Fresh 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.
I will deny this! You will sully my good name no longer. In the 1960s a subway across Eglinton Avenue was justified:
http://torontoist.com/2010/05/oh_eglinton_rapid_transit_service_where_art_thou.php BOOM! In the
1980s it was still justified. In 1995 they actually started to build one across the corridor. That you're trying to justify a 20-km light rail for the same price tag as a 14-km subway is despicable. The most productive surface light rail line in the city, 504/508, presently only carries 55,000 daily. A subway paralleling the same corridor would carry in excess of 250k, perhaps 300,000 daily users right off the bat.
If an area's not dense enough to justify a subway, yet, I still think it's inexcusable to have cars and tracks sharing roadway. When you consider how many hundreds of millions of dollars rail lines cost to build in the first place, it's utterly inexcusable to even consider not grade-separating the road and rail from each other. It’s not for the sake of getting transit out-of-the-way as you put, it's to make the roadways safer and more convenient for pedestrians and cyclists to use and trips faster for every type of commuter. The fact is, most people with money would rather drive, and if you try to simultaneously force them to endure worsened congestion AND pay to subsidize the transit line that's visibly responsible for worsening that congestion, there's going to be a backlash and resentment. Build the light rail line in a way that makes it appear to be convenient and NOT interfere with traffic, and people might support it.
Honestly, there is no argument in favor of Transit City that cannot be effectively countered with facts. I’d take the TTC’s ridership projections with a grain of salt as they are notorious for fudging the numbers if it suits the administration’s agendas. Here’s a more unbiased source, and I quote:
“We estimate that (i) the value of potential real estate developments along the Eglinton transportation corridor is at least $7-16 billion; (ii) 170,000 new residents and 85,000 new jobs could be accommodated along the corridor without disrupting existing neighbourhoods (indeed, in Etobicoke and Scarborough, existing neighbourhoods would be enhanced); (iii) daily ridership on the subway/LRT line would be 300,000-450,000 passengers; and (iv) peak passenger flows in the peak direction would be 30,000-45,000 passengers/hour. We recognize, however, that simply building this transportation corridor would not be sufficient to guarantee that development along the corridor sufficient to generate the additional riders and jobs would occur; a pro-active set of complimentary policies by the City would be needed.”
http://www.geog.utoronto.ca/info/fa...orts/Eglinton Report(8May2003, no photos).doc.
Even if the TTC’s ridership projections are to be believed (in
2003 a pphpd of 4100 was announced for less than 1/5th of the entire Eglinton Crosstown corridor, so either they were lying then or are lying now to shoehorn this light-rail option through since we all know the population density around Eglinton’s increasing). I get the feeling that the folks at Metrolinx have probably discovered some inconsistencies and drawbacks to Transit City, and they are offering alternatives. For example, on the one hand you have ads on TTC subways describing Transit City as being ‘rapid transit’, yet the Sheppard East community consultations - which I personally atteneded - showed the opposite. If the cabal of LRT advocates within city council were to disappear or be outnumbered by realists come October, there’s no reason why Metrolinx, the province and federal government would object to subway expansion.
And just so that I'm not accused of being myopic in my promotion of a single modal solution, even electric buses have certain advantages over electric streetcars. They are quieter, without the squeal of steel wheels on steel rail. They don't need to tear up the streets to lay rails that are a nuisance to cars and a major hazard for bicycles (I speak from experience). They can manoeuvre around obstructions, thus are less likely to be blocked (the battery/intermittent contact designs can even be rerouted on other streets). Best of all, they have much better traction, thus can climb steeper grades and have much shorter stopping distances, leading to fewer accidents. BRT installations using these types of vehicles, particularly articulated ones, would be more than adequate for moderately busy corridors such as Finch Crosstown, Kingston, Albion-Wilson-York Mills-Ellesmere, and Sheppard East.
But back to Eglinton's proposed light rail; how will the TC LRVs handle the steep changes in elevation around the Eglinton corridor? Let’s compare to actual light rail in Boston. The trucks don't seem to be able to find the proper orientation relative to the rails, so they oscillate back and forth. The result is that the vehicle weaves from side to side like a drunken sailor. Boston's PCC's used to do this whenever they got up to speed in the downtown subway or along the Mattapan High Speed Line. Many low-floor LRV's suffer from this same phenomenon. Doesn’t bode well for Eglinton light-rail even through the tunnelled section now does it?
The project team's conclusion that streetcar will have lower operating costs on a per rider basis than say Bus Rapid Transit is based on an extraordinarily rosy prediction of incredible ridership growth in the corridor far in excess of TTC's service area as a whole. This is absolutely unbelievable given the demographic and geographic realities of Rexdale and Malvern-Rouge River. Those predictions are necessary if TTC and Metro are to get all that free federal money. The basic fact is that streetcars cost more to operate than buses and will remain so until $300 per barrel crude. What I have been trying to promote here on UT is a seamless cross-town service in a dedicated reserved right-of-way across the Finch corridor using the hydro fields where applicable; one that links up to the Sheppard corridor, to Westwood Mall, to the airport and Mississauga, to Malvern Town Centre, to Scarborough Centre, even to Durham Region. I would gladly trade an 11 km 1.2 billion Finch West LRT for that, ditto Sheppard East’s 14 km $1.1 billion boondoggle.
If wanting
real rapid transit upgrades for the entire city, including base-fare interregional links - not just a measly 51 kms for $8 billion that'll enforce more transfer points than what presently exists under the bus system - is what you consider makes me anti-transit, so be it. Better I be that than anti-common sense!!
