News   Nov 18, 2024
Canada Lands Company Submits Application Outlining Downsview West District
 212     1 
News   Nov 18, 2024
News Roundup for November 18, 2024
 471     0 
News   Nov 18, 2024
Morning Train
 575     2 

David Miller: Toronto's future rides on commitment to transit

gweed123 said:
Do you qualify the open cut on the Yonge line around Rosedale to be a "scar" as well?
Click to expand...
I think it's unfortunate, and would have been better served if the subway were tunnelled under Yonge. However, it's not really comparable. Compare the width of the ROW for the subway compared to the available widths along the Richview corridor. Also along Yonge there is a row of buildings between Yonge and the subway, that gives Yonge it's streetscape. If you would suggest that along Richview you put in a row of building between Eglinton and the LRT in a ditch ... then I might agree with you.

As for the intended purpose of the land corridor ... do you really want to take that to it's completion, and run it down Spadina as well?

If this all get's built as planned, we are actually going to be able to judge in the future what works best. What you suggest is quite similiar what Mississauga is going to be building along Eglinton west of Renforth for the new busway. So in 2050 or so we'll be able to compare Eglinton/Kipling to Eglinton/Orbitor and see what worked better.
 
nfitz said:
I think it's unfortunate, and would have been better served if the subway were tunnelled under Yonge. However, it's not really comparable. Compare the width of the ROW for the subway compared to the available widths along the Richview corridor. Also along Yonge there is a row of buildings between Yonge and the subway, that gives Yonge it's streetscape. If you would suggest that along Richview you put in a row of building between Eglinton and the LRT in a ditch ... then I might agree with you.

As for the intended purpose of the land corridor ... do you really want to take that to it's completion, and run it down Spadina as well?

If this all get's built as planned, we are actually going to be able to judge in the future what works best. What you suggest is quite similiar what Mississauga is going to be building along Eglinton west of Renforth for the new busway. So in 2050 or so we'll be able to compare Eglinton/Kipling to Eglinton/Orbitor and see what worked better.
Click to expand...

There are some places along the Yonge subway (between St. Clair and Davisville for example, across from the cemetery) where the open cut runs directly beside the road. And I happen to like that open cut section, it's a nice change of scenery from a subway wall.

And comparing the Richview Corridor to Spadina is rediculous. For one, Richview is actually a CORRIDOR. No such corridor exists along Spadina, so there would have been massive property expropriation.

And I cited you a perfectly good working example of a busway in Ottawa that was nearly an identical situation to what I'm proposing on Eglinton. Why should we wait 40 years to compare it to something when there's already something to compare it to? That corridor in Ottawa is slated to be upgraded to LRT in the near future, so it'll be an even more accurate comparison then.

I still don't understand why you're so insistant on running it down the middle of Eglinton (a process that would require rebuilding literally the entire street from scratch), when there's a perfectly good transit corridor sitting right beside Eglinton, waiting to be used. It's like bushwhacking through thicket when you have a perfectly good path 10m away.
 
gweed123 said:
There are some places along the Yonge subway (between St. Clair and Davisville for example, across from the cemetery) where the open cut runs directly beside the road. And I happen to like that open cut section, it's a nice change of scenery from a subway wall.
Click to expand...
They are kind of nice on the train itself ... but it's a huge barrier from Yonge Street, and the cemetary, to where people live.

gweed123 said:
And I cited you a perfectly good working example of a busway in Ottawa that was nearly an identical situation to what I'm proposing on Eglinton.
Click to expand...
I thought Kettal had very effectively shot you down on that. Here's a Streetview of the area you posted.Is that what we are aiming for? Shouldn't suburbia look more like this or perhaps this?


gweed123 said:
I still don't understand why you're so insistant on running it down the middle of Eglinton (a process that would require rebuilding literally the entire street from scratch), when there's a perfectly good transit corridor sitting right beside Eglinton, waiting to be used. It's like bushwhacking through thicket when you have a perfectly good path 10m away.
Click to expand...
Because I'm afraid you'll end up with something like the Transitway in Ottawa!
 
Last edited:
nfitz said:
They are kind of nice on the train itself ... but it's a huge barrier from Yonge Street, and the cemetary, to where people live.
Click to expand...

Accepted, this isn't a ditch that can be built over. Some of the open sections along the Yonge line are being closed over for use. The same can be done for Eglinton.

Shouldn't suburbia look more like this or perhaps this?
Click to expand...

You aren't providing a good comparison. The LRT's that you've linked to are on narrow roads, not comparable to the 6 lane Eglinton Avenue. The Eglinton LRT proposes to take out two lanes from an important road. This will just make gridlock worse, during and after construction. The TOD that will arise from building the LRT can be built over the ditch ie: cover it and build over. I know it's not that simple but it's possible. Plus, the speed of the LRT increases greatly too and you haven't even touched the road.
Go back about 10 posts and you'll find Kettal telling me that the majority of the cost for the LRT (other than the tunnels) comes from road widening, bridge widening and intersection reconfigurations. By building it in the Richview corridor, you're eliminating most of these problems.
 
nfitz said:
They are kind of nice on the train itself ... but it's a huge barrier from Yonge Street, and the cemetary, to where people live.

I thought Kettal had very effectively shot you down on that. Here's a Streetview of the area you posted.Is that what we are aiming for? Shouldn't suburbia look more like this or perhaps this?


Because I'm afraid you'll end up with something like the Transitway in Ottawa!
Click to expand...

So your reasoning against grade-separating the western portion of the Eglinton line using a trench is purely asthetic? That's what I'm getting from what you've said. "It'll be ugly, so we shouldn't do that. We should make the LRT all nice and pretty and European". I guess you're right. Who cares if it'll be a massive construction inconvenience, won't be as fast as a grade-separated ROW, and will continue to be an inconvenience for drivers even after it's done. It'll look prettier.
 
gweed123 said:
So your reasoning against grade-separating the western portion of the Eglinton line using a trench is purely asthetic? That's what I'm getting from what you've said. "It'll be ugly, so we shouldn't do that.
Click to expand...
Good grief no ... how do you make this extrapolations? That it will both cost more $ with only marginal improvements in travel time are the key factors. If it was a huge price savings to do this, I could buy it ... but it will cost us extra $ to make something pretty ugly. We can do a lot better for less $. And no it's not the perfect answer for quick trips to the airport ... but neither is the subway. I guess the whole thing is tied to what you're going to do with the rest of the space; and I'm not sure that really has been thought out properly yet. I"m quite happy to see the LRT stop at Scarlett or Jane for a few years, while they figure that out, if it makes sense.
 
nfitz said:
Good grief no ... how do you make this extrapolations? That it will both cost more $ with only marginal improvements in travel time are the key factors. If it was a huge price savings to do this, I could buy it ... but it will cost us extra $ to make something pretty ugly. We can do a lot better for less $. And no it's not the perfect answer for quick trips to the airport ... but neither is the subway. I guess the whole thing is tied to what you're going to do with the rest of the space; and I'm not sure that really has been thought out properly yet. I"m quite happy to see the LRT stop at Scarlett or Jane for a few years, while they figure that out, if it makes sense.
Click to expand...

I agree that trenching will cost more, but a few things that make it advantageous, you don't have to rip apart and reduce lanes in one of the most important avenues in the city,completely exclusive ROW brings about an increase of many folds in passenger numbers (eg Sheppard: over 100% increase in ridership for a "stubway"), true rapid transit service to the airport and already existing feeder bus routes. In terms of aesthetics, the passengers doesn't care about how the station, stop or road view looks like. I guess you're right when you say the plan for the available space needs to be figured out. But the good thing about trench is that when the develpment comes, the trench can be covered and then built over, albeit there will be vibrations and foundation restrictions.

IMO, we're gonna build it once, and we'd better build it right!!
 
nfitz said:
Good grief no ... how do you make this extrapolations? That it will both cost more $ with only marginal improvements in travel time are the key factors. If it was a huge price savings to do this, I could buy it ... but it will cost us extra $ to make something pretty ugly. We can do a lot better for less $. And no it's not the perfect answer for quick trips to the airport ... but neither is the subway. I guess the whole thing is tied to what you're going to do with the rest of the space; and I'm not sure that really has been thought out properly yet. I"m quite happy to see the LRT stop at Scarlett or Jane for a few years, while they figure that out, if it makes sense.
Click to expand...

sorry but having Eglinton completely grade separated is worth the investment and subway would be better although I could live with the crosstown being 100% LRT and Grade seperated.

It would feel like being in The Montreal Metro but HRT is better if you think long term...


Politician looks a transit as a "spending" and short term, I assume that you share this way of looking at transit.
vs
Europeen sees transit as an INVESTMENT and think LONG TERM.


Who have the better network?
Europeens or us?
 
fanoftoronto said:
I agree that trenching will cost more, but a few things that make it advantageous, you don't have to rip apart and reduce lanes in one of the most important avenues in the city
Click to expand...
If it's cheaper to rip apart and reduce lanes, then why not do that? I don't think there is a major loss of road capacity on Eglinton West in the current design; did I miss something?

fanoftoronto said:
In terms of aesthetics, the passengers doesn't care about how the station, stop or road view looks like.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure that's true. I've heard a lot of complaining from people over the years on how the existing Bloor and Danforth stations aren't actually on Bloor or Danforth.
 
nfitz said:
I'm not sure that's true. I've heard a lot of complaining from people over the years on how the existing Bloor and Danforth stations aren't actually on Bloor or Danforth.
Click to expand...

Ask them if they'd want to pay higher fares or taxes to actually have the line on Bloor or Danforth. Even though we are a democracy, I don't think public policy decisions should be based on the public's ignorance.
 
nfitz said:
If it's cheaper to rip apart and reduce lanes, then why not do that? I don't think there is a major loss of road capacity on Eglinton West in the current design; did I miss something?
Click to expand...

If the LRT is built as planned, then Eglinton loses 2 lanes (1 in each direction) on both the east and the west sides of the tunnel. I haven't driven on Eglinton much but sometimes even on weekends, Eglinton, in Etobicoke has a lot of cars. Not gridlock, don't get me wrong, but more than the cross streets. Reducing the lanes to 2 each direction, added to the fact that the LRT is going to add about 10-12 more signals (U-turn signals) will definitely create congestion. Isn't that what transit is supposed to reduce?? It makes the LRT seem like a better alternative but there will still be congestion on the roads. And construction of the LRT will take up even more space from Eglinton. Eglinton will start showing signs of trouble during construction and will continue to after the LRT is in place. The avenue style development that LRT is promising to bring will just compound as there will be even more cars on the road.

You have to accept that cheaper is not always better. If the Richview corridor was not present, I probably wouldn't be calling to use it as much but it IS available and it IS prossible to bring even faster rapid transit than LRT for not much more of the cost and way less of hassle.

I'm not sure that's true. I've heard a lot of complaining from people over the years on how the existing Bloor and Danforth stations aren't actually on Bloor or Danforth.
Click to expand...

The Bloor Danforth subway is different, in the sense, the subway is about 20 metres to the north of Bloor or Danforth (except for Vic Park, Warden or Kennedy). The Richview corridor is directly north of Eglinton. All that has to be done is to cross the street. Also, even though those people complain, they still take the subway!! Nothing is perfect and ther is always something at fault, you can't make everyone happy all the time. Though the Richview corridor idea comes close: the riders are happy and the car owners are happy. ;)
 
W. K. Lis said:
The Roads Departrment is still "jumping the shark" with cars. If the TTC had real control over traffic lights, the Queensway right-of-way would have have real transit priority years ago.
Click to expand...

and the spadina and st. clair SRT (Streetcar in a Right-of-way Transit) would actually be an LRT.
 
fanoftoronto said:
Yes it is. It is one of the reasons few people don't want to build Transit City, because of all the problems that were faced by the Spadina and St. Clair ROW projects.
Click to expand...

Not a few, the silent majority. And our reasons for not wanting it are very valid. Fix the infrastructure you've got before spending the public purse to curry favor with private contractors and worker's unions on things that'll only be marginally faster than a standard bus.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top