul had learned the lessons of building the Yonge subway.

The grass is always greener, eh?

 

[T3G]

Six? The contract with Mosaic was only signed 5 years ago - in 2018. And unlike a TTC subway is a design-build. So there's going to have to be a longer period than just constructing.

And didn't begin in earnest until quarter 2 of 2019 for the maintenance facility.

Not a good look when one has to cook the timelines in order to give their grievance weight. Or to bring up construction projects from 70 years ago, when safety and labour standards were much lower than they are today.

 

[voilan]

Seoul isn't analogous to Toronto for obvious reasons and dwelling on foreign countries isn't particularly productive, but Line 9 was a 27km line and the original Yonge line was 10km long (same as the Finch streetcar, incredibly). The grass is greener in Seoul, and it's "not a good look" to argue against that.
No real reason to believe that it is possible for Canada to reach Korean levels of cost/speed, but that probably implies scarce resources should be directed toward projects that actually substantially impact travel times and formation of a rapid transit network (i.e. not obscenely expensive marginal improvements on buses). Eager to see if Transit City dead-enders will finally give up the ghost when Finch and Eglinton (east of Laird) are opened and the public discovers that they're multi-billion dollar pseudo-buses. Hopefully will stop EELRT before it's too late.

 

[nfitz]

Seoul isn't analogous to Toronto for obvious reasons and dwelling on foreign countries isn't particularly productive, but Line 9 was a 27km line and the original Yonge line was 10km long (same as the Finch streetcar, incredibly). The grass is greener in Seoul, and it's "not a good look" to argue against that.

Yeah, obviously not comparable in so many ways. As an aside - I was really surprised in Seoul, that I didn't see a blade of grass in the city the entire time I was there, except in the Olympic Park; it was indeed green though. It's unfortunate how there's even so few trees in most of the urban area there.

 

[T3G]

the public discovers that they're multi-billion dollar pseudo-buses

Perhaps people would take anti LRT arguments more seriously if they used actual facts.

No matter how many people parrot this tired trope, it still won't be true. A single LRT car offers higher capacity than a bus, more options for increasing capacity (coupling multiple LRT cars together, theoretically limited only by platform length and the capacity of the substations), a superior quality ride - and their own lanes. Which is not an inherent feature of LRT, but those who call Eglinton and Finch pseudo buses conveniently leave out the fact that neither the Eglinton nor the Finch buses have dedicated lanes, so even despite the areas in which you people perceive the LRT to be lacking, you are still introducing an important feature which didn't exist before.

Next.

 

[voilan]

Yeah, obviously not comparable in so many ways. As an aside - I was really surprised in Seoul, that I didn't see a blade of grass in the city the entire time I was there, except in the Olympic Park; it was indeed green though. It's unfortunate how there's even so few trees in most of the urban area there.

Thank goodness for the mountains which offer some reprieve from concrete and glass. Otherwise, though, not much at all (City Hall, I guess, but the massive intersections nearby aren't ideal).

Perhaps people would take anti LRT arguments more seriously if they used actual facts.

No matter how many people parrot this tired trope, it still won't be true. A single LRT car offers higher capacity than a bus, more options for increasing capacity (coupling multiple LRT cars together, theoretically limited only by platform length and the capacity of the substations), a superior quality ride - and their own lanes. Which is not an inherent feature of LRT, but those who call Eglinton and Finch pseudo buses conveniently leave out the fact that neither the Eglinton nor the Finch buses have dedicated lanes, so even despite the areas in which you people perceive the LRT to be lacking, you are still introducing an important feature which didn't exist before.

Next.

Can't wait til they're open for business and people can finally stop arguing theoretically and see how bus-like (or not) they are in practice! To be clear I don't disagree that streetcars are an upgrade on buses, but given financial constraints and their pricetags, not a large enough upgrade. I will be pleasantly surprised and admit my error if they end up being well-received and used.

 

[jmi22]

Seoul isn't analogous to Toronto for obvious reasons and dwelling on foreign countries isn't particularly productive, but Line 9 was a 27km line and the original Yonge line was 10km long (same as the Finch streetcar, incredibly). The grass is greener in Seoul, and it's "not a good look" to argue against that.
No real reason to believe that it is possible for Canada to reach Korean levels of cost/speed, but that probably implies scarce resources should be directed toward projects that actually substantially impact travel times and formation of a rapid transit network (i.e. not obscenely expensive marginal improvements on buses). Eager to see if Transit City dead-enders will finally give up the ghost when Finch and Eglinton (east of Laird) are opened and the public discovers that they're multi-billion dollar pseudo-buses. Hopefully will stop EELRT before it's too late.

shhh dont say that the whole thread might realize a political slogan from 15 years ago isnt actually a good way to build a coherent transit system

 

[jmi22]

t

Perhaps people would take anti LRT arguments more seriously if they used actual facts.

No matter how many people parrot this tired trope, it still won't be true. A single LRT car offers higher capacity than a bus, more options for increasing capacity (coupling multiple LRT cars together, theoretically limited only by platform length and the capacity of the substations), a superior quality ride - and their own lanes. Which is not an inherent feature of LRT, but those who call Eglinton and Finch pseudo buses conveniently leave out the fact that neither the Eglinton nor the Finch buses have dedicated lanes, so even despite the areas in which you people perceive the LRT to be lacking, you are still introducing an important feature which didn't exist before.

Next.

the whole point is that dedicated lanes is something we can accomplish with a can of red paint and you can get lrt like results without spending billions

 

[north-of-anything]

shhh dont say that the whole thread might realize a political slogan from 15 years ago isnt actually a good way to build a coherent transit system

"Subways subways subways" was from 15 years ago?

 

[jmi22]

"Subways subways subways" was from 15 years ago?

Binary Brainrot

 

[T3G]

t

the whole point is that dedicated lanes is something we can accomplish with a can of red paint and you can get lrt like results without spending billions

Great. Now couple the buses together, and let me know how well that works out.

if they end up being well-received and used.

Why wouldn't they be? This is not brand new tech that no one has tried out before, they have been running in very similar configurations to ours in Europe for decades. If they don't run well, it will be because of our North American conventions of prioritizing safety to a fault, over utility and usefulness.

 

[duty free]

honest question, but why is the Finch LRT being given the designation of Line 6? nothing against the project itself, just confused as to why it's considered a "Line" per se in the same vein as Line 2 (Bloor-Danforth) or Line 1 (Yonge-University).

I have never seen this nomenclature happen anywhere else.

in Madrid this "line" would be called ML 1, 2 etc.. (Metro Ligero)
in Barcelona this "line" would be called T1, T2 etc..
in Paris it would also be called T1, T2 etc..
in Berlin it would be called M1, M2
in London it would be London Trams
in Singapore Light rail lines have their own separate designation just referred to by name that includes LRT.
and so on...

even Mississauga isn't giving the Hurontario LRT a name like Line 1, although calling the Hazel McCallion Line as if she was the Queen or something is equally ridiculous in a different and ironic kind of way.

I guess Boston has the Green Line. that's probably the closest comparison, but really more similar to Eglinton where a good % of the line is underground. just seems a bit silly to call it Line 6 in my opinion. I get this post is a bit old man yells at cloud, I just find it the branding of Line 6 a bit ridiculous since Toronto already has subway Lines. Line 3 was at least completely grade separated, this "line" will not be.

it should be called Finch (West) LRT and nothing else. I would be irritated if I were visiting from somewhere else, thought it was a metro line and found out it's just a tram.

 

[Bureaucromancer]

All else being equal my choice would be to revive the 600 series line numbers for the light rail services….