News   Mar 27, 2024
 1.1K     1 
News   Mar 27, 2024
 1.1K     2 
News   Mar 27, 2024
 631     0 

Transit City Comeback?

Whoever is elected next will have their own transit platform. On Eglinton it is unlikely tunneling beyond the places where Transit City envisioned it and on Sheppard will be underway. On Sheppard there is unlikely to even be a tunneling contract tendered and on Eglinton there might be termination fees depending on how the province tenders the tunneling contract starting near Jane and Eglinton (i.e. is it a contact to tunnel to the Don Valley or is it the whole route). So, a Transit City comeback is possible, so is an Eglinton subway and DRL plan, so is a white elephant subway plan.
 
I think it's very likely actually, once Ford is gone. The fact remains that while Transit City had flaws, it also contained essential investments into corridors that would have benefitted areas of the city that will be getting zilch now thanks to Ford's idiotic knee-jerk impulses. There are still many major streets in Toronto that need an upgrade from buses, and the answer are LRT ROW's. It's also as much about re-developing and densifying our awful car-oriented post war inner suburbs as it is about moving people around more efficiently.
 
I think that certain elements of Transit City (concepts, individual lines or sections of lines, etc) may return, but I think the plan as a cohesive master plan is dead. Most transit plans in Toronto's history have had common elements to them, it's just the technology choice and specific routing have been a little bit different, as have been the priorities.
 
I for one find it ironic how it is perceived that the 'right' prefers larger, more expensive, higher order transit projects, while the 'left' prefers cheaper, less glamorous lower order transit.

Transit transcends political ideologies in large cities such as Toronto, and one's political stance cannot be used to predict the type of transit platform they prefer. I believe that while Ford's transit policies are damaging, Miller's transit policy was equally damaging, though for opposite reasons. While building a subway on Sheppard is ridiculous right now, Transit City would have entrenched the notion of mediocrity for at least a generation, and that would have been devastating for our rapidly growing city.

Toronto needs a mayor who supports subways as strongly as Ford, but has the common sense to simply swap the Sheppard extension with a DRL. We'd be totally set if such a candidate ever came forward, and unfortunately no such candidate - left or right - presently exists at City Hall. The closest we had to this was Sarah Thomson, and it is a real shame that not enough people recognized this.
 
Whoever is elected next will have their own transit platform. On Eglinton it is unlikely tunneling beyond the places where Transit City envisioned it and on Sheppard will be underway. On Sheppard there is unlikely to even be a tunneling contract tendered and on Eglinton there might be termination fees depending on how the province tenders the tunneling contract starting near Jane and Eglinton (i.e. is it a contact to tunnel to the Don Valley or is it the whole route). So, a Transit City comeback is possible, so is an Eglinton subway and DRL plan, so is a white elephant subway plan.

So eglinton will get extended to the airport by 2025 either way.
 
Transit transcends political ideologies in large cities such as Toronto, and one's political stance cannot be used to predict the type of transit platform they prefer. I believe that while Ford's transit policies are damaging, Miller's transit policy was equally damaging, though for opposite reasons. While building a subway on Sheppard is ridiculous right now, Transit City would have entrenched the notion of mediocrity for at least a generation, and that would have been devastating for our rapidly growing city.

Mediocrity how exactly? Like not building anything, which is what were are almost doing now?

Dan
Toronto, Ont.
 
I guess anything that has a medium carrying capacity (like light rail) is mediocre. All transit systems have to be small (bus) or big (subway), but nothing in between. And all buildings have to be small (detached house) or big (supertall) or they aren't worth building. And here I thought that matching the technology to the corridor demand and budget available was good sense. Turns out it's just mediocrity. This new learning amazes me!
 
It seems most people were in favour of a lot of the TC routes. FINCH, Don Mills, JANE, Waterfront, even Eglinton.... What people didnt like was the transfer at Sheppard which could have been eliminated by a conversion, and the Lack of a DRL... Its too bad they couldnt modify the design instead of throwing the whole thing out. I was one of the many optimistic people that were even looking forward to the future where we might get TC2 with a LAWRENCE Dixon Line, and a Wilson/york mills line,.
 
I guess anything that has a medium carrying capacity (like light rail) is mediocre. All transit systems have to be small (bus) or big (subway), but nothing in between. And all buildings have to be small (detached house) or big (supertall) or they aren't worth building. And here I thought that matching the technology to the corridor demand and budget available was good sense. Turns out it's just mediocrity. This new learning amazes me!

It's not about technology choice, it's about the fact that TC had a default arrangement of in-median LRT. Only when circumstances made that alignment impossible (usually due to ROW width) were other options considered. This is the exact opposite of tailoring design to corridor. It's applying a default standard across the board, and only deviating from it when you have to.

Also, Sheppard East, Jane, and Scarbourgh-Malvern were all well within the range of BRT (and in some cases it could be argued even below the profitability range of LRT). They could have had unique options tailored to those corridors, but instead they were slapped with the default in-median LRT option.
 
I for one find it ironic how it is perceived that the 'right' prefers larger, more expensive, higher order transit projects, while the 'left' prefers cheaper, less glamorous lower order transit.

Transit transcends political ideologies in large cities such as Toronto, and one's political stance cannot be used to predict the type of transit platform they prefer. I believe that while Ford's transit policies are damaging, Miller's transit policy was equally damaging, though for opposite reasons. While building a subway on Sheppard is ridiculous right now, Transit City would have entrenched the notion of mediocrity for at least a generation, and that would have been devastating for our rapidly growing city.

Toronto needs a mayor who supports subways as strongly as Ford, but has the common sense to simply swap the Sheppard extension with a DRL. We'd be totally set if such a candidate ever came forward, and unfortunately no such candidate - left or right - presently exists at City Hall. The closest we had to this was Sarah Thomson, and it is a real shame that not enough people recognized this.

I agree with almost everything you said. Ford is full of political ironies: he said Toronto can't handle anymore people and wanted to stop the gravy. Meanwhile he wants to build a form of transit which is above and beyond the needs of the area, and fund it by increasing the population through TOD. On paper, these aren't exactly trademarks of conservative policies...

And I agree that Transit City as planned was filled with problems which did not address the transportation issues which the city faced.

Where I disagree is that we need a mayor who supports subways. LRT is perfectly adequate to meet the city's needs, but it all depends on how it is implemented. The LRT we were to get would not be much more "rapid" than what is found on Spadina or St. Clair - especially after those routes move to POP. The stop spacing would be too close to address the rapid transportation needs of northern Scarborough. I would have the same complaint if the proposed Sheppard subway stopped every 400m east of Don Mills as well.

It is arguable that the subway era is coming to an end, this includes places where there would be density to support it. New York's Second Ave. subway line is to cost several billion per kilometer, and that number continues to grow. I believe the future of rapid transit will be LRT and elevated.
 
Mediocrity how exactly? Like not building anything, which is what were are almost doing now?

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

Since when did an 18km subway line extension constitute as almost nothing?

Really, this is one of the best outcomes which could come from all this. Downtowners didn't vote for Ford, and the metro line to be planned for the area will now be upgraded and offer even better relief for the B-D line. Meanwhile suburbanites did vote for Ford, and will now be seeing public services, including transit, being cut.
 
I think that certain elements of Transit City (concepts, individual lines or sections of lines, etc) may return, but I think the plan as a cohesive master plan is dead. Most transit plans in Toronto's history have had common elements to them, it's just the technology choice and specific routing have been a little bit different, as have been the priorities.

I think so too. Eglinton is pretty much ruled out if we're getting the underground LRT, but I think Finch and Don Mills will go ahead. Jane is a toss-up, Sheppard likely won't go ahead.
 
How about this: I don't particularly care about route choices. Transit City had good points and bad; the Ford gravybahn plan also has good points and bad, and so will whatever plan Mayor Carroll or Micallef or Thompson presents in 2014 (should Ford not be re-elected). For me the bottom line is that we just build something. There's pretty much no higher-order transit investment future generations won't thank us for, so long as they are based on proven technology.

Toronto's list of transit needs is long and only getting longer as each mayor tosses out the plans advanced by the others. What I think is really needed is a gentleman's (or gentlewoman's!) agreement that projects moving through our absurdly long pipeline of approvals, design, and of course construction won't be canceled as a result of elections. If successive mayors (and premiers) honored that, we'd have a shot at a reasonably adequate network within a couple of decades, whatever the specific routes backed by each.
 

Back
Top