News   Aug 05, 2020
 170     0 
News   Aug 05, 2020
 1.8K     6 
News   Aug 05, 2020
 336     0 

Miller will not be running for Mayor, How will this affect Public Transit?

SunriseChampion

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 5, 2009
Messages
5,959
Reaction score
2,175
Location
Parkdale
I'd love to live in the unlimited budget land, it'd be a lot of fun.
I don't know. I lived there from 2005-06 and the only ones that ended up having fun were my creditors.
 

Coruscanti Cognoscente

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
7,739
Reaction score
231
Location
Imperial City
Personally I think LRT is more of a technology for when you're in a small city that isn't dense enough to support subway (e.g. Hamilton), or when you're in a big city and already have tons of subway and just need to upgrade current routes which don't warrant subway but warrant higher order transit (London, Paris).
 

nfitz

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 10, 2007
Messages
23,252
Reaction score
3,363
Location
Toronto
Do what do you use then, in a big city that doesn't have enough subway yet, to upgrade current routes which don't warrant subway?
 

doady

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
3,984
Reaction score
339
Location
Mississauga
Do what do you use then, in a big city that doesn't have enough subway yet, to upgrade current routes which don't warrant subway?
Perhaps the big city should focus on upgrading routes that warrant a subway instead upgrading low-priority routes that do not.
 

salvius

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 28, 2007
Messages
402
Reaction score
0
A bizarre response from someone who's intolerant of other opinions...opinions that you didn't even bother to read in full before regurgitating a lame rant (no doubt copied and pasted from some other post). Nevermind the fact that Fresh Start mentioned using Transit City resources like funding and initiative towards subways instead, like the DRL, that would benefit the city more than projects like, to put words into his mouth, 3 light rail lines to Malvern.
Intolerant? And regurgitation? That's rather rich.

In any case, I'm pointing out that there are severe funding constraints on transit and that the provincial handout so far has been extremely generous, but that it's not realistic to expect even more considering the record deficits. I think that -- yes -- many posters here are working in the unlimited budget mode and that that doesn't make any sense.

50 km of subways is impossible in the economic climate we find ourselves in. Canceling the TC and using that money (by the way, that may not be doable) won't fund you anywhere close to that. Doing so would increase ridership in one sector of the city; yet the whole point of TC is that it improves transit for a wide swath of the city that currently has subpar (to say the least) service.

The DRL debate is irrelevant. Nobody (certainly not the TTC) is saying that TC and DRL are mutually exclusive projects, or that TC means no DRL. DRL is in the books, TC or no TC. Last I checked, TC is not causing the cancellation of the YUS extension, either.
 

Chuck

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 25, 2007
Messages
1,125
Reaction score
0
All 50km of subway would not get built at once. It's at least a 10 year project, so divide the total cost by at least 10. The way that we currently build subways - a little bit here, a little bit there - is extremely inefficient. The TTC would get much better unit costs per km just by expanding the system continuously, not to mention the impact of no longer requiring internationally acclaimed stations.

The upper levels of government should also stop making funding announcements for specific transit projects. By publicly announcing $2B in funding for the Spadina Subway, that guarantees that no contractor would ever submit a bid for less than $2B, because the funding is guaranteed. Funding announcements should instead take the form of "We're pledging $X.XX per year for 10 years" toward an assortment of GTA transit projects." Let the bids be based on true market conditions, not the TTC's publicly announced construction budget plus a markup, which is what we have today.
 

Paleo

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 10, 2009
Messages
550
Reaction score
0
Personally I think LRT is more of a technology for when you're in a small city that isn't dense enough to support subway (e.g. Hamilton), or when you're in a big city and already have tons of subway and just need to upgrade current routes which don't warrant subway but warrant higher order transit (London, Paris).
The only parts of Toronto that are dense enough to support subway are the old City of Toronto, York, and East York. They are the only parts of the city that have comparable density to the vaunted asian cities that people often bring up as being profitable operations.
 

kEiThZ

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 31, 2008
Messages
9,320
Reaction score
2,540
You don't necessarily need the density to support a subway. How dense is the Danforth? We often use subways for inter-regional travel...just as much as we use it for local travel. That's why extensions can make sense even if the density is not there. For example, an extension to STC of Bloor-Danforth would have enough riders. The extension up Yonge despite the density not being there will have riders because it will attract riders from across Richmond Hill.
 

kEiThZ

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 31, 2008
Messages
9,320
Reaction score
2,540
Good riddance! We need someone in office who'll think long-term about the system’s attractiveness and capacity in response to growing travel demand. Transfer City on most counts fails to adequately fulfill this criterion and its funding could instead be used towards 50 kms of new subways that'd benefit a larger segment of the population.

I don't know how y'all feel about Jane Pitfield, but at least she was talking about building a DRL/Queen subway and a Eglinton subway stretching to Jane St right about the same time as TC was being conceived.
We may not agree on where the DRL should go but on this I wholeheartedly agree with you. I think Transfer City squanders the opportunity of a lifetime.
 

nfitz

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 10, 2007
Messages
23,252
Reaction score
3,363
Location
Toronto
Perhaps the big city should focus on upgrading routes that warrant a subway instead upgrading low-priority routes that do not.
Then what we'd get is a downtown relief line, and a Yonge subway.

And we'd still have the congestion issues on Sheppard, Finch, Don Mills, Jane, and Eglinton.
 

kEiThZ

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 31, 2008
Messages
9,320
Reaction score
2,540
Finch west and Eglinton maybe. But Don Mills, Jane and Sheppard East? Congested? Please. Sheppard East ia not even congested during rush hour past Markham.
 

EnviroTO

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
3,948
Reaction score
62
Location
Yonge & Mt.Pleasant
Sheppard East is definitely congested.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/17248968@N00/3407550821/in/photostream/

Don Mills is meant as a reliever to the Yonge Line and the DVP corridor. I have no idea where the idea of a Jane LRT came from... Kipling or Dufferin south of Eglinton would have made more sense to me. When I first heard of the Jane LRT I was surprised because nobody had ever proposed something significant on Jane... it runs through or next to park land or golf courses more than other north-south routes and other than York U at the far northern end of the line there aren't any single stop significant trip generators.
 

kEiThZ

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 31, 2008
Messages
9,320
Reaction score
2,540
The buses maybe congested but the road isn't. And it's defintely not that congested for the length of Sheppard East. At Don Mills yes (and that's indicative of bad terminal design at Don Mills). But east of Markham? That means more buses would fix the problem. Bus lanes would help too. You don't need a billion dollar LRT to add a bit of capacity on Sheppard East. Besides which much of Transit City's argument is based on speed which even the most basic analysis will show has flaws. And of all routes, why Morningside?
 
Last edited:

scarberiankhatru

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
5,274
Reaction score
4
With potentially 5 bus routes continuing to run along Sheppard, that photo might be recreated next decade even with the LRT (which could easily be bunched, too).

The only parts of Toronto that are dense enough to support subway are the old City of Toronto, York, and East York. They are the only parts of the city that have comparable density to the vaunted asian cities that people often bring up as being profitable operations.
Density doesn't matter...riders do. With all that density in central places like the old city of Toronto, how do you explain Museum or Old Mill or Chester or Summerhill compared to Warden or Wilson? Is North York Centre or Yorkdale not dense enough? This forum should have a feature where the words "dense" and "density" are automatically replaced by "kittens" or "boobies" due to rampant misuse.

In any case, I'm pointing out that there are severe funding constraints on transit and that the provincial handout so far has been extremely generous, but that it's not realistic to expect even more considering the record deficits. I think that -- yes -- many posters here are working in the unlimited budget mode and that that doesn't make any sense.

50 km of subways is impossible in the economic climate we find ourselves in. Canceling the TC and using that money (by the way, that may not be doable) won't fund you anywhere close to that. Doing so would increase ridership in one sector of the city; yet the whole point of TC is that it improves transit for a wide swath of the city that currently has subpar (to say the least) service.

The DRL debate is irrelevant. Nobody (certainly not the TTC) is saying that TC and DRL are mutually exclusive projects, or that TC means no DRL. DRL is in the books, TC or no TC. Last I checked, TC is not causing the cancellation of the YUS extension, either.
If budgets were unlimited why wouldn't someone propose 5000 km of subways instead of an obviously reasonable ballpark figure like 50km that would obviously get built over a large number of years and not instantaneously? Oh, that's right, nothing's obvious when you launch into rants without even reading what you're responding to.

If Transfer City funds could be transferred (and they can't, but that doesn't prevent 'what if?' past or future scenarios), yes, you would get dozens of km of subways, possibly over 50km if construction/design was controlled better (we're talking about theoreticals here, meaning not always tunnelling under grass or building 25-bay bus terminals). Trenched segments, shallow cut'n'cover segments, even some elevated portions...grade separated transit does not need to be that expensive.

And where is this "one sector" of the city that 50km of subway can hide in? Don't you realize how long 50km is and how many priority neighbourhoods that can hit? That could be a whole DRL, a whole Eglinton subway, an extension to STC, and leave a few km left over. Or any other combination. It'd only benefit several million people per day...how horrible and IMPOSSIBLE! The city would probably never even need 50km of subway...it's hard to justify that quantity once you factor in GO improvements.

Newsflash: future budget problems affect lines on the books, too. If 50km of subways is impossible (and it isn't), that means the DRL is impossible, the Jane LRT is impossible, etc. An important project like the DRL could have been underway instead of in the books and far from a sure thing in the next decade or more, if Miller had focused on it instead of, say, three light rail lines to Malvern. So much money is being sunk into Eglinton's ballooning budget that even the rest of your precious Transit City is suffering and may never be built. Hopefully, the next mayor won't make these sorts of miserable mistakes. If it means cutting back on multiple redundant lines to Malvern or cutting unaffordable lines like Jane that an astounding less than two thousand people per hour will use, then so be it...the city will benefit. At least with Miller gone, there'll be one less person screaming "subways are impossible!" even as blank cheques come and go and more money is spent on other projects.
 
J

Josef

Guest
He seems to be focusing more on his physical appearance these days than
the city of Toronto in mind. I was hearing on the radio that he tweets about
something regarding his workout schedule?
 

Top