Urban Toronto - Powered by vBulletin
UrbanToronto News - the latest headlines
Sheridan College Breaks Ground for McCallion Campus Expansion
ALSO

View Poll Results: Which transit plan do you prefer?

Voters
81. You may not vote on this poll
  • Transit City

    63 77.78%
  • Ford City

    18 22.22%
Page 526 of 578 FirstFirst ... 26426476516524525526527528536576 ... LastLast
Results 7,876 to 7,890 of 8657

Thread: Transit City Plan

  1. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Woodbridge_Heights View Post
    I find the irony that Rob Ford wants to put the Eglinton LRT underground yet calls it a Subway. For his convenience no doubt as the Eglinton LRT, even when underground, is not a HRT subway. It's an underground LRT.
    I can't keep track of who's arguing what in this absurd discussion, but I'm stupid so I'll contribute.

    All of the terminology is blurry. It's perfectly reasonable to call Eglinton LRT a subway. The vehicles are the same width as New York subway trains. The important bit runs underground.

    Arguably, it's incorrect to call our existing subway HRT. It wouldn't survive a collision with a GO train, much less a freight train. Lagos is building an LRT system using the subway cars they bought from us.

    Yes, Spadina was billed as an LRT when it was built. The meaning of the word drifted. Now LRT means something different in Toronto.

    LRT and BRT both cover a ranger of possible operations and designs around the world. Some run exclusively in grade separated rail corridors, other have chunks of mixed traffic operation in old city centres. For example, Viva is building a partially separated BRT system in York Region that will have mixed traffic operation in old Richmond Hill.

    If you don't like the word LRT, import a term like pre-Metro or stadtbahn. I think that would confuse things further, but clearly people have obsessively narrow definitions of the word LRT, annoyingly incompatible ones at that.


  2. #7877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by leopetr View Post
    I can't keep track of who's arguing what in this absurd discussion, but I'm stupid so I'll contribute.

    All of the terminology is blurry. It's perfectly reasonable to call Eglinton LRT a subway. The vehicles are the same width as New York subway trains. The important bit runs underground.
    .
    For Torontonians, subway is what runs on Yonge, Bloor, University line. I was told at an open house the width of the LRT on Eglinton is the same as the streetcar or perhaps 4" wider. Wow 4". And if the LRT on Eglinton does not run frequent service as like the subways you will hear people call them streetcars. And since it will not be underground once passed Larid it then can't run frequent every 5 min service because they would all be bunched up once they get to grade due to stop lights along Eglinton

  3. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Palma View Post
    And if the LRT on Eglinton does not run frequent service as like the subways
    What if they built what you call a subway but only ran it once every 20 minutes?

    The more capacity you build, the less service you will run unless you have unlimited subsidies. LRT = better service.

    And since it will not be underground once passed Larid it then can't run frequent every 5 min service because they would all be bunched up once they get to grade due to stop lights along Eglinton
    That makes no sense. Frequency of service is driven by capacity required. Bunching doesn't prevent them from running frequent service on the Dufferin bus.

    I would also fully expect them to run this with TTC subway operating practices (i.e. if there's a delay on the system, all the trains pause until it's resolved to maintain spacing) instead of TTC surface operating practices (i.e. if there's a delay on the system, short turn everything and kick everyone to the curb because the holy schedule has been desecrated). I see no reason for a properly built LRT to not run the sensible way, especially since Metrolinx and not TTC will own the infrastructure.

  4. #7879

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by leopetr View Post
    What if they built what you call a subway but only ran it once every 20 minutes?

    The more capacity you build, the less service you will run unless you have unlimited subsidies. LRT = better service.


    That makes no sense. Frequency of service is driven by capacity required. Bunching doesn't prevent them from running frequent service on the Dufferin bus.

    I would also fully expect them to run this with TTC subway operating practices (i.e. if there's a delay on the system, all the trains pause until it's resolved to maintain spacing) instead of TTC surface operating practices (i.e. if there's a delay on the system, short turn everything and kick everyone to the curb because the holy schedule has been desecrated). I see no reason for a properly built LRT to not run the sensible way, especially since Metrolinx and not TTC will own the infrastructure.
    That makes no sense. Frequency of service is driven by capacity required. Bunching doesn't prevent them from running frequent service on the Dufferin bus. Afterall it is Metrolinx that will own it and there mindset is that of GO not subways and the corresponding frequent service of subways.

    .[/QUOTE]You make no sense. I remember people saying Spadina is not at capacity yet the trains run frequent on there - I read a post that the LRT was going to run service in non rush hour every 20-25 min and during rush hour 10-15 min. Does that sound frequent to you.? In that time period I can be in a carat keel st and be past Dufferin st. That is not subway time service which is what I believe people are expecting (that do not follow the subway vs LRT, etc debate). I could be among a handful of people at wilson yet I know the train will not take 10 min to get there. It has to be reliable - afterall, it needs to get downtown where there are more people so it needs to by pass Wilson as an example
    Last edited by Palma; 2012-Mar-13 at 10:48.

  5. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Palma View Post
    You make no sense. I remember people saying Spadina is not at capacity yet the trains run frequent on there
    Maximum capacity (36,000 pphpd) is different from the subway construction threshhold (10,000 pphpd).

    Many trains on Spadina have a regular short turn point before Downsview.

    St. George is less used than Bloor-Yonge even though St. George is an easier transfer.

    I read a post that the LRT was going to run service in non rush hour every 20-25 min and during rush hour 10-15 min.
    That was an idiot official who doesn't have power to set schedules mumbling something he didn't know. Every LRT advocate you argue against on this forum expects no worse service than every 5 minutes.

    Frequency of service will be set by city council and the TTC board after the line is constructed as it is a question of operating budget rather than any technical limitation. Existing Sheppard subway is already getting massive operating subsidies. I see no reason for Eglinton to not get a similar level, considering that it will be busier and require a lower subsidy level.

  6. #7881
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Toronto, ON, CAN, Terra, Sol, Milky Way
    Posts
    6,827

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by leopetr View Post
    Maximum capacity (36,000 pphpd) is different from the subway construction threshhold (10,000 pphpd).

    Many trains on Spadina have a regular short turn point before Downsview.

    St. George is less used than Bloor-Yonge even though St. George is an easier transfer.



    That was an idiot official who doesn't have power to set schedules mumbling something he didn't know. Every LRT advocate you argue against on this forum expects no worse service than every 5 minutes.

    Frequency of service will be set by city council and the TTC board after the line is constructed as it is a question of operating budget rather than any technical limitation. Existing Sheppard subway is already getting massive operating subsidies. I see no reason for Eglinton to not get a similar level, considering that it will be busier and require a lower subsidy level.
    The Sheppard Subway has 5 minute service in both the rush hour and non-rush hours. The LRT's are to have 5 minute service in the non-rush hour, and 2 to 3 minute service in the rush hour.

    I have been in New York City in the non-rush hour, and experienced subway service in the 10 minute headway.
    W. K. Lis

  7. #7882

    Default

    5 min sounds great

  8. Default

    It's a moronic notion to try and sell LRT as subway. Don't bother. The people of Toronto aren't stupid. They aren't going to buy it. It's like people trying to sell St. Clair as LRT lite (both those for and against LRT). Yet, to the average person it's still a streetcar. And I will bet money that's exactly what most Torontonians will call the LRT: the streetcar. It'll not be the Sheppard LRT. It'll be known as the Sheppard streetcar.

    People will live with it. They'll hate it. But they'll live with it. See the SRT. People hate it. I have never ever (and I'm not exaggerating) heard a single Scarborough resident say that was a good idea. The normail line goes something like this, "Why didn't they just extend the subway to STC?" The rest of the city should just hope that the anger manifested by Scarborough residents against Stintz the other night dissipates by election time.

    I blame the province for this. The only reason this debate is on is because the province refuses to provide the funds to extend the subway in the first place. Or for that matter even provide the leadership for a sound regional transit plan (not the laundry list that MO2020). After all, why isn't GO electrification going first? Why aren't subways and LRTs being planned around improved GO service? And while they can find the money to build a subway to presently empty fields in Vaughan because the whims of a sitting minister must be fulfilled, the useless MPPs of Scarborough have the gall to cry poor to their constituents and tell them that they should accept the gruel given to them.

    As for the city, it blows my mind that people complain about paying more for better transit. In Ottawa, a city of 900 000 people (metro of 1.25 million) is pitching in $900 million to build its LRT plan. And just like Toronto, their debate has focused on surface vs. sub-surface (in Ottawa terms tunnel or no tunnel). The residents voted in a mayor who pledged to raise the revenue to pay for the tunnel. In Toronto, it's unbelievable that both the left and the right refuse to talk about collecting the revenue needed to build a better network (at least a balanced plan with surface LRT and some subway expansion). Instead they only debate how to spend the funds that Queen's Park and the feds are providing. No talk at all about raising more so that some subway expansion can be undertaken.

  9. #7884

    Default

    The ONLY concrete difference between LRTs and subways/metros/MRTs is that the length of the car is shorter or that the articulations are closer together, thus allowing the lines to make tighter turns in the street. Everything else is simply a design choice based around its local implementation.

    Power supply? Both LRTs and subways use a mix of electricity from overhead wires, third rail, battery packs, and some even fossil fuels.

    Width? Many LRTs share similar widths to subways, in some cases even surpassing them. The LRVs for the Eglinton line are in fact the same as our subway trains.

    Rails? Both use the same rail design. Since they use the same gauge, our streetcars can fit on our subway rails and vice versa. Of course, they wouldn't be able to move since they use different power supplies.

    Operating environment? While LRT can run underground, elevated, or in the street, subways can do the exact same. While I have been unable to find a system where they do this, technically there is nothing stopping them. Chicago has at grade road crossings on lines powered by a third rail (a break occurs at intersections), and there are numerous examples of heavy freight and passenger lines operating in the street - in mixed traffic and right of ways. The only thing they wouldn't be able to do is turn at intersections, as the radius would be too tight due to car length as mentioned above. On straight roads like the ones in the Toronto area, this is not an issue however.

  10. #7885
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Former City of York, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    4,469

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kEiThZ View Post
    It's a moronic notion to try and sell LRT as subway. Don't bother. The people of Toronto aren't stupid. They aren't going to buy it. It's like people trying to sell St. Clair as LRT lite (both those for and against LRT). Yet, to the average person it's still a streetcar. And I will bet money that's exactly what most Torontonians will call the LRT: the streetcar. It'll not be the Sheppard LRT. It'll be known as the Sheppard streetcar.

    People will live with it. They'll hate it. But they'll live with it. See the SRT. People hate it. I have never ever (and I'm not exaggerating) heard a single Scarborough resident say that was a good idea. The normail line goes something like this, "Why didn't they just extend the subway to STC?" The rest of the city should just hope that the anger manifested by Scarborough residents against Stintz the other night dissipates by election time.

    I blame the province for this. The only reason this debate is on is because the province refuses to provide the funds to extend the subway in the first place. Or for that matter even provide the leadership for a sound regional transit plan (not the laundry list that MO2020). After all, why isn't GO electrification going first? Why aren't subways and LRTs being planned around improved GO service? And while they can find the money to build a subway to presently empty fields in Vaughan because the whims of a sitting minister must be fulfilled, the useless MPPs of Scarborough have the gall to cry poor to their constituents and tell them that they should accept the gruel given to them.

    As for the city, it blows my mind that people complain about paying more for better transit. In Ottawa, a city of 900 000 people (metro of 1.25 million) is pitching in $900 million to build its LRT plan. And just like Toronto, their debate has focused on surface vs. sub-surface (in Ottawa terms tunnel or no tunnel). The residents voted in a mayor who pledged to raise the revenue to pay for the tunnel. In Toronto, it's unbelievable that both the left and the right refuse to talk about collecting the revenue needed to build a better network (at least a balanced plan with surface LRT and some subway expansion). Instead they only debate how to spend the funds that Queen's Park and the feds are providing. No talk at all about raising more so that some subway expansion can be undertaken.
    Great Post Sir. Like I said before, the politicans are bad but the people are mostly to blame.

  11. #7886

    Default

    Subways and LRT are not the same - for one thing less capacity. Apparently people in Scarborough must be....(( won;t say it) because they fell for Ford pretending they were getting a subway for the Eglinton Crosstown and now think they are getting the streetcar. Though I see nothing wrong with streetcars and love them but it seems suburban people do not. The MP's from Scarborough should have pushed the agenda for Scarborough - actually all the MP's from Toronto should have pushed subways for Toronto and not Vaughan due to 1 guy. It should have been an election issue back in 2007. Afterall Vaughan has only about 260,00 while Toronto has over 2.5 million. Which side do you think would have won? But it seems MP's forget about Toronto once elected and that is the problem.

  12. #7887

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kEiThZ View Post
    As for the city, it blows my mind that people complain about paying more for better transit. In Ottawa, a city of 900 000 people (metro of 1.25 million) is pitching in $900 million to build its LRT plan. And just like Toronto, their debate has focused on surface vs. sub-surface (in Ottawa terms tunnel or no tunnel). The residents voted in a mayor who pledged to raise the revenue to pay for the tunnel. In Toronto, it's unbelievable that both the left and the right refuse to talk about collecting the revenue needed to build a better network (at least a balanced plan with surface LRT and some subway expansion). Instead they only debate how to spend the funds that Queen's Park and the feds are providing. No talk at all about raising more so that some subway expansion can be undertaken.
    The Fords seem to be the ones refusing to talk about taxes- the 'left' wishes to see some sort of realistic plan from the Fords, but hasn't seen one so far. And thus they have had to reject the notion of an unfunded subway on Sheppard so far.

    I really do hope that some councillors step up to the plate and put forward a motion making Sheppard subway construction conditional on the raising of taxes and fees.

  13. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by denfromoakvillemilton View Post
    Great Post Sir. Like I said before, the politicans are bad but the people are mostly to blame.
    Agreed that was a great post by kEiThZ as always. If I wasn't gay he'd be my man-crush.

  14. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coruscanti Cognoscente View Post
    Agreed that was a great post by kEiThZ as always. If I wasn't gay he'd be my man-crush.
    Wouldn't that just make him your crush then? lol

  15. #7890

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kEiThZ View Post
    It's a moronic notion to try and sell LRT as subway. Don't bother. The people of Toronto aren't stupid. They aren't going to buy it. It's like people trying to sell St. Clair as LRT lite (both those for and against LRT). Yet, to the average person it's still a streetcar. And I will bet money that's exactly what most Torontonians will call the LRT: the streetcar. It'll not be the Sheppard LRT. It'll be known as the Sheppard streetcar.

    People will live with it. They'll hate it. But they'll live with it. See the SRT. People hate it. I have never ever (and I'm not exaggerating) heard a single Scarborough resident say that was a good idea. The normail line goes something like this, "Why didn't they just extend the subway to STC?" The rest of the city should just hope that the anger manifested by Scarborough residents against Stintz the other night dissipates by election time.

    I blame the province for this. The only reason this debate is on is because the province refuses to provide the funds to extend the subway in the first place. Or for that matter even provide the leadership for a sound regional transit plan (not the laundry list that MO2020). After all, why isn't GO electrification going first? Why aren't subways and LRTs being planned around improved GO service? And while they can find the money to build a subway to presently empty fields in Vaughan because the whims of a sitting minister must be fulfilled, the useless MPPs of Scarborough have the gall to cry poor to their constituents and tell them that they should accept the gruel given to them.

    As for the city, it blows my mind that people complain about paying more for better transit. In Ottawa, a city of 900 000 people (metro of 1.25 million) is pitching in $900 million to build its LRT plan. And just like Toronto, their debate has focused on surface vs. sub-surface (in Ottawa terms tunnel or no tunnel). The residents voted in a mayor who pledged to raise the revenue to pay for the tunnel. In Toronto, it's unbelievable that both the left and the right refuse to talk about collecting the revenue needed to build a better network (at least a balanced plan with surface LRT and some subway expansion). Instead they only debate how to spend the funds that Queen's Park and the feds are providing. No talk at all about raising more so that some subway expansion can be undertaken.
    Well said

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •