saveoursubways (SOS)

[gweed123]

^ My response was to the BRT in place of LRT everywhere advocate, not the SOS peeps.

Fair enough. BRT is not a one-size-fits all solution either, same as LRT or subway. Each mode needs to be chosen based on the current and future needs of that corridor. The majority of the BRT Light lines that we propose in Move Toronto will not be BRTs forever, nor should they be. There will come a time when a lot of those corridors will need LRT, and when that time comes, they can be upgraded. We chose BRT Light not because it was the best technology, but because it was the technology that delivered the greatest increase in service quality for the least amount of cost.

To have a BRT Light line cost $3-6 million per km and be in service for 15-25 years before being upgraded to LRT (or something else) is a pretty good investment in my books, even if it isn't as flashy as an LRT corridor down a grand boulevard. Like I've said before, I'm not opposed to LRT, far from it. I'm just opposed to the way it's being implemented right now, as a substitute for grade-separated higher order transit along primary corridors. I have no problems with it being implemented on Jane or Finch or wherever, so long as it's AFTER the primary network is of suitable size and capacity, and right now it isn't. That's why I think the best course of action is to take the majority of the money that is being spent on these secondary network improvements (or subtitute solutions on the primary network), and get it right the first time. Then, once that is done (Eglinton, DRL, Sheppard, and a few smaller extensions is really that is needed to support the city for the next 50+ years), start upgrading the secondary corridors that were BRT or BRT Light to LRT.

 

[kEiThZ]

Any plans for any kind of response to Steve Munro's three-part blog series on Transit City? I thought it was a very good read.

Why get into a verbal war wtih Steve Munro? It's not like we're going to change his or any LRT fanboys mind.. I agree that the series was good. Let's leave it at that.

Our goal is and should remain, engaging the public and decision makers to persuade them to our point of view. It's tried and tested formula. After all, it worked for Steve Munro.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

Remember that Steve Munro and his blog disciples will criticize people for suggesting subways or BRT or whatever else, especially if examples in other cities are cited, and then turn around and say Toronto needs to build LRT lines because other cities are building LRT lines. They want Toronto to partake in the fad, too.

They also condemn anything other than LRT lines on the basis of cost, yet look at the cost of existing streetcar lines: http://www3.ttc.ca/PDF/Transit_Planning/service_improvements_2008.pdf Compare any streetcar route with similarly-scaled bus routes...why does Finch use more peak vehicles than King, run more hours per day, and run twice the km, yet cost $22,000 less per day than King? What's so wrong with these published numbers if bus routes replaced with LRT are supposed to cost less to operate (which at a glance might seem reasonable in some situations)? Really, I'd like to know. Also, the cost of 3 Transit City lines has already ballooned beyond the initially claimed cost of all 7 lines, and that was before a single shovel went into the ground or before the designs were even finished. Yeah, these LRT lines are sooo affordable...

 

[nfitz]

They also condemn anything other than LRT lines on the basis of cost ...

That just isn't true. Two of the LRT lines that have been discussed in recent years were Yonge north from Finch and Eglinton to the BD subway near Don Mills. Steve didn't support either,and said they should be subway instead based on demand.

It's not the cost that's the defining issue. It's the demand. Why spend $ to build something more than is needed?

If you can demonstrate that BRT can meet the demand, and cost a lot less, then I see no reason why you wouldn't be heard.

 

[kettal]

Wow. Whatever you guys do, it would be advisable to disassociate yourselves from Dentrobate's rants.

 

[Juan_Lennon416]

Why get into a verbal war wtih Steve Munro? It's not like we're going to change his or any LRT fanboys mind..

..and what he says is not going to change your or any subway fanboy mind's either. Yet, the man would still sit down and have a debate with S.O.S. The point is to engage in a 'healthy debate', allow the general public to see the arguments on both sides of the fence, and have them make up their own minds. Maybe a debate with Steve Munro catches the attention of mayoral candidates

 

[W. K. Lis]

Remember that Steve Munro and his blog disciples will criticize people for suggesting subways or BRT or whatever else, especially if examples in other cities are cited, and then turn around and say Toronto needs to build LRT lines because other cities are building LRT lines. They want Toronto to partake in the fad, too.

Toronto did not partake in the 1940' and 1950's fad of junking their streetcars and replacing them with buses. The cities that did replace them with buses saw their ridership drop like a stone. The cities that stuck with rail, kept most of their ridership.

Today, the cities in North America that are turning to rail (be it HRT, LRT, or streetcar) saw increases in ridership.

 

[kEiThZ]

..and what he says is not going to change your or any subway fanboy mind's either. Yet, the man would still sit down and have a debate with S.O.S. The point is to engage in a 'healthy debate', allow the general public to see the arguments on both sides of the fence, and have them make up their own minds. Maybe a debate with Steve Munro catches the attention of mayoral candidates

The only people who've heard of Steve Munro are transit enthusiassts. A debate with him at best will catch the attention of a few hundred people. It's not worth SOS' time or effort. We'd rather work on engaging politicians and the public. If Munro wants to debate us, he has his soapbox (in his website) and can do so in public any time (by writing articles challenging our plans). And I am sure if we ever do gain any significant amount of traction, he will. Just like I am sure, he's going to defend Transit City from the coming onslaught of election candidates (Giambrone could well end up being the only candidate who supports Transit City).

As for not changing my mind, he would have had a shot, if he actually understood the dynamics of transit in Scarborough. His insistence on terminating the subway at a ridiculous terminus like Kennedy and Eglinton is what got me going in the first place. Why couldn't he have pushed for a subway line to STC and a cheap at-grade LRT on Progress to Malvern? That would have cost about as much as the ridiculous grade separated LRT they are planning now, from Kennedy to Malvern Town. I can't wait for the EA, when all the residents who live beside the hydro corridor show up to protest this elevate railway that'll literally block the sun from their property.

The only thing that matters for him is ridership. How a community functions and travels does not matter. STC being the centre of all government services for Scarborough, sprouting tons of condos, being an existing employment node, the largest retail node in Scarborough and the largest transport hub in basically the eastern GTA does not matter. Growth potential does not matter. He writes STC off as another "suburban node". Imagine if the builders of the Yonge line had the same attitude about North York Centre. His claim to understanding Scarborough is that he worked there and took the SRT....years ago. He does not grasp how much more important STC has become over the years and how much potential will be sacrificed if it does not get a subway.

 

[Juan_Lennon416]

The only people who've heard of Steve Munro are transit enthusiast. A debate with him at best will catch the attention of a few hundred people. It's not worth SOS' time or effort. We'd rather work on engaging politicians and the public.

You might encounter many politicians and residents who think the same way as Steve does. How will SOS handle that? Will you choose not to debate with those people as well?

 

[kEiThZ]

Toronto did not partake in the 1940' and 1950's fad of junking their streetcars and replacing them with buses. The cities that did replace them with buses saw their ridership drop like a stone. The cities that stuck with rail, kept most of their ridership.

Today, the cities in North America that are turning to rail (be it HRT, LRT, or streetcar) saw increases in ridership.

I am fairly sure that ridership decrease had more to do with conspiratorial efforts to destroy public transit in the US. Taking out the tracks was only part of a wider plot by the auto sector to slowly degrade transit till it was not a viable alternative to the car. And that example is not universally true. Ottawa took out it's tracks. It's transit system is bursting at the seams today.

Toronto's ridership also remained high, because of transit expansion (particularly heavy rail) into the suburbs which accompanied growth there (something that did not really happen in the US) and because Toronto didn't really pursue highway expansions with the same zeal as its US counterparts.

To wrap up all those complex factors into a simple excuse, that the streetcars kept ridership up, is terribly simplistic and deceptive, and it's what has given this paradigm today, where transit sucks unless its rail to my doorstep. Heaven help me if I have to take a bus anywhere.

 

[kEiThZ]

You might encounter many politicians and residents who think the same way as Steve does. How will SOS handle that? Will you choose not to debate with those people as well?

Why do we have to debate anyone? People are free to critique our plans as they see fit. We even have comment sections on our website for it! Yes, we actually let you critique our plans on our website (and we don't filter the comments, except maybe for foul or hateful language). Like I've said from the beginning, our goal to tell the public what the alternative is and what they are missing out on, if they stick with Transit City. Anybody is free to challenge our arguments, or put up an alternative vision in the public sphere. Heck, you could even get together and create an anti-SOS group for all I care. I see no need, nor do I have the time for debate.

I am not into circular arguments with anyone. Steve Munro's arguments consist of: there's not enough ridership and there's no money for subways. That basically sums it up. We've argued that there's more to transit than ridership (speed and comfort for one), that longer distance travel should be taken into account, and properly allocated there is money for subways. I don't know how you have a debate when you have such basic philosophical differences in the approach being taken to solve the problem at hand. And unlike Steve Munro, I am not retired with a public sector pension and no dependants to take care off. I don't have as much time on my hands as he does.

 

[Juan_Lennon416]

I read on Steve's site that SOS is scared to debate Steve Munro.

 

[Juan_Lennon416]

People want live discussions because not only do you convey your message but you also convey body language and your ability to defend your plan without having to look up information. You also showcase what the SOS members look like (and in your case, a group of low-key citizens who care so much about their city)

 

[kEiThZ]

I read on Steve's site that SOS is scared to debate Steve Munro.

What are you, in Grade 5?

People can say what they want. If they think it's fear, so be it. I could not care less. I don't even think we've been in touch with Steve Munro. And he certainly hasn't contacted us.

Anyway, I am not out to convince a bunch of transit enthusiasts. Like I said, there's nothing to discuss with Steve. We have completely different approaches to transit. Everybody knows his philosophy. We don't care for it. And none of us see the point in debating his approach vs. ours. Lay them out and let the public choose.

 

[Dan416]

I read on Steve's site that SOS is scared to debate Steve Munro.

WTF. This is seriously the most ridiculous thing I've ever read. You know, beyond the concept of debating Steve Munro in the first place. The only people who care about Steve Munro in the first place are streetcar fanatics. I assure you a good 90% of Torontonians don't know and don't care who he is, so why should we debate him? We have our vision of transit for Toronto. He has his. Torontonians are free to choose between them.