picard102
Senior Member
Actually, it's better if they shut up. Let the real experts decide what's best for Toronto, based on evidence not votes.
Which experts drew up these plans (Transit City) to begin with?
Actually, it's better if they shut up. Let the real experts decide what's best for Toronto, based on evidence not votes.
Actually, it's better if they shut up. Let the real experts decide what's best for Toronto, based on evidence not votes.
As of Christopher Hume's statement, I really don't understand what he dislikes about Finch and Sheppard LRT plans, and how he would build them instead. He did not elaborate. I would think that those two lines are designed as close to his vision as it gets.
We know that he would like to put all of Eglinton on surface; that's totally impractical IMO, but at least his position is known. Regarding Finch and Sheppard, it is just puzzling.
Sheppard (both subway and LRT) should be abandoned. Why all these transfers? Instead, why not extend the Bloor Danforth to McCowan and Finch or Steeles, and then have the Finch LRT go from Humber College to Malvern (Finch and Neilson or turn on Neilson into Malvern Center)?
I certainly like the continuous Finch LRT (west + east).
As for Sheppard, obviously the existing subway cannot and will not be abandoned. The question is whether to extend it in some form (LRT, BRT, ALRT), and when.
How do you just abandon vital infrastructure like a subway?
Which experts drew up these plans (Transit City) to begin with?
Read what Chris Hume has said in the past, such as the central part of Eglinton LRT should be at grade on the street, before taking his word as gospel.
Perhaps he is correct.
Most of us think it is dumb to have a mostly underground LRT that is within 90-95% of the cost of a subway. Maybe he is saying would could have gone the other way and saved over $3B by staying in the median and converting Eglinton to single lane. The main purpose of Transit City was to make everything look like Queen St., so why not a single lane in each direction.