Transit City Plan

[JoeParez]

I'm thinking B-D to STC, a very short Sheppard subway extension (to VP?) and the Eglinton LRT entirely as planned, except maybe with some small alterations (Richview corridor or whatever).

What would be really great is if that Sheppard extension can go west to Downsview as well (which Rob Ford campaigned for I believe?), however like alot of people are saying, where's the funding going to come from?

The only TC line I didn't like was the Sheppard Line, to me, it was essentially the completion as of the Sheppard Subway, sort of a half assed approach to completing the line. I believe it makes sense that if you're going to put "rail" on Sheppard, you might as well finish the Sheppard Subway.

I always figured that the "revised" plan would only be a Sheppard extension and the Eglinton LRT; but if the city, Metrolinx and the TTC can come to a sensible, afforable plan, then that's good for the City Of Toronto -- at least during the Rob Ford era! haha.
I'll be watching this story with baited breath in hopes that Toronto gets the expanded transit that it deserves.


PS -- sorry if this post is a little random..

 

[W. K. Lis]

When my elderly mother was alive she avoided the subway to get around Toronto (she didn't have a driver's license). She didn't like taking the stairs, so avoided them. Even at stations with escalators or elevators, they are known to break down and have to revert to the stairs. Instead, she took the bus or streetcar.

A transit illiterate mayor who is known to avoid public transit and proposes subways because he doesn't want to see them, shows how selfish he is towards the public who do take transit.

A surface rapid transit would be of better benefit for the elderly and disabled. There would be no steps to worry about. And with the new low-floor light rail vehicles, they would be more accessible than current vehicles.

 

[LAz]

Yes. But the key point "given enough ridership".

Exactly. That is the smallest problem - land use gets changed and voila.

Why is it that a random message board poster knows better what projected demand will be on a given corridor a generation from now than the professionals with access to far more data and city development plans? Even if you were to double their estimations, you still aren't at subway justification levels.

What was not clear about the flawed planning that I explained to you???
If they wanted to build a subway they can easily pull up some numbers out of their @$$ to support it. It all depends on what one wants. A change in land use is the key.
And naturally that the entire LRT will not be a subway. In their alternative option in their EA they said "that it is entirely a suwbay" - like wtf?! They compared something ridiculous so that it would fail on purpose.

If there were anywhere close to subway demand levels foreseen within the next generation, then I'd want a subway (just like I want a DRL). But there isn't, so it makes no economic sense to wastefully spend money on excessive systems in one corner of the city when so many others also need improvements.

Wherever you build a subway there will be demand. It is like that always. Subways change land use and attract development.

One will provide excessive subway capacity to X number of people. The other will provide LRT (closer to subway than buses) for many times X number of people.

The people in the urban fringes do not want trams - they prefer to drive. And I say that based on personal experience of living there and knowing people there.
Excess capacity is a question mark. There will be extra capacity always - there is now on every line, no? Sufficient capacity is what you mean. There will be sufficient capacity - there always is on any subway project anywhere.

On top of all this, such huge investments in trams is something unprecedented. It's part of a strategy to raise housing values and extract more tax revenue. A downright bastard way to gentrify the fringes.

TC does not preclude subways.

It incorporates no metro in its plan. Therefore I say screw it.

So years of planning and detailed design mean they've inflated speeds and deflated costs, but Ford's back-of-the-napkin subways everywhere scheme is efficiently costed and reasonably thought out?

Part A is true. Thanks for agreeing.
Can't say how truw Part B is. But, I am really surprised that people are not rioting against TC. So anything that kills it is a step forward.

It was impossible for there to have been years of planning and detailed design for TC. Only about a year before signing off on Giambrone's plan, Miller was pushing hard for a Sheppard subway extension. If any plan was written on the back (or front) of a napkin, it was TC.

And I'm not sure how Ford's napkin plan for Sheppard and B-D extensions qualifies as subways everywhere.

That's part of the strategy of the tram fanatics.
a) give more credibility to this TC thing
b) try to cause paranoia/havoc regarding minor metro expansion

Rapid transit is so expensive that it needs a forceful champion to push it through. The existing five-stop Sheppard subway went ahead partly because of the advocacy of Mel Lastman, mayor of North York and then Toronto. The Spadina extension is going ahead because it had the backing of a powerful McGuinty cabinet minister, Greg Sorbara, whose Vaughan riding the subway will eventually serve. Mr. Ford has now become the champion of extending the Sheppard line to Scarborough, yet another political subway. Who is going to stand in his way?

He'll fuck anyone up who dares stand in the way.

Just like Miller fucked anyone up who peeped out against TC.

There is no more peeping out against stuff. We pawns should just accept the rape from the above - be it in our favor or against. Blah.

The lost of Eglinton Crosstown would be tragic but I have hope for a compromise. How will he oppose the underground section of Eglinton since it fits his criterias...

Has for Finch, they could start with
-Express branch on the 36 Route
-Reserved lane

Make it a metro from the get-go as many of us have hollered.


For finch - since any sort of plan is too expensive for someone or someone else, the cheapest thign would be to make bike lanes and have the peons be on some sort of bike rental program where they put in a 20 dollar token for a bike and return it at the end of the day when they finish using the bike. Not bad, reduces costs even more huh?

Perhaps there'd be enough money left to build 3-4 stations on Eglinton East.

I think it's better to build it on the west side than the east side.
Though anywhere is good - as long as it is not a tram tunnel. That way if it is a metro tunnel the tram fanatic plans get castrated.

 

[k10ery]

Based on the article, doesn't it sound like Metrolinx is now pushing BRT in the Finch corridor, plus maybe a promise to extend the Sheppard subway in the distant future (i.e. never)?

Ford has already said his idea of transit is people taking buses "to the slots at Woodbine". Ironically, if extended far enough, a Finch BRT could actually deliver on that!

 

[LAz]

SELRT is dead. Coming from the premier's mouth, Sheppard subway will happen...

If only it went in both directions.

But yeah, going in one is at least something.





I want 50+ km of subway per decade. Where is the compromise that favors such stuff, huh??? The tram promoters must not be compromised. Cut the snake's head off, the tail will fall off. That must be done, to not give them any room for more destructive planning.

 

[Asterix]

Exactly. That is the smallest problem - land use gets changed and voila.

"Voila"? You somehow manage to change projected 3000 passengers per hour to 10,000+? If only everything in life were as easy as saying "voila".

Wherever you build a subway there will be demand. It is like that always. Subways change land use and attract development.

Like the development attracted along much of the Bloor line or the Spadina line? Demand from 3000 per hour is demand, but not demand worth spending the bucks required for subway. It's all about 'efficiencies', you know, that Rob Ford term? Simply waving a magic wand, saying "land use change" will not also somehow produce three times the demand.

Excess capacity is a question mark. There will be extra capacity always - there is now on every line, no? Sufficient capacity is what you mean. There will be sufficient capacity - there always is on any subway project anywhere.

Building a subway from Milton to Barrie will also have "sufficient capacity" (in that there will always be room for anyone who wants to ride it), but there will be loads of extra capacity that will never be used within the lifespan of that subway. Is that not therefore a waste of capacity?

You need to make the case that any subway or LRT you build will have "sufficient capacity" for existing demand as well as enough "excess capacity" to handle projected peak period demand increase within the next generation. Repeating "land use change" does not mean that excess capacity will be made use of. Do you have anything of substance on which you base your calculations (ie actual development plans and city plans that will provide these thousands of currently non-existing passengers, or is it just a matter of saying "voila"?)

On top of all this, such huge investments in trams is something unprecedented. It's part of a strategy to raise housing values and extract more tax revenue. A downright bastard way to gentrify the fringes.

So "land use change" to produce piles of new development investment is only meant to produce slums that won't increase housing values or gentrify anything? I thought you were making the "land use change" argument because land was now going to be more valuable with a subway present.

It incorporates no metro in its plan. Therefore I say screw it.

Purchasing hundreds of new buses in the last few years incorporates no metro in its plan. Screw that too?

But, I am really surprised that people are not rioting against TC.

Maybe some people actually believe that providing vastly improved transit to large swaths of underserved parts of the city is a good thing. If we had huge piles of cash, then yeah, make 'em all subways. But we don't, so it is not a matter of 'do you prefer subways or LRT' but a matter of 'do you prefer LRT or existing buses?'

If you aren't willing to accept that as a valid argument (even if you don't agree with it), then further facts and rationalization are just going to be lost on you.

 

[Asterix]

I want 50+ km of subway per decade. Where is the compromise that favors such stuff, huh???

I'd love that 50+ km/decade as well. First, show me the money. Some of us have to live in the real world.

 

[GenerationW]

I'm thinking B-D to STC, a very short Sheppard subway extension (to VP?) and the Eglinton LRT entirely as planned, except maybe with some small alterations (Richview corridor or whatever).

Given that the GO grade separation at Kennedy is well underway and is being financed with the soon-to-be converted SELRT funding, I would expect an extension to go beyond VP.

When my elderly mother was alive she avoided the subway to get around Toronto (she didn't have a driver's license). She didn't like taking the stairs, so avoided them. Even at stations with escalators or elevators, they are known to break down and have to revert to the stairs. Instead, she took the bus or streetcar.

A transit illiterate mayor who is known to avoid public transit and proposes subways because he doesn't want to see them, shows how selfish he is towards the public who do take transit.

A surface rapid transit would be of better benefit for the elderly and disabled. There would be no steps to worry about. And with the new low-floor light rail vehicles, they would be more accessible than current vehicles.

I guess this is the best diatribe you could come up with on a day when oil dips below $90.

 

[GraphicMatt]

Given that the GO grade separation at Kennedy is well underway and is being financed with the soon-to-be converted SELRT funding, I would expect an extension to go beyond VP.

Maybe - I'm not sure how far he could get given the funding available. I don't think they'll get to STC. But maybe he'll put "Finish Sheppard to STC with support from the private sector" in his 2014 campaign platform.

 

[GenerationW]

Yeah, I don't think he'll be able to find enough funding to finalize an extension to STC before the next election.

As for Eglinton, I think Metrolinx is rejigging the TC proposal and putting out the bait to see if Ford will change his stance and bite. He is, after all, often hungry.

 

[js97]

It blows my mind that the only real argument TC supporters can come up with is the lack of density/ridership.

When did we build transportation infrastructure for the present?

Imagine if they considered the 'now' when they built the Bloor and Yonge/Univeristy lines.

The amount of car traffic between between STC and Donmills along Shepperd and 401 should be a very good indication at the potential ridership to be had if a subway was available.

I'm hoping the compromise consists of Shepperd subway to STC, Eglinton crostown between Jane to Donmills (there literally is NOTHING between Donmills and say, Kennedy?).

p.s. There is no density along the Yonge and York U extensions, Finch West does not need an LRT, heck, even Eglinton East past Laird Ave lacks the density/ridership to justify an LRT.

 

[GraphicMatt]

Ridership projections on Yonge and Bloor would have easily met subway ridership standards.

Similarly, do you think the projections they've done don't take into account potential growth over the next few decades?

 

[Tulse]

It blows my mind that the only real argument TC supporters can come up with is the lack of density/ridership.

When did we build transportation infrastructure for the present?

Should someone by a minivan at 18 because they plan to have kids when they're 30?

 

[BobBob]

If it takes 10 years to have it delivered, maybe.

 

[Asterix]

It blows my mind that the only real argument TC supporters can come up with is the lack of density/ridership.

So financial efficiency (ie not wasting money) is not a relevant issue? Did you not follow Rob Ford's campaign about gravy trains?

Imagine if they considered the 'now' when they built the Bloor and Yonge/Univeristy lines.

Bloor streetcar was carrying 9000 per hour when the subway opened. I'd be interested in seeing your evidence-backed study showing even half that for Sheppard subways in the next 20 years.

The amount of car traffic between between STC and Donmills along Shepperd and 401 should be a very good indication at the potential ridership to be had if a subway was available.

Why should it? Are those cars on the 401 actually traveling between STC and Don Mills? Can you demonstrate that many of those cars are making trips that would be conducive to a subway, should one be there?

I'm hoping the compromise consists of Shepperd subway to STC, Eglinton crostown between Jane to Donmills

Are you bringing the extra money to the table needed to fund both those projects? According to those signing the cheques, it ain't there now.