News   Jul 12, 2024
199 Church Showcases Heritage Facade and Artwork at Street Level
 1.2K     0 
News   Jul 12, 2024
Six Points Plaza Redevelopment Advances With 36-Storey First Phase
 1K     1 
News   Jul 12, 2024
Trading Spaces: Can Real Estate Conversion Help Boost Housing Supply?
 381     0 

Finch West Line 6 LRT

APTA-2048 said:
You're the only one who came up with this stupid idea. Eglinton has an underground/grade separated section. Where the corridor is less dense and the road is wider, it transitions to surface. It's one continuous line that is versatile and adapted to its surroundings. That's a completely reasonable idea. I think it would be even better if strategic grade separations were considered for its eastern leg, however.
Click to expand...

While I'd agree it's unfair to say that Transit City had x km of subway, there's no question it expanded underground transit. We all focus on Eglinton, but Jane was also supposed to have an underground portion.

I'm not sure about the other lines.

It's amazing how well Ford's 'LRT's are streetcars' rhetoric worked. To this day it's looked at as 2nd class transit, even though much of the plan had significant merit.
 
syn said:
While I'd agree it's unfair to say that Transit City had x km of subway, there's no question it expanded underground transit. We all focus on Eglinton, but Jane was also supposed to have an underground portion.

I'm not sure about the other lines.

It's amazing how well Ford's 'LRT's are streetcars' rhetoric worked. To this day it's looked at as 2nd class transit, even though much of the plan had significant merit.
Click to expand...

I think that was a huge mistake for LRT proponents to try to brand LRT is something completely different from streetcars, that Flexity Freedom is completely different than Flexity Outlook, or that the Canadian Light Rail Vehicle is not a light rail vehicle. Transit City could have harnessed the iconic "Toronto Streetcar" brand for the good of the city and unite the city but they chose the opposite route, and that just gave an opportunity for divisive politicians like Ford.

Imagine trying to promote BRT using anti-bus rhetoric. It's the same with all you pro-LRT people trying to distance it from "streetcars". It just makes no sense to me.
 
doady said:
I think that was a huge mistake for LRT proponents to try to brand LRT is something completely different from streetcars, that Flexity Freedom is completely different than Flexity Outlook, or that the Canadian Light Rail Vehicle is not a light rail vehicle. Transit City could have harnessed the iconic "Toronto Streetcar" brand for the good of the city and unite the city but they chose the opposite route, and that just gave an opportunity for divisive politicians like Ford.

Imagine trying to promote BRT using anti-bus rhetoric. It's the same with all you pro-LRT people trying to distance it from "streetcars". It just makes no sense to me.
Click to expand...
You do realize the same people who hate the "LRT" are the same people who despise Toronto's streetcars. Labeling the LRT in the same light as a streetcar would have only further fueled the hate for LRT. This isn't just a theoretical either since this is exactly what Rob and Doug Ford did. They labeled the LRT as streetcars and riled about the motorists and "anti-streetcar" lobby. Painting the LRT in the same light as Toronto's streetcars would have been counter-intuitive and disastrous as seen by the damage the Ford brothers did with there garbage rhetoric.
 
Last edited:
JSF-1 said:
You do realize the same people who hate the "LRT" are the same people who despise Toronto's streetcars. Labeling the LRT in the same light as a streetcar would have only further fueled the hate for LRT. This isn't just a theoretical either since this is exactly what Rob and Doug Ford did. They labeled the LRT as streetcars and riled about the motorists and "anti-streetcar" lobby. Painting the LRT in the same light as Toronto's streetcars would have been counter-intuitive and disastrous as seen by the damage the Ford brothers did with there garbage rhetoric.
Click to expand...

I think trying to separate streetcars from light rail, or vice versa, and therefore further entrenching a division between downtown and suburbs only plays into the hands of the Fords'.

I think it is hard for people to see what is the meaningful difference between the new LRVs in ROWs on Spadina, Queens Quay, and St. Clair and upcoming LRVs along Finch. Because there really isn't any meaningful difference. People might be stupid, but not stupid enough to be fooled by such pretenses.

"LRT" as a brand for modern light rail makes sense in places that do not already have any existing traditional light rail system. It doesn't make as much sense in Toronto.

I'm not saying these new lines should simply be branded as "streetcar" but to pretend that it is something completely new to Toronto and not already a part of Toronto's identity and culture, and not use it to unite downtown and the suburbs was such a mistake. It just gives the perception of one system for downtown and another for the suburbs. These kind of divisions just give fuel to politicians like Ford.
 
doady said:
I think trying to separate streetcars from light rail, or vice versa, and therefore further entrenching a division between downtown and suburbs only plays into the hands of the Fords'.

I think it is hard for people to see what is the meaningful difference between the new LRVs in ROWs on Spadina, Queens Quay, and St. Clair and upcoming LRVs along Finch. Because there really isn't any meaningful difference. People might be stupid, but not stupid enough to be fooled by such pretenses.

"LRT" as a brand for modern light rail makes sense in places that do not already have any existing traditional light rail system. It doesn't make as much sense in Toronto.

I'm not saying these new lines should simply be branded as "streetcar" but to pretend that it is something completely new to Toronto and not already a part of Toronto's identity and culture, and not use it to unite downtown and the suburbs was such a mistake. It just gives the perception of one system for downtown and another for the suburbs. These kind of divisions just give fuel to politicians like Ford.
Click to expand...
Yes it's completely meaningless if the operating environment is not mention. For Ottawa when the system is completely grade separated, they should just call it subway. The should use the term a subway portion for the Crosstown so people understand it's like a subway. The SRT replacement made everything think it's a streetcar on the road cause they used the term "LRT". They should have branded it as an upgrade instead of making people think it was a downgrade. Of course everyone wanted "TTC Line 2 technology" instead. Their promotion strategy is stupid. If you want people to know what it will look like, consider advertising it with pictures to the public instead of telling people to visit open houses or their website. ML put up tons of banners saying how the Crosstown will be moving people faster yet no one can figure out how it will look like when the project is done. The public won't know LRTs can operating like elevated like Skytrains, underground like subways or grade separated surface rail.

I'll just call the Transit City surface lines Rapid urban surface rail transit and call the former grade separated SRT replacement a Subway! It operates at subway speed like a subway, it's a subway. The trains on Canada Line in Vancouver is short and small, that's pretty much a subway. The Confederation Line in Ottawa is like a subway too. It'll be a fool to replace a 7 stop subway with a super expensive one stop subway.
 
Steve X said:
Yes it's completely meaningless if the operating environment is not mention. For Ottawa when the system is completely grade separated, they should just call it subway. The should use the term a subway portion for the Crosstown so people understand it's like a subway. The SRT replacement made everything think it's a streetcar on the road cause they used the term "LRT". They should have branded it as an upgrade instead of making people think it was a downgrade. Of course everyone wanted "TTC Line 2 technology" instead. Their promotion strategy is stupid. If you want people to know what it will look like, consider advertising it with pictures to the public instead of telling people to visit open houses or their website. ML put up tons of banners saying how the Crosstown will be moving people faster yet no one can figure out how it will look like when the project is done. The public won't know LRTs can operating like elevated like Skytrains, underground like subways or grade separated surface rail.

I'll just call the Transit City surface lines Rapid urban surface rail transit and call the former grade separated SRT replacement a Subway! It operates at subway speed like a subway, it's a subway. The trains on Canada Line in Vancouver is short and small, that's pretty much a subway. The Confederation Line in Ottawa is like a subway too. It'll be a fool to replace a 7 stop subway with a super expensive one stop subway.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Scarborough RT is a good example. It is off of the street like subway. Fare-paid zones like subway. No meaningful difference from subway from the practical standpoint. No need for the "LRT" brand at all.

I think the fare payment system is important. The streetcars now use proof-of-payment system for all-door boarding. The upcoming light rail lines will be the same. Eglinton Crosstown will be the same as Finch: boarding at named stations and POP. So they should not be branded differently.

Maybe they are building "streetcar subways", or "streetcar rapid transit (SRT)", or something. Anything but "LRT", please.

In Ottawa, it is O-Train. Montreal has the Metro. Vancouver has Skytrain. It doesn't matter what a city calls it as long as it's consistent. I think the problem with Toronto recently is lack of consistency. What happened with the Scarborough RT was really unfortunate.
 
I guarantee that for the average Torontonian, the Eglinton Crosstown will just be called "the subway on Eglinton" or "Line 5" or "the orange subway on the map".

The differences of terminology in consultant documents are meaningless to the public. Instead, pay attention to how realtors have been selling it.
 
WislaHD said:
I guarantee that for the average Torontonian, the Eglinton Crosstown will just be called "the subway on Eglinton" or "Line 5" or "the orange subway on the map".

The differences of terminology in consultant documents are meaningless to the public. Instead, pay attention to how realtors have been selling it.
Click to expand...
Maybe those living near Eglinton will call it a subway., Those in Scarborough will not.
 
BurlOak said:
Maybe those living near Eglinton will call it a subway., Those in Scarborough will not.
Click to expand...
I don't think those in Scarborough call the existing Line 3 a subway, despite TTC branding it as such for many years, and the signs near the stations saying "Subway".
 
JSF-1 said:
You do realize the same people who hate the "LRT" are the same people who despise Toronto's streetcars. Labeling the LRT in the same light as a streetcar would have only further fueled the hate for LRT. This isn't just a theoretical either since this is exactly what Rob and Doug Ford did. They labeled the LRT as streetcars and riled about the motorists and "anti-streetcar" lobby. Painting the LRT in the same light as Toronto's streetcars would have been counter-intuitive and disastrous as seen by the damage the Ford brothers did with there garbage rhetoric.
Click to expand...
I don't think that's a fair assessment. People can hate the design of the light rail the city is proposing on some corridors (Eglinton comes to mind) and still respect and enjoy riding the downtown streetcars. Every technology has it's place, and some just don't believe that the city has done a particularly good job at choosing the right technology for certain corridors.

However, the Doug ford streetcar rhetoric is certainly toxic, and unfortunately gets suburbanites riled up about bad experiences driving downtown (these are the same people who don't realize you can park your car at a subway station and take the train downtown so you don't have to drive down there). They play on people's ignorance, and that is the danger of these politicians.

WislaHD said:
I guarantee that for the average Torontonian, the Eglinton Crosstown will just be called "the subway on Eglinton" or "Line 5" or "the orange subway on the map".

The differences of terminology in consultant documents are meaningless to the public. Instead, pay attention to how realtors have been selling it.
Click to expand...
I'd argue that it is a subway, at least the section from Mt Dennis to Science Centre. It's underground so it shouldn't really be called anything else. Also, I believe the underground stations will have fare-paid areas, but can have officers check for POP. This should be an issue since everyone will most certainly have a presto card by then.
 
Wondering if places like Albion Centre will experience situations, like at Yorkdale Mall, where they will have to request a parking fee before the stores open for people who will park their cars there and take the Finch West LRT (and transfers) to work, school, play, and shopping?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top