2014 Municipal Election: Toronto Transit Plans

[Electrify]

Where did Chow say she was against the two hour transfer? My understanding was that she was behind the recommendations 100%.

Just double checked the articles pertaining to the service plan. All I can say about Chow's position is...

As someone who is critical of the TTC's creative accounting to determine those losses, the only place where I could see them losing significant revenue is on Metropasses, as people find that it is cheaper to use tokens for similar levels of convenience. However this can be controlled by increasing the cost of tokens and cash fares so that they are in a better balance with passes, so that a token costs about $3, or $30 for a pack of 10. That means that a $133.75 pass will break even at 44-45 rides rather than 49-50, or twice a day on weekdays plus a round weekend trip each week on a single fare.

 

[kEiThZ]

Thanks for making me laugh like a fool on my bus. People are staring.

Anyways my goal as a snobbish downtown elitist is to improve transit all across our city to the point where driving is no longer a necessity. It's why I support the Transit City Bus & LRT Plan and it's why I support GO RER.

Now excuse me while I sip on my latte.

You're ignorant if you think people are going to give up their cars because the local streetcar/LRT saves them 10 minutes.

There are two transport components to the average person's life:

1) Their commute.
2) Local errands (groceries, kids activities, etc.)

You'd have to drastically improve both in the outer 416 to convince people to ditch cars. On the first one, commute times to downtown are annoyance but high parking costs and traffic congestion mean that most people grit their teeth and put up with transit to the core. They just take their anger out at the polls. But those who drive to work with a car elsewhere (like me when I'm in Scarborough, to get to work at Downsview), don't consider transit at alternative because the network for regional travel is pathetic. When I stay over at my parents (in Scarborough) and go to work at Downsview, my choice is 2 hrs on TTC or 45 mins by car. A car is a no-brainer in these circumstances if you can afford it. Using transit means passing up an extra 2.5 hours per day, a rather large hit to quality of life.

For the local errands, it's not LRT on major avenues that will make a difference, it's the frequency of the bus at the stop beside your house and the stops beside the grocery store, community centre, etc. Actually, the biggest difference could be walkability. Build mini-grocers in every subdivision and you'll make it far easier to pass on a car. (the 416 is better on this than the 905 in my observation).

The idea that people will pass up on cars because the SELRT saves them 10-15 minutes shows how delusional some transit advocates are. And I don't even think my Scarborough to Downsview commute is that unusual or atypical in this day and age. There are many, many people that have longer and more convoluted commutes than mine. Ultimately people pay for quality of life. And a lot of that is related to the one thing in life you can't get back: time. Time spent on transit is time lost with loved ones. Ergo, people who can afford it will choose to use their cars, until the gap between car and public transit narrows to a time and fiscal difference that's within their acceptable level of economic tradeoff.

This argument is not going to go away either. I would have thought fuel costs would change behaviour. By the rate at which electric cars are improving and gaining traction (adoption far higher than when hybrids launched) means that it's actually becoming more attractive to drive over time. Not less. Before the end of the decade, you'll have electric cars that cost $20k and do 100 miles on a single charge, which might cost $10 to "fill up" at worst (peak rate). At that point, driving becomes incredibly attractive, with the overall cost of car ownership per mile actually dropping below that of transit for most trips less than 40km.

 

[Electrify]

You're ignorant if you think people are going to give up their cars because the local streetcar/LRT saves them 10 minutes.

There are two transport components to the average person's life:

1) Their commute.
2) Local errands (groceries, kids activities, etc.)

You'd have to drastically improve both in the outer 416 to convince people to ditch cars. On the first one, commute times to downtown are annoyance but high parking costs and traffic congestion mean that most people grit their teeth and put up with transit to the core. They just take their anger out at the polls. But those who drive to work with a car elsewhere (like me when I'm in Scarborough, to get to work at Downsview), don't consider transit at alternative because the network for regional travel is pathetic. When I stay over at my parents (in Scarborough) and go to work at Downsview, my choice is 2 hrs on TTC or 45 mins by car. A car is a no-brainer in these circumstances if you can afford it. Using transit means passing up an extra 2.5 hours per day, a rather large hit to quality of life.

For the local errands, it's not LRT on major avenues that will make a difference, it's the frequency of the bus at the stop beside your house and the stops beside the grocery store, community centre, etc. Actually, the biggest difference could be walkability. Build mini-grocers in every subdivision and you'll make it far easier to pass on a car. (the 416 is better on this than the 905 in my observation).

The idea that people will pass up on cars because the SELRT saves them 10-15 minutes shows how delusional some transit advocates are. And I don't even think my Scarborough to Downsview commute is that unusual or atypical in this day and age. There are many, many people that have longer and more convoluted commutes than mine. Ultimately people pay for quality of life. And a lot of that is related to the one thing in life you can't get back: time. Time spent on transit is time lost with loved ones. Ergo, people who can afford it will choose to use their cars, until the gap between car and public transit narrows to a time and fiscal difference that's within their acceptable level of economic tradeoff.

This argument is not going to go away either. I would have thought fuel costs would change behaviour. By the rate at which electric cars are improving and gaining traction (adoption far higher than when hybrids launched) means that it's actually becoming more attractive to drive over time. Not less. Before the end of the decade, you'll have electric cars that cost $20k and do 100 miles on a single charge, which might cost $10 to "fill up" at worst (peak rate). At that point, driving becomes incredibly attractive, with the overall cost of car ownership per mile actually dropping below that of transit for most trips less than 40km.

Have you looked at GO? The 401 buses run between Scarborough Centre and Yorkdale every 30 minutes, and take about 35 minutes (includes a stop at York Mills).

 

[ehlow]

Today, Olivia Chow released her transit map and compared it with John Tory’s. It starts moving people now, moves more people, covers more of the city and doesn’t rely on unrealistic funding schemes.

“My plan is a better plan because it starts investing now, to move people now,” said Olivia. “New projects start faster, serve more people and cost less. We need a change in direction, and it starts with investing now to improve service now, right across the city.

“My plan is better than Mr. Tory’s because it moves people sooner, and brings service to more parts of the city faster,” she said.

Olivia’s plan is comprehensive. It agrees with the TTC that buses are key to get people moving now, and will invest $15 million a year immediately. It’s consistent with the existing agreement with the province. It reflects what experts advise, and includes the TTC’s top priority of a subway relief line.

“John Tory opposes investing now to move more people now,” said Olivia. “That’s not good enough because people can’t wait to get moving, and with my better plan they won’t.”

She noted the approach of Mr. Tory looks just like Mr. Ford’s in 2010. They both opposed investing today to improve service now. They both demonized above-ground rail. They both refuse to incorporate cycling or pedestrians in transport plans. And they both—whether it’s subways or Mr. Tory’s latest priority—hold up faraway projects with huge costs they say no-one will have to pay.

“Mr. Ford didn’t get people moving and Mr. Tory won’t either,” said Olivia. “We need a change in direction. So let’s make that change, start investing now and start moving people now.”

The differences between Olivia’s plan and Mr. Tory’s are:

Olivia supports investing now in buses. 60% of all TTC rides include a bus, and it’s the fastest, most widespread way to boost service. Mr. Tory opposes investing in buses. As such, he is openly campaigning on investing nothing in service improvements in the next term.

Olivia supports the existing agreement for above-ground rail in Scarborough. It is 2.9km longer than underground rail with four more stops. It will be finished four years faster. Mr. Tory disagrees. He would delay until 2019, serve fewer people and spend $1 billion more.

Olivia supports the TTC’s number one priority of a subway relief line. In April, she said she would invest in one to bring federal and provincial governments to the table. Mr. Tory began his campaign saying it was his top priority. He now attacks Olivia for supporting it.

Olivia supports the existing, provincial plans for light rail along Sheppard East and Finch, which will bring service to areas in desperate need of it. Mr. Tory has left these off his map.

Olivia supports electrifying GO lines and has for years. Fare integration with GO would allow these to be used for intra-city travel. Mr. Tory wants to piggy-back his new priority onto some of these lines at a cost of $8 billion, and $100 million in debt costs to the city.

The map is pretty good, but the DRL should be moved slightly north I think.

You're ignorant if you think people are going to give up their cars because the local streetcar/LRT saves them 10 minutes.

There are two transport components to the average person's life:

1) Their commute.
2) Local errands (groceries, kids activities, etc.)

You'd have to drastically improve both in the outer 416 to convince people to ditch cars. On the first one, commute times to downtown are annoyance but high parking costs and traffic congestion mean that most people grit their teeth and put up with transit to the core. They just take their anger out at the polls. But those who drive to work with a car elsewhere (like me when I'm in Scarborough, to get to work at Downsview), don't consider transit at alternative because the network for regional travel is pathetic. When I stay over at my parents (in Scarborough) and go to work at Downsview, my choice is 2 hrs on TTC or 45 mins by car. A car is a no-brainer in these circumstances if you can afford it. Using transit means passing up an extra 2.5 hours per day, a rather large hit to quality of life.

For the local errands, it's not LRT on major avenues that will make a difference, it's the frequency of the bus at the stop beside your house and the stops beside the grocery store, community centre, etc. Actually, the biggest difference could be walkability. Build mini-grocers in every subdivision and you'll make it far easier to pass on a car. (the 416 is better on this than the 905 in my observation).

The idea that people will pass up on cars because the SELRT saves them 10-15 minutes shows how delusional some transit advocates are. And I don't even think my Scarborough to Downsview commute is that unusual or atypical in this day and age. There are many, many people that have longer and more convoluted commutes than mine. Ultimately people pay for quality of life. And a lot of that is related to the one thing in life you can't get back: time. Time spent on transit is time lost with loved ones. Ergo, people who can afford it will choose to use their cars, until the gap between car and public transit narrows to a time and fiscal difference that's within their acceptable level of economic tradeoff.

This argument is not going to go away either. I would have thought fuel costs would change behaviour. By the rate at which electric cars are improving and gaining traction (adoption far higher than when hybrids launched) means that it's actually becoming more attractive to drive over time. Not less. Before the end of the decade, you'll have electric cars that cost $20k and do 100 miles on a single charge, which might cost $10 to "fill up" at worst (peak rate). At that point, driving becomes incredibly attractive, with the overall cost of car ownership per mile actually dropping below that of transit for most trips less than 40km.

Again you demonize local transit for regional, when the reality is we need both to be good and both to be connected to each other.

Regional means stops are far apart since it has to be fast, and very few within walking distance. The best way to serve suburban areas is to use local transit to feed into the regional transit ie buses, BRT or LRT to feed into trunk lines like a fast subway or GO REX.

Local transit where people can walk from their homes to the stop is necessary to provide such feeder lines. Our whole system is built on it.

As shown here: http://www.urbantoronto.ca/news/201...nsit-washington-san-francisco-bay-and-toronto, the feeder bus system works very well for Toronto suburban transit. Much better than giant parking lots at stations.

It's not some choice between local or regional, both are needed.

Electric cars are great, but they don't change the fact that Toronto's traffic is getting worse and worse. An electric car gets stuck in traffic just as much as a gas powered one. Automated cars could ease some congestion depending on what level of automation happens, but it won't be drastic in my opinion. In dense urban environments, it's still economical for large vehicles that people share (public transit).

 

[TheTigerMaster]

You're ignorant if you think people are going to give up their cars because the local streetcar/LRT saves them 10 minutes.

You need to improve your reading comprehension skills before calling others ignorant.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Today, Olivia Chow released her transit map and compared it with John Tory’s. It starts moving people now, moves more people, covers more of the city and doesn’t rely on unrealistic funding schemes.

“My plan is a better plan because it starts investing now, to move people now,†said Olivia. “New projects start faster, serve more people and cost less. We need a change in direction, and it starts with investing now to improve service now, right across the city.

“My plan is better than Mr. Tory’s because it moves people sooner, and brings service to more parts of the city faster,†she said.

Olivia’s plan is comprehensive. It agrees with the TTC that buses are key to get people moving now, and will invest $15 million a year immediately. It’s consistent with the existing agreement with the province. It reflects what experts advise, and includes the TTC’s top priority of a subway relief line.

“John Tory opposes investing now to move more people now,†said Olivia. “That’s not good enough because people can’t wait to get moving, and with my better plan they won’t.â€

She noted the approach of Mr. Tory looks just like Mr. Ford’s in 2010. They both opposed investing today to improve service now. They both demonized above-ground rail. They both refuse to incorporate cycling or pedestrians in transport plans. And they both—whether it’s subways or Mr. Tory’s latest priority—hold up faraway projects with huge costs they say no-one will have to pay.

“Mr. Ford didn’t get people moving and Mr. Tory won’t either,†said Olivia. “We need a change in direction. So let’s make that change, start investing now and start moving people now.â€

The differences between Olivia’s plan and Mr. Tory’s are:

Olivia supports investing now in buses. 60% of all TTC rides include a bus, and it’s the fastest, most widespread way to boost service. Mr. Tory opposes investing in buses. As such, he is openly campaigning on investing nothing in service improvements in the next term.

Olivia supports the existing agreement for above-ground rail in Scarborough. It is 2.9km longer than underground rail with four more stops. It will be finished four years faster. Mr. Tory disagrees. He would delay until 2019, serve fewer people and spend $1 billion more.

Olivia supports the TTC’s number one priority of a subway relief line. In April, she said she would invest in one to bring federal and provincial governments to the table. Mr. Tory began his campaign saying it was his top priority. He now attacks Olivia for supporting it.

Olivia supports the existing, provincial plans for light rail along Sheppard East and Finch, which will bring service to areas in desperate need of it. Mr. Tory has left these off his map.

Olivia supports electrifying GO lines and has for years. Fare integration with GO would allow these to be used for intra-city travel. Mr. Tory wants to piggy-back his new priority onto some of these lines at a cost of $8 billion, and $100 million in debt costs to the city.

Wow. This plan is brilliant.

You get SmartTrack (ahem... GO RER) AND you get the Relief Line... for the same price or less!

 

[salsa]

You need to improve your reading comprehension skills before calling others ignorant.

For someone who "lives at UT", he needs to improve his manners.

 

[kEiThZ]

Have you looked at GO? The 401 buses run between Scarborough Centre and Yorkdale every 30 minutes, and take about 35 minutes (includes a stop at York Mills).

Still well over 1hr for me and that would be 2 TTC fares and 1 GO fare thanks to TTC rules on direction of travel and exiting the system.

Also, I drive a hybrid. Gas for me on that commute is about $2.70. Even with maintenance and consumption of the tires and such, I'm looking at ~$3 per trip on my commute if I leave out insurance and car payments (which I'm making anyway). There's no way transit can beat that.

 

[kEiThZ]

Again you demonize local transit for regional, when the reality is we need both to be good and both to be connected to each other.

Regional means stops are far apart since it has to be fast, and very few within walking distance. The best way to serve suburban areas is to use local transit to feed into the regional transit ie buses, BRT or LRT to feed into trunk lines like a fast subway or GO REX.

Local transit where people can walk from their homes to the stop is necessary to provide such feeder lines. Our whole system is built on it.

As shown here: http://www.urbantoronto.ca/news/201...nsit-washington-san-francisco-bay-and-toronto, the feeder bus system works very well for Toronto suburban transit. Much better than giant parking lots at stations.

It's not some choice between local or regional, both are needed.

Read my post again. I made it quite clear that you need strong local transit to get rid of cars. But that does not mean an LRT 2km away. It means a bus very near to me and a route with reasonable frequency. The LRT fallacy here is that we are attempting to solve a regional travel problem with a medium range travel solution. LRT has a place: as a feeder to the subway and GO REX network. It's a marginal improvement at best, when you consider the overall commute, to replace a 15km bus ride with a 15km non-segregated LRT. Better than the bus? Sure. But hardly competitive with a car. And does not do jack for anyone who wants to travel locally in their neighbourhood or borough without a car.

Electric cars are great, but they don't change the fact that Toronto's traffic is getting worse and worse. An electric car gets stuck in traffic just as much as a gas powered one. Automated cars could ease some congestion depending on what level of automation happens, but it won't be drastic in my opinion. In dense urban environments, it's still economical for large vehicles that people share (public transit).

Read my post again. My point was that electric cars will perpetuate the congestion problem. It was previously thought that rising fuel costs might force transit usage. My point was that the development of EVs is proceeding at such a pace that it's reasonable to foresee a substantial amount of private vehicles being EVs by the end of next decade. Therefore to reduce congestion, the sales pitch for public transit will have to focus on the convenience of not driving and still getting there in a reasonable amount of time. With an EV, for anyobdy with access to reasonably costed parking at work, the cost of driving will not be a hindrance.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Read my post again. I made it quite clear that you need strong local transit to get rid of cars. But that does not mean an LRT 2km away. It means a bus very near to me and a route with reasonable frequency.

This is exactly what Transit City was designed to do. I suggest you read the Transit City Bus Plan (PDF). It would have transformed local transit in this city.

And [LRT] does not do jack for anyone who wants to travel locally in their neighbourhood or borough without a car.

This is untrue. I can think of numerous issues where ECLRT, FWLRT, SELRT would have been useful for the local travel that I do in the suburbs. In fact, I don't think there's any mode better for intra-borough travel.

 

[BurlOak]

The map is pretty good, but the DRL should be moved slightly north I think.

Phase 1 of the DRL should be from Pape/Cosburn to Eastern/Broadview. Maybe after this portion hits 15-20k pphpd then we can talk about extending it to the north (and also west).

 

[nfitz]

Phase 1 of the DRL should be from Pape/Cosburn to Eastern/Broadview. Maybe after this portion hits 15-20k pphpd then we can talk about extending it to the north (and also west).

Why would anyone want to travel to Eastern/Broadview? Isn't the whole point of a relief line, that it intersects more than one subway line? What the point of having only 3 stations, centred on Danforth?

 

[TheTigerMaster]

The map is pretty good, but the DRL should be moved slightly north I think.

You're reading into the map too much. It's not a technical map, it's just to show what Chow wants to be built. In other words, its a [very] rough sketch

 

[MetroMan]

Olivia needs a better looking map. While better than Tory's as a transit plan, the map's design is just not exciting. Maybe it's because it's missing the stops or maybe it's because the colours don't work well.

Didn't Mafaldaboy design that beautiful streetcar map? I'll take it up myself but I'd rather let somebody who's done it before go for it.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Yeah, the design of that map is horrible. It looks like a 12 year old did it in MS paint.