Woodbridge_Heights
Senior Member
Yup a transfer on the Sheppard corridor is OK but one on the Eglinton corridor would be anarchy!!!
|
|
|
Candidates and their subway plans... The Star tells you which one is more credible
- Thread starter Ansem
- Start date
Yup a transfer on the Sheppard corridor is OK but one on the Eglinton corridor would be anarchy!!!
LAz
Active Member
Are you suggesting that millar's TC is backed up by something?
Justin10000
Banned
Second_in_pie
Senior Member
Alright. So if I payed for a Subway on Sheppard, the ridership would suddenly be big enough to justify subway? :O
Just because it's endorsed by the government doesn't mean it's good. The TTC can pull whatever numbers outta their ass they want.
Juan_Lennon416
Senior Member
Just because SOS says we need subways does not mean we actually need them! Seriously, there is enough ridership to extend the Sheppard Subway into Scarborough?
Second_in_pie
Senior Member
Just because Miller says LRT would be better does not mean it actually is! As I said, the TTC can pull whatever numbers they want. 10 years ago, there was demand for Sheppard to go to STC. Based on all those new towers going up in Agincourt, I'll guess that it's pretty hard for that demand to suddenly disappear.
Ansem
Banned
For someone going to STC, youy create an extra transfer at Sheppard/McCowan.
Spending a billion to make it less efficient is really strange to me and any Transit planners from world class cities (which Torontonians prides themselves to belong to) would find our methods mediocre at best and would call our planners amateur
You like mediocracy? Than congrats! You got it...if we don't elect a moyor who want to scratch that line.
I always said if the line was
PLEASE READ
a)Going to STC
b) less stop, faster and more spacing between stops,
This project would have already made more sense
Ansem
Banned
kEiThZ
Superstar
I don't share this opinion for a few reasons:
1) Just because Transit City is not perfect does not mean we should do nothing for 4 years.
2) If nothing gets built for years, you can bet that Transit City is more likely not less. LRT will be seen as easier to build and cheaper. Whoever replaces Ford might run TC on steroids. I don't want that either.
kEiThZ
Superstar
That's a pretty offensive statement.
Justin10000
Banned
You are really obsessed with STC. It's like the centre of the universe to you.
That link you posted means diddly squat. Why would the future resident of that high density development want to travel to STC by subway? Explain!
You treat the RTES as some sacred document. It's the only reason I can think of why you're obsessed with STC. Or obsessed with the outdatde theory of high-density nodal development.
Last edited:
kEiThZ
Superstar
York University students living in Scarborough and North York to start with...
Justin10000
Banned
If you had to pay for the subway, I bet you would not even build a subway, because it would never reach the ridership to justify your investment!
Juan beat to the punch on this comment. I'll just add the SOS group tinkered with the numbers so they could to justify their MoveToronto plan was called for the many many errors in it, and made a revised plan. You should not be calling the TTC out on questionable numbers, when you group is just a guilty.
Well, Juan beat me to what I was going to post, so I'
Justin10000
Banned
Not even close. Next!
And how do you treat Transit City? This post reaks of hypocracy.
Yes, outdated in that it is a foundation of both the Places to Grow Act and the Metrolinx RTP. Yeah, 2006 and 2009 are sooooo outdated. What a stupid statement to make.