Whose vision of transit in Toronto do you support?

[Fresh Start]

I've been tellin' 'em to start posting flyers where-ever possible.

We have to treat Tramsit City and the Miller office as a dictatorship.

The bastards do not want public participation. They want token participation where they basically just inform us and then hope that we stfu. Oppose the dictatorship!!!

Quite frankly, I've lost all interest in promoting SOS because of the lack of support or even signs of enthusiasm for the cause from other members. The only hope we pro-subway advocates have now is the election of a Mayor and Council body with the common-sense and willingness to listen to what local constituents actually want running through their neighbourhoods. Citizens control the vote and with those votes we can still influence the agenda.

 

[rbt]

Quite frankly, I've lost all interest in promoting SOS because of the lack of support or even signs of enthusiasm for the cause from other members. The only hope we pro-subway advocates have now is the election of a Mayor and Council body with the common-sense and willingness to listen to what local constituents actually want running through their neighbourhoods. Citizens control the vote and with those votes we can still influence the agenda.

SOS and pro-subway advocates would have much better luck gaining support to secure funding for additional projects (Yonge subway line and DRL) if they abandoned the fight against projects currently in motion.

In Toronto it is very difficult to get a transit project started; or even finished once started. For SOS to fight against a project, like Eglinton (50 year lifespan as designed) and call themselves pro-transit is ridiculous.

It is very similar to working a dead-end job and turning down a raise because it wasn't big enough, then continuing to work the dead-end job anyway. Funding for Eglinton is about the same as what Hamilton, Mississauga, Kitchener/Waterloo, and York Region want for their short-term LRT/BRT lines. As the Ontario Premiere fighting an strongly anti-tax opponent with suburban support; this redistribution of funds would likely help get McGuinty re-elected. The likely hood of Hudak stepping up to fund Toronto's Eglinton project or winning large numbers of seats in Toronto is quite low; but he can win seats in the above-mentioned locations.

Politically, fighting for Eglinton to be a subway before the 2011 provincial election is akin to fighting for buses to remain on those routes. After the election, in the event of a McGuinty re-election, by all means -- though I would tend to focus my efforts on additional funding for the DRL and let Eglinton be whatever it will be.

 

[Second_in_pie]

I'd use your metaphor, but that if you turn down this raise, you have a high probability of getting a significantly larger one in the future.

 

[LAz]

In Toronto it is very difficult to get a transit project started; or even finished once started. For SOS to fight against a project, like Eglinton (50 year lifespan as designed) and call themselves pro-transit is ridiculous.

Building a 13 km tram tunnel instead of a subway tunnel is insane. That is anti-transit.

I'm loosing track here ... why are you trashing the Conservative party?

Am I? I think the liberal party is just as bad.
Lets take a look at what transit city is going. Are they looking at real alternatives? No. They are trying to ram through their own plan, completely disregarding all else. It's gonna be a mighty fine day when this anti-transit plan get buried.

But yeah, screw the conservative party and the liberal party.

Quite frankly, I've lost all interest in promoting SOS because of the lack of support or even signs of enthusiasm for the cause from other members.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the most enthusiasm has come from me, and I am not even in Toronto.

 

[Mapleson]

I'd use your metaphor, but that if you turn down this raise, you have a high probability of getting a significantly larger one in the future.

The question is if you hold out for that $1 an hour raise from MacDonald's, are you actually better off, or would you make more money if you'd taken that $0.50 raise last year?

Building a 13 km tram tunnel instead of a subway tunnel is insane. That is anti-transit.

Is it going to be a different diameter bore, or what else will make the tunnel not easily convertable between light and heavy rail use?

Am I? I think the liberal party is just as bad.
Lets take a look at what transit city is going. Are they looking at real alternatives? No. They are trying to ram through their own plan, completely disregarding all else. It's gonna be a mighty fine day when this anti-transit plan get buried.

But yeah, screw the conservative party and the liberal party.

Really, we need a new party that closer reflects the Canadian dicodomy: lowering taxes and raising services.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the most enthusiasm has come from me, and I am not even in Toronto.

SOS seems like a fruitless endevour to me. It doesn't seek political influence, but it includes condemnation of politically motivated projects. If you want to make a difference, focus on what difference you want to make. If you want to harp on about perils other systems, drop the pro-subway stance.

 

[Justin10000]

Building a 13 km tram tunnel instead of a subway tunnel is insane. That is anti-transit.

You should tell the German cities who built tram tunnels, and now have successful networks they are anti-transit.

Am I? I think the liberal party is just as bad.
Lets take a look at what transit city is going. Are they looking at real alternatives? No. They are trying to ram through their own plan, completely disregarding all else. It's gonna be a mighty fine day when this anti-transit plan get buried.

But yeah, screw the conservative party and the liberal party.

Time to start your own party? The Subway party! W

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the most enthusiasm has come from me, and I am not even in Toronto.

I pegged SOS as a hopeless cause when they attempted that silly petition, and could not even provide a serious response to Steve Munro's rebuttal of their plan.

 

[nfitz]

Is it going to be a different diameter bore, or what else will make the tunnel not easily convertable between light and heavy rail use?

The tunnel diameter will actually be bigger for the LRT, by about 0.2 m. This is because of the clearance for the power supply.

Give that the trains will be about twice as frequent with LRT, and will easily handle a lot more than the projected capacity in 25 years, I really don't see on what grounds anyone can object to this, other than not having some fetish about lines on a map fulfilled.

 

[gweed123]

You should tell the German cities who built tram tunnels, and now have successful networks they are anti-transit.

Are you suggesting that these German cities did not have successful networks before they build these tram tunnels?

I pegged SOS as a hopeless cause when they attempted that silly petition, and could not even provide a serious response to Steve Munro's rebuttal of their plan.

We did rebuttle it. We released an entirely new plan as a result. In fact, the 2nd version of the plan was not all that dissimilar from what Smitherman later proposed.

 

[gweed123]

The tunnel diameter will actually be bigger for the LRT, by about 0.2 m. This is because of the clearance for the power supply.

Give that the trains will be about twice as frequent with LRT, and will easily handle a lot more than the projected capacity in 25 years, I really don't see on what grounds anyone can object to this, other than not having some fetish about lines on a map fulfilled.

As I've said before, my biggest objection with Eglinton is the lack of grade-separation in the west. The lack of grade separation not only limits headways, but limits the lengths of trains. Running anything longer than paired trains through at-grade intersections is a safety risk, to both the passengers, the nearby pedestrians, and the vehicles on the road. Grade-separate the line, and you can run 6-car trainsets. If Eglinton was being built to the same standards as the Ottawa LRT project (platforms being built to eventually accomodate 6 car trainsets, tunneled central portion, full grade separation on the outer portions), I would have no quams with it. But it isn't. The central portion is, but the outer portions will ultimately hinder the capacity of the line. Grade-separate the western portion of the line, similar to the Scott St corridor in Ottawa. If this (http://www.ottawalightrail.ca/en/routes-stations/tunneys-pasture) was what was being proposed for the Richview corridor, I would be very happy. But it isn't. Instead a perfectly viable transit corridor is being left empty, while Eglinton is being ripped up instead.

 

[LAz]

You should tell the German cities who built tram tunnels, and now have successful networks they are anti-transit.

They started building them when their metro area had half a million people.
So seriously, stop looking silly comparing tiny hamlets to big Toronto. Look at Berlin if you are interested in something closer for comparison. Oh but wait, maybe better you don't, to avoid a heart attack once you see how huge their system is.

Time to start your own party? The Subway party! W

Meh, no. I kinda like the idea of supporting the Rhino party. They got some good ideas. Like paving all of manitoba.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neorhino.ca

could not even provide a serious response to Steve Munro's rebuttal of their plan.

I am not aware of his response or whatnot. I came a bit later I guess. But anyways, I don't see who the hell is steve murno, and why is he so "omg important". A major failure in urban planning is to try to make it only done by experts. Thus the concerns of the commoners get ignored, while the so called expert decides what to do. That's just wrong.
Take for example, Roxbury in Boston. A community that was really appalling. They however managed to organize - something that few are able to. What happened next was that over time they managed to be the ones leading the planning, rather than the experts from outside ramming things down into their belly. The experts wanted to gentrify their neighborhood, to displace the lower class. But because there was democracy and organization, the poor managed to throw out those plans and developed plans of their own - the neighborhood drastically improved - slowly, but it did over 20-30 years... and displacement was minimal. Quite a slap into the face of the so called experts. These hicks were able to do something more sustainable! So I say, "fuck the corporate rubber stamp expert". We need to take alternatives, and not be part of the broader menace of neoliberalism.

Is it going to be a different diameter bore, or what else will make the tunnel not easily convertable between light and heavy rail use?

We have a certain subway technology. We built the metro here. Hence we should continue building that if we build underground.

As I've said before, my biggest objection with Eglinton is the lack of grade-separation in the west.

They do not give a damn - be it the rubber stampers here, or the dictators in power.








The major failure here is that all plans ignore the major necessity - increasing growth management. To this there is major resistance. But it is what will make or break our city.

 

[gweed123]

They do not give a damn - be it the rubber stampers here, or the dictators in power.


The major failure here is that all plans ignore the major necessity - increasing growth management. To this there is major resistance. But it is what will make or break our city.

My concerns lie not so much with the choice of technology, but with the choice of the degree of grade-separation that will be used WITH that technology. It's easy to say "we're going to build LRT on major corridors throughout the city". On the surface, I do not 100% object to that (I do from the standpoint that there are some corridors that should certainly be using a higher capacity system than LRT). What I object to is the notion of "at-grade, in-median LRT will work for all of these corridors" (with the exception of Central Eglinton). This completely ignores the dynamics of the individual corridors. Because the fact is the degree of grade separation has just as big of a part to play in determining capacity, speed, and reliablility as the technology choice does. And the fact that the TTC believes that Eglinton West and East only deserve the same degree of grade separation as a streetcar along St. Clair West boggles my mind. They're completely different corridors, serving completely different purposes. Why use the exact same approach?

Not grade separating a line places severe restrictions on vehicle frequency, and vehicle length. When dealing with low to moderate ridership numbers, these factors are minor. But when the ridership gets up to near 10,000pphpd or above, these restrictions begin to play an enormous factor. Technology is not the fundamental flaw with Transit City, the inability to properly identify the degree of grade separation that is needed on a corridor is.

 

[Justin10000]

Are you suggesting that these German cities did not have successful networks before they build these tram tunnels?

I am suggesting Laz's claim you need subways to be pro-transit is ridiculous.

 

[gweed123]

I am suggesting Laz's claim you need subways to be pro-transit is ridiculous.

Yet you have insinuated on many occasions that favouring subways makes people anti-transit, because subways are just an excuse to get transit out of the way of cars. Both of your suggestions are equally wrong.

 

[Second_in_pie]

I think the idea between Justin's claim is that with LRT you can build 10x as much track as you can with subway. The big thing that I think all you LRTistas need to realize is that subway in no way needs to cost 300 million/km. In fact, tunnel bored subways don't even need to cost that. Stop building stations to rival European cathedrals with 3 exits for each side of the street and large bus bays that will go unused, and costs will go way down.

On top of that, LRT all the way people totally disregard the simple notion of creating an elevated ROW or trenching or cut 'n cover. To add to gweed's previous post, the notion that TC is proposing the exact same thing on Eglinton West as on St. Clair, when there's a completely free corridor set aside almost specifically for transit that could accomidate far higher speeds, capacity and reliability literally on the same corridor, is just crazy.

 

[Justin10000]

Yet you have insinuated on many occasions that favouring subways makes people anti-transit, because subways are just an excuse to get transit out of the way of cars. Both of your suggestions are equally wrong.

Fresj Start has made it clear he only wants subways because it is out of the way of cars. Do you deny this? There is more than enough evidence in threads to validate it. This is anti-transit as it gets. I have made it clear so many times, I favour subways where justified, but you and others just ignore it, because you want an LRT vs. Subway debate.