Toronto Ontario Line 3 | ?m | ?s

Ansem said:
Just don't vote for Miller and his team, choose someone who is for subway extensions...

The ONLY way is to NOT vote for people who think that LST (light slow transit...Spadina...St-Clair...No light priority) is the answer to Toronto transit.

We wait for a candidate that will make DRL, Sheppard and Eglinton is priority.
Click to expand...

Pushing for all these three lines as subways is a fiscal suicide. We need to set priorities.

DRL subway is #1 since the system won't be able to operate without it.

Strategically / long term, Sheppard subway is more essential than Eglinton. Keep extending it, but be willing to get only partial extension within the 25-year plan.

And for God's sake, let Eglinton be built as LRT. This is not the ideal solution, but it will cope, and the funds will be untied for other projects.
 
I think Eglinton as LRT is the ideal solution, not the best, but ideal solution given the circumstances. Besides, the line will be more than capable of handling the demand expected, and the central section will be a subway in almost every way but name, and will be longer than any real subway they would have built by now anyways.
 
Voltz said:
Besides, the line will be more than capable of handling the demand expected, and the central section will be a subway in almost every way but name, and will be longer than any real subway they would have built by now anyways.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

Voltz said:
I think Eglinton as LRT is the ideal solution, not the best, but ideal solution given the circumstances.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't call it ideal, it will have certain drawbacks. Nevertheless, it is the best compromise in the whole network context.
 
Hmm...I wonder what the other ways might include...stopping at red lights outside of the tunnel, perhaps? Sorry, but that's not rapid transit, and everyone knows it.
 
scarberiankhatru said:
Hmm...I wonder what the other ways might include...stopping at red lights outside of the tunnel, perhaps? Sorry, but that's not rapid transit, and everyone knows it.
Click to expand...

The fully grade-separate part of Eglinton line (hopefully, Jane to Don Mills) could still operate as a true rapid transit. There is no reason for it to be slower than, say, Bloor subway. Furthermore, since the fully grade-separate part can sustain shorter headways, it will be possible to run a short-turn branch which will be totally independent on the red lights.
 
Yeah, I'm also not against Eglinton the way it is planned, with the exception of running cars in the middle of Eglinton where there's also the Richview Transportation Corridor. The DRL, and and Sheppard, ought to the priorities in the City of Toronto for subways.
 
Rainforest said:
Pushing for all these three lines as subways is a fiscal suicide. We need to set priorities.

DRL subway is #1 since the system won't be able to operate without it.

Strategically / long term, Sheppard subway is more essential than Eglinton. Keep extending it, but be willing to get only partial extension within the 25-year plan.

And for God's sake, let Eglinton be built as LRT. This is not the ideal solution, but it will cope, and the funds will be untied for other projects.
Click to expand...

1: DLR/ Yonge to Steeles

2: SRT

3: Cloverdale

4: Eglinton

5: Yonge remaining sections

6: Sheppard
 
Reading this post gives me some hope, in a time of hopelessness. People here are saying the right things. 'LST' -> exactly. 'Stopping at traffic lights does not constitute rapid transit' -> exactly. This talk about financial suicide has got to go. I totally understand the reason behind this talk, but it does not justify the result. If we submit to this 'at least we get something, because if we ask for subway we get nothing', then we get what we ask for. I think it is pretty clear that times are changing. It's not 1969 anymore. Governments at all levels are becoming more willing to spend on transit infrastructure. If we tell them "we want the cheap way because we're afraid of getting a 'no' if we ask for anything more", then they will say "alright, fine, here you go".

We need to stop being weak, stop being so damn pessimistic. Now is the time to push for more. This is EXACTLY the time where we need to say 'wait, no, we're not going to accept falling behind the rest of the world'. This is the time where we need to say 'no, we're not going to accept transit that is more for postcards than it is practical for transportation'. This is the time where we need to start questioning this pathetic 'let's give up, nothing's going to change' attitude. When those old, useless politicians and bureaucrats running the show who still live in '69 retire (and they will soon), things will start happening. We need to be ready for that, not dooming ourselves for eternity of mediocrity and dysfunctional infrastructure.
 
hkric88 said:
... This talk about financial suicide has got to go. I totally understand the reason behind this talk, but it does not justify the result. If we submit to this 'at least we get something, because if we ask for subway we get nothing', then we get what we ask for. I think it is pretty clear that times are changing. It's not 1969 anymore. Governments at all levels are becoming more willing to spend on transit infrastructure. ...
Click to expand...

I disagree. This approach will yield a bunch of stubways (like the present piece of Sheppard) while critical components of the network (for example, DRL) will remain missing.

I don't suggest LRT everywhere just because it is cheaper, however subway projects have to be prioritized.
 
There's no such thing as financial suicide because there is not and never will be a fixed amount of money available to spend on transit.
 
scarberiankhatru said:
There's no such thing as financial suicide because there is not and never will be a fixed amount of money available to spend on transit.
Click to expand...

The amount is not exactly fixed, each project gets reviewed and funded on its own merit.

However, the governments have many areas to fund, apart of public transit: health care, schools, police ... name it.

Transit funding as per MoveOntario 2020 is semi-committed and there is a decent chance that it will be actually provided. Moreover, the involved governments are likely to be receptive to a replacement of one project with another with a similar price tag. A moderate increase in the overall cost might be justifiable as well, if a particular project warrants it.

In contrast, a large increase in the funding demand will prompt the governments to either stonewall it, or commit now and renege down the road. That likely means stubways, and reduces the likehood that the most important lines get actually built by the time they are desperately needed.
 
Of course, but the fact remains that Transit City alone will cost significantly more than any prospective subway wishlist that the TTC has ever put forward. For example, it will cost more than completing the entire Network 2011 network. The money is clearly there. Complaints about shortage of funds whenever subway is brought up is simply a red herring.
 
unimaginative2 said:
Of course, but the fact remains that Transit City alone will cost significantly more than any prospective subway wishlist that the TTC has ever put forward. For example, it will cost more than completing the entire Network 2011 network. The money is clearly there. Complaints about shortage of funds whenever subway is brought up is simply a red herring.
Click to expand...

Only so much money for subways can be carved out of Transit City. Canceling or deferring the Jane, Don Mills, and "Scarborough-Malvern" LRT lines can release funds for a section of DRL subway (downtown to Danforth, and possibly, with some extra funding, to Eglinton / Don Mills).

Not much else is left to redirect. Finch W is a useful LRT project. Sheppard E corridor needs improvements anyway, so an alternative to the 800 M light rail line is using those funds to extend Sheppard subway (those 800 M will probably suffice to get to Warden). No leftovers for elsewhere in the system.

Waterfront LRT? Not a bad line altogether (although if the projected cost of connecting to Union loop grows beyond reason, I would consider deferring this project, and connecting it to DRL West in future). Anyway, if Waterfront LRT is deferred, those 770 M will not come close to paying for the upgrade of Eglinton LRT to a subway.
 
vcc.jpg


vs

westtoronto.jpg
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top