Whose vision of transit in Toronto do you support?

[gweed123]

IMO
Sheppard East LRT should be a subway if cost of LRT goes more than $1.6 billion
Eglinton Crosstown LRT should be a subway if cost goes more than $6 billion

At that point there is just no point in going with LRT for such a high capital.

The only problem is, what happens when the cost goes over that mark halfway through construction? Do they stop and start over again? If it's a mistake, the TTC should do their research properly, so that they find out it's a mistake BEFORE they start building, not halfway through. The cost of Transit City as a whole has nearly doubled since it was first proposed, and that's with only half the lines in really detailed levels of planning, and really only 1 project even started construction. That doesn't give me much optimism that the TTC actually did their homework and accurately projected the costs. It's looking more and more like they budgeted for a bare-bones system just to get it passed, and then they beefed it up to what they were actually looking for all along (which was double the cost).

 

[Fresh Start]

They didn't do their homework, it's that obvious. They had politicians on the board of trustees planning for them a politically motivated scheme that would garner those individuals electoral votes (which unfortunately worked). It was never about the downtrotten single mother at Jane/Finch or Malvern whom has to travel back and forth across town to get to her second job and pick up that essential item for Sally's school recital in the "big city" (downtown) before heading back to catch her five winks of sleep. They basically put the bus service on rails which by operational design will only make it run slower and less frequently than the bus it has just replaced. But not before indefinitely razzing a street for likely years, seeing to road closures and turned away clientele from businesses, which like a domino effect forces them to close down and so on. Thanks alot Miller.

 

[Fresh Start]

Fresh Start and kEiThZ I suggest you both visit the following link before spouting off about Mississauga (Transit). http://www.mississauga.ca/file/COM/WeekdayMap_Jan2010.pdf

You see how many routes would serve Sherway? The same as it is now: one (1): Route 4. That is how important a Sherway terminal is to Mississauga, i.e. not at all. An East Mall station could be used as a terminal for certain MT routes (e.g. the ones coming off the 427). However at this point we don't even know how many routes will service the Kipling terminal once its built versus how many will stay at Islington. Even if the subway were extended as far as Dixie/Dundas, Route 1 would very likely continue and would probably service both the Dixie subway and the East Mall stop. I could see Route 3 rerouted to the East Mall stop, but they may just have it continue on to Islington as it does now.

My point is, the subway extension doesn't become useful to Mississauga Transit until it breaches the border and hits Dixie/Dundas at the very least (where it would bisect the 1 and the 5 so they could feed it from both directions). What would be more useful, in the medium term, would be the Dundas LRT since the subway will never serve the portion of Dundas between Dixie and East Mall, which according to Google Maps is 3.8 km, so the LRT will be needed there regardless.

You do not really understand the concept if you think that I was merely suggesting that we dash some lines of paint down the highway system and brand that as Bus Rapid Transit. I am saying that the bus network as it exists today can transport more people to more destinations where customers actually want to go or where they originate from in contrast to the one subway line that will snake along in excess of 45 stations and 90 minutes from end to end. To what end? Sherway would be just as practical as an East Mall station for buses exiting off the 427, except even better because the former site has greater land availability for a mass interregional terminal facility that can be built on the northeastern corner of the Sherway Gardens property where nothing but car spaces exist today. The introduction of private bus-only ramps and a dedicated road-median ROW design makes the runtimes up and down the 427 remarkably fast. The marrying of a subway or LRT onto Dundas Street is subject because per BRT implementation at Sherway Gardens the bus would operate faster and run more frequently than light-rail and cost significantly less than heavy rail. And like I said above, not only Dundas, but also buses running along Burnhamthrope, Eglinton, and Dixon would also get exclusive on/off access ramps from their on-street operations to the road-median busway.

I am nowhere as convinced that Sherway is of no value. Remember that this is a Toronto Transit Commission metro (as in urban) subway line so the suggestion to bypass the closest thing to an urban centre we’ve got on the Toronto/Mississauga border is ridiculous. Does not a fair share of Sherway patrons (mall, hospital, office park, big box centre) consist of visitors from Mississauga? For routes like the 5 and 23 getting dumped off at the Long Branch bus shed to lay wait the infrequent 501 car doesn’t sound nearly as nice as staying on-board their bus straight into the nearest subway. For them that would be the Queensway/West Mall area. And let’s not forget the significance of the location in general. BRT routes from as far as Malton, Brampton, Woodbridge and Oakville could be serviced out of this station i.e. no more draconian transferring from one transit operator to the next as one passes through a municipal boundary, just the convenience of one-seat direct rides. So in essence, what average Joe 905 customers would be getting is GO Transit bus standards of speed and directness without being subject to GO's outrageous pricing schema nor infrequent scheduling of bus trips.

It’s kind of sad that you mention Dundas/Dixie as a logical terminus because we both know that no one will ever be satisfied with that. They’ll want to extend it next to Cooksville, then onto Square One, and I’ve even heard on this very forum cries to extend it all the way to Creditview/Burnhamthrope. What’s next: Erin Mills, Meadowvale, Lisgar? It is this mindset that will make by the year 2110 no part of the city/region will fetch anything beyond a few piecemeal LRT lines that if we’re lucky may stretch cross-town but will still be subject to mitigating traffic, weather, blackouts, road deterioration, and population drift just to name a few.

 

[GTS]

Adam Giambrone poste on Facebook:

"speaking @ Urban Transportation Summit this morning on transit expansion in TO. TTC has the largest FUNDED expansion program in North America and the largest LRT (in progress) expansion project in the world."

Hopefully we get some more transit announcements or at least some plans like the westward extension of the Bloor Line to compliment all the LRT plans and subway expansion. Toronto is going to be an incredible city for public transit in the near future. I will try and find out what was said at the Urban Transportation Summit.

 

[The Mad Navigator]

Hopefully we get some more transit announcements or at least some plans like the westward extension of the Bloor Line to compliment all the LRT plans and subway expansion. Toronto is going to be an incredible city for public transit in the near future. I will try and find out what was said at the Urban Transportation Summit.

That's only if it all gets built. Political wrangling has a habit of derailing and altering plans. Network 2011 ring a bell?

 

[gweed123]

That's only if it all gets built. Political wrangling has a habit of derailing and altering plans. Network 2011 ring a bell?

If that plan was built to the full extent, we would have a very different transit scenario in Toronto today... Thank you very much Mike Harris...

 

[The Mad Navigator]

If that plan was built to the full extent, we would have a very different transit scenario in Toronto today... Thank you very much Mike Harris...

Lesson here: Never elect a right wing small town mayor for premier if you want transit investment.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

That and if you want true transit you need operational funding, not ad hoc make work capital project funding.

 

[DavidH]

Lesson here: Never elect a right wing small town mayor for premier if you want transit investment.

The vast majority of Ontario voters were not looking for transit investment in 1995. They were also not looking for an anti-transit premier. They were looking for the perception of a steadier hand at the economy after the Bob Rae years, and a different approach to governance. They were also buying a pack of lies that they could have their services AND cut taxes too.

Unfortunately, we have yet to see a provincial election in which road congestion and public transportation are an election issue.

 

[The Mad Navigator]

The vast majority of Ontario voters were not looking for transit investment in 1995. They were also not looking for an anti-transit premier. They were looking for the perception of a steadier hand at the economy after the Bob Rae years, and a different approach to governance. They were also buying a pack of lies that they could have their services AND cut taxes too.

Unfortunately, we have yet to see a provincial election in which road congestion and public transportation are an election issue.

My mistake: I don't think Mike Harris was a mayor of North Bay or any town for that matter.

I think what has to happen here is for a "shifting of thought processes" for the general public in cities, and the ONLY way to accomplish that is to market transit as a significantly better alternative to driving. At present, that isn't the case and not enough is being done thus far.

It's almost like the province fears public transit expansion for some reason, like for instance, if your the premier and you support a high amount of public transit investment, then you risk sacrificing a lot of votes for the party.

 

[kEiThZ]

It's almost like the province fears public transit expansion for some reason, like for instance, if your the premier and you support a high amount of public transit investment, then you risk sacrificing a lot of votes for the party.

Public transit isn't a rough sell. Public transit in Toronto is a rough sell. First off the price tags tend to be unfathomable to non-GTA residents (Ottawa is building a grade separated fully segregated LRT and a bunch of transitways that will meet demand for 25 years for the price of the Eglinton LRT alone). Next, every public transit project actually seems to increase the amount of subsidy that's required. That makes the province even more reluctant to pitch in. If these planned LRTs don't reduce the ops costs for the TTC, you can bet the province is going to be twice as skeptical the next time TO needs money for transit expansion.

Finally, traffic has just not been an issue till now. Though, I'd argue that this is not the case anymore.

 

[gweed123]

I think what has to happen here is for a "shifting of thought processes" for the general public in cities, and the ONLY way to accomplish that is to market transit as a significantly better alternative to driving. At present, that isn't the case and not enough is being done thus far.

You're right. Unfortunately, the way Toronto is going about it is not the right way. You don't make transit the more attractive option by making the car less attractive, you make transit more attractive by making transit better. You don't want the options to be bad or worse, you want the options to be good or better. Boosting transit ridership by making it harder for people to drive, without actually improving transit at all, is pointless, and will only lead to more frustration.

 

[The Mad Navigator]

Public transit isn't a rough sell. Public transit in Toronto is a rough sell. First off the price tags tend to be unfathomable to non-GTA residents (Ottawa is building a grade separated fully segregated LRT and a bunch of transitways that will meet demand for 25 years for the price of the Eglinton LRT alone). Next, every public transit project actually seems to increase the amount of subsidy that's required. That makes the province even more reluctant to pitch in. If these planned LRTs don't reduce the ops costs for the TTC, you can bet the province is going to be twice as skeptical the next time TO needs money for transit expansion.

Finally, traffic has just not been an issue till now. Though, I'd argue that this is not the case anymore.

Yeah, you're right, it is a rough sell. I work just north of Emery village, and I'll tell you, I'm only 1 of 2 people in my office that takes transit to work. Most people think I'm crazy, but really, I'm saving money like no tomorrow.

I believe that if these projects had more accurate cost estimates, then we wouldn't have these cost overruns to begin with. The public sector is light years behind the private in this case. The cost & spending inefficiencies need to be addressed with more scrutiny (without the outright removal of transit lines), otherwise we'll just be back at sqaure one. I have faith in the LRT lines, only because I'm sick of riding buses in routes where the transit mode should be at least LRT in the minimum.

Traffic is an issue, just depends where and when in the city. Bring on congestion charges and road tolls. If you want to drive, be prepared to pay premium.

 

[The Mad Navigator]

You're right. Unfortunately, the way Toronto is going about it is not the right way. You don't make transit the more attractive option by making the car less attractive, you make transit more attractive by making transit better. You don't want the options to be bad or worse, you want the options to be good or better. Boosting transit ridership by making it harder for people to drive, without actually improving transit at all, is pointless, and will only lead to more frustration.

Duly noted.

Toronto needs a mayor WITH balls.

 

[GraphicMatt]

You're right. Unfortunately, the way Toronto is going about it is not the right way. You don't make transit the more attractive option by making the car less attractive, you make transit more attractive by making transit better. You don't want the options to be bad or worse, you want the options to be good or better. Boosting transit ridership by making it harder for people to drive, without actually improving transit at all, is pointless, and will only lead to more frustration.

I keep seeing people say this, and it's a nice sentiment, but it's not really true. Good, cheap and efficient transit generally comes at the expense of road space. To make transit better we necessarily must make it harder for people to drive.