News   Nov 01, 2024
Toronto’s Bike Lane Feud at an All-Time High
 2.1K     14 
News   Nov 01, 2024
Bayview Village Resubmission More Than Doubles Height Near Bessarion Station
 2.5K     3 
News   Nov 01, 2024
Drone Flight Captures Cladding Progress at Menkes' Maison 77 Clarendon
 747     0 

Whose vision of transit in Toronto do you support?

Whose vision of transit in Toronto do you support?

  • Steve Munro's vision (basically Transit City plus subway expansion for DRL and Yonge only)

    Votes: 82 49.7%

  • Save Our Subways vision (expanding all subway lines plus DRL and Eglinton)

    Votes: 83 50.3%
  • Total voters
    165
The SOS thread was shut down for a good reason. Please take your name-calling offline or the mods will shut down this thread as well (and any others this continues to spill over into).
 
Northern Magus said:
Reality check: Eglinton LRT is a subway in the most important section of its route. Ridership and a cost benefit analysis don't support building the rest of it underground.

And if your group is trying to deliver a prompt, it's going horribly wrong. Save Our Stubways is getting no attention beyond a small number of online transit geeks (myself included), and even then you''re failing to win over a majority of active UT members, even in an online poll with a strong self-selection bias for those in agreement with it. Outside of the immediate SOS group, reaction appears to be middling and mixed.

On top of that, no political candidates have aligned themselves with yourselves, let along a mayoral challenger. You've have received no media exposure. Nada. Unless you take the next logical step and run a slate of candidates, it's unlikely that this will change.
Click to expand...

1) The link you provided does not describe any ridership projections or cost benefit analysis. It is just a brief history of the Eglinton subway proposal.

2) I am aware of the ridership projections you mentioned (although they are located elsewhere). They predict the peak load in the 7,500 - 8,000 range, which is within the range of LRT capabilities.

I have concerns about those numbers though. The ridership modeling for a route like Eglinton is difficult, because it intersects many other routes. Hence, riders have choices: they can switch to Eglinton, or stay on the intersecting route. The fact that Eglinton is expected to get no more than 8,000 pphpd while Bloor gets 24,000, is somewhat suspicious.

3) This is not "my" group. I am not a member of SOS, and disagree with many parts of their plan. Nevertheless, I welcome the fact that they presented it, as this opens a chance (however small) to modify parts of Transit City.

4) If you support LRT and you feel that the SOS group is failing its cause, the better for you. You should not waste your valuable time debating the initiative which, according to your own opinion, has no chance to succeed anyway.
 
leopetr said:
The same people that are designing the LRT would be in charge of designing your hypothetical BRT. If they didn't put them in on one, they won't put them in on the other. If you want heated stations, campaign for heated stations on the LRT.
Click to expand...

Yeah, as if to say on-street, road median platforms and stops have the available space necessary to accommodate proper stations. If hypothetical BRT stations are treated as major interchanges same as metro they’ll have heated enclosures at minimum. The primary concern isn’t walk-in traffic, its transfer traffic from other parallel or intersecting routes. The 36, 39, 111, 112 would still exist per the introduction of BRT; BRT just gives long-haul commuters a break, relief from hour-long sojourns aboard local service buses or LRTs to the nearest subway. The overlapping of multiple routes along the single piece of ROW would result in every 90 seconds or better frequency during rush hour. I’m not to be blamed if the perception of BRT you’re getting from the Move Toronto report differs significantly from what I’ve posted all these months. I was not the author.

kettal said:
Flood plains and parklands: where a simple Tim Hortons could never possibly be built, but massive subway stations must.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I don’t think you ever heard me advocate for a stop in the flood plain, I’d personally recommend having the subway bypass the Jane intersection and have all Jane buses feed into Mt Dennis Stn.

Northern Magus said:
I wish that transit planning and construction were as simplistic as you imply, I really do. You're talking about building a 32km subway line from scratch. It would involve halting everything, throwing out all the work and planning done and going back to the drawing board, allowing community groups to weigh in, plans to be drawn up, considered and discussed, budgets debated and approved by three levels of government and two transit agencies, and then $15-20b ponied up once adjusted for inflation. Good luck. You're looking at 5-10 years to start and 15-20 years to finish.
I'm sure you and your pals will counter with more pie in the sky dreaming, but the reality is that no government would be able to fund your luxury line for a very long time.
Click to expand...

Sheppard East LRT was fast-tracked what it not? Many here have stated they didn’t even realize that an EA process had been pushed through initially. When political will gets behind a plan, it’s a lot easier to manipulate the public to vote in your favor or at least just passively object. If a strong, influential candidate came forward like Jane Pitfield and found a way to navigate the bureaucracy as such to put a major subway project or two on the docket without disrupting the concept of mass transit for every ward, then that person would be viewed as a hero, as someone willing to invest long-term in the growth and sustainability of transit in the city. The people are angry and frustrated. Many view the TTC as a menacing bully whom during a recession is making it more and more difficult for transit riders to afford their system. Business-owners are scared for their livelihoods in the wake of the 512 St Clair fiasco. Residents in many areas are contemplating a move to the 905. And the reliability and speed of their surface routes today are a joke. You can make up as many apologetics for the bureaucracy or the transit agency as you please, but the fact remains, cities of lesser importance than Toronto are managing to fund the build of fully grade-separated or exclusive at-grade ROW RT systems in 2010. Vancouver, Richmond, Quebec City, Gatineau, Winnipeg, Edmonton, Montreal.

The pie in the sky dreaming really starts and finishes with Transit City, IMO, an election campaign scare tactic used to advance the careers and pocket-wealth of the few (private contractors, overpaid consultants, TTC personnel and City Hall, some apartment dwellers) but does little for everyone else. See how 120 kms for $6 billion three years ago became 75 kms for $12 billion today. Yup, let’s see just how much new ridership it’ll actually generate in contrast to new metros. Push come to shove, many might just stay in their automobiles.
 
Rainforest isn't the only non-member of SOS who has been accused of being a part of it, scarberiankhatru has been a victim of the witch hunt as well. The attacks against SOS members and anyone the LRTistas think is a member of SOS are getting pretty ridiculous. But that's why God invented the ignore button.

I understand it's a lot easier to be defeatist and accept Transit City as is. SOS just wants something better.
 
Last edited:
Fresh Start said:
Yeah, I don’t think you ever heard me advocate for a stop in the flood plain, I’d personally recommend having the subway bypass the Jane intersection and have all Jane buses feed into Mt Dennis Stn.
Click to expand...

Well since nobody is going to use a floodplain station anyways, there won't be anybody waiting there in the cold on a winters day. Problem solved.
 
The options in the poll presented really give polar opposites i.e. TTC vs. SOS. I would have voted for a mid-option as obviously some corridors that need a subway, but some that are better represented by LRT.
 
andomano said:
The options in the poll presented really give polar opposites i.e. TTC vs. SOS. I would have voted for a mid-option as obviously some corridors that need a subway, but some that are better represented by LRT.
Click to expand...

To be fair, SOS isn't exactly of one mind either. The point of the poll was about vision. SOS envisions reviving the subway as the preferred method of rapid transit in the city. Transit City is about saving money and making do with what we have.
 
It's fascinating how close this poll turned out, at the very least. The Move Toronto plan is very populist with its whole "we deserve better!" undercurrent. I thought it'd win by a substantial margin.
 
Coruscanti Cognoscente said:
... our plan is based on TTC plans.
Click to expand...
That's complete and utter BS. Show me one person in TTC who supports this plan. That's like saying that the US supports the invasion of Ireland because in the back draw of some forgotten Pentagon filing cabinet is some WW2 invasion plan.

And I don't recall TTC ever supporting a BD extension to Sherway ... RTES was very negative on it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top