DavidH
Senior Member
I'd be very concerned about the possibility that the referendum sends a message of "no tax increases for transit" to politicians.
|
|
|
Transit City Plan
- Thread starter 299 bloor call control.
- Start date
EnviroTO
Senior Member
Agreed. Referendums run the risk of sending the opposite message than the one you expect. There is a large group out there that want more road lanes and less bike lanes, less transit spending, and less taxes. It is possible that those people could show up at the polls and set back transit spending for decades.
scarberiankhatru
Senior Member
In terms of new riders within ~5 years, that depends entirely on the length, alignment, and stations. As for operating costs, that also depends entirely on those three factors. A DRL that supplements but does not replace any existing surface routes would cost more than one that replaces some or all of one or more surface routes...many of which are absolute black holes of operational funds A longish DRL could, for example, manage to replace basically the entire King streetcar, but if built as an express link just from Pape to Union or Queen, that won't absorb much surface transit.
valkoholic
Active Member
Sorry if this is in the wrong thread (The Finch West thread is closed.... or taking a sevn-minute coffee break):
I'm looking for the funding or construction status of the Finch West LRT. I've looked around and called the TTC and found the following:
-The EA is wrapped up (or nearly wrapped up)
- Construction start was planned for 2010 by the TTC and some work could start with the right funding
- Metrolinx is concerned about funding and wants to push it back to 2011
That's about all I can find. Any other inside scoop would be very helpful.
I'm looking for the funding or construction status of the Finch West LRT. I've looked around and called the TTC and found the following:
-The EA is wrapped up (or nearly wrapped up)
- Construction start was planned for 2010 by the TTC and some work could start with the right funding
- Metrolinx is concerned about funding and wants to push it back to 2011
That's about all I can find. Any other inside scoop would be very helpful.
ShonTron
Moderator
Member Bio
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 12,462
- Reaction score
- 9,251
- Location
- Ward 13 - Toronto Centre
The Finch West thread is closed because it is not ready yet - E-C will be the first thread to be complete, then sort out the rest.
M II A II R II K
Senior Member
Reassess Transit City - it has too many flaws
Mar 18 2010
Richard Gilbert
Read More: http://www.thestar.com/opinion/article/781418--reassess-transit-city-it-has-too-many-flaws
#############################################################
Transit City is Toronto's plan to add eight streetcar lines over the next 10 or more years at a cost above $10 billion. Toward this, $7.82 billion has been committed by the Ontario government and $0.32 billion by the federal government. The plan is firmly in the tradition of Toronto's 40-year record of inept decision-making about transit and associated land development. It should be reconsidered.
The lamentable record began with the decision in the early 1970s to route the Spadina subway line through a low-density residential area that has still not been redeveloped to justify a high-capacity transit service. The result is a hugely underused resource.
Other examples of ineptitude are failure to provide for sufficient development at stations along the Bloor-Danforth subway line; construction of costly, unnecessary streetcar tunnels at Union Station, Bloor and Spadina, and Bathurst and St. Clair; and installation of the absurdly expensive and soon-to-be-replaced Scarborough RT line. The worst example has been the billion dollars spent on the Sheppard subway line, which has done nothing to increase ridership along that corridor. The $2.6 billion being spent on extending the Spadina subway line could be almost as wasteful, chiefly because there is no plan for high-density redevelopment at its stations to provide ridership sufficient to justify the extension.
Transit City also lacks a coherent redevelopment plan. It has other glaring flaws that mostly result from a philosophy that streetcars – light rail if you prefer – should be the cornerstone of transit expansion in Toronto, whether appropriate or not. This thinking has led to Transit City's greatest absurdity: the proposed construction of a 10-kilometre streetcar tunnel under Eglinton Ave. between Laird Dr. and Keele St. This will cost close to $3 billion, the same per-kilometre cost as the Spadina subway extension. Thus, we could have a subway line along this stretch of Eglinton for the cost of the streetcar line.
This conclusion begs two questions. Would the subway cost more to operate, and would there be enough ridership to justify a subway line? Subway lines cost three or more times as much to operate as streetcar lines. However, subways can typically carry five or more times as many passengers. Thus, with sufficient ridership, subways can be a lot cheaper per passenger to operate. At present, there seems to be enough TTC ridership along this part of Eglinton to justify a streetcar line, but nowhere near enough to justify a subway line. There could be enough for a subway if sufficient redevelopment occurred, but there is no plan for such intensification.
Transit City's other 110 kilometres of streetcar route are to be above ground, installed at an average cost of about $70 million per kilometre, including vehicles and maintenance facilities. This cost seems high. The comparable 12-kilometre line planned for Norfolk, Va., is to have an all-in cost of about $30 million per kilometre. (Norfolk also has plans for development along the proposed line.)
Mar 18 2010
Richard Gilbert
Read More: http://www.thestar.com/opinion/article/781418--reassess-transit-city-it-has-too-many-flaws
#############################################################
Transit City is Toronto's plan to add eight streetcar lines over the next 10 or more years at a cost above $10 billion. Toward this, $7.82 billion has been committed by the Ontario government and $0.32 billion by the federal government. The plan is firmly in the tradition of Toronto's 40-year record of inept decision-making about transit and associated land development. It should be reconsidered.
The lamentable record began with the decision in the early 1970s to route the Spadina subway line through a low-density residential area that has still not been redeveloped to justify a high-capacity transit service. The result is a hugely underused resource.
Other examples of ineptitude are failure to provide for sufficient development at stations along the Bloor-Danforth subway line; construction of costly, unnecessary streetcar tunnels at Union Station, Bloor and Spadina, and Bathurst and St. Clair; and installation of the absurdly expensive and soon-to-be-replaced Scarborough RT line. The worst example has been the billion dollars spent on the Sheppard subway line, which has done nothing to increase ridership along that corridor. The $2.6 billion being spent on extending the Spadina subway line could be almost as wasteful, chiefly because there is no plan for high-density redevelopment at its stations to provide ridership sufficient to justify the extension.
Transit City also lacks a coherent redevelopment plan. It has other glaring flaws that mostly result from a philosophy that streetcars – light rail if you prefer – should be the cornerstone of transit expansion in Toronto, whether appropriate or not. This thinking has led to Transit City's greatest absurdity: the proposed construction of a 10-kilometre streetcar tunnel under Eglinton Ave. between Laird Dr. and Keele St. This will cost close to $3 billion, the same per-kilometre cost as the Spadina subway extension. Thus, we could have a subway line along this stretch of Eglinton for the cost of the streetcar line.
This conclusion begs two questions. Would the subway cost more to operate, and would there be enough ridership to justify a subway line? Subway lines cost three or more times as much to operate as streetcar lines. However, subways can typically carry five or more times as many passengers. Thus, with sufficient ridership, subways can be a lot cheaper per passenger to operate. At present, there seems to be enough TTC ridership along this part of Eglinton to justify a streetcar line, but nowhere near enough to justify a subway line. There could be enough for a subway if sufficient redevelopment occurred, but there is no plan for such intensification.
Transit City's other 110 kilometres of streetcar route are to be above ground, installed at an average cost of about $70 million per kilometre, including vehicles and maintenance facilities. This cost seems high. The comparable 12-kilometre line planned for Norfolk, Va., is to have an all-in cost of about $30 million per kilometre. (Norfolk also has plans for development along the proposed line.)
Ansem
Banned
Reassess Transit City - it has too many flaws
Mar 18 2010
Richard Gilbert
Read More: http://www.thestar.com/opinion/article/781418--reassess-transit-city-it-has-too-many-flaws
#############################################################
Transit City is Toronto's plan to add eight streetcar lines over the next 10 or more years at a cost above $10 billion. Toward this, $7.82 billion has been committed by the Ontario government and $0.32 billion by the federal government. The plan is firmly in the tradition of Toronto's 40-year record of inept decision-making about transit and associated land development. It should be reconsidered.
The lamentable record began with the decision in the early 1970s to route the Spadina subway line through a low-density residential area that has still not been redeveloped to justify a high-capacity transit service. The result is a hugely underused resource.
Other examples of ineptitude are failure to provide for sufficient development at stations along the Bloor-Danforth subway line; construction of costly, unnecessary streetcar tunnels at Union Station, Bloor and Spadina, and Bathurst and St. Clair; and installation of the absurdly expensive and soon-to-be-replaced Scarborough RT line. The worst example has been the billion dollars spent on the Sheppard subway line, which has done nothing to increase ridership along that corridor. The $2.6 billion being spent on extending the Spadina subway line could be almost as wasteful, chiefly because there is no plan for high-density redevelopment at its stations to provide ridership sufficient to justify the extension.
Transit City also lacks a coherent redevelopment plan. It has other glaring flaws that mostly result from a philosophy that streetcars – light rail if you prefer – should be the cornerstone of transit expansion in Toronto, whether appropriate or not. This thinking has led to Transit City's greatest absurdity: the proposed construction of a 10-kilometre streetcar tunnel under Eglinton Ave. between Laird Dr. and Keele St. This will cost close to $3 billion, the same per-kilometre cost as the Spadina subway extension. Thus, we could have a subway line along this stretch of Eglinton for the cost of the streetcar line.
This conclusion begs two questions. Would the subway cost more to operate, and would there be enough ridership to justify a subway line? Subway lines cost three or more times as much to operate as streetcar lines. However, subways can typically carry five or more times as many passengers. Thus, with sufficient ridership, subways can be a lot cheaper per passenger to operate. At present, there seems to be enough TTC ridership along this part of Eglinton to justify a streetcar line, but nowhere near enough to justify a subway line. There could be enough for a subway if sufficient redevelopment occurred, but there is no plan for such intensification.
Transit City's other 110 kilometres of streetcar route are to be above ground, installed at an average cost of about $70 million per kilometre, including vehicles and maintenance facilities. This cost seems high. The comparable 12-kilometre line planned for Norfolk, Va., is to have an all-in cost of about $30 million per kilometre. (Norfolk also has plans for development along the proposed line.)
BRAVO!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Finally!!!!
M II A II R II K
Senior Member
Yea but a rant in a newspaper isn't going to change much!
valkoholic
Active Member
Well, it will help. Rumour has it the Eglinton LRT / subway debate is still ongoing behind closed doors. As Miller fades away (and with it his obsession with being the LRT king) the chances of common sense prevailing here go up.
Also, there's a growing chance that this project has missed the economic cycle, and that it will be cancelled completely to help balance provincial books.
The Mad Navigator
Banned
Wow, let's move Toronto backwards some more!
GraphicMatt
Looking forward to a FRESH START for Toronto
Cancelled transit projects? A real victory for transit in Toronto! I know we'll absolutely get things 100% as *I* want them next time. But if we don't - no worries - we'll just cancel everything again!
valkoholic
Active Member
Technically it would be more sideways than backwards.
Brings up an interesting dilema for pro-subway people (like me). Would you rather see the Eglinton LRT delayed so subway planning could start from scratch (gravely risking its chances of being built for another 10 years) or would you rather they just build the LRT starting next year?
EnviroTO
Senior Member
Is this the Transit City progress thread?
Finally someone who sees the Sheppard subway was a complete waste as well as every other project built in the last 20 years. Now we are getting somewhere?
Finally someone who sees the Sheppard subway was a complete waste as well as every other project built in the last 20 years. Now we are getting somewhere?
The Mad Navigator
Banned
Hells yes.
And here are my reasons why:
1) As a former pro subway nut, I've opened my eyes to LRT as a transit mode. Just because we don't get subways built does not mean it's the end of the world.
2) LRT can work if it's implemented and maintained properly. Other cities have done it, why can't Toronto? (This does concern me because the city's success rate of implementing LRT/streetcars in ROWs is less than stellar)
3) Subways are more expensive to build here because of the methodology used by the City and the TTC. Hiring private consultants and sub-consultants to do the majority of the work, using TBMs instead of cut and cover to excavate the tunnels, overbuilt stations, and let's not forget that there's always cost overruns with any large scale transit infrastructure project.
4) Have you ever ridden on an LRT line in Europe by chance? If you haven't, I suggest you do. The T3 line in Paris is one that I recommend highly. Beautiful trams, the ROW has grass plantings between the tracks, you don't have to wait to board the vehicle when it arrives, and it's a smooth and comfortable ride!
5) Subway station spacing versus LRT station spacing. Clearly, LRT stations are more closely spaced (500m on average) than subway stops (minimum of 1km? I'm not exactly sure), leaving better access points for more residents (if they travel by foot).
6) Better for businesses and tourists. What better way for potential clients to see businesses along a street than LRT? A subway isn't going to accomplish that beneath the ground. And please don't say bus service would suffice because it's just not comparable to LRT in this case.
Anyhow, those are my points. Correct me if you think I'm wrong on anything, but I think I'm fairly justified with them.
Ansem
Banned
Haha !
good try...
Sheppard is a waste the way it is now.
Sheppard was never designed to be that way
Downsview to STC would not be a waste of money...