I think we can all agree that the real debate is not subways vs. LRT. It is about grade-separated transit vs. mixed traffic to save on cost. We all want a better transit system, but we have to live within our means.
The problem I have with surface transit is they get stuck at traffic lights. That can be resolved with transit priority signals, but let's face it, have we implemented it in any other corridor? I noticed in Jersey City, their LRT uses railway crossing to cross some roadways.
There's also a perception that surface transit does not work in snow, and when they do, they vehicles bunch up. Well that is true for the open sections of the subway as well. Vehicles bunching up, especially along Spadina when I used to take it was probably related to signal timing and again transit priority. The fact that future LRTs will operate with the driver operating the vehicle more like a train (not collecting fare, doesn't have to interact with passengers who hold up the vehicle by running for it, etc.) may alleviate scheduling problems.
I would really like to see LRTs succeed, but past experience in this city makes it not the ideal environment. I find that a lot of projects are not fully completed and you do not end up with the expected performance or results. Those types of failures do not convince people to switch from the convenience of their cars. Perhaps what we need to do is have a marketing campaign to highlight the benefits of a completed LRT project and actually complete the project, with signal priority and all.
On the topic of cost, how do other cities accumulate the debt to build subways? Does the city or transit authority have the ability to issues bonds like the MTA? New York is finally building their Second Avenue subway line right in Manhattan.
I think we need to use some reasoning with the models we use to determine where we place transit in this city. I come from an engineering background as well, and one of the first things I learned from was of knowledge separated from experience vs. knowledge embedded in experience. The person designing a transit system has a different view than the person using the transit system. Our models cannot account for every aspect of a system, from psychological to socio-economic. It would be a very difficult problem to solve!
Perhaps fantasy subway maps have some basis in the psychological aspect of the system. Whereas our numbers from a purely usage based standpoint dictate build an LRT along a particular corridor. However, if you think like a transit user, wouldn't it make sense to connect Sheppard to Downsview, allowing east GTA users to get to York University or other employment districts?
When the Sheppard subway opened, the experts believed that people would take an express bus along Finch to Don Mills. The route did so poorly, they boosted express bus service along Finch to Finch Station instead via the 199.
We have limited funding and we need to make sure we are looking at the total picture in the long-term even though one method may seem to be the cheaper alternative to fix the problem quicker.
