THANK YOU!

I would rather see Eglinton as a full subway but an LRT is alright - Sheppard, I draw the line!

It's already a subway, FINISH IT!I definitely see where you're coming from, but I question the logic in trying to correct a small mistake by expending it into a big one. A subway should never have been buil on sheppard in he first place, and I think the whole thing should be converted into LRT. The underground section just needs a couple more stations so it can better server the local ridership.

Making Eglinton into full subway isn't a bad idea though.

I definitely see where you're coming from, but I question the logic in trying to correct a small mistake by expending it into a big one. A subway should never have been buil on sheppard in he first place, and I think the whole thing should be converted into LRT. The underground section just needs a couple more stations so it can better server the local ridership.

Making Eglinton into full subway isn't a bad idea though.

It's a mistake because it's not used to its full potential. Already, ridership on Sheppard is growing steadily, development is booming alongs its corridor.. The extended subway will create a string of density between two major population centres in the GTA.

Sobering post by a forumer on UT:

I rode the Bloor streetcar in 1965, and it could very well have continued as a streetcar line. I take it you got that 9,000 number from Steve Munro's website. Well, Steve conveniently fails to mention that that 9,000 was at the peak point ONLY, and for maybe just 2 hours a day. When the subway opened in 1966, the loading on it was very LIGHT, and I recall everyone getting a seat, with seats to spare, even during rush hours. There were roughly 50,000 riders per day on the Bloor side, and another 50,000 on the Danforth side, for a total of 100,000. This is comparable to ridership on the Sheppard subway today (considering that it's only 1/2 of the length of the original Keele-Woodbine segment of the Bloor St. line).

By the way, ridership on BD is now 480,000 per day.

With the growth Toronto is experiencing this will definitely happen on Sheppard as well.. Back then infrastructure was built for future needs not current needs (using projections for LRT vehicles only).. That was one of my biggest concerns with TC.. No accounting for the future.

I think building for future needs is wonderful! But only if you're not doing it while current needs are being neglected.

If you can show that at the time when the Sheppard line was built there was no other corridor that needed it more, then I'll agree that it wasn't a mistake. But I have a hard time believing that projects like the DRL and Eglinton wouldn't have been far more successful.

As for attracting riders, there are people who will not ride a bus because, regardless of how flashy it is, it is still a bus and there is a stigma against that. LRT and subways are more appealing. If the CTrain was a BRT system, it would be nowhere near as successful as it is today.

If the CTrain was Transit City it also would be nowhere near as successful as it is today.

Transit City is supposed to help provide a bandage for these issues until the provincial and federal governments cough up some money to replace them with subways. It's the equivalent of having a Toyota to meets your ends until you can afford a Benz.

Actually during the funding negotiations for Transit City, it was the city which was pushing the current plan and the province was pushing an elevated rapid transit plan. [source: http://stevemunro.ca/?p=4705]

Also, Transit City is not LRT. I’ve lived in Calgary and used the CTrain, I am familiar with LRT. Transit City does not represent true LRT. The narrow stop spacing, the ROW and the lack of railway crossings at intersections disqualifies Transit City as LRT. Transit City is essentially BRT but with streetcars.

Compare Transit City's Environmental Assessments (http://www3.ttc.ca/About_the_TTC/Projects_and_initiatives/Transit_city/News_and_Reports/Transit_City_Approvals.jsp) to Calgary’s West LRT plan (http://www.westlrt.ca/contentarchives/westlrthistory.cfm) and it will be evident that Transit City is not LRT.

Isn't a hybrid plan going to increase transfers during trips and make public transit disjointed?

I would rather we either go 100% subways or 100% LRT.

I don't believe the article's reference to a hybrid plan refers to a hybrid of technologies, rather a hybrid between Rob Ford's proposed routes and Transit City's proposed routes. In all likelihood the only lines which will remain are phase one of Transit City's Eglinton, Ford's Sheppard and maybe Ford's Scarborough.

If the article I linked above is any indication, the lines will be elevated with a limited underground section in central Eglinton. The Sheppard extension and the Eglinton route will be very similar to Vancouver's Canada Line: fewer subway cars and in the case of Eglinton, narrower subway cars on a standard gauge.

Something to ponder: the total cost of Vancouver's Canada Line was $2 billion (approx. $140 million per kilometre).

I think building for future needs is wonderful! But only if you're not doing it while current needs are being neglected.

If you can show that at the time when the Sheppard line was built there was no other corridor that needed it more, then I'll agree that it wasn't a mistake. But I have a hard time believing that projects like the DRL and Eglinton wouldn't have been far more successful.

To bad life wasn't always like that. Althrough my life I had to make sacrifices so that some of my future needs can be fulfilled. I wonder what type of world where all my needs can be fulfilled as well as not having to make any sacrifices for my future, I would really want to live in that world.

I have driven along Sheppard quit a few times last couple of weeks to research if it justifies extention to STC. From my observations work has started underground and it is perfectly setup just like Yonge to Downsview. Every stop mentioned is either already open space or decaying building that can be demolished for new complexes and towers. Even the Agincourt Go and Progress St. are cleared up space for a future station. I look forward to 2015 now so that I can have a ride along the entire stretch from Yonge to STC.

The Sheppard line should probably be a subway along its whole length, I never really got the whole "and then at this point everyone gets out and goes into a different vehicle to continue their trip!" thing.

Subways on every street, and a stop at everyone's doorstep! No more transferring to a different vehicle to continue their trips!

On a more serious note, the Sheppard subway is going to drain most of the available funding. Completing the subway is a non-starter. It should not have been built in the first place. mistakes made we learned. Build the SELRT, make the transfer as easily as possible, and move on!


Aside from a downtown relief line, the other lines should be fine as LRT.

Everyone agrees on this one.

The Sheppard line should probably be a subway along its whole length, I never really got the whole "and then at this point everyone gets out and goes into a different vehicle to continue their trip!" thing.

Aside from a downtown relief line, the other lines should be fine as LRT.

Are you still living downtown? You seem to have seen the light with the Sheppard extention, what makes you still want a DRL? Everthing from west of Eaton Center to Chinatown is with in walking distance. As a tourist when visiting Toronto those are the main places for to see. If I want to go distillery districk or King west or Lakefront I'd take a streetcar or cab.

If you agree with Sheppard you have to realize this is going to be a big project and is going to change the way the city commutes. When all is said and done more Torontonians will be heading to North York then to Downtown for work. What is there 10 office towers in the finacial dritict for 6mil people in the GTA? What will it be like when GTA hits 12mil or 15mil people. There will have to be atleast 10 more office Towers built. They will not all fit in the old Finacial ditrict, they will still fit in North York. The old Toronto skyline is going to be nothing more then a tourist trap to get people wanting to come see this city.

http://media.thestar.topscms.com/images/38/cd/981755bc4d69b162c708424106e9.jpeg

Source: Toronto Star

http://www.thestar.com/news/transportation/article/916372--subways-would-cost-more-and-serve-fewer-group-says?bn=1#photo

The Toronto Star has an article about a report from the Pembina Institute, I decided to go to the website:

I have yet to read the report but here are the highlights, Pembina posted on their website:


The analysis compares the four funded light rail transit projects with the proposed subway extension. The study finds:

The LRT projects would deliver more than twice as much service for every dollar invested compared to the proposed subway extension.

The LRT projects would bring rapid transit service to six times as many low-income residences as an extended subway.

The four LRT lines would bring rapid transit to the doorsteps of 290,000 Torontonians (within a six-minute walk) - while this is true for only 60,000 people by extending the subway.

The light rail projects would attract 126 million rides each year, getting up to 140,000 vehicles out of traffic; the proposed subway extension would attract half as many rides (65 million) and leave up to 70,000 more vehicles stuck in gridlock.

The LRT projects result in cleaner air and less climate change pollution, reducing vehicle emissions by more than 200,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent by 2031, compared to just 75,000 tonnes of reductions under the subway plan.

The proposed subway plan wouldn't begin operating until 2020, while the planned LRT service is scheduled to start running in 2014.

"The main difference with the current light rail plan is the way it connects people with the places they need to get to," Burda said. "Low-income commuters and people living in underserved areas will have an affordable, reliable way to get to work and around the city. Rapid light rail transit offers an efficient alternative to driving, while revitalizing the neighbourhoods it runs through. It really is a win-win solution."

"As Metrolinx and TTC discuss the options, this analysis brings some numbers to the table - not just costs, but where and who transit will serve."

Original posting, and a link to the report is here:

http://www.pembina.org/media-release/2152

http://media.thestar.topscms.com/images/38/cd/981755bc4d69b162c708424106e9.jpeg

Source: Toronto Star

http://www.thestar.com/news/transportation/article/916372--subways-would-cost-more-and-serve-fewer-group-says?bn=1#photo

But a streetcar-based plan will shave less time off people's commutes than a heavy-rail subway. We shouldn't look solely at the number of people served.

It's not a streetcar based plan, and the travel time, and reliabilty would be significantly improved over the current buses that ply the routes.

We SHOULD be looking at serving the most number of people, your logic is flawed! Why wouldn't you want to serve the most number of people, especially when the travel time difference between a subway, and LRT has shown to be marginal?

Travel time is not the only factor that attracts riders to transit.

Plan on the left is like holding pocket Aces, when the flop comes AAKKQ. AKQ are hearts though. The plan on the right is not as good a starting hand because its only J10 but in the end the J10 of hearts still beats the pocket aces. morol of the story what doesn't look like much in the beginning is going to turn into a royal flush at the end.

Yeah, whatever.

Transit City is like a Royal Flush. It's a winner!

:banana:

Winner? I guess that's why the Liberals destroyed half of it and Ford the rest (Eglinton LRT possibly going through, nothing sure as of yet)..

You LRTistas make me laugh because you still believe TC will go through by ways of your hero McGuinty and Metrolinx.. Guess what? They have an election to face.. Why would they invest their time chasing an ex mayor's dream?
If it was such a clear winner nobody would criticize it or try to dismantle it, no?

Subways FTW.. Every city worth its weight is investing massively in them.

Yeah, whatever.

Transit City is like a Royal Flush. It's a winner!

:banana:

Royal Flush, hardly. Transit City is a very ill conceived plan. The plan suffers from a number of problems which it seems supporters are unwilling or unable to recognise.

Eglington is considerably under serviced by Transit City. Central Eglington has significant commercial development in place. In addition the connection to Pearson has the potential to generate a considerable amount of traffic. Eglington needs Rapid Transit. Not to the same scale as the as the existing Subway but comparable to Vancouver's Canada Line (the cost of which is $140 million per kilometre).

At the same time the proposed lines on Don Mills, Finch and Jane are overkill. LRT is simply too much for the area. Don Mills, Finch and Jane would be well served by a busway. Busways would be considerably cheaper.

While Sheppard could be also be replaced with a busway with the option of adding a subway extension down the line.

The potential cost savings on Sheppard, Don Mills, Jane and Finch would be more than enough to support the construction of a rapid transit on Eglington.

Royal Flush, hardly. Transit City is a very ill conceived plan. The plan suffers from a number of problems which it seems supporters are unwilling or unable to recognise.

You're just full of soundbites!


Eglington is considerably under serviced by Transit City. Central Eglington has significant commercial development in place. In addition the connection to Pearson has the potential to generate a considerable amount of traffic. Eglington needs Rapid Transit. Not to the same scale as the as the existing Subway but comparable to Vancouver's Canada Line (the cost of which is $140 million per kilometre).

Much of the line is tunneled, and will offer speeds equal to the Bloor-Danforth subway. The sections that will be on the surface are in areas that are wide enough to support surface rail, and do not have the density to justify subways. That is the beauty of LRT! VERSATILITY! The LRT, as planned will not be the only rapid transit link to the Airport. The ARL will link the airport, the 190 Airport rocket will most likely still be in service, and you have the proposed Finch LRT to the Airport. The airport is being well-served with many potential lines. Much better than one subway that will never be built!


At the same time the proposed lines on Don Mills, Finch and Jane are overkill. LRT is simply too much for the area. Don Mills, Finch and Jane would be well served by a busway. Busways would be considerably cheaper.

:lol:

I love how you speak as if you're an expert on transit! That is cute! Seriously though, the Finch LRT is sorely needed. The Finch bus needs to replaced. It is at capacity, slow, and many buses taking up road space. How is building a LRT line, and replacing many buses with fewer, larger trains "overkill"? A busway will most likely be built in the hydro corridor, far from Finch. How that better than LRT on Finch? It's not!

The Jane LRT design is already problematic with trying to fit a track on Jane! How is a busway that takes up more space better? Lesson, noob, Busways TAKE UP more space! Just so you know.

Same goes with the Don Mills. The better idea is to extend the DRL to Eglinton, and run the LRT from there into York Region. York is receptive to the Don Mills, but what do they know? They should listen to you!
While Sheppard could be also be replaced with a busway with the option of adding a subway extension down the line.


The potential cost savings on Sheppard, Don Mills, Jane and Finch would be more than enough to support the construction of a rapid transit on Eglington.

A group called SOS already tried to prove that, and their numbers were thoroughly debunked. Their answer? They came back with a plan with LESS subway to justify their position!

You, like Filip, do not care about transit. You're just like ROb Ford, who wants transit out of the way of your car!

Winner? I guess that's why the Liberals destroyed half of it and Ford the rest (Eglinton LRT possibly going through, nothing sure as of yet)..

If it was a subway plan, it probably would not have been built! Do not forget what happened to Sheppard, and the 2011 plan.... Politicians could care less about the technology! When they want to cut, they will cut!


Subways FTW.. Every city worth its weight is investing massively in them.

:lol: Every city worth their weight is also investing in LRT! Only buffoons would support killing a network plan to build a subway in a suburb!

(I did not bother responding to the previous paragraph, because it is Filip's usual nonsensical crap!)

Just spent two weeks in Australia, where they love cars as much as we do and their cities are just as dense (or not) as ours... but their transit is 100x better. So much heavy rail/underground heavy rail, trams, etc that it makes me shake my head at our country...

Now is time to add a subway for Sheppard, there is no point waiting for construction cost to increase. Work looks like it's already started underground, let's not prolong the future but instead imbrace why don't we. Should go check out all the stops every once and a while. If you do you'll see how each stop has huge potential of multiple highrise developement.

As far as Eglington I say it's well enough served with buses. If Sheppard was able to make do with buses for all those years, Eglington can survive with buses as well.

A new subway option can be a connection from Ellsmere SRT station going north underneath the go rail tracks. This would give the east end of the city a north/south subway much like what Spadina subway does for the west end.

January 5th 2011 CBC News

Ford's subways pricier, reach fewer than LRT: report

Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2011/01/05/subway-light-rail-report241.html#ixzz1ADHzlxQf
Toronto Mayor Rob Ford's planned subway expansion will take years longer to implement than the current Transit City light rail plan, is more expensive and will reach fewer people, a new report says.

Making Tracks to Torontonians, prepared by the Pembina Institute, an energy think tank based in Calgary, was released Wednesday to "inform city council how best to invest the current allocated budget for necessary transit in Toronto."
Transit City Lines

Sheppard LRT. Expected completion date: 2014.

Eglinton Crosstown LRT. Expected completion date: 2020.

Finch West LRT. Expected completion date: 2019.

Scarborough LRT. Expected completion date: 2020.

There are four other lines that are being considered, but they are in a preliminary evaluation stage and have not received any funding.

The report used numbers from the regional transit agency Metrolinx to determine that the four Transit City light rail lines that have secured $8.15 billion in provincial funding will cost on average $140 million per kilometre to build. That number includes rail yards and tunnelling costs that will be incurred for the underground portion on the Eglinton Crosstown LRT.

Meanwhile, the report pegged the cost of Ford's subway plan at $6.2 billion, based on spending estimates of $300 million per kilometre of track plus a $500 million rail yard.

The total estimated cost per kilometre of Ford's subway plan, the report says, is $344 million. Ford has pledged to scrap the Transit City plan in favour of expanding the city's subway network by:

* Linking the Don Mills station to Scarborough Town Centre.
* Linking Downsview station to Sheppard station.
* Replacing the Scarborough RT with a full-fledged subway station.

"It's great to have a mayor and council that are committed to investing in Toronto's transit network," said co-author Cherise Burda in a news release. "Taxpayers in this city need to be confident that they're investing in the option that is the most fiscally responsible and will deliver the best commuter service for the most people."
Wait expected for subways

Implementing the current Transit City plan will also be much easier than a new subway plan, the report said.
Rob Ford's transportation plan
Campaign literature outlining transit priorities.

It cites a November Toronto Transit Commission briefing note that estimates construction on Ford's planned Sheppard Avenue subway extension will likely not begin until 2014 at the earliest and will not be completed before 2020. This is contrary to Ford's assertion that all lines would be completed before 2015 in time for the Pan Am Games.

Construction has already begun on the Sheppard Ave. light rail line as envisioned in the Transit City plan, and the first portion of the line, linking Don Mills subway to the Scarborough town centre, is expected to be completed by 2014.

The report compares the relative speeds of the three modes of transit under consideration. It makes the distinction between streetcars, which travel at speeds of 10-20 kilometres an hour in optimal conditions, and light rail vehicles, which top out at 25-30 kilometres an hour. Subway trains travel at a speed of up to 30-40 kilometres an hour.

"These speeds are unlikely to be reached in typical operating conditions but provide a relative comparison between options available," the report says.

According to the report, subway trains can carry more people, with the average capacity of a six-car subway train being around 1,100 individuals. Meanwhile, the Bombardier light rail vehicles that will run in the city have a total capacity of around 175.

The report also estimates that the four LRT lines would serve an additional 290,000 people who live within six minutes' walking distance of one of the stops.

However, Ford's subway plan "would serve just one region of the city" and would place stops within a six-minute walk of 61,000 people.


Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2011/01/05/subway-light-rail-report241.html#ixzz1ADHiAoOq

IMO it would be best to keep and move forward with the current metrolink plan and Ford can do his best to champion the DRL. That line will better sever more people one the east and west ends of our city.

You're just full of soundbites!

Wait, like you aren't?


Much of the line is tunneled, and will offer speeds equal to the Bloor-Danforth subway. The sections that will be on the surface are in areas that are wide enough to support surface rail, and do not have the density to justify subways. That is the beauty of LRT! VERSATILITY! The LRT, as planned will not be the only rapid transit link to the Airport. The ARL will link the airport, the 190 Airport rocket will most likely still be in service, and you have the proposed Finch LRT to the Airport. The airport is being well-served with many potential lines. Much better than one subway that will never be built!
Oh please.. Versatility?
It's a fucking expensive streetcar.. $20 billion is what is being thrown around now as the cost for the FULL TC network... Far cry from the $6 billion quoted by Miller & Co. in 2007.


:lol:

I love how you speak as if you're an expert on transit! That is cute! Seriously though, the Finch LRT is sorely needed. The Finch bus needs to replaced. It is at capacity, slow, and many buses taking up road space. How is building a LRT line, and replacing many buses with fewer, larger trains "overkill"? A busway will most likely be built in the hydro corridor, far from Finch. How that better than LRT on Finch? It's not!

And what makes you an expert? The fact that you align yourself with LRT?

The Jane LRT design is already problematic with trying to fit a track on Jane! How is a busway that takes up more space better? Lesson, noob, Busways TAKE UP more space! Just so you know.

I would go as far as saying busways are even more versatile.. But it's a bus and it runs on diesel so therefore it's dangerous, makes baby Jesus cry, kills kittens.. etc yada yada leftist crap.


Same goes with the Don Mills. The better idea is to extend the DRL to Eglinton, and run the LRT from there into York Region. York is receptive to the Don Mills, but what do they know? They should listen to you!
While Sheppard could be also be replaced with a busway with the option of adding a subway extension down the line.

I actually agree with this.


A group called SOS already tried to prove that, and their numbers were thoroughly debunked. Their answer? They came back with a plan with LESS subway to justify their position!

Their numbers weren't debunked, they were simply ridiculed by streetcar fetishists like Munro who has numerous times already (even on UrbanToronto) been proven to skew statistics to suit his arguments.


You, like Filip, do not care about transit. You're just like ROb Ford, who wants transit out of the way of your car!
I don't own nor drive a car btw; but dealing with the 501 streetcar as my *only* commute option downtown has made me bitter about the TTC's management of surface rail vehicles. Literally, the only trustworthy commute option is the subway, no wonder the vast majority of Torontonians want to see the network grow.. They see what LRT (streetcars) are like and cannot fathom having them growing like genital warts all over the city.

January 5th 2011 CBC News

Ford's subways pricier, reach fewer than LRT: report



Comparing Ford's plan to the FULL TC network, which isn't even funded let alone even on the radar, is a strong sign of bad journalism.

If that's what we're doing we might as well use the Network 2011 plan to compare with the entire Transit City, so let's include the Eglinton line from the Allen to the Airport, Sheppard from Downsview to Scarborough Town Centre and the Downtown Relief Line doing its U at the bottom.

Comparing Ford's plan to the FULL TC network, which isn't even funded let alone even on the radar, is a strong sign of bad journalism.

If that's what we're doing we might as well use the Network 2011 plan to compare with the entire Transit City, so let's include the Eglinton line from the Allen to the Airport, Sheppard from Downsview to Scarborough Town Centre and the Downtown Relief Line doing its U at the bottom.


Well if you read the full artical you would know it was based on per km. And it was just a report done on a study. A study being one of those things that Ford never seems to care for. That and salad.

Filip, I understand it's not the Toronto Sun, so not real news to a Ford supporter.

You seem to have seen the light with the Sheppard extention

No, the whole time I have thought it was stupid to have a subway for four stops then an LRT for another 6 stops then the Scarborough RT after that. Just make it a subway. Even continue it west then have it turn south and connect to the Bloor line to create a loop, though that would be even worse without a downtown relief line because getting south of Bloor would be so difficult; subway cars would be too full. In some cities you have to wait about 10 minutes for several subway cars to go by before you can get on. Do you want that in Toronto? How would you like it if we removed half the lanes on every freeway?

The Sheppard Subway is probably the most stupid public transit project in North America, but connecting it with LRT to another form of rapid transit that connects it back to another subway is stupid too. If we could magically teleport it to Eglington that would be nice. :)

what makes you still want a DRL? Everthing from west of Eaton Center to Chinatown is with in walking distance.

I've never been to Toronto but as I understand it, Young-University south of Bloor is very crowded, hence the name, "Downtown Relief Line". The infrastructure is at its limits, short of full automation and magically expanded stations you can't fit more people into those tracks. The DRL will also allow streetcars on Queen to be removed, opening up more room for your precious cars.

Toronto's subway is too top heavy. Ford's plan will give it a good net in part of the suburbs, but there will be a horrible bottleneck downtown that will make the system virtually unusable within a few years. From an investor's standpoint, expanding suburban infrastructure without expanding urban capacity is a very bad idea. It would be like having the 401 dump all of its cars onto Yonge Street.

My city's transit system is like this. A bunch of suburban routes dumping everyone onto a single trunk route that simply cannot handle the capacity and functions very poorly. It makes the transit system inefficient and that wastes money, they very thing Ford is against, but that is what he will get if he adds more feeders onto an already crowded line.

BTW, 61,000 people saving 20 minutes is less than 630,000 people saving 5 minutes.

Rob Ford wants to dump another 30,000 -60,000 onto this line every day. Smart one Rob, but then you never use the TTC so what do you care?

5JVtdFHaP7w

So Finch, Eglinton (for argument's sake) Sheppard LRT dumping from that potential 610 000 people served onto that line isn't?

We all know Transit City is nothing but a glorified feeder to the YUS line so I think you struck out on that one, Andrew.

Transit city isn't designed to shuttle people onto one subway line. Not sure how I struck out there. Have you looked at the Transit City map? I know you have so I know you must know I did not strike out.

Your mayor is a useless tool that will only slow things down for the burbs transit wise until we get a new mayor in 3.75 years. His plan screws over the people that voted for him the most so I guess get what they deserve.

Enjoy your buses burbs for the next 10-20-30+ years, who knows?

This man will be in charge in 2014, and he supports Transit City. I think you'll find out Filip that being loud can only get you so far, you actually need to be smart as well to run Toronto. Ford lacks one of those qualities.
http://nationalpostnews.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/1209tory.jpg?w=620

By the time Tory becomes mayor (I'd vote for him) Transit City will be a distant memory and subway expansion will once again be on the front of transit expansion priority.

And yes, I have looked at a Transit City map, at least the one we're getting... Where is Finch going to dump riders? YUS, Eglinton? YUS, Sheppard? The subway with connection to YUS.. EVERYTHING IS GETTING DUMPED ON THAT LINE.. Do you truly believe it won't wreak havoc on an already congested line? You claim Sheppard doesn't have the ridership to justify a subway extension yet you claim it would overpower the YUS line... Doesn't even matter that Eglinton, Finch, and the Sheppard LRT would (according to your sources) carry a fuckload more in total than Sheppard yet not destroy the Yonge trunk line?

I'm afraid I'm confused.

It's not a streetcar based plan, and the travel time, and reliabilty would be significantly improved over the current buses that ply the routes.

We SHOULD be looking at serving the most number of people, your logic is flawed! Why wouldn't you want to serve the most number of people, especially when the travel time difference between a subway, and LRT has shown to be marginal?

Travel time is not the only factor that attracts riders to transit.
I doubt subway travel time is marginally better than LRT, given LRT has to cope with traffic lights and more stops along the same distance. I doubt you can go from Finch to Bloor on LRT in 30 minutes by LRT but it's perfectly achievable by subway.

So by your logic, 100,000 people saving 1 minute each is better than 30,000 people saving 10 minutes each? The 100,000 will barely feel the improvement but the 30,000 will definitely feel a shorter commute.

Coverage range is only one of many factors transit planners need to consider. Subways are meant to go long distances without stops. If they keep the 2km spacing between stations, subways will most definitely be faster than LRT.

By the time Tory becomes mayor (I'd vote for him) Transit City will be a distant memory and subway expansion will once again be on the front of transit expansion priority.

And yes, I have looked at a Transit City map, at least the one we're getting... Where is Finch going to dump riders? YUS, Eglinton? YUS, Sheppard? The subway with connection to YUS.. EVERYTHING IS GETTING DUMPED ON THAT LINE.. Do you truly believe it won't wreak havoc on an already congested line? You claim Sheppard doesn't have the ridership to justify a subway extension yet you claim it would overpower the YUS line... Doesn't even matter that Eglinton, Finch, and the Sheppard LRT would (according to your sources) carry a fuckload more in total than Sheppard yet not destroy the Yonge trunk line?

I'm afraid I'm confused.


Wow, you've had way to much kool-ade. The most Ford will get done is a few extra stops on Shepphard, and I'm all for that. The rest of TC will go ahead as planned. There are smarter and much more powerfull people out there then your mayor.

That video is of a rare accident occurance, you can not use that as any real evidence that toronto subways are over crowded. Not one person exited or enter that train, you notice?
What happen to my argument of developing to area not as conjested and moving the population around the city? If downtown is over crowding be the first to move out. DRL is Downtown Rail Line, Vid. We've been lobbying for it for years now. No peep of word as to when or if they, the Metrolinks group are even considering it.

I am fine with the way Toronto skyline looks doesn't need to get any denser for me. No need for DRL anymore, I'm actually against it now. Sheppard east is going to get built, might as well look for a condo along that stretch now.

Wow, you've had way to much kool-ade. The most Ford will get done is a few extra stops on Shepphard, and I'm all for that. The rest of TC will go ahead as planned. There are smarter and much more powerfull people out there then your mayor.

What Kool Aid? What is wrong with you? I'm simply stating the obvious and you completely circumvented my point! TC dumps riders on the YUS line.. How can the Sheppard extension lead to overcrowding when 3 TC lines won't? Explain please

Every LRT line currently planned (except for maybe Eglinton) are DEAD. This has been said by Ford, reiterated by the TTC and indirectly accepted by Metrolinx and by extension McGuinty.

You may want to have a look at our media from yesterday and Monday... Metrolinx is working with Ford to deliver the Sheppard subway and a tweaked Eglinton LRT which will focus more kilometres underground.. THAT'S IT. In fact, since this will lead to LRT being an orphan technology in Toronto (as Eglinton will be the only LRT line in the city) I fully see Metrolinx converting it into a subway line.. More miles underground already and everything is supposedly designed and engineered to be easily convertible to full subway technology.. So, what's stopping us?

You say you'd vote for Tory? His right hand man err woman has said that Transit City should go ahead as planned. Watch over the next few months as your mayor flounders on this issue, one he knows nothing about. All the experst are going to school him and it will be fun to watch.

So Finch, Eglinton (for argument's sake) Sheppard LRT dumping from that potential 610 000 people served onto that line isn't?

We all know Transit City is nothing but a glorified feeder to the YUS line so I think you struck out on that one, Andrew.

That's why Transit City seemed like a bad idea to me. There was nothing added to downtown in that plan either. Both of them ignore downtown but at least Transit City serves more than one neighbourhood. Part of the reason I would also support turning Sheppard and Bloor-Danforth into a giant loop, and maybe add another north-south subway somewhere in the centre or two to either side, who knows. Perhaps connect Don Mills and Jane LRT so that they go through downtown, providing another option? People east and west of those lines wouldn't have to go as far as YUS to get to downtown, they could transfer to a Don Mills/Jane/DRL route to get downtown instead. Could be LRT in the suburbs and underground LRT downtown.

You say you'd vote for Tory? His right hand man err woman has said that Transit City should go ahead as planned. Watch over the next few months as your mayor flounders on this issue, one he knows nothing about. All the experst are going to school him and it will be fun to watch.

It's fine if she said that a few months ago, in fact even now... Stintz was a strong supporter of Transit City.. Now she isn't.. Politicians change opinions like I change underwear - daily! Metrolinx has said Transit City will go ahead no matter what the mayor wants yet look at the situation now.

When things change on the ground, EVERYTHING changes. Metrolinx and McGuinty won't fight for a transit planned designed by a mayor who isn't even mayor anymore. They will not fight and lose political points by going against a very popular mayor on his platform when they are facing an election by the end of this year.

I just feel sad for people who can't accept that things have changed. When Ford leaves the mayor's chair (whether that's in four, eight or however many years) Transit City is long gone and dead. Nobody will revive a transit plan that took an intense political beating.. Network 2011 is dead and was replaced by a plethora of new plans.. Same goes with Transit City.

Let's just leave the misguided attempt at a transit plan for a big city to die peacefully.. Just leave it be.

RIP TC!

RIP level headed thinking by some.

That's why Transit City seemed like a bad idea to me. There was nothing added to downtown in that plan either. Both of them ignore downtown but at least Transit City serves more than one neighbourhood. Part of the reason I would also support turning Sheppard and Bloor-Danforth into a giant loop, and maybe add another north-south subway somewhere in the centre or two to either side, who knows. Perhaps connect Don Mills and Jane LRT so that they go through downtown, providing another option? People east and west of those lines wouldn't have to go as far as YUS to get to downtown, they could transfer to a Don Mills/Jane/DRL route to get downtown instead. Could be LRT in the suburbs and underground LRT downtown.

I got into numerous arguments with a forumer on UT about Eglinton being a subway line.. Apparently it would cause the collapse of the YUS line... (Even though it had lacklustre ridership, and not taking into account that a shitton more LRT lines would feed that subway)..

Never made sense to me, but for LRTistas, as long as it's on rails and on the streets it's God's gift to Torontonians!

RIP level headed thinking by some.

To be honest, I'm the one in our little argument providing actual arguments.. You're just going on about Ford = Evil, TRANSITCITYISTHEBESTESTZOMG.

Level headed isn't just about agreeing with you...

Actually you're the one that seems to be dismissing all of the facts pointed out in the reports I posted. You are the one that seems to be turing a blind I to all the facts. You subway rants are the smae old same old all the time Ford = Good SCREWDOWNTOWNNOMATTERWHATTHECOST.

Also Julian Deans with Tory by her side made that comment about Ford and his transit plan one week after election. If you actually knew who was on Tory's team you would know it's not Stinz at all. Tory could care less about Stinz.

Seriously, if you say you'd support Tory should you not know more about him? Or is this how you vote, blindly?

I'm too grumpy about Team Canada's loss to argue with you Filip, you are a good guy I just hate you in this thred ;) . Time for some cartoons and video games.

Actually you're the one that seems to be dismissing all of the facts pointed out in the reports I posted. You are the one that seems to be turing a blind I to all the facts. You subway rants are the smae old same old all the time Ford = Good SCREWDOWNTOWNNOMATTERWHATTHECOST.

Also Julian Deans with Tory by her side made that comment about Ford and his transit plan one week after election. If you actually knew who was on Tory's team you would know it's not Stinz at all. Tory could care less about Stinz.

Seriously, if you say you'd support Tory should you not know more about him? Or is this how you vote, blindly?

I know Stintz isn't his right hand woman.. Jeez.. I'm not politically illiterate just so you know..

I voted for Ford for one reason.. Dismantling TC.. He did that.. Now I don't care.. If a better candidate comes up in 2014 (Tory) he'll get my vote.. By then you won't be able to revive that plan and I can continue living peacefully.

Do you really think Tory (Miller's nemesis) would revive a TC plan planned by him? No, he's going to go for his own legacy project, which has a very high chance of including subways.

The end.

About the hockey game? I agree, I'm just glad I don't have cable right now.

It was bad, very bad.

You're just full of soundbites!

Much of the line is tunneled, and will offer speeds equal to the Bloor-Danforth subway. The sections that will be on the surface are in areas that are wide enough to support surface rail, and do not have the density to justify subways.



Therein lies the problem. The surface rail sections suffer from tremendous design flaws, the deisgn flaws will hamper the central underground section.

Consider signal priority. In Calgary, at each intersection outside the downtown core, the CTrain has signal priority through railroad style crossings. Transit City has to face stop lights.

To make matters worse, the stations are located after the stoplight. So when the LRV stops at a stop light it will be followed by another stop at the station.

That is poor public transit planning on the part of the city. Both the surface and underground sections will suffer from reliability problems. [See: MUNI Metro in San Francisco]

If Transit City LRT on Eglinton would be built to the same standards as Calgary's CTrain, I would support it. Eglinton can support CTrain style rapid transit. However, Toronto made accommodations for the automobile. If Calgary had made the same concessions to the automobile, Calgary's CTrain would have been a failure. If Toronto is unwilling to provide LRT the tools it needs to succeed then Toronto should not build it.

However, I am offering an alternative. Toronto does need a cost effective alternative that does not burden transit with the same concessions to the automobile. The model offered with Vancouver's Canada Line is a good model. Only two car trains operating on an elevated ROW in the suburbs. The two car configuration and the elevated ROW significantly reduced the cost of building the Canada Line. The Canada Line cost about $140 million per kilometre to build while Transit City costs about $111 million per kilometre.

If it is planned right (a big if in Toronto), the city can also forgo the cost of constructing a yard for the Eglinton line and simply store the trains at the existing subway yard at a substantially lower cost.



That is the beauty of LRT! VERSATILITY! The LRT, as planned will not be the only rapid transit link to the Airport.



Transit City is not rapid transit. Calgary's CTrain, on the other hand, is rapid transit.



The ARL will link the airport, the 190 Airport rocket will most likely still be in service, and you have the proposed Finch LRT to the Airport. The airport is being well-served with many potential lines.



By your logic, one could argue that their are already buses running to the Airport, so whats the point of expanding transit with Transit City.


Much better than one subway that will never be built!



Eglinton is core to Metrolinx's regional transit strategy. In fact, Metrolinx was pushing the TTC to build Eglinton as an elevated line during the negotiations to fund Transit City. [Source: http://stevemunro.ca/?p=4705].


:lol:

I love how you speak as if you're an expert on transit! That is cute! Seriously though, the Finch LRT is sorely needed. The Finch bus needs to replaced. It is at capacity, slow, and many buses taking up road space. How is building a LRT line, and replacing many buses with fewer, larger trains "overkill"? A busway will most likely be built in the hydro corridor, far from Finch. How that better than LRT on Finch? It's not!



BRT can run in the median of city streets and Finch has the width to support a median BRT line. The York Region is successfully building BRT in the median of city streets. Their is no reason to run a BRT line down the hydro corridor.

To address the capacity issue, the city could purchase articulated buses. One articulated bus is about the same size as the purposed LRV on Transit City. (Transit City purposes running one LRV on Finch).




Same goes with the Don Mills. The better idea is to extend the DRL to Eglinton, and run the LRT from there into York Region. York is receptive to the Don Mills, but what do they know? They should listen to you!



If anything other than Transit City is unaffordable on Eglinton, where do you suppose the money is going to come from for a Downtown Relief Line? A downtown subway would be far more expensive than a suburban rapid transit line.


A group called SOS already tried to prove that, and their numbers were thoroughly debunked. Their answer? They came back with a plan with LESS subway to justify their position!


Yes it means fewer lines, but more people using those lines.

Secondly, unlike SOS, I'm not purposing a subway line like the ones running on Younge, Spadina, Bloor or Sheppard. Rather as I said above, I would like to see something similar to Vancouver's Canada Line.


You, like Filip, do not care about transit. You're just like ROb Ford, who wants transit out of the way of your car!

Ah yes, anyone who questions Transit City must be a transit hating motorist who eats little children while driving. :ohno:

This man will be in charge in 2014, and he supports Transit City. I think you'll find out Filip that being loud can only get you so far, you actually need to be smart as well to run Toronto. Ford lacks one of those qualities.
http://nationalpostnews.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/1209tory.jpg?w=620

John Tory will forever be the Robert Stanfield of Toronto politics. The best mayor that Toronto never had.

Their numbers weren't debunked, they were simply ridiculed by streetcar fetishists like Munro who has numerous times already (even on UrbanToronto) been proven to skew statistics to suit his arguments.


Here is something interesting, a cost comparison of transit construction costs in Toronto to other cities in North America.

http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/9168/72293533.png

Montreal built a subway at $143 million per kilometre (and that line ran under a river) while Toronto is building the Spadina Subway for 300 million per kilometre. Transit City costs $111 million per kilometre and Boston is able to build at-grade transit for $85 million per kilometre.

So why does it cost so much in Toronto to construct transit? Could Montreal have a solution for Toronto's Transit woes (such as narrower trains)?

Also, apparently I over estimated the cost of the Canada Line. :)

Probably Montreal trains are only 2-3 cars while TO trains are 6cars. You can factor in the longer platforms wider tracks and more stops, but it still doesnt justify the price differance. The cost of Sheppard phase 1 turned out to be a pretty good deal, if only we had planned ahead and completed the entire length back then.

A elavated Eglington line is intriging, what is wrong with having just regular surface rail down Eglington. Would that not be cheaper, but then again I do see the point of travel time and traffic conjestion. The lenght of Eglington is also a concern, if you build you need to build the entire stretch. This make Eglington a pricey project, meaning nothing left for future transit plans. Maybe people along Eglington are better served taking a north/south bus conecting to B/D or Sheppard subway.

Probably Montreal trains are only 2-3 cars while TO trains are 6cars.



Please check your facts before posting. It's pretty foolish to make an assertion that is so easily disproven with a few seconds on Google.

http://i1.trekearth.com/photos/17800/metro3.jpg

Just about to post that pic Justin! Beat me to it.

Probably Montreal trains are only 2-3 cars while TO trains are 6cars. You can factor in the longer platforms wider tracks and more stops, but it still doesnt justify the price differance. The cost of Sheppard phase 1 turned out to be a pretty good deal, if only we had planned ahead and completed the entire length back then.


Actually Montreal runs longer trains than Toronto, but Montreal's trains are narrower than Toronto's trains. So due to the narrower trains, Montreal only needs to build one subway tunnel to serve two trains (see below), while Toronto needs to build two (one tunnel per train). That's part of the reason it is so much more expensive to build subway in Toronto than in Montreal. However, Montreal ran the Orange Line extension under the Rivière des Prairies, so that alone doesn't explain everything.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/58/178152601_99762c256f.jpg


A elavated Eglington line is intriging, what is wrong with having just regular surface rail down Eglington.


Well as I said above, nothing is wrong with running LRT at street level if it is done right. But Toronto is making far too many mistakes with its proposed LRT system and is unwilling to correct the mistakes. Such as a lack of traffic priority and placing stops after stop lights. These mistakes will hamper the LRT's functionality and attractiveness to Toronto commuters.


Would that not be cheaper, but then again I do see the point of travel time and traffic conjestion. The lenght of Eglington is also a concern, if you build you need to build the entire stretch. This make Eglington a pricey project, meaning nothing left for future transit plans. Maybe people along Eglington are better served taking a north/south bus conecting to B/D or Sheppard subway.

That's not always the case. Surface LRT is only cheaper if it is built on an existing ROW. This could be in the form of a preserved ROW or another ROW that the LRT piggy-backed on such as an existing railway line, an expressway, or a hydro-corridor. But if the ROW needs to be carved out – as is the case with Transit City – surface LRT is considerably more expensive due to the roadwork required to create the ROW.

Consider the West LRT in Calgary. Generally Calgary runs LRT along existing ROWs or along ROWs which the city preserves for future LRT development. But in the West LRT, a short section of the West LRT ran through a heavily developed inner-city area. For this area, the original plan called for an elevated ROW from 10th Street West Station to 16th Street SW Station (the city's first elevated station), then continued along an elevated ROW to the median of 12th Avenue where it would proceed at grade to 26th Street SW Station. The elevated ROW proved to be controversial. The ROW ran near the community of Scarbro, an inner-city community in Calgary. The community did not like the elevated row and pressured the city into building an underground ROW instead. The city refused but offered a compromise, an entirely at-grade ROW between 16 Street SW Station and 26th Street SW Station. But the compromise increased the cost of building the LRT by $20 million dollars (the added at-grade ROW is approximately half a kilometre). [source: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/calgary/story/2008/05/14/cgy-lrt-expansion.html]

The reason for the cost increase was due to the roadwork necessary on 12th Avenue and Bow Trail to accommodate the at-grade ROW. With an elevated ROW, the city would have avoided doing any major roadwork to accommodate the LRT. But Toronto is a developed city, so the ROWs needed to be carved. The construction costs associated with constructing the ROW brings the cost to a level that is comparable to an elevated railway.

On Eglinton, their is a preserved ROW along the site of the former Richview Expressway. But for rest of the line the city needs to do road work to build a ROW. That adds to the construction cost.

I think, Toronto can easily build an elevated line at a comparable cost to Transit City. The city could build an elevated ROW using three car trains with each train being as long as an LRV. The trains could be narrower than the standard subway train. That should bring the cost to a level which is comparable to Transit City.

As I have been saying, Transit City will cost about $111 million per kilometre while Vancouver's Canada line was built at $108 million per kilometre.

Therein lies the problem. The surface rail sections suffer from tremendous design flaws, the deisgn flaws will hamper the central underground section.

There are design flaws, I will not deny that. That is not a valid excuse to totally scrap a plan, or blame it on a technology. I can find many, many flaws with the Sheppard Subway for instance. Any plan will have flaws, that can be looked at, and rectified.


Consider signal priority. In Calgary, at each intersection outside the downtown core, the CTrain has signal priority through railroad style crossings. Transit City has to face stop lights.


Transit City will have signal priority at all lights. Just like Calgary, without the gates. LRV's will not be waiting at lights, just like Calgary! Also, Considering the trains will be 5 minutes apart, it's not going to be difficult to manage. And please, do not bring up St. Clair, or the other legacy streetcar lines. Totally different operations.


To make matters worse, the stations are located after the stoplight. So when the LRV stops at a stop light it will be followed by another stop at the station.

See above, Farside stops are preferable to nearside stops when implementing signal priority. Only a fool would advocat nearside stops!


That is poor public transit planning on the part of the city. Both the surface and underground sections will suffer from reliability problems. [See: MUNI Metro in San Francisco]

No, what is poor transit planning is building two massively expensive subways that will be guaranteed to be underused, will serve less residents, and add huge operating costs to the budget. That is poor planning, and quite frankly politics. There is nothing wrong with the Muni Metro. It runs perfectly fine. There is a problem with the ENTIRE muni system(buses, trolleybus, and Light Rail). Kind of funny, I have ridden Muni, and it was great, especially in the Metro!


If Transit City LRT on Eglinton would be built to the same standards as Calgary's CTrain, I would support it. Eglinton can support CTrain style rapid transit. However, Toronto made accommodations for the automobile. If Calgary had made the same concessions to the automobile, Calgary's CTrain would have been a failure. If Toronto is unwilling to provide LRT the tools it needs to succeed then Toronto should not build it.

Eh, I could care less what you support, and what yu think should not be built, to be honest. No agency builds high floor LRT anymore. Low Floor is just as practical.


However, I am offering an alternative. Toronto does need a cost effective alternative that does not burden transit with the same concessions to the automobile. The model offered with Vancouver's Canada Line is a good model. Only two car trains operating on an elevated ROW in the suburbs. The two car configuration and the elevated ROW significantly reduced the cost of building the Canada Line. The Canada Line cost about $140 million per kilometre to build while Transit City costs about $111 million per kilometre.

The Canada Line is already at capacity, and to expand it, is going to be insanely expensive. The Eglinton LRT is being built with spare capacity!
The fact you support a line that even Skytrain advocates admit is a disaster says a lot! Not only that, you do reason the Canada Line went way over budget, and a lot of element taken out to stick within cost.


By your logic, one could argue that their are already buses running to the Airport, so whats the point of expanding transit with Transit City.

By my logic, building a subway to the airport is massive overkill, and will be a waste of money. Just like Sheppard!

(yeesh)


Eglinton is core to Metrolinx's regional transit strategy. In fact, Metrolinx was pushing the TTC to build Eglinton as an elevated line during the negotiations to fund Transit City. [Source: http://stevemunro.ca/?p=4705].

So Metrolinx is a hack transit agency with no idea of what they want! I already knew that, and Steve articulated that nicely in that blog post.


BRT can run in the median of city streets and Finch has the width to support a median BRT line. The York Region is successfully building BRT in the median of city streets. Their is no reason to run a BRT line down the hydro corridor.

To address the capacity issue, the city could purchase articulated buses. One articulated bus is about the same size as the purposed LRV on Transit City. (Transit City purposes running one LRV on Finch).

Typical ill-informed Anti-LRT rant. Heard this so many times, I am tired of replying. Go and read the EA, and see why BRT was rejected.


If anything other than Transit City is unaffordable on Eglinton, where do you suppose the money is going to come from for a Downtown Relief Line? A downtown subway would be far more expensive than a suburban rapid transit line.

So you're all for a Sheppard Subway, and against the DRL? I see! Difference between you, and me. I support TRANSIT! You support SUBWAYS! Subwa fetishism is not cool!


Yes it means fewer lines, but more people using those lines.

No. Transit City is projected to carry far more riders than a Sheppard extension. And serve many more neighbourhoods, and destinations. You're against a transit network. Subway fetishism is not cool, dude!


Secondly, unlike SOS, I'm not purposing a subway line like the ones running on Younge, Spadina, Bloor or Sheppard. Rather as I said above, I would like to see something similar to Vancouver's Canada Line.

Again, I could care less what you propose, and I could care less what you want to see. Especially when you're proposing something like the Canda Line, which already at capacity, and cannot be expanded without significant expenditure!


Ah yes, anyone who questions Transit City must be a transit hating motorist who eats little children while driving. :ohno:

Nah, just a transit hating motorist who thinks building subways means he is all for transit!
And eating little children while driving. Or kitens. I hear you subway fetishists have a thing for raping cute kittens.

I do question anyone who thinks cancelling a funded transit network that has been provento work around the world so a much more expensive subway that serves far fewer riders is a great idea. Especially one who uses the Canada Line(!!) as an example of what Toronto should build!

Here is something interesting, a cost comparison of transit construction costs in Toronto to other cities in North America.

http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/9168/72293533.png

Montreal built a subway at $143 million per kilometre (and that line ran under a river) while Toronto is building the Spadina Subway for 300 million per kilometre. Transit City costs $111 million per kilometre and Boston is able to build at-grade transit for $85 million per kilometre.

So why does it cost so much in Toronto to construct transit? Could Montreal have a solution for Toronto's Transit woes (such as narrower trains)?

Also, apparently I over estimated the cost of the Canada Line. :)

Ah yes, I posted this back in November. Here's the link to the UT grad student who did this study: http://www.drlnow.ca/costanalysis.html

Oh, and:
http://img713.imageshack.us/img713/2452/34617409.png

I find it kinda outrageous that Toronto's spending over $300 million per kilometre to tunnel under warehouses in Vaughan. Those billions could have built half of the DRL, with a second half phased in after.

There are design flaws, I will not deny that. That is not a valid excuse to totally scrap a plan, or blame it on a technology. I can find many, many flaws with the Sheppard Subway for instance. Any plan will have flaws, that can be looked at, and rectified.


The design flaws are not small, they are major design flaws. Once built, it is very difficult to fix those design flaws. Transit City needs to be sent back to the drawing board. Despite what you believe, it does not serve the interest of transit users.

Here is how a proper LRT system would look:

On Sheppard, the subway cars would be replaced with High Floor LRVs, such as Calgary's Siemens SD160. The LRT would then proceed at-grade along the side of Sheppard (lower cost than the median). The at-grade section will use high floor trains to create a seamless link between the Sheppard Subway and the Sheppard LRT. Minor intersections would be eliminated, and major intersection will either use railroad style crossings or have grade separation. The line would run up to Scarbrough Town Centre. Finally, an at-grade extension to Downsview. The mistake was made with building the Sheppard Subway in the first place, but don't make another mistake by creating a disjointed transit network.

On Eglinton, the line would be identical to what it is now, but minor intersections would be eliminated. At major intersections their will be railroad style crossings or grade separation depending on the size of the intersection.

Finally, the ROW would be dedicated to only LRT. So no emergency vehicle or bus would be allowed to operate on the ROW. The tracks would not be encased as to discourage people from driving on the ROW and also to increase the speed of the train. The LRVs will run at a speed of 80 km/h between stations.

But, I am not convinced that type of LRT is politically feasible in Toronto.

Transit City will have signal priority at all lights. Just like Calgary, without the gates. LRV's will not be waiting at lights, just like Calgary! Also, Considering the trains will be 5 minutes apart, it's not going to be difficult to manage. And please, do not bring up St. Clair, or the other legacy streetcar lines. Totally different operations.


Nope, read the initial environmental assessment on the Sheppard East line. In Toronto what is being proposed is not true priority. The LRV in Toronto will only be able to request a longer green light or a shorter red light. Its better than nothing, but the LRV will often be stuck at intersections waiting for a green light. The MUNI Metro uses the same kind of Transit Priority. Here it is in operation:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwV7ZSIzrXk&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Na6m83KlRBU&feature=related

Note: the LRT still had to wait its turn. Each cycle was shortened, but the cycle which gave preference to the LRT was not bumped to the top. Instead the LRT had to wait, until its turn came around. That is not acceptable for good public transit. Every time an LRV will come to a stop for a stop light, the train needs take time to accelerate and take time to reach full speed. From my experience in Calgary, that could take up to half a kilometre.

I fear what we will end with in Toronto is something like the MUNI Metro. The only thing MUNI has done well is that it reaches almost all of San Francisco, but beyond that, the MUNI has few benefits.

Since you bring up St. Clair, it has the same signal priority as what is purposed on Transit City, but it was never turned on. The same holds true for Spadina. What gives you any indication Transit City will be any different?


No, what is poor transit planning is building two massively expensive subways that will be guaranteed to be underused, will serve less residents, and add huge operating costs to the budget. That is poor planning, and quite frankly politics.


I'm not advocating subways. What I'm advocating is an elevated route through Eglinton and busways on the rest of Transit City.

If you don't like the Canada line, what about an elevated LRT line? Build it elevated for now, and when it comes time to extend the line build it at-grade. Once the line is in operation for some time, it would be politically easier to build an at-grade extension with traffic priority.

Also in more developed areas, an elevated line is cheaper than a at-grade line. An elevated line requires less road reconstruction to accomodate the at-grade ROW. See what I said above about Calgary's West LRT.


There is nothing wrong with the Muni Metro. It runs perfectly fine. There is a problem with the ENTIRE muni system(buses, trolleybus, and Light Rail). Kind of funny, I have ridden Muni, and it was great, especially in the Metro!


MUNI suffers from major delays caused by the surface section [see MUNI Meltdown]. If MUNI had given its LRT proper signal priority, it would not suffer from those delays.


Eh, I could care less what you support, and what yu think should not be built, to be honest. No agency builds high floor LRT anymore. Low Floor is just as practical.


When I refer to the CTrain being better planned it has nothing to do with high floor or low floor trains. Calgary builds high floor trains because at the time only high floor was available. Instead of building disjointed extensions, the city has opted to build extensions using the existing technology. Newer lines, which will not connected to existing LRT lines, such as the Southeast LRT line, will be built using low-floor LRVs. If Transit City would be built like Calgary proposed Southeast LRT then I would support it.

This is what Calgary has on it's transit system which Transit City lacks:

- Speed
- True traffic priority
- A dedicated ROW
- A seamless network


The Canada Line is already at capacity, and to expand it, is going to be insanely expensive. The Eglinton LRT is being built with spare capacity!


The capacity on the Canada Line is comparable to the LRT proposed on Eglinton. If Toronto planned correctly, an elevated line on Eglinton could be planned for capacity expansion down the line. Also the cost of running the Canada line is comparable to Calgary's LRT.


Typical ill-informed Anti-LRT rant. Heard this so many times, I am tired of replying.


I know what is LRT, Transit City is not true LRT. If you think Transit City is true LRT, I don't think you understand what is LRT. Transit City is just Bus Rapid Transit using Streetcars.

If the city wants to fix Transit City and provide it the tools necessary to succeed then I will support it. But if they don't, I won't shed a tear over its cancellation.


So you're all for a Sheppard Subway, and against the DRL? I see! Difference between you, and me. I support TRANSIT! You support SUBWAYS! Subwa fetishism is not cool!


Please read: I said the Sheppard Subway extension should be a busway not a subway. Maybe an elevated extension to the Sheppard Subway in the future when demand warrents.

The model of transit your pursuing is not the right model. Transit should the alternative to the automobile, not just something the poor use because they cannot afford an automobile. The model of transit which Calgary uses is this model and Calgary has been very successful. Take the CTrain in rushour, you will see plenty of people who clearly as professionals in oil and gas sector using the CTrain. It can be done.


No. Transit City is projected to carry far more riders than a Sheppard extension. And serve many more neighbourhoods, and destinations. You're against a transit network. Subway fetishism is not cool, dude!

Nah, just a transit hating motorist who thinks building subways means he is all for transit!
And eating little children while driving. Or kitens. I hear you subway fetishists have a thing for raping cute kittens.


Are you a child? If not, grow up and lets have a mature discussion on Transit. Rather than belittling everyone who disagrees with you or attacking their character, provide some facts.

I agree with extending Sheppard as I always have. At least the Yonge to Downsview section should be completed to make a viable northern route. Sheppard will continue to develop and it will become much busier when the Spadina ext is open.
The Don Mills to STC should be completed but it will have to wait as there are bigger fish to fry.
Tearing down the STC is an obscene waste of funds for a city that has none and a small rapid transit for itt's size to begin with. Put in the heating track system and improve the route so it can handle the MK11 trains. If someone's feelings are hurt because they have to cross a street to transfer then tell them to walk home.
I am very pleased that Metrolinx is actually considering doing what the rest of the planet does in the burbs, elevate.
Build a rail line from GO rail , use to ROW to Kingston, and then head west to Pearson.
Tunnel the 11km as planned and have the rest of the line elevated and save billions. That would be a true Eglinton Crosstown............stopping a "crosstown" at Kennedy is not a crosstown route.
There is an alternative but I don't know if it has ever been suggested by Metrolinx............extend the BD east past Kennedy to Kingston and beyond and having the SRT turn westbound at Kennedy along Eglinton to form the Eglinton/Pearson line.
If they heated the lines like they were suppose to, increased the frequency and got the new MK11 cars I think Torontonians view of the ICTS would change dramatically. They would, as Vancouverites have discovered, it is a fast, affordable, cost effective, comfortable, quiet, pleasant, reliable, and safe form of mass/rapid transit.
No matter what, under any plan, they should not even consider replacing the SRT for anything. It serves it's purpose and Toronto shouldn't be spending billions to just replace a line that doesn't have to be replaced.

If Transit City vehicles are really going to stop at traffic lights rather than be like full Calgary/Portland style LRT, then I'm a bit skeptical of its value. Toronto is huge and I can't imagine traveling on cross-town routes using something slow.

I traveled between Cityplace and Union on the Waterfront streetcar, and while it was fun, I don't think I'd enjoy traveling on it 20 times further.

What's so impossible about full traffic priority?

If Transit City vehicles are really going to stop at traffic lights rather than be like full Calgary/Portland style LRT, then I'm a bit skeptical of its value. Toronto is huge and I can't imagine traveling on cross-town routes using something slow.

Calgary and Portland use LRT as their backbone.

Toronto was going to use LRT primarily as feeder routes. So, the equivalent of a typical bus route but with much higher capacity.

There is a need for additional Metros which do allow you to cross the city quickly; and for the most part GO will be building those even if they haven't figured it out yet.

$4B on the Lake Shore line and you can get 5 minute frequencies (over 60,000pphpd!) from Hamilton to Oshawa with stops every couple kilometres.

On Sheppard, the subway cars would be replaced with High Floor LRVs, such as Calgary's Siemens SD160. The LRT would then proceed at-grade along the side of Sheppard (lower cost than the median). The at-grade section will use high floor trains to create a seamless link between the Sheppard Subway and the Sheppard LRT. Minor intersections would be eliminated, and major intersection will either use railroad style crossings or have grade separation. The line would run up to Scarbrough Town Centre. Finally, an at-grade extension to Downsview. The mistake was made with building the Sheppard Subway in the first place, but don't make another mistake by creating a disjointed transit network.

Any type of at grade rail would cause to much conjestion for Sheppard E. Sheppard has been set up to become a fullfedge subway for many years now. The corners at each proposed stop is either open parking lots or deteorating plaza's. If you are trying to stop the seconded phase of Sheppard from getting built, please just save your time and energy.

On Eglinton, the line would be identical to what it is now, but minor intersections would be eliminated. At major intersections their will be railroad style crossings or grade separation depending on the size of the intersection.

Eglington is currently a busway, no?

Are you a child? If not, grow up and lets have a mature discussion on Transit. Rather than belittling everyone who disagrees with you or attacking their character, provide some facts.

He's the pop singing sensation Justin Berber!

Please check your facts before posting. It's pretty foolish to make an assertion that is so easily disproven with a few seconds on Google.

http://i1.trekearth.com/photos/17800/metro3.jpg

Is a subway like this going to impress tourist and get them to immigrate to Toronto? I wouldn't think so, that is probably why Montreal subways cost half of what Toronto is paying.

!Are you a child? If not, grow up and lets have a mature discussion on Transit. Rather than belittling everyone who disagrees with you or attacking their character, provide some facts.

I do not have time to answer your entire post at the moment, but this caught my eye. I'll answer the rest later.

You're not having a meaningful conversation. You're just pushing your opinion, and trashing a plan based on technology. What's even worse is telling members what you "want to see, and coming up with fantasy plans. There is a thread for that! That is not debate, it's opinion, and you're not even backing it up with numbers.

I'll take this comment you posted in post #256

"The potential cost savings on Sheppard, Don Mills, Jane and Finch would be more than enough to support the construction of a rapid transit on Eglington."

Jane and Don Mills is far into the future and will most likely be subject to major revision in the future, so there is no cost estimate for the lines. How can you make that comment without even knowing the total cost of the lines?

Reading your posts, you're not even close to having a mature conversation with anyone!

If you think LRT should only be elevated, or grade-seperated, you have idea about LRT, and the capabilities of LRT. For you to say LRT is BRT with streetcars speaks volumes on your ignorance of LRT. (or ability to mesh terms). What makes LRT so compelling is it's ability to fit into the urbanscape, and make more effective use of the roadway at an affordable price.

!
If you think LRT should only be elevated, or grade-seperated, you have idea about LRT, and the capabilities of LRT. For you to say LRT is BRT with streetcars speaks volumes on your ignorance of LRT. (or ability to mesh terms). What makes LRT so compelling is it's ability to fit into the urbanscape, and make more effective use of the roadway at an affordable price.

Your right, LRT can be at-grade. But if it doesn't have full traffic priority at intersections it is a srteetcar on its own right - of - way.

Transit City will not have full traffic priority, therefore it is streetcar on its own right - of - way. If Toronto gave the LRT full traffic priority it would be LRT.

That's the main difference.

What should be done is finish the Sheppherd subway line in full. Build the DRL, and move forward with the rest of Transit City. It would be an amazing system after that.

Don't forget about extending Yonge Line up to Hwy7 now. After that's done then we can look at how conjested the loop south of Bloor really is. Most people nowaday up in York only want to go as far down as Sheppard anyways. If someone wants to do some heavy duty shopping at a mall maybe they should choose STC or Yorkdale over Eaton Center.

Let York Region expand it with their own funds if they want to. The DRL should be built first as the Yonge Line is already near max capacity.

!
If you think LRT should only be elevated, or grade-seperated, you have idea about LRT, and the capabilities of LRT. For you to say LRT is BRT with streetcars speaks volumes on your ignorance of LRT. (or ability to mesh terms). What makes LRT so compelling is it's ability to fit into the urbanscape, and make more effective use of the roadway at an affordable price.

I am actually in Calgary for the holidays and I'm staying at my parents house. I happened to have some time to spare, so I took some picture to show you the difference between Transit City and the CTrain.

First, here is today's METRO to prove that I am actually in Calgary and that I am familiar with LRT. Since you seem to love denying that I have any knowledge on the LRT.

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5203/5334380576_39ba9e9cef.jpg

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5042/5334394592_e20bb22af7.jpg

Also here is a train ticket from Calgary Transit to prove I am in the city.

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5286/5333777943_b48d058131.jpg

I grew up in Calgary and I used a real LRT system on a daily basis. I am familiar with LRT.

I've discussed railway crossing enough so I won't discuss it in this post much about it. But here it is:

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5241/5334382226_b62c927c5c.jpg

Here are more problems with Transit City.

The following is the style of wiring. Calgary uses what is called catenary wiring.

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5205/5333770023_0f6a6466ed.jpg

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5085/5334384984_32a05dfc2b.jpg

Transit City by contrast will use the following kind of wiring:

http://lrt.daxack.ca/Overhead/hires04.jpg

Calgary uses catenary wiring because catenary wiring allows the LRT to travel at very high speeds. In fact, you maybe able to tell by this picture of the LRT in Calgary, the LRT can run up to 80 km/h.

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5124/5334381342_76a8fd0ff4.jpg

In fact this style of wiring is also used on the TGV in France.

However, the kind of wiring which is purposed for Transit City will not allow the LRT to travel any faster than 40 km/h. Calgary only uses this kind of wiring in downtown where the high speeds of the LRT are not currently possible due to the shared ROW (the CTrain is in the process of being moved underground in downtown). If the train goes any faster, it could cause the wiring to snap.

Second the signalling system, Calgary's signalling system was rejected on Transit City.

Calgary's signalling system allows Calgary CTrain with the same kind of spacing that is possible on a subway. Eventually, once the new purchase of new SD160s is complete, Calgary's CTrain will have a 2-3 minute headway.

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5163/5333768083_9ed7e61945.jpg

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5169/5333762245_fd89ded379.jpg


Another, unlike Transit City, Calgary does not use enclosed tracks.

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5002/5333761587_99bf0d0945.jpg

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5130/5334382688_6cf419a264.jpg

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5127/5333772905_b0898f50dd.jpg

The open tracks have a number of advantages. The first being speed, the Train can run much faster on an open track than a closed track.

The second reason Calgary does not use enclosed tracks is that open tracks give the LRT a dedicated ROW. In Toronto, city vehicles will be allowed to the Transit City ROW. Again that will slow down the LRT.

The other reason the ROW is not encased is for winter. The open ROW provides some protection from Calgary's winter whether.

Also Calgary uses concrete to join the tracks together. Transit City will likely use wood, that has major problems associated with speed and maintenance.

If Toronto wants to build LRT, Toronto should build it like this. But if it continues to get built the way Transit City is currently purposed to be built, it will be too difficult to fix.

Also the reason I'm advocating elevated rail is that I know Mayor Ford will never support this kind of an LRT. With elevated rail, once a new mayor is in place, it would be possible to make at-grade extensions in the future.

!

Reading your posts, you're not even close to having a mature conversation with anyone!



I don't say that those who disagree with me like to rape kittens. You claim those who support a subway rape kittens. That is really immature.

The city should consider constructing a surface Lawrence LRT that tunnels under intersections and links to SSC. In 10-20 years we could proceed to construct a proper Eglinton airport link subway. That is only if the trains are as fast as the Canada Line!

Is there still hope for the Spadina extension to get downsized to a YorkU terminus?

^^I'm with you on that!

The city should consider constructing a surface Lawrence LRT that tunnels under intersections and links to SSC. In 10-20 years we could proceed to construct a proper Eglinton airport link subway. That is only if the trains are as fast as the Canada Line!

Is there still hope for the Spadina extension to get downsized to a YorkU terminus?

YorkU won't let that happen. They worry about commuters from the 905 parking at YorkU and taking the subway downtown.

I grew up in Calgary and I used a real LRT system on a daily basis. I am familiar with LRT.

If you think the C-train is "real" LRT, you truly have no clue about LRT!

The following is the style of wiring. Calgary uses what is called catenary wiring.

Transit City by contrast will use the following kind of wiring:

Wrong. Transit City will utilize OCS, and pantographs. The LRV's are double-ended, and higher powered. Pantographs and OCS is more effective. Not that it should matter anyways. Many LRT systems around the world use single wire, and can still operate at high speed. More immature nonsense from you, especially with your arrogant attitude. We know what LRT is, and it's components. For you to post pics, and explain what it is, and why Transit City is not LRT based on your limited knowledge speaks volumes. And you're new here!


However, the kind of wiring which is purposed for Transit City will not allow the LRT to travel any faster than 40 km/h. Calgary only uses this kind of wiring in downtown where the high speeds of the LRT are not currently possible due to the shared ROW (the CTrain is in the process of being moved underground in downtown). If the train goes any faster, it could cause the wiring to snap.

Honestly, where are you coming up with these assumptions, and conclusions. It's nonsense! Vehicles are not limited to 40km under single wire! Streetcars in Toronto regularly run above 40km on a single wire, and interurbans have been running under single wire for decades! Why do you post this crap for? Go and do some research!


Second the signalling system, Calgary's signalling system was rejected on Transit City.
Calgary's signalling system allows Calgary CTrain with the same kind of spacing that is possible on a subway. Eventually, once the new purchase of new SD160s is complete, Calgary's CTrain will have a 2-3 minute headway

Railway style signaling is not required for LRT. It is actually unnecessary for many systems.


Another, unlike Transit City, Calgary does not use enclosed tracks.

The open tracks have a number of advantages. The first being speed, the Train can run much faster on an open track than a closed track.

The second reason Calgary does not use enclosed tracks is that open tracks give the LRT a dedicated ROW. In Toronto, city vehicles will be allowed to the Transit City ROW. Again that will slow down the LRT.

The other reason the ROW is not encased is for winter. The open ROW provides some protection from Calgary's winter whether.


:bash: All right. The above comments are the biggest load of BS I have in a long while. It's astounding. You know NOTHING. I am sorry, but you have absolutely no clue, none whatsoever. For you to post that crap above is astounding. Trying to have a "mature" debate with you is pointless. You do not know what you're talking about!

Leaving the track, and ties in ballast is cheaper! Transit City tracks were originally proposed to be exposed, but communities and businesses wanted the tracks enclosed for fear garbage would collect in the ROW. Here is a little trivia for you, since you know so little: The TTC legacy streetcar system have ROWs that are in ballast, AND enclosed!


Also Calgary uses concrete to join the tracks together. Transit City will likely use wood, that has major problems associated with speed and maintenance.

More BS from you. You know NOTHING! So I am not going to bother correcting you. I'll give you some more info, to blow your mind: For the open cut sections of our subway system, the TTC uses... WOOD! I believe only the open cut sections on the Spadina line use concrete.


If Toronto wants to build LRT, Toronto should build it like this. But if it continues to get built the way Transit City is currently purposed to be built, it will be too difficult to fix.

You know squat about Transit City, and your LRT knowledge is limited to Calgary. Go and ride systems elsewhere and learn a few things.

Even better go this site: www.lrta.org, and do some research!

I highly recommend reading the section on "what is LRT?"


I don't say that those who disagree with me like to rape kittens. You claim those who support a subway rape kittens. That is really immature.

Not surprised, you cannot detect sarcasm.

Anyways, I am done "debating"with you. You act as you're an expert on LRT, but you have shown your knowledge is limited to one system. You have no clue about Transit City, and you're just pulling crap from the air in some sad attempt to prove your point. At least make sure what you're saying is true!

Again, go to www.lrta.org and read up on LRT. Riding one LRT system does not make you an expert, and definitely does not give you the right to say what is LRT, or what is not LRT. Your post clearly show you have limited knowledge on the subject.

Too bad TRZ stopped posting on this forum, he'd have something to say about all of this...

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5130/5334382688_6cf419a264.jpg

This is just terrible. Toronto has nothing to learn from Calgary. A C-Train type of build would kill any street it went down.

Is anybody going to the meeting at city hall tomorrow to discuss LRT construction with supporting councilors?

It's at 2-4pm, I plan on going to get more facts on the issue. I might even wear pink.

Trains don't run slower on enclosed tracks. Enclosed tracks are just way more expensive and generally reserved for highly-pedestrianized inner-city areas where there's more density of people and traffic to deal with, where trains need to travel slower anyway.

If actual purpose of Transit City is to redesign the suburbs into something they are not then yes Calgary's LRT is not the best option. Calgary's LRT is an alternative to Subway construction.

But Transit City shouldn't be sold a solution to Toronto congestion. When you read the political rhetoric it is about dealing with Toronto's congestion troubles. Transit City would do little to resolve Toronto's congestion troubles. The people who drive right now will continue to drive down the road. Something is else needed to resolve the congestion troubles. That solution is Rapid Transit, either in the form of commuter rail or Rapid Transit.

Toronto's congestion troubles are not small by any stretch of the imagination. It is driving more business out of the city and towards the 905. That doesn't help anyone in the long run.

The race to the 905 ended years ago, this is why they are finally about to give the TTC an overhaul. Also it's no longer about just getting people to the core faster but to build up other key regions around more localized transit hubs. 6 Rob Ford subway stops won't help out the city at all. Talk about a gravy train. Even if a streetcar can only travel at 40km an hour, on a right of way it should only take a person under an hour to travel from one side of the city to the other. Not bad at all.

I've travelled from one side of the city to the other and its LONG! If i remember correctly Starting at STC and on the Scarborough RT to Kennedy and from Kennedy stn to Islington is over either 1.5 hrs and under 2 hrs if memory serves me right.

I've travelled from one side of the city to the other and its LONG! If i remember correctly Starting at STC and on the Scarborough RT to Kennedy and from Kennedy stn to Islington is over either 1.5 hrs and under 2 hrs if memory serves me right.


Currently yes.

That's about how long it takes to go from end to end in Thunder Bay by bus. :lol:

We have a horrible system. :( Our longest bus route is about 2.5 times longer than the longest route in New York City.

But Transit City shouldn't be sold a solution to Toronto congestion. When you read the political rhetoric it is about dealing with Toronto's congestion troubles. Transit City would do little to resolve Toronto's congestion troubles. The people who drive right now will continue to drive down the road. Something is else needed to resolve the congestion troubles. That solution is Rapid Transit, either in the form of commuter rail or Rapid Transit.




The pictures you showed are nothing more then a suburban wasteland. The purpose of transit city is to provide better transportation to massive amounts of the city. It's not being built to shuttle people from one side of town to the other. The percentage of people that would need to make that commute is very low and can still use the Bloor Line, and hopefully a completed shepherd line to do so. they are building it to make new transit hubs and self sufficient neighborhoods across town.

Once again the C-Train is a terrible solution for Toronto. What kind of urban pedestrian style development would take hold around that?

The top speed of urban mass transit is largely irrelevant. Skytrain can go to 80kph, but how often does it ever crack 50kph before slowing down for the next station? More critical to commute times are station spacings and grade separation.

But should it really matter how long it takes to travel across the city... should such miserable commute patterns be encouraged? In a massive area like TO, localized hubs with their own vitality, is where it's headed, or should head.

Currently yes.

It takes an hour, give or take a few minutes to get across the city on the RT, and Subway. Must have been a bad day for the trip to take 2 hours!

Once again the C-Train is a terrible solution for Toronto. What kind of urban pedestrian style development would take hold around that?

But it's REAL LRT, and Transit City is not! Sorry, could not resist. The C-Train works great in Calgary, the system would be a disaster here. The point of Transit City is give Toronto the rapid transit network we need, but have failed to build because of plan focused solely on subways.

I would love to go to that meeting, but I will not be able to get off work.

But it's REAL LRT, and Transit City is not! Sorry, could not resist. The C-Train works great in Calgary, the system would be a disaster here. The point of Transit City is give Toronto the rapid transit network we need, but have failed to build because of plan focused solely on subways.

I would love to go to that meeting, but I will not be able to get off work.


Please define REAL LRT, it's a very grey area. The C-Train is closer to heavy rail IMO.

From what I gathered from todays meeting is that 3 councilors are on the fence and will be the deciding votes needed for either side. If it's this close in council I think no change of transit city should be done without a refferendum if Ford wants to kill it so badly.

Please define REAL LRT, it's a very grey area. The C-Train is closer to heavy rail IMO.

I was pulling Sober2thought's leg. He said the C-train was real LRT, and Transit City is just a "streetcar" network, because Transit City lines will not be like the C-Train. I consider the C-Train to be LRT. The system incorporates many aspects of LRT.

Please define REAL LRT, it's a very grey area. The C-Train is closer to heavy rail IMO.

From what I gathered from todays meeting is that 3 councilors are on the fence and will be the deciding votes needed for either side. If it's this close in council I think no change of transit city should be done without a refferendum if Ford wants to kill it so badly.

If there are still 3 councilors undecided then that is enough to make a decision. Doesn't say how many votes you have to win by, you just need to win. Now we just need to wait a see which way they vote.

The pictures you showed are nothing more then a suburban wasteland. The purpose of transit city is to provide better transportation to massive amounts of the city. It's not being built to shuttle people from one side of town to the other. The percentage of people that would need to make that commute is very low and can still use the Bloor Line, and hopefully a completed shepherd line to do so. they are building it to make new transit hubs and self sufficient neighborhoods across town.

Once again the C-Train is a terrible solution for Toronto. What kind of urban pedestrian style development would take hold around that?

Quite a bit pedestrian development. That one segment is taken from the North East which hast seen as much involvement from the city to transform the area.

Go take a look at Heritage Park TOD, Dalhousie TOD, Kensington, all of those areas were transformed into pedestrian friendly neighbourhoods by the LRT. The reason being it was now possible to get into those neighbourhoods without the assistance of an automobile. Kensington in particular experienced a pedestrian boom after the LRT was installed.

This is Kensington:
http://lrt.daxack.ca/Cities/Calgary/hires010.jpg
http://lrt.daxack.ca/Cities/Calgary/hires032.jpg
http://lrt.daxack.ca/Cities/Calgary/hires040.jpg
http://www.chomp.ca/img/hotspot/photo/kensington_001.jpg


But that being said, in those cases the city played a heavy role in redesigning those neighbourhoods. In the case of Dalhousie and Heritage Park it was the city which became the developer for the area. If it wasn't for the city's involvement the transformation would not have occurred.

I highly doubt Toronto City Council will take the same measures which Calgary did to redevelop the suburbs.

Also here is a cautionary tail. The downtown transit mall. It is exactly like the Transit City proposal, but in its case LRT has been a disaster for pedestrianization.

http://lrt.daxack.ca/Cities/Calgary/hires131.jpg

I was pulling Sober2thought's leg. He said the C-train was real LRT, and Transit City is just a "streetcar" network, because Transit City lines will not be like the C-Train. I consider the C-Train to be LRT. The system incorporates many aspects of LRT.
[/QUOTE]

Not just a "streetcar" network, I said "Streetcar Rapid Transit." It looks and feels just like VIVA's proposed phase 2 BRT but with LRVs. Therefore, it isn't true Light Rapid Transit, but in my opinion it is a "Streetcar Rapid Transit."

I'm not saying it is a bad thing. It is better than what exists in downtown and it might have its place, but in my opinion Eglinton could serve a higher order of transit.

Also take a look at the following. According to this website, systems which are closer to Calgary's CTrain are defined as LRT while those which are closer to Transit City are defined as Streetcars:
http://www.lightrailnow.org/

Once again, The C-Train is NOTHING like transit city, Toronto has nothing to learn from it. Toronto's transit is far more complex then Calgary's. I wish you'd stop comparing the two systems, it's like apples and oranges.

Calgary's C-Train has more in common with Buffalo's transit system.

TTC Streetcars- a huge desaster for creating pedestrian friendly regions. I suggest you go to a meeting on Transit City so you know what you are talking about. I can provide you with the dates and locations.
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/26/65351254_7bb325c825.jpg

Not just a "streetcar" network, I said "Streetcar Rapid Transit." It looks and feels just like VIVA's proposed phase 2 BRT but with LRVs. Therefore, it isn't true Light Rapid Transit, but in my opinion it is a "Streetcar Rapid Transit." [/quote]

If you had even the slightest bit of knowledge about LRT, you would not be using terms like "true LRT"and "Streetcar Rapid Transit" It is just planning jargon, and means little in the scheme of things. The distinction between the contemporary streetcar(tram), and Light Rail is blurred. Most transit experts, and LRT advocates(myself included) agree the one clear distinction is a streetcar operates in mostly in mixed traffic, with passengers boarding, and alighting in the middle of the street. LRT operates in reserved ROW where no vehicular traffic, except emergency vehicle is allowed, allowing for high speeds, and protected shelters. After that, it's pretty much open. Hence why I sent you the LRTA site, so you can learn a few things, and stop making nonsenical assumptions on a subject you clearly know little about.


Also take a look at the following. According to this website, systems which are closer to Calgary's CTrain are defined as LRT while those which are closer to Transit City are defined as Streetcars:
http://www.lightrailnow.org/

The folks at Light Rail Now would heartily disagree with you, and correct you. Using your logic, the Pheonix system would be considered a streetcar, because it essentially what Transit City is proposed to be, the one exception is Transit City lines will have more stops.
In fact, the folks at LRN call Transit City LRT!

http://lightrailnow.org/news/n_newslog2007q1.htm#TOR_20070331

So, Fresh Start, enough? You're wrong, and you have been proven wrong. Accept it. I have been reading LRN since 2002, and I know the site very well.

The C-Train is LRT, Transit City is LRT, Lyon's Tramway is LRT! Hell, parts of Toronto's legacy streetcar network can be considered LRT(The TTC did try to market LRT with the Harbourfront line as LRT, even going as far as symbolizing the line as part of the subway network in the transit guide in the 90's).

Also here is a cautionary tail. The downtown transit mall. It is exactly like the Transit City proposal, but in its case LRT has been a disaster for pedestrianization.

*sigh* The Transit City ROW will be a reserved ROW, on raised concrete. You know nothing, yet keep on talking. Astounding! And it's "tale".

If I was you, I would take up Andrew's offer to attend a few meetings. They are quite informative, and you'll learn a lot. Or just read the LRTA site. I am a member, and the knowledge, and history is astounding.

I'm glad you've had a lovely trip to Calgary, and enjoyed the C-Train but none of that system reflects what Toronto has, will be getting, or needs. Our streetcars and ROW's are not built on raised concrete, aside from Queens Quay if you consider curb height raised. Our new cars are lo riders and travel at grade with other vehicles. Unlike the C-Train no massive elevated stations are needed, and thank go no fencing along the route. Though not encouraged people can and do still j-walk on our system.

Toronto doesn't need to follow any Noth American city plan seeing as it's managed to take it's own transit direction from the time of the continnental dimise of the streetcar. Transit city and it's streetcars are not meant to just move more people but to create more urban walkable, and commerce friendly streets in our outer burbs. They will ad value to neighbourhoods over large swaths of regions that a C-Train would never do, and that subways just can't accomplish.

Please show us more C-Train shots, you're just making yourself look stupid by saying it's a good solution for Toronto. If you'd like to show some elevated LRT from Vancouver that would be fine as that would be a great solution for sections of our outer burbs.


No thanks -
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2068/2479671899_594477dbb5_b.jpg

Once again, The C-Train is NOTHING like transit city, Toronto has nothing to learn from it. Toronto's transit is far more complex then Calgary's. I wish you'd stop comparing the two systems, it's like apples and oranges.

Calgary's C-Train has more in common with Buffalo's transit system.

TTC Streetcars- a huge desaster for creating pedestrian friendly regions. I suggest you go to a meeting on Transit City so you know what you are talking about. I can provide you with the dates and locations.
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/26/65351254_7bb325c825.jpg

When is need TTC meeting? I want to suggest better bus and streetcar shelters.

If you look at the political side of Transit City it sounds like the true purpose of Transit City is to built a system of rapid transit to quickly shuttle people around the city. I'm just point out if that's the goal of Transit City then Transit City should be constructed more like Calgary CTrain with fenced ROWs etc.

But if as you suggest the true purpose of Transit City is to transform Toronto into a pedestrian friendly environment then maybe Transit City is being built right.

But perhaps this a reflection on why Transit City has been so difficult to sell. Their simpy too much confusion surrounding the issue.

Fenced ROW is fine for commuter trains not for rapid transit. Stop with the C-Train already. Nobody in this city would want that no matter what side of the political fence they sit.

If you look at the political side of Transit City it sounds like the true purpose of Transit City is to built a system of rapid transit to quickly shuttle people around the city. I'm just point out if that's the goal of Transit City then Transit City should be constructed more like Calgary CTrain with fenced ROWs etc.

A fenced ROW is not needed for high speed ROW. It will not fit well in a neighbourhood. Transit City, as designed will do the job very well.


But if as you suggest the true purpose of Transit City is to transform Toronto into a pedestrian friendly environment then maybe Transit City is being built right.

Yay!


But perhaps this a reflection on why Transit City has been so difficult to sell. Their simpy too much confusion surrounding the issue.

That, and people do not know what LRT is. To many, it is a streetcar.

Aw yiss, Ford's going cut back on service, raise fares ten percent.

STOP THE GRAVYEE BUSS!!!

JustinB, that's why I've been saying LRT isw a very grey area, it is decribed by so many people in so many different ways. I think it's best to debating with sobre2ndthought as he is overl impressed with Calgary's system and doesn't see how it would not work here.

Aw yiss, Ford's going cut back on service, raise fares ten percent.

STOP THE GRAVYEE BUSS!!!

To be fair, the one bus route that is getting reduced service which I know first hand is the 76B Royal York South via Grand Ave. I've taken that bus a couple of times past 10pm and I was one of the 3 or 4 people riding it from Royal York subway to Grand and Manitoba.

I assume the rest of the cuts affect poorly used lines such as this. IMO, they shouldn't have received increased service in the first place.

Cutting back service on poorly used bus routes is fine, but raising fares for the TTC? And cutting vehicle registration fees on cars? Unacceptable.

I really do hope that traffic in Toronto gets incredibly bad. It'll hopefully generate support for other forms of transport other than cars and public transit. It might even push more development downtown.

Cutting back service on poorly used bus routes is fine, but raising fares for the TTC? And cutting vehicle registration fees on cars? Unacceptable.

I really do hope that traffic in Toronto gets incredibly bad. It'll hopefully generate support for other forms of transport other than cars and public transit. It might even push more development downtown.

Oh, I hope so too, and at the rate we're going you can be damn sure that in five years the city will be impossible to navigate.

Maybe then, MAYBE then, we can get significant capital investment from senior levels of government to fund meaningful rapid transit expansions.. European cities don't have to worry about capital investments for transit because they'll get it (Italy btw, has the highest car ownership in the world).

I remember riding the Bloor subway 3,4,5,6,7 years ago and it wasn't nearly as crowded as it is now. Before, rush hour would be crowded, other times it would be tolerable.. Now, rush hour is ridiculous and taking the subway at noon would be crowded. I've taken the Bloor line past 11pm on a Friday and couldn't find a place to sit down!

Oh, I hope so too, and at the rate we're going you can be damn sure that in five years the city will be impossible to navigate.

Maybe then, MAYBE then, we can get significant capital investment from senior levels of government to fund meaningful rapid transit expansions.. European cities don't have to worry about capital investments for transit because they'll get it (Italy btw, has the highest car ownership in the world).

I remember riding the Bloor subway 3,4,5,6,7 years ago and it wasn't nearly as crowded as it is now. Before, rush hour would be crowded, other times it would be tolerable.. Now, rush hour is ridiculous and taking the subway at noon would be crowded. I've taken the Bloor line past 11pm on a Friday and couldn't find a place to sit down!

I very well doubt so. Toronto rarely votes strategically so both Con and Libs don't feel the need to pump money into it. The only way we'll see any meaningful expansion in transit is if the next mayor makes it his top priority.

What I hope more to see is the deregulation of transit. If people can start operating more local forms of transit such as jitneys, that can help alleviate transit for the time while senior governments wrangle over transit projects. We will definitely see more bike riders soon, as long as Ford doesn't make biking too difficult.

http://www.thestar.com/news/transportation/article/919782--ttc-fare-hike-off-as-city-comes-up-with-the-money?bn=1#article

Ford saves us from transit disaster! Abeit a totally manufactured one.

Couldn't he have waited at least a week or two to make it seem, just a bit more believable?

Europeans have two levels of senior government devoted to public transit. We have one and it barely qualifies for that description. Unless there is some monumental change in the federal government's behaviour, any expectations of funding for mass transit coming from them will go unfulfilled. The only level of government that gives a damn is the province.

I very well doubt so. Toronto rarely votes strategically so both Con and Libs don't feel the need to pump money into it. The only way we'll see any meaningful expansion in transit is if the next mayor makes it his top priority.

What I hope more to see is the deregulation of transit. If people can start operating more local forms of transit such as jitneys, that can help alleviate transit for the time while senior governments wrangle over transit projects. We will definitely see more bike riders soon, as long as Ford doesn't make biking too difficult.

When Toronto gets so congested that it begins to adversely affect the region's economy, you can bet the senior levels will do something about it.

They might resent Toronto, but they do know it's a major source of prosperity for Canadians.

The government is almost solely dedicated to the West these days.

The CPC has almost abandoned Quebec and has estimated that it can still win without them. They'd spend money in the 905, but what makes you think they'd spend any money on the Toronto proper?

If anything, it'll be the provincial government stepping up to pay for transit expansion.

Just remember that Toronto isn't just by the lake and what you see in postcards. There is life north of the 401 and with a first phase of subway extension into York Region. Look how much better Toronto got from amalgamating Scarborough, North York and Etobicoke. It will get even better when parts of Durham, York and Peel get amalgamated into the city as well.

* Door breaks down.

Here comes OE, charging in to save the day!

*OE runs into wall and explodes in a firey fireball.

* Door breaks down.

Here comes OE, charging in to save the day!

*OE runs into wall and explodes in a firey fireball.

What are you implying, I do not get it. I like to think my vision and comments are of logic and not just veiws against the downtown TO. As you can see I have CN Tower as my aviatar, I am happy with the way Toronto skyline has developed.

What are you implying, I do not get it.

No surprise, there isn't very much you do get. :lol: You're great comic relief though.

The government is almost solely dedicated to the West these days.

The CPC has almost abandoned Quebec and has estimated that it can still win without them. They'd spend money in the 905, but what makes you think they'd spend any money on the Toronto proper?

If anything, it'll be the provincial government stepping up to pay for transit expansion.

The 905's prosperity might as well be written off without Toronto..

Where do you think the majority of them work?

No surprise, there isn't very much you do get. :lol: You're great comic relief though.

That is part of my gimmic, to give people a good laugh every once and a while. Doesn't mean I don't speak the truth or that my idea should not be heard does it?:)

Wait, you're comic relief now? That explains everything!

When Toronto gets so congested that it begins to adversely affect the region's economy, you can bet the senior levels will do something about it.

It already has an adverse effect on our economic output...something to the tune of $5 billion a year.

Wait, you're comic relief now? That explains everything!

You have no idea how many people here pulled the "I was purposely being stupid" card when they really weren't.

Wasn't there an article somewhere about Toronto's commute times being one of the longest in North America? =/

^ Why yes there is! And it's right on the front page of the Transit & Infrastructure forum.

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=1162911

:colgate:

It already has an adverse effect on our economic output...something to the tune of $5 billion a year.

Surprised that Queen's Park earmarked $8 billion for Transit City (well subway expansion at this point)?

That will be the first of many major projects, mark my words.

You have no idea how many people here pulled the "I was purposely being stupid" card when they really weren't.

I was being sarcastic.

Surprised that Queen's Park earmarked $8 billion for Transit City (well subway expansion at this point)?

That will be the first of many major projects, mark my words.

On a long term scale, sure. There will be many projects over the next 100 years.

In the next 20? I'm not optimistic. Especially under Hudak. He and Ford might have similar taste but Toronto is still going to elect Liberals. If being in government has been as bad as you guys describe it, being out of government will be worse.

On a long term scale, sure. There will be many projects over the next 100 years.

In the next 20? I'm not optimistic. Especially under Hudak. He and Ford might have similar taste but Toronto is still going to elect Liberals. If being in government has been as bad as you guys describe it, being out of government will be worse.

I don't think Toronto will ever get a provincial government that will help its cause, but I am quite happy McGuinty will be getting booted.

Well, we've gone NDP, Conservative, then Liberal over th epast 20years. All we need is a clear leader from one party to outshine the others. I can't name the leaders of the NDP or Conservatives for our province. I used to care so much more when provincial politics was more fun. McGuinty keeps winning for the same reason that Harper (I had to google his name that's bad), beccause the other party's have no great leaders. So the tools keep running the show.

As long as the Fiberals have Ignatieff as their leader, they stand a snowball's chance in hell of becoming government.

That man suffers from the same problem as Smitherman.. Simply a sleazy character; too bad his ego is so huge he refuses to step down.

Fiberals? How about the CONservatives. Or the N Debt P?

Are you Boso's just kids, come on grow up why don't you. Back to the topic, what are we getting for the city transit. Were we right about subways or what.:lol:

Like it or not, politics is important in transit. Many decent plans were scrapped, or re-hashed due to politics.

If Hudak wins the election, you can kiss any sort of transit expansion good-bye.

Are you Boso's just kids, come on grow up why don't you. Back to the topic, what are we getting for the city transit. Were we right about subways or what.:lol:

Look who's talking! If you want subways, enjoy riding your 'full' system 50+ years down the line!

Point is, Hudak will likely focus on giving rural and suburban voters what they want over Toronto. He knows that if he focuses on them, their votes can outnumber Toronto's, progress and economy be damned. The only hope otherwise, is a massive worldwide jump in gas prices.

More of the 905 than Toronto, but the implications are very telling.

Durham residents fuming over plan to build ‘half a highway’

http://www.thestar.com/news/article/...half-a-highway


Carola Vyhnak
Urban Affairs Reporter

Halfway measures don’t work when you’re building a highway, the people and politicians of Durham Region have warned the province.

“No one wants to have half a highway,” Oshawa resident Mark Little told a public meeting on the planned east extension of Hwy. 407 Wednesday night. “We were promised a whole highway. Oshawa needs it (as) a kick start to get back on its feet.”

The city and region were caught off guard last year when the province announced it plans to build the 50-kilometre extension to Hwy. 35/115 in two stages. The first section, to be completed by 2015, will end at Simcoe St. N., just south of the hamlet of Columbus. The rest of the public toll highway will be completed when money is available, Transportation Minister Kathleen Wynne has said.

The change in plans has unleashed a wave of anger with residents’ groups, municipalities, local MPs and MPPs, and the city of Peterborough, who are objecting to everything from imbalanced economic growth to traffic and safety issues.

Ending the 407 at Simcoe St. will spew 2,100 vehicles per hour onto a road that was never built for that volume, regional chair Roger Anderson told the City Hall meeting attended by about 150 people.

“It’s like a bunch of fighting red ants coming at you,” he said.

The $255 million it will cost Durham for road improvements “would take literally all our money to accommodate it,” he added.

In a letter to Premier Dalton McGuinty last month, Oshawa Mayor John Henry said the phased approach would have “devastating and crippling impacts.” He urged the government to reroute $8 billion set aside for Toronto’s LRT so the entire 407 extension can be completed by 2013, according to the agreement signed with the federal government in 2007.

In a televised interview shown at the meeting, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty warned the province to live up to its word. “We expect them to honour their agreement. This story isn’t over yet.”

Columbus resident Rosemary McConkey urged council to “stick to your guns” in insisting the extension be built all in one go. The project will affect the entire GTA, she said, expressing concerns over traffic volume through a small heritage community.

Developer George Lysyk called the 407 extension the “most important issue” council will face during its four-year term.

“This is insane, folks,” he said, referring to “massive tax increases” that will result from stopping the highway at Simcoe St. “This is going to cost us huge money and will cost us in terms of safety.”

In an interview Wednesday, Christine Elliott, MPP for Whitby-Oshawa, predicted the government’s “broken promise” will be the biggest issue in this fall’s provincial election.

“It’s not just the people of Columbus who are affected, it’s a widespread concern,” she said. “We need the 407 for our economic growth and our ability to travel.”

--------------------------------------------------------------

From GraphicMatt from Urban Toronto:
The scary part is that the Ontario PCs seem to be pushing for the 407 as a key election issue. The bulk of Toronto's transit money doesn't kick in until after 2015. A Hudak win in the fall could absolutely cause a change of course.

Goodbye transit expansion!

Why the HELL are our tax dollars going towards extending the 407!? Why isn't the 407 International Corp. building it themselves!? It's there friggin highway. Where is all that money they make from gouging drivers and purposely holding back bills so they can allow the interest to build up?

The Ontario PC's are in bed with the 407 corp. Could it be anymore obvious? That 100 years contract Mike Harris agreed to with the 407 was EPIC FAILURE! And Tim Hudak was right there probably standing next to Master Harris, snickering away.

Here's another one for you guys

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2011/01/10/niagara-highway.html

Why is Tim Hudak so determined to give the 407 corporation more power by giving them more tolled highways?

The PC's are giving the Liberals and NDP a gift of an issue to hammer the PC's with. Will they use it?

Probably not. The Liberals, unless they're able to publicly emphasize Hudak's Smitherman Complex (basically appealing to the public that he's not McGuinty without releasing any plans) are probably going to lose the election.

Thus ends transit expansion within Toronto for the next term!

That article was funny, the 407 won't be what helps Oshawa turn around. Oshawa's problems have nothing to do with transit, if they try to get 1 cent of our LRT money let's crush them.

407 should be turned into a public hwy, with no tolls.

How cool is this? Why didn't we go for these? Perhaps one day in the future we will lose all of our overhead wires for this system.

EZylrGjebnw

407 should be turned into a public hwy, with no tolls.
I like it the way it is. It discourages people from driving and gives business to YRT and VIVA which in my opinion are managed very well. That gives choice for those don't want to drive but go to school / work in the suburbs - like me.

OK!

The 407 discourages people from driving. Are you, and OEincorparated competing for dumbest posts?

How cool is this? Why didn't we go for these? Perhaps one day in the future we will lose all of our overhead wires for this system.

EZylrGjebnw

Ground level power collection is 3 times the cost of conventional OCS. I personally do not want to see OCS replaced with ground power collection. I love the look of OCS.

Do you know for a fact it cost three times as much to build, or is this just a number that sounded good to you?

I do know it would cost more to build but operating costs power wise are cheaper. I to like the overhead lines but I think it might be more of a nostalgic thing then anything else.

I can see that type of style LRT, used in Missisauga to connect to the airport someday.

Do you know for a fact it cost three times as much to build, or is this just a number that sounded good to you?

I do know it would cost more to build but operating costs power wise are cheaper. I to like the overhead lines but I think it might be more of a nostalgic thing then anything else.

Alstom's APS was first installed in 2004 on the Bordeaux tram line. The initial costs turned out to be 3x times the cost of conventional OCS. That is to be expected. Both Bombardier's PRIMOVE, and Alstom's APS are new, very complex, and proprietary technologies.
No system has been installed in areas with heavy snowfall, and Bordeaux has been having problems with "water-logging" on the system.
I do not know about the operating costs of APS, or PRIMOVE, so I cannot comment. Both technologies are fairly new, and proprietary, whereas OCS is standard across the industry. I would prefer the TTC not to be stuck dealing with just one company for something as critical as power collection.
It's not about nostalgia, it's about getting the best value for limited transit dollars.

Overhead lines look horrendous. Hopefully, their days are numbered.

You remember Ford saying people voted for Subways. Seems we want Subways AND Light rail! *face slap*

http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/January2011/20/c3994.html


Torontonians want light-rail alongside subways: Poll
Mayor lacks mandate for major transit change, but there's room for compromise

TORONTO, Jan. 20 /CNW Telbec/ - While Mayor Rob Ford, the Toronto Transit Commission and the Ontario government are reviewing Toronto's transit expansion plan, the city's residents favour keeping the current "Transit City" light-rail transit expansion program, but are open to moving more of the new lines underground. These are among the key findings of an independent survey conducted by Leger Marketing between January 12-16, 2011.

As part of its regular sampling of opinion on key public policy issues, Leger asked Torontonians to evaluate the various arguments being made by different players in the debate. Here are the survey's key findings:

No mandate for change: Only 26 percent agree that "we should build subways because it's what Rob Ford promised in the election, and he has a mandate, even if it means stopping the projects now underway." 89 percent agree that "smart transit planning is done for the long term and should not be changed every time a new government is elected."

When mixing modes, density matters: 83% agree that "Toronto should have a mix of subways, light rail, streetcars and buses, depending on the number of people living in the neighbourhoods." Less than 14% disagree with the "mixed mode" argument.
Transit City a step forward: 65% agree that "the TTC's Transit City plan was an effective step forward in helping meet Toronto's transit needs," while 18% disagree.

No more money, no more waiting: 62% agree that "Toronto should not cancel or change the current plan if it means higher costs or a longer wait to get new transit."

Subway or light rail? Split decision: When asked to choose between building subways or building light rail, respondents are in a statistical tie. Just under 44% choose subways, while just over 40% choose light rail. Men tend to favour subways more than women, and senior citizens tend to favour light rail.

The underground option: When offered the choice between keeping the light-rail plan, building subways, or keeping Transit City but moving more lines underground, a plurality of respondents (44%) choose the underground light-rail option. 32% say keep the light-rail lines" as currently planned." Only 15% choose building subways instead. Not surprisingly, 55% agree with the argument for building subways "because underground transit would be less disruptive to cars," while 41% disagree.

"Torontonians clearly see Transit City as a good plan, and light rail as a good option alongside subways and streetcars," said Dave Scholz, executive vice president of Leger Marketing. "It's really a call for realism. People are open to modest changes to the plan, but impatient about anything that adds cost or time. This may pave the way for a compromise between the city and the province that sees Transit City built, but with more of it underground."

Leger surveyed 550 Toronto adults over the age of 18 between January 12-16, 2011 using its online panel, LegerWeb. The data have been weighted according to Statistics Canada for age and gender. A full copy of the report can be found at www.legermarketing.com.

The sample size is quite small unfortunately, but I think even with a large sample size, the results would be similar.

The 500 Torontonians surveyed is far more accurate than the 3,000 Canadians surveyed to determine the popularity of political parties.

So only 18% are against Transit City? I said it before, if Rob wants to derail Transit City he should hold a referendum, those who argued before that the election was a referendum on Transit City have just been schooled.

Did any of you see the article in 24 Hour today? Rob Ford is going to do spot checks at TTC stations tomorrow to make sure nobody is sleeping. Does Rob even know how to get to the TTC?

Unfortunately we can't have both, so with more people favouring subways I'm guessing we'll have to finished Sheppard Line first. But second on the agenda is Yonge north so maybe we might not see LRT til after that even.

Our mayor walks through poor neighbourhoods to ask to citizens about how we can come up with solution for the poverty and crime problem...

Yours wanders down to Subway stations because he assumes the employees are slacking off...

This is so weird. My brain is hurting just thinking about it. Next thing you know we're going to be building light rail while you guys get stuck in a 4 year EA process to build a subway to the zoo. :crazy:

Sleeping on the job is corporate stealing, a very serious offense.

Unfortunately we can't have both, so with more people favouring subways I'm guessing we'll have to finished Sheppard Line first. But second on the agenda is Yonge north so maybe we might not see LRT til after that even.


Did you even read that report? More people favoured Transit City over subways.

Rob, oh Rob, it's time to wake up. Everybody left hours ago.

http://nationalpostnews.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/1216rford2.jpg?w=620

Did any of you see the article in 24 Hour today? Rob Ford is going to do spot checks at TTC stations tomorrow to make sure nobody is sleeping. Does Rob even know how to get to the TTC?

Hilarious. I didn't see it, but I did see the one about Owen Wilson naming his baby Rob Ford.

Did you even read that report? More people favoured Transit City over subways.

LOL, of course people are going to take Transit City over nothing, especially if you ask a guy that is using the system. When asked if they wanted subway or LRT more people choose subways.

LOL, of course people are going to take Transit City over nothing, especially if you ask a guy that is using the system. When asked if they wanted subway or LRT more people choose subways.

Yeah, the problem is nobody wants to pay higher taxes to pay for new subways, so they are settling for the LRT. (a good compromise) A subway to Scarborough will not help the traffic/transit problems in Toronto. There isn't even enough density in Scarborough to support a subway, so I don't know why Ford is so hell-bent on it. How will that help the over crowding we now have on the Yonge and Bloor lines? With all the new condos going in close to Yonge Street, I just see things going from bad to worse. We need transit NOW, not in 10 years.

Those wireless streetcars would be wonderful. I'd love to get rid off all the streetcar and electrical wires that litter our streets. All that clutter needs to go. I can't wait for our new street cars. They may still have over-head wires but the low floors and longer cars will be great.

Did you even read that report? More people favoured Transit City over subways.

Well it's a bit more complicated than that... The report stated more people prefer subways over LRT, but significantly less would cancel TC to build more subways. The majority would want a mix of subways and LRT, not one and the other, and mostly underground... In fact, it goes hand in hand with what Ford is saying.

Btw vid, the subway is going to the mall, the LRT was going to the zoo.

I agree!

Well it's a bit more complicated than that... The report stated more people prefer subways over LRT, but significantly less would cancel TC to build more subways. The majority would want a mix of subways and LRT, not one and the other, and mostly underground... In fact, it goes hand in hand with what Ford is saying.

Btw vid, the subway is going to the mall, the LRT was going to the zoo.

You can ask people if they want a Benz or a Chevy, and the majority would pick a Benz. People will always choose the more expensive option.

Rob Ford never wanted surface LRT. The majority do not want to see Transit City, which is surface LRT plan, cancelled. It does not go hand in hand with Ford. Not in the least! People want a mix of surface, underground LRT, and subways. Ford just wants it all underground. I would argue George Smitherman's plan was more in line with what Torontonians want. And we know how that turned out. This election was NOT a referendum on Transit.

And a small correction on the LRT. Sheppard LRT is going to Meadowvale, but there is to be a connection with the upgraded Scarborough (L)RT to provide access to STC.

I thought we all agreed Sheppard Line needed to be completed.

^ Do you mean Sheppard LRT or Sheppard subway?

I thought we all agreed Sheppard Line needed to be completed.

You're more delusional than I realized. Yikes!

Why is finishing Sheppard Line delusional, it's tops on the agenda for transit upgrade right now.

You think everyone agrees the Sheppard Line should be completed. That is being delusional, and speaking for me! I do not want to replace a fully funded, and planned LRT plan with a plan that only serves a small portion of Toronto.

Majority of the people believe finishing Sheppard line is number one priority then. Mix surface and undrground LRT is third on the list after Yonge Line ext.

What is second on this list according to you?

I'd have Yonge Line extansion just ahead of mix surface, underground LRT. 2017-18 hopefully we will see work starting on a entire network of LRT.

Curious.................I know that Ford and Metrolinx are meeting this week but what exactly do people expect to come of this. Are they actually going to have a new plan they agree on and get building or is this just a meeting to strike a committee? Is this suppose to result in a solid new plan or simply another meeting to agree to needing another meeting?

The priority right now is Transit City, and making sure the funded, and contracted portions of the plan are built. The next priority should be the DRL, and extending the Yonge line at least to Steeles Ave. Extending the Sheppard Line is a non-starter STC does not require a subway line, the models prove as much.

I doubt the TTC will evaluate downtown bus routes for eventual conversion to streetcar, but I think that should be a priority sometime in the future. The 29 Dufferin Bus seems to be a good candidate for streetcar conversion between St. Clair Ave, and King St.

^^why not all the way up to Yorkdale? i live on Eglinton and Dufferin, and i dont like the idea of having to transfer from the 29 bus to a streetcar to continue on a my trip to Dufferin Stn on Bloor

Didn't really answer my question.................will this result in a true plane like The Big 5 or just a get to know ya love fest?

It would be fun to have a sit and discuss transit plans with some of you guys. We really need to come up something solid with no regreets wheather it be subway or LRT and start builing ASAP. Wonder how two unit double decker LRT would look, it would save from having to build long platform stops.

^^why not all the way up to Yorkdale? i live on Eglinton and Dufferin, and i dont like the idea of having to transfer from the 29 bus to a streetcar to continue on a my trip to Dufferin Stn on BloorAs I recall, there are single family homes along some parts of Dufferin north of Bloor.

Once you get to St. Clair things get busy again - a Dufferin streetcar / LRT would have to go up to St. Clair - perhaps as far as Eglinton if the Cross-town LRT is built.

But as far as Yorkdale - not likely to be a priority for the city or TTC.

Cheers, m

The priority right now is Transit City, and making sure the funded, and contracted portions of the plan are built. The next priority should be the DRL, and extending the Yonge line at least to Steeles Ave. Extending the Sheppard Line is a non-starter STC does not require a subway line, the models prove as much.

I doubt the TTC will evaluate downtown bus routes for eventual conversion to streetcar, but I think that should be a priority sometime in the future. The 29 Dufferin Bus seems to be a good candidate for streetcar conversion between St. Clair Ave, and King St.
Stop living in a fantasy world!

Transit City is not the priority.. It is dead! The only thing that could come from TC is the Eglinton LRT, but even that will be strongly tweaked. Sheppard is going to be a subway.

Stop living in a fantasy world!

Transit City is not the priority.. It is dead! The only thing that could come from TC is the Eglinton LRT, but even that will be strongly tweaked. Sheppard is going to be a subway.

Herp derp subways everywhere!
I really don't know whose world is more fantastical.

Face it, no one wants to pay for subways, even though we want to build them. The province doesn't, the federal government doesn't, even taxpayers would balk at paying extra taxes for subways. Ford is not a transit person. You have everything about him wrong. His main goals are to cut down on waste, not to build a city. Sheppard was but a token scrap tossed to keep transit users happy- if he were really gunning towards solving Toronto's traffic problems, he would have released a complete transit plan- something that improves transit across the city.

Speaking of which, Sheppard will probably consume the entire TC budget and more- where's the money going to come from, eh?

Ah, Ontario politics.

Subway lines that make sense are either cancelled or discussed a lot but never actually built and subway lines that don't make sense undergo construction.

Herp derp subways everywhere!
I really don't know whose world is more fantastical.

Face it, no one wants to pay for subways, even though we want to build them. The province doesn't, the federal government doesn't, even taxpayers would balk at paying extra taxes for subways. Ford is not a transit person. You have everything about him wrong. His main goals are to cut down on waste, not to build a city. Sheppard was but a token scrap tossed to keep transit users happy- if he were really gunning towards solving Toronto's traffic problems, he would have released a complete transit plan- something that improves transit across the city.

Speaking of which, Sheppard will probably consume the entire TC budget and more- where's the money going to come from, eh?

I highly doubt Yonge to Downsview and Don Mills to STC will cost $8 billion unless we're building the rails out of solid gold.

Stop living in a fantasy world!

Transit City is not the priority.. It is dead! The only thing that could come from TC is the Eglinton LRT, but even that will be strongly tweaked. Sheppard is going to be a subway.

It is quickly approaching the point where all proposes will be truncated or killed by a Hudak majority. If Ford does manage to get Sheppard agreed to by McGuinty, it will still be truncated by half or more before construction.

A best case for Sheppard in 2020, if not LRT, is a one station extension to Vic Park.

I have higher hopes for GO projects but it will be at the expense of any project in Toronto that does not cross municipal boundaries (Sheppard and Eglinton are both on that list; again).

It isn't just subways. It's basically any form of infrastructure that will benefit a city.

From the Globe:

"The Toronto Transit Commission says that subways cost about $300-million a kilometre to build, compared with $75-million to $100-million for the light-rail transit (LRT) envisioned under the Transit City plan that Mr. Ford has unilaterally declared dead. The total cost for the Sheppard subway extension would be $3.6-billion, not including $500-million for a possible new train yard. "

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/toronto/marcus-gee/sheppard-subway-extension-a-quarter-the-stops-for-three-times-the-cost/article1847893/

----------------------------------------------------------------

A Sheppard Line extended both ways along with a new trainyard would cost probably around $4-5 Billion. The costs could easily be halved using elevated rail, but Ford wants everything underground, of course. Add to that the costs of maintaining it and you've got a white elephant that will stay for at least a decade or so until development (assuming housing doesn't crash) catches up.

This still leaves scraps for transit expansion around the city. I would not be surprised if, under Hudak, the money allocated for transit gets slashed again. Really, the only project worth pursuing at this time is the Eglinton line.

In order for Hudak to be elected he'll have to get some seats within the GTA.. Since suburbs are more likely to vote for him (suburban 416) he'll have to do something for them.

The Sheppard subway does a great job at this.

Btw, in terms of cost, a new trainyard is not necessary. If the line is extended to Downsview and interlined with the YUS line; Wilson can be expanded accordingly for higher capacity.

I was riding the bus on Sheppard West today. There is a lot of new mid and high-rise development along the way, as if the developers anticipated the subway extension. And the bus was quite busy too - a lot of passengers considering it was 8 am on Sunday.

The only problem with that hypothesis is that those developments can't cash in on speculation. The smart developers would hold on to properties until the TTC actually starts building along that route. At that point they can start to market their projects as being on a subway or LRT line. What you see along Sheppard is just supply and demand development that would happen without any change with the TTC.

My guess is that if Hudak wins, Eglinton will lose again. We will probably get the Sheppard extension to Vic Park in the east and Scarborough Centre if we are unlucky.

Crazy as it might seem I'd prefer the westwards extension to Downsview over the extension from Vic Park to STC.

It would be much better for the line to stick to Sheppard, with the Scarborough subway extension connecting Kennedy to McCowan & Lawrence, STC & McCowan & Sheppard.

Scarborough subway & Eglinton subway are still my first choices for Toronto in a 'subways only' world.

Cheers, m

I agree with the extention to Scarborough Centre as well as the westward extention. But maybe the westward extention should be LRT, that way it can go even further west all the way to Humber College and Pearson airport.

I agree with the extention to Scarborough Centre as well as the westward extention. But maybe the westward extention should be LRT, that way it can go even further west all the way to Humber College and Pearson airport.

That's a pretty long trip there!

Make the tracks go north west of Keele up to Finch and then run it surface rail from Jane/Finch westward before going down into a tunnel to pick up Humber College and connect to the Airport. This will eliminate having to build Finch LRT track and make way for Yonge extention up to hwy7, No need to tranfer onto Viva or Go anymore.

Question...................when Ford and Metrolinx {yet again} will they come out of the meeting with a solid go ahead plan or just another meeting to tell you when the next meeting is?
Is this going to result with Metrolinx, Toronto, and Queen's Park actually coming out with a new plan with funding supplied and a solid timetable?

How did the whole debate become one of subways vs. LRT rather than one of more transit investment vs. traffic congestion?

City eyes private partnership to extend Sheppard subway
February 16, 2011

Tess Kalinowski and Robert Benzie


Mayor Rob Ford’s office is proposing a public-private partnership by the city to extend the subway along Sheppard Ave.

Mayor Rob Ford’s office is proposing a public-private partnership by the city to extend the subway along Sheppard Ave., leaving $8.15 billion in provincial transit funds for an underground light rail line along Eglinton that could be extended to the Scarborough Town Centre.

Metrolinx has not yet agreed to the proposal, which was raised in a meeting Tuesday, in the latest efforts to find a compromise between the provincially funded light rail plan and Ford’s commitment to building subways.

Under the mayor’s plan, Sheppard would be paid for using a combination of development charges and tax increment financing, an innovative tool former finance minister and key Spadina subway extension proponent Greg Sorbara introduced in 2006.

It enables municipalities to borrow against the future property tax revenue of land that is improved by having a subway nearby.

The key is you have to designate the land as such before any infrastructure is built.

A Sheppard subway extension would cost between $3.4 billion and $4.4 billion and be owned by the city.

The Eglinton light rail line would be provincially financed and owned and would run straight to Kennedy station.

It’s not clear yet whether the obsolete Scarborough RT would become an extension of the Bloor-Danforth subway line or be converted to the light rail technology being used on Eglinton.

The city wants it to be subway — an expensive option that would require realigning the SRT route — but relieve some crowding on the Bloor-Danforth line.

While Metrolinx has still to study the proposal, former provincial infrastructure minister David Caplan, a Liberal MPP, told the Star in January that the public-private scheme could work to build two to three kilometers of new tunnels annually in Toronto.

http://www.thestar.com/news/transportation/article/940055--city-eyes-private-partnership-to-extend-sheppard-subway?bn=1

Sounds like the province is agreeing to fund Eglinton and the replacement of the SRT, but told Ford he can't have any money for his pet subway on Sheppard.

Sounds like the province is agreeing to fund Eglinton and the replacement of the SRT, but told Ford he can't have any money for his pet subway on Sheppard.

This will hopefully be the scenario.

Sounds like the province is agreeing to fund Eglinton and the replacement of the SRT, but told Ford he can't have any money for his pet subway on Sheppard.sounds good. Just get it done.

Hmmm...actually when I think about it, it's a nice placeholder for all sides. McGuinty promises public transport. One Transit City project gets started (and it's an underground one) and Ford gets the Sheppard subway extension that he wants.

Plus Ontario admits that they screwed up on the SRT and replace it with subway like it should be now.

And if the Tories win the election, then Ford still gets his subway and the government doesn't have to pay for it...while the Eglinton line probably becomes an extension of the SRT instead.

Cheers, m

That article is just one persons opinion, you do not have to agree with it. A fully underground LRT Eglinton line would be a terrible waste of funds and require extensive developement along Eglinton. I would rather see the province hold on to the money or help finish off a already started Sheppard line. As of now Sheppard line is still not worth running because the route is too short and doesn't have enough stops to pick up more fares. If you are going to shut down SRT for 4-5years it makes even more sense to complete Sheppard to STC.

Really? Eglinton is way more developed than Sheppard.

If anything, the use of the 8 billion on Eglinton alone has just killed the Sheppard expansion. There is no way that development charges and tax increment financing can fully fund the line- even the Spadina expansion was still funded by the taxpayers upfront.

And that's assuming that the condo market will keep on growing.

This is the best idea yet out of Ford.

Eglington is also old, dirty and narrow west of Bathurst St.

Yes, old, dirty and narrow, but also developed and walkable.

a line along Eglinton would go through all 6 boroughs, compared to just 2 along Sheppard, plus more people live along Eglinton...plus it's a waaaaay more interesting street compared to boring Sheppard :lol:

Yes, old, dirty and narrow, but also developed and walkable.

I would rather live on Eglinton, than Sheppard. I have walked Sheppard, and I work near Sheppard. The corridor is not a nice street to walk along.

What is sad about the subway is there will be no station at Birchmount. With all the multiple dwelling located in the area, a station there is a no-brainer.

In order for Hudak to be elected he'll have to get some seats within the GTA.. Since suburbs are more likely to vote for him (suburban 416) he'll have to do something for them.

The Sheppard subway does a great job at this.

Btw, in terms of cost, a new trainyard is not necessary. If the line is extended to Downsview and interlined with the YUS line; Wilson can be expanded accordingly for higher capacity.

Seriously, can you be anymore of a tool?

They should have the Eglinton line continue as the SRT. That way people on the SRT will be inclined to stay on and transfer at Yonge and Eglinton instead of transfer at Kennedy and then transfer again at Yonge & Bloor. This would take pressure off Yonge & Bloor station which is already overcrowded.

They should have the Eglinton line continue as the SRT. That way people on the SRT will be inclined to stay on and transfer at Yonge and Eglinton instead of transfer at Kennedy and then transfer again at Yonge & Bloor. This would take pressure off Yonge & Bloor station which is already overcrowded.that's fine as long as the Eglinton line uses LRT technology, not ART LIM technology.

Personally, I'd love to see them abandon the whole SRT route and replace it with an LRT running from Kennedy & Eglinton up Danforth & McCowan to Scarborough Town Centre - a surface Scarborough Subway.

The at grade alignment of the SRT can be used for double tracking the GO line to Stouffville, and the elevated guideway can become a bike path or something like that (or a branch of the Scarborough Eglinton LRT).

Cheers, m

Why in god's name would the tunnel east of Don Mills and not elevated the line. Are they worried about how it would destroy the ever so bohemian Golden Mile?

Why in god's name would the tunnel east of Don Mills and not elevated the line. Are they worried about how it would destroy the ever so bohemian Golden Mile?

Because any elevated section east of Don Mills would have to go over an existing highway interchange, and dip back down. Would most likely be a gradient that exceeds the acceptable 5% for comfort. And please, no crap about Monorails being able to do up to 10%, or whatever. LRT can easily do steep grades.

The obvious options is surface LRT, but Torontonians voted in an idiot whose brother is calling the shots. I have a feeling the line will be underground, and lots of stops lost, and we'll be stuck with a situation like Sheppard with bus service lost, and traffic congestion increasing to severe levels.

Seriously, can you be anymore of a tool?
Hey asshole, you're back!

Transit City is still dead - so move along.

---------------------------------

The only thing I'm not understanding about this new plan is that the entire $8 billion funding is going into Eglinton. Well if they're building an entirely underground line, it might as well be a subway for that pricepoint.

And by the looks of it, so is the Sheppard Subway.

http://www.thestar.com/news/transportation/article/940904--doubt-cast-on-ford-s-hopes-for-subway-partner

Good luck in finding a partner to take on that cost!

Ford’s transit trope


The mayor’s dreamed up private-public transit plan has real costs
By Enzo Di Matteo
Mayor Rob Ford met with the media Thursday afternoon outside his City Hall office in a scrum called, or so the media thought, to talk about his plan to raise private money to fund his subway to Venus, er Scarborough Town Centre.

Instead, it seems the presser was held to offer Torontonians assurances that the mayor is feeling fine and back saving the taxpayers money after surgery to remove a 5 mm kidney stone last week.

A City Hall press gallery increasingly agitated about access to the mayor, or more precisely, the lack thereof, pressed Ford on the access question: is Ford the mayor or is his older brother Doug, the councillor from Ward 2, the guy calling the shots around here?

The mayor laughed. Shrugged. Rasped something about being the mayor. And then was quickly pulled from the horde by press secretary Adrienne Batra. Just like that, they were back behind the double-locked glass doors of the mayor’s office, safe from the media hordes. That took all of three minutes.

There were few details offered by Ford on his “public-private” funding plan for transit, sent to the provincial transit authority, Metrolinx, on Tuesday, although parts of that have already been leaked.

According to Councillor Joe Mihevc, Ford’s plan, besides private money for a Sheppard subway extension includes putting the Eglinton Crosstown light rail line proposed as part of Transit City completely underground, and ditching the Finch West light rail line and replacing it with buses.

A curious turn on the transit file.

The TTC is supposed to be working on an alternative to Transit City for the mayor. And presenting that plan to the mayor, some time soon. The impression left up till now was that the TTC, mayor and Metrolinx would at some point in the near future walking hand-in-hand to a dais to announce their plan.

Now it looks like transit policy is being sketched in the mayor’s office. Call it transit planning by politics.

It could be that Ford is getting some push back from the province on his pitch for a Sheppard subway. Mihevc thinks he may be.

The province promised light rail along Sheppard for the Pan Am Games. And has put Ford on notice that the city will be on the hook for $130 million already spent on plans for the Sheppard LRT proposed under Transit City, if it’s replaced with a subway.

In Mihevc’s estimation, there’s also an equity issue for the Grits to weigh when it comes to funding a Sheppard subway over Transit City. That being: will Scarborough be better served by a subway or light rail? The latter seems to be the answer to that question.

Ford, though, seems not to be trying to push his ample political weight around to put the heat on the province to accept his subway plan, by saying he’s got private money for it. The mayor knows everything can change after the next provincial election in October.

It’ll be a different ball game if McGuinty’s still in the premier’s chair then.

Right now, though, McGuinty is looking at his declining poll numbers, seeing Ford’s support in Toronto and getting nervous about the prospect of losing seats in Scarborough. Which is why Transportation Minister Kathleen Wynne in speaking in soft tones about being “cautiously optimistic” about the province and city finding common ground on Ford’s public-private subway dreaming.

Could the Libs be fashioning an election campaign in Toronto opposing Ford’s subway plan and keeping Transit City? Now that would be interesting.

The money’s already there for Transit City. Ford’s private-public partnership for Sheppard, what we can surmise from it so far, could end up being another boondoggle with taxpayers footing the bill. We’ve seen this movie before with private money for a Sheppard subway, only starring Mel Lastman, which ended costing taxpayers close to a billion bucks. And continues to lose money every year for the TTC because there aren’t the densities to support it.

Mihevc, doesn’t think there’s the $3 billion that’ll be needed out there in private sector to build Ford’s subway, anyway. He says either property taxes will have to be raised, or development charges levied, to raise the cash. To say nothing of the densities that will have to be given away along the route to make Ford’s plan financially feasible.

According to Councillor Shelley Carroll, that would mean 40-storey towers at major intersections all along Sheppard.

Another thing the mayor hasn’t factored into his calculations, says Carroll, are the operating costs of an expanded subway system. She notes that the city can barely scrape up enough money now to keep the current system clean and maintained.

More on this story as it develops.



I do not like making up fantasy scenarios, but it's likely we'll see one Eglinton Line from Jane to Scarborough Centre. The line will be underground from Jane to Kennedy, and rise to the surface to run in the SRT ROW. I personally think an underground LRT east of Laird is a terrible idea. The 34 bus is a local bus with many stop utilized. An underground line east of Laird might see spacing in excess of 900 metres, or just at the major intersections. I hope I am wrong, and the station spacing is more akin to the Yonge/University south of Bloor, or the B-D line in the original 1966 section.

Rob's subway expansion is D.O.A. It's a money sinker. Therefore it'll recieving no private investments. Either he'll have to gouge the tax payers in order to fund his pet project or scrap it entirely.

And now that Transit City is dead, we're back where we started. No plans to improve public transit.

Oh god! I wish we could cancel the Pan Am games. We won't be ready.

It's quite clear the only winners in all of this are the transit riders. :cripes:

It's beginning to look like we will get as much out of this round as we did for Network 2011. Anything committed to this summer will be cut by 50% or more by Hudak.

I do not like making up fantasy scenarios, but it's likely we'll see one Eglinton Line from Jane to Scarborough Centre. The line will be underground from Jane to Kennedy, and rise to the surface to run in the SRT ROW. I personally think an underground LRT east of Laird is a terrible idea. The 34 bus is a local bus with many stop utilized. An underground line east of Laird might see spacing in excess of 900 metres, or just at the major intersections. I hope I am wrong, and the station spacing is more akin to the Yonge/University south of Bloor, or the B-D line in the original 1966 section.

They could pretty much use the same stops on an underground Eglinton line from Laird to Kennedy that they would have for the surface LRT. The only stops that would be likely to be cut out are Ferrand, Lebovic and Ionview. The rest are major intersections or would create an unaccceptable gap.

It's quite clear the only winners in all of this are the transit riders. :cripes:

How? Nothings getting built.

How? Nothings getting built?

Eglinton needs to be put on high priority at this point and Metrolinx needs to sink enough money into the project to make cancelling it difficult.

On a side note, an Eglinton extended to Kennedy can potentially replace the SRT.

Would a subway or LRT line along St. Clair be a better investment than say, the Sheppard Line extension? Unless that would be considered redundant.

Or how about extending the Sheppard Line the other way, towards Wilson and beyond?

Or another alternative, making the Sheppard extension into LRT and converting the SRT to LRT, thus having two LRT branches going from Scarborough Centre to Don Mills and Kennedy, respectively.

Would a subway or LRT line along St. Clair be a better investment than say, the Sheppard Line extension? Unless that would be considered redundant.

St. Clair already has street cars, which they just finished giving their own lanes.

St. Clair already has street cars, which they just finished giving their own lanes.

Perhaps then something like a St. Clair Crosstown Rapid Streetcar Line, essentially extending the St. Clair ROW eastward.

I don't think anyone would propose ripping up the St. Clair streetcars and replacing them with subways given what the street went through to get them. On the other hand, considering that density lessens the further away you are from downtown, it does seem a little odd that St. Clair will have streetcars, Eglinton will have light rail and Sheppard will (possibly) get a subway.

I don't think anyone would propose ripping up the St. Clair streetcars and replacing them with subways given what the street went through to get them. On the other hand, considering that density lessens the further away you are from downtown, it does seem a little odd that St. Clair will have streetcars, Eglinton will have light rail and Sheppard will (possibly) get a subway.

How about a line running parallel to the St. Clair streetcar line or, as I fantasized about before, a crosstown St. Clair Rapid Streetcar line?

Maybe instead of a subway, make a rapid streetcar line for Sheppard?

That's what LRT was, a rapid transit streetcar. Considering so many people here don't want Sheppard subway completed, I would rather see it completed with LRT. This should leave enough money to completed the Sheppard west to the airport as well.

That's what LRT was, a rapid transit streetcar. Considering so many people here don't want Sheppard subway completed, I would rather see it completed with LRT. This should leave enough money to completed the Sheppard west to the airport as well.

I thought Metrolinx was taking care of the airport rail link.

Why in god's name would the tunnel east of Don Mills and not elevated the line. Are they worried about how it would destroy the ever so bohemian Golden Mile?Because any elevated section east of Don Mills would have to go over an existing highway interchange, and dip back down. Would most likely be a gradient that exceeds the acceptable 5% for comfort. And please, no crap about Monorails being able to do up to 10%, or whatever. LRT can easily do steep grades.

The obvious options is surface LRT, but Torontonians voted in an idiot whose brother is calling the shots. I have a feeling the line will be underground, and lots of stops lost, and we'll be stuck with a situation like Sheppard with bus service lost, and traffic congestion increasing to severe levels.not to mention, he would probably be quite upset if anything happened to the Golden Mile, which represents the Golden Age before the 'war on the car.'

Cheers, m

I thought Metrolinx was taking care of the airport rail link.they are - and the trains are ordered and the purchase approved.

http://media.thestar.topscms.com/images/81/57/b073c94d406fa909c90500035328.jpeg

http://www.thestar.com/news/transportation/article/941224--pearson-union-link-gets-53m-worth-of-diesel-trains?bn=1

Cheers, m

Would a subway or LRT line along St. Clair be a better investment than say, the Sheppard Line extension? Unless that would be considered redundant.

Or how about extending the Sheppard Line the other way, towards Wilson and beyond?

Or another alternative, making the Sheppard extension into LRT and converting the SRT to LRT, thus having two LRT branches going from Scarborough Centre to Don Mills and Kennedy, respectively.St. Clair's big problem is east of Yonge - it becomes a narrower road with larger single family homes on both sides - and then you have the Don Valley.

St. Clair on the east side is quite different as well.

It makes more sense to build Eglinton since Eglinton is the only street that crosses all former municipalities in the city of Toronto.

Another option that has not been considered is extending the St. Clair streetcar west to Scarlett Road and under the railway bridge to join Dundas St.

Extending the Sheppard subway to Wilson is a possibility but TTC does not have it high on their priority list for now.

Making the Sheppard extension into LRT and converting the SRT to LRT ... and eventually extending both to Malvern - that is what was planned under Transit City which Ford has stated that he is against.

Cheers, m

I don't think anyone would propose ripping up the St. Clair streetcars and replacing them with subways given what the street went through to get them. On the other hand, considering that density lessens the further away you are from downtown, it does seem a little odd that St. Clair will have streetcars, Eglinton will have light rail and Sheppard will (possibly) get a subway.

Toronto is a city that can't make up it's mind on what it wants. We have a little bit of everything. Just to complicate things.

Frankly I wish we would stick with Subways, Buses and LRV's (future street cars). Things would be a lot simpler for us and the TTC.

Underground LRT's seem kind of redundant when you already have subways.

Those new trains are cool, too bad 99% of Torontonians won't be able to afford to take it.
Why don't they just do the obvious.............improve the current SRT and have it as SkyTrain to Pearson. It would save having to rip up the and replace a rapid transit line with another one.
Just improve the current SRT with heating mechanisms and to accomodate MK11 cars.
The SkyTrain {outside of Toronto where the city and TTC went out of it's way to let it rot}} has proven itself in Vancouver to be very cost effective, {due to automation and low electrical usuage levels}, comfortable, very reliable, quiet, smooth, very fast pick up and stoppage, and extremely safe.
Whether you like SkyTrain or not extending west {elevated} at Eglinton to Don Mills and then tunneled to Jane seems the most cost effective and practical route to go. It also allows for the extension of the BD line east to Kingston and beyond.
Whether SkyTrain or Metro is up to Metrolinx and Ford but I truly cannot understand for the life of me why they even consider LRT. If it's going to be exclusive ROW with most tunneled LRT would be the worrst choice. It doesn't have the capacity or speed of Metro or SkyTrain. It would take larger LRT stations to accomodate the same capacity and larger longer stations means more money. If they are going to elevated some portions along Eglinton then again LRT is the worse choice as it is more expensive and time consuming to build than either elevated Metro or SkyTrain.
What is the supposed logic they are using to build underground LRT that will be more expensive to build than underground Metro or SkyTrain? It really does make one wonder who's palms are getting greased.
The thing to also bear in mind is that these LRT trains are not using the same tracks as the new downtown streetcars which means an entirely new yard and maintenance centre. Standard Metro can use the current facilities as can SkyTrain which also has it's yard and command centre. They may need some expansion but that's a hell of a lot cheaper than building a new one from scratch. Also LRT cars don't have as long a life span as either Metro or SkyTrain cars.
I would really like to know why LRT is now even being considered for Eglinton.

Those new trains are cool, too bad 99% of Torontonians won't be able to afford to take it.
Why don't they just do the obvious.............improve the current SRT and have it as SkyTrain to Pearson. It would save having to rip up the and replace a rapid transit line with another one.
Just improve the current SRT with heating mechanisms and to accomodate MK11 cars.
The SkyTrain {outside of Toronto where the city and TTC went out of it's way to let it rot}} has proven itself in Vancouver to be very cost effective, {due to automation and low electrical usuage levels}, comfortable, very reliable, quiet, smooth, very fast pick up and stoppage, and extremely safe.
Whether you like SkyTrain or not extending west {elevated} at Eglinton to Don Mills and then tunneled to Jane seems the most cost effective and practical route to go. It also allows for the extension of the BD line east to Kingston and beyond.
Whether SkyTrain or Metro is up to Metrolinx and Ford but I truly cannot understand for the life of me why they even consider LRT. If it's going to be exclusive ROW with most tunneled LRT would be the worrst choice. It doesn't have the capacity or speed of Metro or SkyTrain. It would take larger LRT stations to accomodate the same capacity and larger longer stations means more money. If they are going to elevated some portions along Eglinton then again LRT is the worse choice as it is more expensive and time consuming to build than either elevated Metro or SkyTrain.
What is the supposed logic they are using to build underground LRT that will be more expensive to build than underground Metro or SkyTrain? It really does make one wonder who's palms are getting greased.
The thing to also bear in mind is that these LRT trains are not using the same tracks as the new downtown streetcars which means an entirely new yard and maintenance centre. Standard Metro can use the current facilities as can SkyTrain which also has it's yard and command centre. They may need some expansion but that's a hell of a lot cheaper than building a new one from scratch. Also LRT cars don't have as long a life span as either Metro or SkyTrain cars.
I would really like to know why LRT is now even being considered for Eglinton.There's a simple reason why they considered LRT - because they could also run it on the surface of Eglinton Ave. east of Laird and west of Keele. Cannot do that with ICTS.

The 3 three LRV consist is about 90m long, while a 6-car train of Mark II ICTS is about 100m long so the capacity is about the same, and LRT costs less.

LRT trains operating in their own exclusive lanes can top 100km/h. The streetcars we have now can top 80km/h easily - but even the subway's average speed is around 30km/h. (Interestingly enough, over 4 years my car's computed average speed is only 34km/h).

LRT will use 1435mm gauge which is the same as the SRT. If they wanted to they could use the McCowan depot - but McCowan depot is too small for an LRT or expanded SRT fleet.

LIM technology has problems in snow. Despite all the successes in Vancouver, the Skytrain does have problems on the occasions that it snows in Vancouver. And of course it does snow more often in Toronto than in Vancouver.

As for the cost of LRT underground, where do you get the idea that LRT underground would cost more than ICTS or Subway? ICTS and Subway would require platforms that are far larger, wider and longer than LRT.

Not to mention, if the line is going to be fully underground, why build ICTS? Why not just build a full subway? Then you do not have to worry about a separate, fussy, high-maintenance technology.

Nothing wrong with LRT on, and under (and above if necessary) Eglinton Ave. And hey, if you prefer to have an integration of SRT and Eglinton to Jane St, no problem. Hamilton, Mississauga-Brampton and K-W will be happy to take the LRT instead.

Cheers, m

The thing is that LRT is great if there is even one cross section of traffic but outside of that I don't understand it. If they don't want SkyTrain the natural choice is a Metro.
Elevated LRT is also more expensive than either elevated SkyTrain or Metro due to bot only having to build the tracks but also the overhead power lines.
LRT does not have the capacity of SkyTrain as SkyTrain cars are slightly wider and both pick up and slow down speeds are quicker. The new MK11 are wider than standard LRT and Metro is of course much wider. That means shorter stations for the same capacity. The tunnels for Metro/SkyTrain/LRT all use standard boring machines but if there is any extra expense if would be for LRT as the tunnels need to be slightly higher to accomodate the overhead power supply.
This is completely illogical.

Hmm good points made against LRT.

The thing is that LRT is great if there is even one cross section of traffic but outside of that I don't understand it. If they don't want SkyTrain the natural choice is a Metro.
Elevated LRT is also more expensive than either elevated SkyTrain or Metro due to bot only having to build the tracks but also the overhead power lines.
LRT does not have the capacity of SkyTrain as SkyTrain cars are slightly wider and both pick up and slow down speeds are quicker. The new MK11 are wider than standard LRT and Metro is of course much wider. That means shorter stations for the same capacity. The tunnels for Metro/SkyTrain/LRT all use standard boring machines but if there is any extra expense if would be for LRT as the tunnels need to be slightly higher to accomodate the overhead power supply.
This is completely illogical.

I don't see how erecting overhead lines is more expensive than erecting third rail or, in the case of Vancouver, third rail and linear induction down the middle of the tracks.

I don't see how erecting overhead lines is more expensive than erecting third rail or, in the case of Vancouver, third rail and linear induction down the middle of the tracks.


It's not, in fact it may be cheaper. What some people don't understand is that LRT will provide more stops then a subway or elevated track ever could. This is more about replacing the buses with a fleet of comfortable reliable transit that can hold more people.

It's not, in fact it may be cheaper. What some people don't understand is that LRT will provide more stops then a subway or elevated track ever could. This is more about replacing the buses with a fleet of comfortable reliable transit that can hold more people.

It really depends on the system in any given city.

More stops is not necessary a good thing it only makes for a longer journey. Not pleasant when you are travelling longer distances.

I don't see how erecting overhead lines is more expensive than erecting third rail or, in the case of Vancouver, third rail and linear induction down the middle of the tracks.

I am pretty sure you have heard this from ssiguy2 before. It's not the first time he brought up this LRT vs. Skytrain nonsense. I am surprise he did not try to talk about monorails being a better technology. ICTS is NOT cheaper than LRT, or the technology would be selling better than it is.

The key difference between ICTS and LRT is flexibility. ICTS is a very inflexible, trouble-prone proprietary technology. With LRT, you can run at grade, elevated, or in tunnel. With ICTS, it must be grade-separated, and you must buy cars from Bombardier. It's a couple of reasons why the technology has not really sold well in the past decade, compared to LRT. Bombardier sold 7, or 8 ICTS systems compared to well over a thousand new LRV's.

OEincorparated: More stops IS a good thing, especially if the corridor warrants a spacing of 400-500 metres. Less stops does not automatically mean a faster trip, any sort of time savings will be lost due to longer dwell times at fewer stops.
Go and look at Seattle's Central Link line. The line is designed for speed, and only attract 21,000 riders a day. That is nothing, and it's a 19km Light Rail/Metro line!

I didn't want to make this about Skytrain vs LRT.

I was just saying how installing overhead lines on an elevated track are not necessarily more expensive than installing third rail.

I love how someone who hates Vancouver so much is constantly pimping out Vancouver's skytrain system.

LRT and Sktrain serve different purposes. LRT is street oriented, and geared for continuous mid-high density development pattern (the best kind); while skytrain, like subway is geared for high-density nodial development and serves as a higher-capacity, higher speed backbone. Yes, station spacings hugely affect speed, but both kinds are needed in an transit system.

A more relevant comparison is between Skytrain & subway, rather than skytrain to LRT.
Skytrain's advantages:
-slightly cheaper track construction
-automated system allows for less-than-one-minute wait times and lower costs of operation
-linear induction technology offers a smoother quieter ride and can handle steep grades better (which is why it's used in Vancouver)

Disadvantage: capacity

So while I would never replace LRT plans with skytrain, running it out to medium-ridership areas in the suburbs, instead of a $300-million-per-km subway line, makes much more sense.

I didn't want to make this about Skytrain vs LRT.

Skytrain would work well on some roads that will never be high pedestrian traffic getting people from point A to point B faster. Eglington is not one of them though. Some of our north south routes would be ideal for this sort of skytrain transit.

More stops is not necessary a good thing it only makes for a longer journey. Not pleasant when you are travelling longer distances.

Why would you travel long distances on a line that is intended to serve locals?

GO is for long distances. Stops every 2km to 4km and priced as an express system. What you want is more frequent GO service, not fewer stops on TTC.

^^
It would be interesting to see a future through tunnel, essentially joining the two Lakeshore lines into one and perhaps even including lines C and G in that scheme.

Am I anti-LRT?..........not at all.
The issue here is that Ford will not allow any at grade system. In other words any economic advantage of LRT is gone.
This is why I am stating for a SkyTrain or Metro. Why would Toronto turn a SkyTrain to LRT for a whopping amount of money when it won't be any faster?
By simply upgrading the current SRT and then having it head west at Kennedy along Eglinton is logical.
It would not only be cheaper but there would be no disruption of service. I really do not understand the logic.

@RBT Yes, but go trains don't go up and down Yonge like TTC or Viva. We need a continuous rail system that goes north/south through our artery the world renown Yonge st. Needs to be extended north of Finch, and preferably all the way to Newmarket. 2-4km per stop is fine but this should be put as priority over some inner city projects.

By the way, my GO Lakeshore and/or Milton-Stouffville through tunnel assumes that these two lines are already electrified.

@RBT Yes, but go trains don't go up and down Yonge like TTC or Viva. We need a continuous rail system that goes north/south through our artery the world renown Yonge st. Needs to be extended north of Finch, and preferably all the way to Newmarket. 2-4km per stop is fine but this should be put as priority over some inner city projects.

OE, I can't even tell if your trying to troll us or something.

Nah I'm just here to check out pictures of place I don't get the chance to go to anymore.

A more relevant comparison is between Skytrain & subway, rather than skytrain to LRT.
Skytrain's advantages:
-automated system allows for less-than-one-minute wait times and lower costs of operation

The automation kit Skytrain uses can be applied to any vehicles that is grade separated and follows a guide or track. Montreal has been using it (older coding, but essentially version 0.1) on their rubber tire subway system since before the SRT was built in Toronto.

Anyway, automated operations is not a feature exclusive to Skytrain.

@RBT Yes, but go trains don't go up and down Yonge like TTC or Viva. We need a continuous rail system that goes north/south through our artery the world renown Yonge st. Needs to be extended north of Finch, and preferably all the way to Newmarket. 2-4km per stop is fine but this should be put as priority over some inner city projects.

Then why can't Metrolinx handle this and let TTC handle things pertaining to the city proper?

Then why can't Metrolinx handle this and let TTC handle things pertaining to the city proper?

These are Ontario municipalities. Logic need not apply!

Putting cost aside, I wish to know the main arguments for subways and for LRT along Eglinton.

Does it involve density? Does it involve potential capacity?

And to add my two cents, it seems that Rob Ford's rhetoric has poisoned the water for subway supporters, by unnecessarily pitting them against LRT supporters.

Putting cost aside, I wish to know the main arguments for subways and for LRT along Eglinton.

Does it involve density? Does it involve potential capacity?

And to add my two cents, it seems that Rob Ford's rhetoric has poisoned the water for subway supporters, by unnecessarily pitting them against LRT supporters.cost was basically the main argument ... because the LRT costs less, we could get more of it.

When Eglinton-Crosstown was introduced, we basically got this:

*LRT across the city from the Airport to Kennedy and further east, with an lrt-sized tunnel from Laird to Keele; or
*Subway (in a subway-sized tunnel) from Laird to Keele and then transfer to buses for the rest of the trip.

The second main argument would be projected demand - since the projections for passenger movements are for mostly local trips, mostly to and from the Spadina and Yonge subways, as well as fewer local trips in between the two subways.

Of course, that was all before the recession - when cost became the clear "winner" and Toronto became the clear loser.

Now, if we go back to the original Eglinton West line (which was to be a 4-carriage subway, originally), the main reasons for that proposal were:

*to replace the Eglinton 32 bus (which was and is overcrowded, though not the busiest route in the city)
*to connect to the City of York's proposed civic centre at Eglinton and Black Creek Drive.
*to eventually connect to the Airport.

Cheers, m

Then why can't Metrolinx handle this and let TTC handle things pertaining to the city proper?

I recall reading earlier Metrolinx was looking over both York Region and Toronto.

Have there ever been less expensive alternatives to the DRL that have been proposed?

That is, would the waterfront LRT and increased capacity/frequency on the GO transit Lakeshore line be less expensive alternatives to building the DRL?

Or maybe, instead of making the line an underground metro line, how the line be an elevated metro or elevated LRT line instead?

Have there ever been less expensive alternatives to the DRL that have been proposed?

Indirectly but not actually studied.

You could spend $2B on the Lake Shore line beefing up service between Kennedy and Union (electrification, moving tracks to make for a very simple transfer, etc.)

Same could be done in the east from Kipling Station.

Problem is, they all dump at Union (severely over capacity with an additional 60,000 pphpd dumping at it); as nearly any single station would be so you either spend another $4B tunnelling through downtown and spreading GO load over 3 to 4 stations or something similar.

By now it is roughly the same cost as a DRL but without the advantage of servicing any new areas. A DRL would make for a huge improvement in transit east of the DVP as a side effect, particularly if taken up to Eglinton.


I expect the GO plan is what will actually happen. It's incremental ($25M to $500M chunks of funding can accomplish it, not a big block of $6B), many parts are being actively pursued at this time (electrification, additional tracks, etc.), cross-regional improvements occur, and the province doesn't need the city mayor/council and the next city mayor/council on board to do it.

Too bad, DRL through Pape/Queen (or Adelaide) would be have a significant impact to downtown travel.

I like this person's quote on how to deal with the Transit City situation. It sounds like a pretty good idea. A 'lightning rod,' as the poster refers to it.

That is very true. I think it would almost be better if these projects continued through the election as separate projects, rather than as one "plan". People hear "$8.15 billion transit plan" and they freak out. The Eglinton line has by far the highest degree of city-wide support. Trumpet that one, and let whatever other projects you need to get done slip in through the back door. Eglinton is going to be very hard to refute, even at the Provincial level. The best hope McGuinty has of keeping transit moving in Toronto is to stop referring to the whole transit plan, and just harp on Eglinton as much as he can. I want Finch West to keep going forward, but let's face it, if it gets too high of an exposure, it'll become a political target.
http://urbantoronto.ca/showthread.php?5714-Transit-City-Plan-Debate/page372

Hume: Finch West LRT

http://www.thestar.com/videozone/968829--hume-finch-west-lrt

How do I get the embedded feature to work on the forum? All I get is this:

<iframe width='400' height='226' frameborder='0' scrolling='no' marginwidth='0' marginheight='0' src='http://www.thestar.com/videozone/embed/968829'></iframe>

So, will this new transit plan generate enough revenue to cushion the blow of cancellation fees?

Hume: Finch West LRT

http://www.thestar.com/videozone/968829--hume-finch-west-lrt

How do I get the embedded feature to work on the forum? All I get is this:

<iframe width='400' height='226' frameborder='0' scrolling='no' marginwidth='0' marginheight='0' src='http://www.thestar.com/videozone/embed/968829'></iframe>

copy/paste the article into the thread and put [ quote ] [ /quote ] around it. That's how I've always done it.

So Rob Ford did it, he killed Transit City without any difficulty.

Not so long ago, the majority of you guys claimed that he wouldn't be able to pass a fart in city hall without city council support. Seems like he has ample support to do whatever he wants.

Now time to get some subways up in that biznatch.

Before Ford was elected I recall several forumers confidently stating there was no way Ford could ever even win even though he was leading in the polls. Perhaps that's the problem. Nobody bothers to muster any serious opposition to him since he seems to goofy and unassuming no one thinks he can actually pull anything off. So without serious opposition, he can do whatever he damn well pleases.