Rob Ford's Transit plan

[nfitz]

You don't see a problem with waiting until 2018 to start the DRL?

Which is why I spoke out about that at the time. On the other hand, if we were really to start building a DRL in 2018, only 3 years after the Spadina extension opens, and 2 years before Phase 1 of the Eglinton line opens, then it's probably better than nothing. Metrolinx has the opening as late as 2034.

As for the Sheppard line, I'd be happy with any plan that cancels the Sheppard East LRT.

There's not enough demand for one subway, let alone two. Extending Danforth is barely justifiable ... but doesn't create much time savins ...

 

[junctionist]

Above all, there's zero demand for an extra transfer at Don Mills. I think the ridership for the stubway speaks for the demand. Sometimes, a piece of infrastructure has to pass through lower demand areas in connecting two points of high demand or areas that we want to grow in the future.

 

[Dan416]

Which is why I spoke out about that at the time. On the other hand, if we were really to start building a DRL in 2018, only 3 years after the Spadina extension opens, and 2 years before Phase 1 of the Eglinton line opens, then it's probably better than nothing. Metrolinx has the opening as late as 2034.

There's not enough demand for one subway, let alone two. Extending Danforth is barely justifiable ... but doesn't create much time savins ...

There aren't ANY concrete DRL plans at all, which is one of my problems with Miller/Giambrone/Transit City.

In regards to subway to STC, there's plenty demand for replacing the SRT as it's overcrowded as is, and it makes no sense to to put an LRT when you can just extend the subway a couple stops to its logical terminus.

Extending Sheppard isn't really very important, but keep in mind that Sheppard was never finished in the first place. That said, what's currently planned, the Sheppard East LRT, is the single most inane transit project on the books in this city. If you'd like to NOT put a subway on Sheppard, fine. But don't put a stupid LRT there. Put it somewhere else.

 

[EnviroTO]

I'm hoping for a subway DRL, a subway extension to SCC of the Danforth line (but not following the current SRT route), Sheppard LRT from Downsview to SCC, and Eglinton LRT from Pearson to Kennedy (via 27 and Dixon, not Commerce).

To me the biggest mistake is not extending the subway from Kennedy to SCC. The SRT has proved valuable and the number of stops in between have been proven overkill so a two stop extension to SCC makes sense. Kennedy isn't a "Place to Grow" location... the SCC is. The DRL isn't a mistake... it is simply absent. For the Sheppard LRT I think changing the tunnel to LRT still has potential to happen if Eglinton proves successful, so I have no problem with what they are doing there either besides the fact that they aren't creating a branch to the SCC.

 

[nfitz]

There aren't ANY concrete DRL plans at all, which is one of my problems with Miller/Giambrone/Transit City.

Nothing seems concrete these days until the excavation has started ... and even that wasn't good enough for the Eglinton West subway. But surely last months announcement about starting the DTRES, including doing the EA was pretty promising; heck, we don't have a Scarborough RT EA finished yet ... or even a timeframe for the Jane and Don Mills EAs.

In regards to subway to STC, there's plenty demand for replacing the SRT as it's overcrowded as is, and it makes no sense to to put an LRT when you can just extend the subway a couple stops to its logical terminus.

Except that it costs dollars that don't exist. The subway extension to Scarborough Centre will cost more that upgrading the current RT and extending it to Sheppard.

 

[Dan416]

Except that it costs dollars that don't exist. The subway extension to Scarborough Centre will cost more that upgrading the current RT and extending it to Sheppard.

It costs dollars that don't exist? Now that's a nonsensical argument if I'd ever heard one. The DRL also costs dollars that don't exist. Everything costs dollars that don't exist until they're spent.

As the doing ANYTHING on the SRT alignment is nonsensical because it takes it out of service for months if not years. A subway extension along a separate alignment can be built concurrently with running the SRT down to the bitter end of it's usable lifetime. Will it cost more? A bit, but it serves it's purpose a lot better and reaches an Urban Growth Centre.

 

[Romtoronto]

What Mr. Rob Ford says is a pure absurd that contradicts the development of the modern world. I am afraid he is not aware what’s going on OUT THERE. Let’s help him.

A short piece of the world transit history - a list of systems that have been opened since 2000:

Buenos Aires (Argentina, 2007)
Ottawa (Canada, 2001)
Vancouver (Under Construction)
Changchun(China, 2003)
Chemnitz (Germany, 2002)
Nordhausen (Germany, 2004)
Rotterdam-Den Haag (Netherlands, 2006)
Almada (Portugal, 2006)
Porto (Portugal, 2002)
Stockholm (Sweden, 2000)
Bergen (Norway, 2010)
Aulnay-Bondy* (France, 2007)
Angers (France, 2010)
Aulnay-Bondy (France, 2007)
Bordeaux (France, 2003)
Caen (France, 2004)
Clermont-Ferran (France, 2006)
Le Mans (France, 2007)
Lyon (France, 2000)
Montpellier (France, 2000)
Mulhouse (France, 2006)
Nice (France, 2007)
Orleans (France, 2000)
Paris (France, 2007)
Toulon (France, 2009)
Toulouse (France, 2010)
Valenciennes (France, 2006)
Athens (Greece, 2004)
Dublin (Ireland, 2004)
Cagliari (Italy, 2008)
Messina (Italy, 2003)
Padova (Italy, 2006)
Sassari (Italy, 2006)
Barcelona (Spain, 2004)
Bilbao (Spain, 2002)
Murcia (Spain, 2007)
Parla (Spain, 2007)
Santa Cruz Tenerife* (Spain, 2007)
Sevilla (Spain, 2008)
Velez-Malaga (Spain, 2006)
Vitoria (Spain, 2008)
Glattal (Switzerland, 2007)
London (UK, 2000)
Nottingham (UK, 2004)
Stourbridge (UK, 2009)
Camden–Trenton*(US, 2004)
Charlotte (US, 2007)
Houston (US, 2004)
Hudson-Bergen (US, 2000)
Minneapolis (US, 2004)
Glendale (US, 2007)
Portland (US, 2001)
Seattle (US, 2008)
Tacoma (US, 2003)
Caracas (Venezuela, 2009)
Valencia (Venezuela, 2007)
Adana (Turkey, 2009)
Antalya (Turkey, 2009)
Bursa (Turkey, 2002)
Eskisehir (Turkey, 2004)
Keyseri (Turkey, 2009)

Germany hasn’t been opening the streetcar systems that often as… it already has 66 (!) of them. And none of the streetcar systems has been closed there during last 30 years. Basically, nowhere in Europe or North America they’ve been closed at that time. Now a list of systems closed since 2000:

Baku (2004, Azerbaijan)
Tbilisi (2006, Georgia)
Ivanovo (2008, Russia)
Voronezh (2009, Russia)
Arkhangelsk (2004, Russia)
Astrakhan (2007, Russia)
Ryazan (2010, Russia)
Shakhty (2002, Russia)
Makiivka (2006, Ukraine)
Yerevan (2004, Armenia)

Impressive?

There are 5 major reasons why all cities are developing streetcar/light rail systems.

1) Higher capacity resulting in lower traffic. Mr. Ford's proposal will increase traffic congestion. For example, it would require 20-30 additional buses to replace The 504 King Streetcar only.

2) Affordability. Serving the city as a light metro they are much cheaper allowing to cover much bigger area for less money.

3) Reliability as they usually have private right-of-way. Exactly what they are going to do at Transit City.

4) Environmental issues. No pollution at all. Mr. Rob Ford is feeding people with a myth of "clean buses" which have been non-existent. I was told at TTC they are going to replace hybrid buses with diesels as the latter ones are more reliable.

5) They are quiet and comfortable. If you don't believe just visit any other city or wait until the first Bombardier cars will appear at Toronto Streets.

Where is going to be Toronto that used to admire visitors with its own face and its own heritage? For instance, the 501 streetcar route is enlisted by National Geographic as on of the Top-10 most beautiful and picturesque routes in the World.

Streetcar abandonment stopped a long time ago – its well known fact unless you are stuck in 1950s. Now Toronto is on the edge of the modern development. According to Mr. Rob Ford the place of Toronto is in the company with Baku and Yerevan. All the development in Europe or Canada or United States means nothing to Mr. Ford who is ready to sacrifice everything just for a couple of extra-votes. I call this right extremism which inevitably leads to degradation and stagnation.

 

[nfitz]

It costs dollars that don't exist? Now that's a nonsensical argument if I'd ever heard one. The DRL also costs dollars that don't exist. Everything costs dollars that don't exist until they're spent.

That makes absolutely no sense.

You say these things that just aren't true.

You make false claims about Miller and Giambrone not supporting DRL.

You make false claims that there isn't DRL planning going on right now.

And when confronted with the truth, you just change the subject and make nonsenical statements.

I don't get it.

 

[ssiguy2]

I can only assume that the new Danforth ext everyone wants will be tunneled. Toronto excels at tunneling in the burbs which one of the reasons nothing ever gets built.
The Sheppard streetcar is a $ Billion waste of funds which Toronto can ill afford as will be Finch.
If they have only so much money then they should put it all into one line and do it right the first time.
Build Eglinton from one end of the city to the other ie UT Scar to Pearson. Make use of the rail ROW, elevate where needed, use under/overpasses where the train will not be making an at grade station stop, build UTurns for cars into the system, a 8 or 9km tunnel from Bayview to Dufferin, make the system on average having one stop every 1 km, be choosy with the stops because this is suppose to {according to Miller, the TTC, and City Hall} a rapid transit line so people are going to have to walk further.
Roughly 43km of REAL rapid transit at an affordable price. I don't think it needs a 12km tunnel............8km at most and the rest of that money would be better spent increasing the speed as I mentioned above. Fewer at grade stops means less chance of interference with the roadways cutting the chance of getting stuck by an accident on the street in half.
If they have further funds or get more they can do the same with Sheppard/Finch from Morninside along to STC then up to Sheppard using the same type system as Eglinton , transfer the stubway to LRT to Downsview/Spadina Line and go north on Bathurst and head straight down Finch to Humber/Woodbine.
All underground stations should be 100 metres to accomodate 3 full LRT cars but the at grades only need be 60or 70 for now as long as they can be extended at a future time.
It's also important to remember that the less lights it hits means less chance of bunching and can accomadate higher frequencies than if they are stopping every 3 blocks.
TC can work and work well if they make it the rapid transit system it is touted as being. Cut the transfers, cut the number of stations, cut the amount of lights, cut amount of intersections. TC can still be salvaged and Toronto could have a system it could be proud of and one that people will want to take.

 

[Justin10000]

Why was Fresh Start banned anyways?

 

[Asterix]

build UTurns for cars into the system,

Aren't there currently UTurns for cars planned to be built in to the system already, like on St Clair?

a 8 or 9km tunnel from Bayview to Dufferin,

Where, specifically, would you have the above-ground section running between Bayview and Brentcliffe?

Where, specifically, would you have the above-ground section running west of Dufferin?

Have you seen those streets in person?

make the system on average having one stop every 1 km, be choosy with the stops because this is suppose to {according to Miller, the TTC, and City Hall} a rapid transit line so people are going to have to walk further.

What do you think the average stop spacing is now in the planned for tunneled section?

All underground stations should be 100 metres to accomodate 3 full LRT cars but the at grades only need be 60or 70 for now as long as they can be extended at a future time.

What do you think the underground station length is in the current plans?

It's also important to remember that the less lights it hits means less chance of bunching and can accomadate higher frequencies than if they are stopping every 3 blocks.

Are you aware that in the highest demand portion of the line (underground 12km) that they will be able to use ATC and cross-over tracks to turn back trains, thereby significantly increasing frequencies where they are needed most?

 

[nfitz]

I can only assume that the new Danforth ext everyone wants will be tunneled.

An interesting assumption given that 2 candidates propose using the current untunnelled surface and elevated alignment, while 2 others support LRT.

 

[Swarley]

Build Eglinton from one end of the city to the other ie UT Scar to Pearson. Make use of the rail ROW, elevate where needed, use under/overpasses where the train will not be making an at grade station stop, build UTurns for cars into the system, a 8 or 9km tunnel from Bayview to Dufferin, make the system on average having one stop every 1 km, be choosy with the stops because this is suppose to {according to Miller, the TTC, and City Hall} a rapid transit line so people are going to have to walk further.

It's also important to remember that the less lights it hits means less chance of bunching and can accomadate higher frequencies than if they are stopping every 3 blocks.
TC can work and work well if they make it the rapid transit system it is touted as being. Cut the transfers, cut the number of stations, cut the amount of lights, cut amount of intersections. TC can still be salvaged and Toronto could have a system it could be proud of and one that people will want to take.

You've pretty much described the original Eglinton Crosstown proposal by Miller and Giambrone, before the province cut it back. The same line that Rob Ford would completely IGNORE. Please remind me why you support his plan.

 

[Dan416]

That makes absolutely no sense.

You say these things that just aren't true.

You make false claims about Miller and Giambrone not supporting DRL.

You make false claims that there isn't DRL planning going on right now.

And when confronted with the truth, you just change the subject and make nonsenical statements.

I don't get it.

Here we go again with your hyperbolic lies

 

[nfitz]

Here we go again with your hyperbolic lies

You started this debate by saying that neither Miller nor Giambrone proposed the DRL. When the fallacy of this was pointed out, you've avoided the subject with a bargepole, and made other attacks instead. When the complete failure of your argument is pointed out, you resort to simply insults.