nfitz
Superstar
Extremely bizarre ... it's one of the strangest comments I've seen here. I think we can easily ignore anyone making such obviously false comments.
|
|
|
saveoursubways (SOS)
- Thread starter kEiThZ
- Start date
- Status
kEiThZ
Superstar
The core of SOS' plan is the heavy rail network. Why are we debating BRT? That's there only to get you to the subway station. The bulk of the time savings will come from improved access to the subway network. That the BRT can be converted to LRT down the road (if demand warrants...just the argument TC is making now for subways) is a bonus. If you can build in the extra lanes to hold buses, then you have the room to build in LRT. The big bonus comes in front-loading subway costs. It's damn expensive to upgrade LRT to subways down the road. So let's just dispense with the myth that this will happen (say on Eglinton). It won't. In reality, TC is a plan to end subway construction (save the DRL) in Toronto for good. But it is far more feasible to convert BRT to LRT in due course because the disruption and cost would be far more manageable. The big bonus like I said comes in front loading subway costs. If we are so deeply concerned about the rate of infrastructure cost inflation than surely building subways now and LRT later makes sense.
Finally, let's dispense with the myth that we don't have the funds. If we have $15 billion for TC, we have $15 billion for whatever else we want to do with transit. I highly doubt the provincial and federal governments will only pay for LRTs. They would have provided for subway extensions if we asked for them or BRT if we asked for that. It is the TTC that put LRT as the only option on the table. Want proof of the province's flexibility? They have no issue with the TTC changing its mind on the SRT replacement from an ART Mk II to a LRT, even though it might cost more to construct.
Finally, let's dispense with the myth that we don't have the funds. If we have $15 billion for TC, we have $15 billion for whatever else we want to do with transit. I highly doubt the provincial and federal governments will only pay for LRTs. They would have provided for subway extensions if we asked for them or BRT if we asked for that. It is the TTC that put LRT as the only option on the table. Want proof of the province's flexibility? They have no issue with the TTC changing its mind on the SRT replacement from an ART Mk II to a LRT, even though it might cost more to construct.
Rainforest
Senior Member
Mr. Giambrone and subways
Actually, Mr. Giambrone has been speaking in favor of subway extensions (Sheppard to STC and Spadina to York U) as recently as in 2003 - in response to the provincial government's announcement about VIVA funding.
Of course, it is not likely that he will promote subways now, having invested so much political capital with TC.
Actually, Mr. Giambrone has been speaking in favor of subway extensions (Sheppard to STC and Spadina to York U) as recently as in 2003 - in response to the provincial government's announcement about VIVA funding.
Of course, it is not likely that he will promote subways now, having invested so much political capital with TC.
nfitz
Superstar
Giambrone has been speaking in favour of the extension to York U a lot more recently than 2003!
kEiThZ
Superstar
Yet, nothing for STC!
Dan416
Senior Member
OMFG I just lost a reply for the second time because I used "Quick Reply" and then thought to hit "Reply to Thread" after that. But no, I should hit "Post Quick Reply". A little counter-intuitive there but one learns from one's mistakes. Anyway.
The Spadina extension is underway. It's not going to be an election issue. When it comes to subways, there are many worthy projects that politicians can choose to support. Notably, the DRL, Sheppard East (and West) and Danforth. The Eglinton line will be tunnelled in the main portion, so that deserves to be on the Subway/RT map. But DRL, even Steve Munro admits, can only be HRT. And Sheppard East and West, logically, can only be subway extensions. Danforth should terminate at STC, not Kennedy. And the Scarborough-Malvern LRT can begin at STC.
The Spadina extension is underway. It's not going to be an election issue. When it comes to subways, there are many worthy projects that politicians can choose to support. Notably, the DRL, Sheppard East (and West) and Danforth. The Eglinton line will be tunnelled in the main portion, so that deserves to be on the Subway/RT map. But DRL, even Steve Munro admits, can only be HRT. And Sheppard East and West, logically, can only be subway extensions. Danforth should terminate at STC, not Kennedy. And the Scarborough-Malvern LRT can begin at STC.
nfitz
Superstar
Somehow I can't imagine whether or something appears on a certain map is going to be even mentioned during the election, let alone a topic!
Dan416
Senior Member
And you know what, public transit itself won't be the defining issue of the election, if previous elections are any indication. So should we not talk about? Maybe we should just close down the Transportation section of the forum?
Talk about latching onto a single sentence and attacking it, and not the argument at hand.
Chuck
Senior Member
I think that given the current transit expansion plans slated for Toronto, the BRT vs. LRT debate is completely irrelevant. Whether Transit City consists of streetcars or buses is literally of no importance whatsoever. The fact of the matter is that if either of these modes is built in certain corridors in lieu of a new subway line, which is a very real threat, it will be devastating for the future of transit in the GTA.
Argue about LRT and BRT all you want, but it just doesn't matter in any tangible way. If we finally got the DRL, Sheppard, and Eglinton subways, the TTC could build whatever else it wants, or nothing, and we'd still be set for a generation or two.
Argue about LRT and BRT all you want, but it just doesn't matter in any tangible way. If we finally got the DRL, Sheppard, and Eglinton subways, the TTC could build whatever else it wants, or nothing, and we'd still be set for a generation or two.
Dan416
Senior Member
Chuck I agree with you to an extent. I'd prefer Eglinton were subway too, but what's proposed for Eglinton should be fine for 20-50 years. For all intents and purposes, the underground portion will be operating as a subway, and with the LRT at least it'll be a one-seat ride from one end to the other, and the western portion should be as fast as the central portion according to the TTC (yes, I know, according to the TTC, but it's the only info we have at this point). DRL can only be subway. And Sheppard already has a subway, so it makes no sense whatsoever to put an LRT and make a stub forever.
I've always said SOS believes in extending ALL subway lines. The terminals we have were all build like 20+ years ago. We should be reaching out. Bloor should be extended. Danforth should be extended. Spadina is being extended. Yonge should be extended. Sheppard should be extended in both directions to make something more than a stubway.
I've always said SOS believes in extending ALL subway lines. The terminals we have were all build like 20+ years ago. We should be reaching out. Bloor should be extended. Danforth should be extended. Spadina is being extended. Yonge should be extended. Sheppard should be extended in both directions to make something more than a stubway.
Incremental expansion to existing lines is how we got the system we have today. 40 years ago, Eglinton station was what Finch is today, a subway terminus with a series of lower-order transit routes feeding into it. Incremental expansion is not a new thing, and it should continue that way with existing lines. The change in dynamic is that we want to go one step further: start a couple new lines (Eglinton and the DRL), and then continue on with incremental expansions to both of them.
I would not necessarily mind LRT along Eglinton, as long as it is continuous with opportunities for extension of the underground portion. What I cannot accept is permenantly installing transfers at relatively arbitrary points (and yes, Kennedy and Don Mills are arbitrary points) along a line, and changing technologies part way through, thereby making it much more expensive and difficult to ever extend the higher order transit beyond that point. End the lines at logical points, namely urban growth centres. This makes it easier for those centres to act as regional hubs for a series of lower-order lines radiating from it.
nfitz
Superstar
Who knows what the defining issue will be. I can't really think of a defining issue in the last election. In the previous election, the defining issue was transportation - the island airport. Not sure why.
The right-wing forces seem to be trying to define this election based on ending the war on the car. Perhaps that will be the defining issue ... though with the daily slaughter of pedestrians by vehicles, I'm not sure the car is losing the war ..
Fresh Start
Banned
Thanks for making the most absurd post ever made since UT's relaunch. I've got to hand it to you, quite the honour.
Not really worth the bit space to repost in full here though. When you've come back down to planet earth and stop quipping about corny sci-fi alien movies you'll realize that constituents seek real, tangible results SOON, QUICKLY, within the next 5 years URGENT. These semantic games you and a host of ignorant folk on the internet want to play in regards to the potentiality of true unadulterated Bus Rapid Transit, something of the likes the GTA has yet to fully experience first-hand, only serves to make you look bad, not me. The citizenry don't have 10 years to wait upon a STREETCAR line through suburbia to be ready for daily operations. Bus Rapid Transit is a fast-tracking of service quality desperately needed after decades of intra-suburban neglect. BRT can be up and running in a matter of months not years. If the TTC really gave a rat's ass about its users it wouldn't be crying to the government for handouts to spend on underground Shangri Las through industrial areas while commuting east-to-west across the downtown core is a daily burden faced by tens of thousands. I am sick of inaction, sick of indifference but most of all sick of the ill-conceived notions that light rail at $12 billion can really make for a superior crosstown commuter line than a subway or busway at either higher carrying capacity or higher frequencies and speeds. $12 billion should be getting this city at least a crosstown route that's grade-separated or unobstructed the entire length.You rationalize to yourself but far worse seek to brainwash the naive and misinformed into thinking that THE BUS is an all-out evil. You think that in these turbulent economic times $12 billion and counting must be invested to shave all of 5 minutes off local bus commutes, routes that presently lack the the installation of transit signals at intersections to make their runs smoother, faster and more reliable. It doesn't take billions. It takes political motivation. I suppose even after I spoonfed you those videos documenting how countless modern developed cities around the world (btw, since when are Brazil, Australia and the United States considered 3rd world? Wtf?) and in our own backyard prove time and again that BRT can be as successful, adaptable and affordable as LRT, you still can't see the woods for the trees. You can ridicule the countless hours of manpower and hard work put forward by the researchers, technicians, urban planning and development committees, civic engineeers, marketing and PR firms of those cities if you choose to do so. I will be taking my concerns and findings to a candidate, someone whose influence and opinion actually matters.
Fresh Start
Banned
+1
A rational, honest analysis of our current situation which recognizes the importance of BRT to a transit NETWORK. The irrational objections I'm garnering vis a vis my promotion of it defies logic. If we got a DRL subway from Don Mills and Eglinton to Weston Rd and Eglinton and they proposed abridged versions of the Don Mills and Jane LRTs to commence northwards from those points, I'd be more than cool with that. I don't appreciate being labelled anti-LRT, I'm just anti-ignorance. Particularly in regards to the Finch West line due to GO Transit's and the TTC's long-term vested interests in expanding transit options through the hydro corridor. I will never understand the decision the city has come to, never. With all the bus routes which feed into or use the Eglinton corridor as part of its routing (e.g. 54, 86, 100, 116); and Eglinton's ability to penetrate all six former boroughs plus the City of Mississauaga with a clear-cut link to Sq1 via the Transitway BRT line - Eglinton has more potential than Sheppard for long term ridership growth. Why the Harris gov't cancelled Phase 1 again defies logic. But if we have Sheppard subway already and have major nodes extending eastwards of it, you just don't block off any chance for future extension via a blockage, enforcing a needless transfer at Don Mills and another transfer at some point east to connect to a major Places to Grow designated area. And how about bringing other lines to the 416/905 border for easier cross-border travel? You see we need all these things and every dime spent on Transit City subtracts from any real long-term SOLUTIONS taking place.
nfitz
Superstar
Ironically though, I can't figure out which post you are referring to, and am genuinely curious. And when you press on the button in the quote, it merely takes you to the beginning of the thread.Thanks for making the most absurd post ever made since UT's relaunch. I've got to hand it to you, quite the honour.
- Status