News   Jul 30, 2024
 333     2 
News   Jul 30, 2024
 1K     3 
News   Jul 30, 2024
 533     0 

OneCity Plan

The Millwood bridge, to the best of my knowledge, was not designed with a lower subway deck in mind (unlike the Prince Edward Viaduct). Even if it was, the end locations of the bridge may not be suitable for a good DRL alignment (the turn into Thorncliffe Park would be very sharp).
It wasn't ... it was however designed so that 2 of the 4 lanes could by streetcars ... though the urban myth goes that this extra capacity was used to widen it to 6 lanes. Which is kind of ironic, given that there really isn't the need for 6 lanes here.
 
One City is strange. It seems bold at first glance, an approach reinforced by the suggestion of increased taxes, but its transit solutions for downtown and the urban east and west ends come off as barebones rapid transit through the Don Valley and the Kitchener rail corridor in the west end. Forget the dense old city of Toronto neighbourhoods, the new subway will be the "Don Mills Express". If property taxes are to be increased specifically for transit, then build quality transit, not subways in the cheapest alignments where no one wants to be. I'm reminded of the Scarborough RT stations like Lawrence East and Ellesmere which appear to be well placed on a map, until you realize that they're tucked in under bridges and poorly integrated with transfers and the neighbourhood around them because the rail corridor was the cheapest place to build rapid transit. The Spadina line would have also been better used and more effective as transit and a city-building mechanism if built under Bathurst rather than isolated in the middle of Allen Road.
 
Last edited:
Because the Ex is the next big development hot-spot west of downtown. It's largely city-owned land that is severely under-utilized. If the city plays its cards right, the funds raised from the sale of some of those lands (if they even do sell them, they can do some TCHC developments there if needed) can help fund the subway construction.

As far as "already being served by GO", I would argue that the stop spacing that GO will be using through this area will be too wide to effectively act as a local transit solution, and there wouldn't be much point in taking a feeder route for 2 minutes just to transfer and go a couple of stops via GO.

And this whole Ex thing is nothing new. This was pretty much the original alignment that the Spadina line was supposed to take in the 70s (out to the Ex and then right up Dufferin). It was only because of some last-minute council shenanigans that we ended up with the alignment that we have now.

And while the King-Queen area does need transit improvements, a DRL that bisects the King, Queen, Dundas, and College streetcars will do wonders for relieving the commuting pressure on these lines, allowing them to act as more local lines.

Also note in the plan that I posted here that it very much leaves the door open for a Queen LRT, which would have similar stop spacing to B-D, in order to provide a local, yet rapid service.
The Ex being the next development hotspot is purely speculation on your part. A subway is needed far more on King/Queen West than a hypothetical community that might get built at the Ex sometime in the future. Besides, the Ex is already served by a streetcar, future Waterfront West LRT, and Exhibition GO station. The subway is needed farther north.

I'm not sure what you're saying about GO. Stop placement doesn't matter when the entire Ex and Liberty Village are walking distance to Exhibition Station. With proper regional rail it would be the best option to get downtown. The WWLRT would be a pretty good option too, with closer stop spacing for more local service.

A subway going by the Ex may not be a new idea but the Queen subway is an even older idea. And let's face it, once the DRL gets built, chances of building another east-west line along Queen will be slim to none. The local, yet rapid service you describe is what the DRL is best suited for.

If the DRL does dip down to the Lakeshore line, the option I'd prefer is for it to follow the Weston sub back to Queen or King (duplicating another line, I know, but only for a short distance) and then going west to Roncy.
 
80% of residents support Stintz plan: Star poll

80% of residents support Stintz plan: Star poll
Tess Kalinowski
Transportation Reporter

The province may be rejecting TTC chair Karen Stintz’s bold OneCity transit plan, but a poll commissioned by the Toronto Star suggests residents are overwhelmingly prepared to support the tax-for-transit scheme.

Eighty per cent of Torontonians favour the $30-billion, 30-year plan with 47 per cent indicating strong support in the poll by Angus Reid Public Opinion/Vision Critical.

More: How TTC chair Stintz and her allies made the OneCity transit plan

It shows that most would be willing to pay more property tax for the massive transit expansion, including 21 new subway, LRT and bus lines. Forty-nine per cent say users should pay for more service; that it’s not up to the TTC or the private sector.

James: Torontonians see the reality of transit improvements that politicians don’t

“Torontonians are quite critical of public transit. It’s always at the top of the list of concerns so anything that comes forward as a large-scale expansion or improvement gives a lot of hope. Even if it is very early days, people are very excited to see the colours on the map and all those different routes,†said Jodi Shanoff, senior vice-president of Angus Reid Public Opinion/Vision Critical in Toronto.

Support for OneCity is highest in the downtown. But even in Mayor Rob Ford’s suburban strongholds of Etobicoke and Scarborough, only 16 per cent and 17 per cent, respectively, were strongly opposed to the plan unveiled by councillors Stintz and TTC vice-chair Glenn De Baeremaeker on Wednesday.

It envisions a web of interconnected routes extending to all corners of Toronto, linking the downtown, as well as the suburbs. A copy of the plan and the map of proposed lines was provided to poll respondents.

Among the 20 per cent who were opposed, 60 per cent indicated they disagreed with having to pay the tax that the city councillors suggest to cover a third of the transit expansion. Senior governments would each provide another third.

Almost one in three residents who voted for Ford strongly oppose the plan.

Asked if they were willing to support a 2-per-cent property tax increase to fund transit expansion, 67 per cent of the 800 residents polled, said yes. Forty-eight per cent of those who voted for Ford, however, were not in favour.

Even when residents were asked specifically if they supported a $180 annual property tax increase — the average prescribed once the OneCity tax plan is fully phased in — 59 per cent remained in favour, with 38 per cent opposed.

“Support is as high as 74 per cent among Torontonians who did not vote for Rob Ford,†said Shanoff. Fifty-five per cent of Ford supporters oppose a tax increase.

The high acceptance indicated for the transit tax is unusual.

More:

“Historically, Canadians have only ever had an appetite for a tax increase when it was in the vein of being dedicated to better health-care delivery,†said Shanoff.

The poll has a 3.4-per-cent margin of error 19 times out of 20.

It was conducted Thursday, a day before Ontario Infrastructure and Transportation Minister Bob Chiarelli swiftly dismissed some of OneCity’s key proposals.

The Ontario Liberal cabinet has already approved a plan to spend its $8.4 billion in Toronto transit funding on LRTs on Eglinton, Sheppard East, Finch West and the Scarborough Rapid Transit route. The OneCity plan, however, envisions the SRT as a subway.

Chiarelli also dismissed turning the premium Pearson-to-Union Station express train shuttle, scheduled to open by 2015, into public transit, another OneCity proposal.

Residents can’t wait for another long city council debate, Chiarelli said.

“Too much time has been wasted. . . . The province has been patient and nimble. What we need now is action and implementation,†he said.

He repeated his comments from earlier in the week that the city already has the power to raise property and other taxes, so there’s no need for the province to approve the legal change OneCity proposes to allow Toronto to capture the uplift in property assessments.

Stintz (Eglinton-Lawrence) said the provincial announcement is premature She plans to ask council to approve a staff study of OneCity in July, which would then come back to council in October.

Extending the Bloor-Danforth subway northeast of Kennedy to Sheppard rather than converting the SRT to LRT is one element of a much larger plan, she told reporters.

“The big component of OneCity is that the city is willing to step up and fund our one-third,†said Stintz.

“If there is a (council) decision to find the money and to ask the province to reconsider then we would expect the province to take that under consideration. If they come back and say, ‘No we’re sorry it’s too late,’ that’s the decision we will respect,†she said.

Councillor Peter Milczyn (Etobicoke-Lakeshore) said councillors should leave transit planning to the province’s Metrolinx authority.

But he’s in favour of extending the Bloor-Danforth subway up to Sheppard so it can be linked to the Sheppard subway and “create a loop that’s been on the books for years in all the planning documents.â€

In that case, though, Stintz and her council colleagues will be reopening the subway-versus-LRT debate that bitterly divided council earlier this year.

That’s when a majority of councillors, led by Stintz, rejected Mayor Rob Ford’s insistence on a subway rather than an LRT on Sheppard East. Council decided it would be better to spread the province’s $8.4 billion in transit funding to more lines and that the mayor did not have the private sector he promised in the election would pay for the Sheppard subway.

15a317644957ae4b97c8c566663e.jpg



With files from Paul Moloney
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/1219752--80-of-residents-support-stintz-plan-star-poll
 
One City is strange. It seems bold at first glance, an approach reinforced by the suggestion of increased taxes, but its transit solutions for downtown and the urban east and west ends come off as barebones rapid transit through the Don Valley and the Kitchener rail corridor in the west end. Forget the dense old city of Toronto neighbourhoods, the new subway will be the "Don Mills Express". If property taxes are to be increased specifically for transit, then build quality transit, not subways in the cheapest alignments where no one wants to be. I'm reminded of the Scarborough RT stations like Lawrence East and Ellesmere which appear to be well placed on a map, until you realize that they're tucked in under bridges and poorly integrated with transfers and the neighbourhood around them because the rail corridor was the cheapest place to build rapid transit. The Spadina line would have also been better used and more effective as transit and a city-building mechanism if built under Bathurst rather than isolated in the middle of Allen Road.

"Don Mills Express" is just a marketing term. When (and if) the detailed design is performed, I am sure that it will have several stations in the Old Toronto proper east of downtown, significantly improving transit there.

"Etobicoke Express - ARL" and "Scarborough Express" are, naturally, envisioned as routes with wider spacing, and possibly a premium fare (although not as high as $20 a pop). Their existence would be justified by the large number of riders from the outer parts of 416 who wish to travel downtown.
 
I don't understand:

1) Why we are even giving any of our time to listen to transit plans designed by politicians like Stintz (who only have a rough idea of need and then draw their lines on maps) when we could have real TRANSIT planners who specialize in this stuff design great systems.

2) Why Torontonians will support transit expansion but won't back it up by supporting tax increases that go DIRECTLY into these expansions. If you don't pay more into the collective money pot, you won't get better transit/services. Simple as that. I recognize that the federal and provincial governments need to smarten up about transit and give more funding for it, but in the meantime the best we can do is tax Torontonians to expand our transit. I'm sick of Torontonians acting like their taxes are outrageously high. They are not.
 
When I saw that headline about the poll I thought it was an unscientific star.com poll or something. But it's from Angus Ried so it's likely accurate...although public opinion is bound to be pretty volatile over the next few months.

I don't understand:

1) Why we are even giving any of our time to listen to transit plans designed by politicians like Stintz (who only have a rough idea of need and then draw their lines on maps) when we could have real TRANSIT planners who specialize in this stuff design great systems.
Because we're all a bunch of nerds about this stuff and we inevitably get caught up in the details and argue about them :D I think we all realize that the dedicated funding is more important than the plan itself, which is preliminary and subject to change.
 
Because we're all a bunch of nerds about this stuff and we inevitably get caught up in the details and argue about them :D I think we all realize that the dedicated funding is more important than the plan itself, which is preliminary and subject to change.

Pretty much, haha. A lot of the critiques we have are relatively minor things on the 1st draft of a plan.

Priorities and design elements can be changed through public consultations. What we should be focused on is making sure that this financing scheme gets approved. Without that, it's just a bunch of lines on a map.
 
We have taken the debate on OneCity to the front page: we are debuting Jon English as our transit planning commentator. Check out Jon's opening article where he begins analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the OneCity plan here.
 
I want to clarify that I wasn't criticizing anyone here for their comments and debate about the Stintz plan; more I was just venting my frustration that city council/ the population of Toronto bat these ideas by politicians around instead of getting real transit planners to do the work.

But I agree, the benefit of creating a plan, however unrefined, is that it demonstrates a NEED for transit, and sets goals by which we can obtain financing.
 
Agreed about the DRL serving either King or Queen St. W. and a transfer station between a DRL and the Lakeshore line can be created at Roncesvalles.
 
Wait... is Transit City still called "Transit City"? Or is it PART of the OneCity plan?
 
54% of Torontonians want the DRL to be the next subway line built.

Notice how nowhere in the article do they say what the question in order to get the 43% numbers. How you phrase the question can drastically alter the results.
 

Back
Top