News   Jul 12, 2024
199 Church Showcases Heritage Facade and Artwork at Street Level
 1K     0 
News   Jul 12, 2024
Six Points Plaza Redevelopment Advances With 36-Storey First Phase
 878     0 
News   Jul 12, 2024
Trading Spaces: Can Real Estate Conversion Help Boost Housing Supply?
 353     0 

SmartTrack (Proposed)

TheTigerMaster said:
Then why were certain councillors trying to stop the EELRT from advancing?:
Click to expand...

That don't try to stop EELRT.

They thik that SSE is more important. Therefore, they don't want SSE to become dependent on EELRT getting the funding.

If EELRT receives independent funding, few if any will vote against it.
 
Last edited:
sixrings said:
People on here debate if one of the busiest bus routes in the city (finch) deserves to be converted to lrt.
Click to expand...

People debate everything. If you conducted a poll on Finch LRT here, you would probably get something like 90% in support of Finch LRT.

sixrings said:
Nothing is safe when it comes to above ground rail projects which take a lane of traffic
Click to expand...

That's unfortunately true, and not only for above ground rail projects. Governments are always tempted to delay or scale back all kind of transit projects. They know that their budget will improve immediately, while the drawbacks of not building enough transit will be felt several years later, and likely under the next administration.

That said, the transportation gridlock remains with us. Once every few years, each level of government has to show that they are doing something to expand transit. Then they review the transit projects, and pick those that suite them most.

EELRT has a good chance, because it is a) useful, b) non-controversial, and c) relatively affordable. Even if it is not selected in, say, N-th round of transit funding, it will be examined again in the (N+1)-th round, and eventually will win.
 
Went to a presentation, they should just drop the SmartTrack moniker. It’s actually improved GO service with extra stations added with an Eglinton West LRT thrown in.

And at first it may not through route through Union until they can electrify Union and sort out other issues with it. So you would ride the Georgetown Line and then transfer to the Stoufville Line as you do today.

And there’s no limited stop service, all trains will stop at all stations except for the current rush hour express trains we have now.
 
But but but the fares are ttc fares, right? I voted for tory because he wasn't ford. This plan didn't make sense from day one and the only thing left to announce is that smarttrack will indeed be a premium service with an additional charge. Then it will be official that this Is go transit in disguise for gullible torontonians who want to believe the suburbs are going to get express service without premium fares
 
They haven’t made the fare thing up yet. They have more information on physical integration but there are limited to inconvenient transfers with Stockyards and Landsdowne due to physical constraints mostly track related to have to put the platforms where they’re forced to place them.

Landsdowne is south of Bloor and 200m from Landsdowne station. Liberty Village is north of King so you have to cross the street to get to Liberty Village. And Stockyards is tucked away north of St. Clair, etc. The Cityplace and Rail Deck park thing is the one to get excited about.
 
So they haven't broken the inevitable bad news yet. I guess they are waiting for the first week of Torys second term
 
Jimmy K is holding a Town Hall Meeting regarding the proposed Finch-Kennedy GO/SmartTrack station. He's against the removal of the 250 parking spaces that were originally proposed because everyone north of the 401 has to be able to drive to the station to take transit downtown.
 
marcus_a_j said:
Jimmy K is holding a Town Hall Meeting regarding the proposed Finch-Kennedy GO/SmartTrack station. He's against the removal of the 250 parking spaces that were originally proposed because everyone north of the 401 has to be able to drive to the station to take transit downtown.
Click to expand...

It make sense to build parking in these stops. Do we want to build public transit all people would use or pretend all places are of similar need? The car is not going anywhere for decades, maybe centuries for many reasons. Reality is people across the entire City drive cars, including in and around the core. In Jimmys area especially the reality is the cars are faster and more comfortable than buses in these areas over short distances, but not long where commuters have been choked off. If we don't give car commuters a place to park they will continue to drive and have more defined travel patterns to areas accessible to car only. A hybrid car to rapid transit approach makes sense for now and the coming decades. If we want people out of cars, we need to give the, a place to dismount from their cars.

Should these stops be more cycle friendly and accessible by foot? Absolutely and of course for the healthy willing people close to the stops. But reality is these stops are spaced far apart and cycling long distances in the suburbs before for a 1-2 hour commuter is a non starter for the majority, then you factor in weather, age, family and health. Still most people will take the bus or drive. We should cater to both but face the reality that one could actually get more people onto public transit in these areas.

Such a fine line between complaining people don't take public transit or building infrastructure that most people would actually find useful and supports all lifestyles that will continue to exist for a long time.
 
Last edited:
OneCity said:
Such a fine line between complaining people don't take public transit or building infrastructure that most people would actually find useful and supports all lifestyles that will continue to exist for a long time.
Click to expand...

In the main, I agree with you. The City needs to be pragmatic and recognise the auto isn’t going away anytime soon.
The trick is to apply sensible change strategies that nudge people away from the auto so that we don’t enable or entrench today’s habits, without annoying people to the point where they dig in their heels and chant ‘war on the car’ (which there ought to be, but subtly).
The other pragmatic objection is that large parking lots create a terrible city space where one wants the most attractive and inviting public landscape.
To me that says, plan some parking but maybe not immediately adjacent to the station, let people walk a bit to their car. And, charge for parking to reflect that there is a real cost to providing parking and to ‘put a finger on the scale’ of economic utility.
- Paul
 
MaxthonSnap20171014143908.png

https://twitter.com/BenSpurr/status/918876358218043392
 

Attachments

  • MaxthonSnap20171014143908.png
    MaxthonSnap20171014143908.png
    305.7 KB · Views: 452
OneCity said:
Should these stops be more cycle friendly and accessible by foot? Absolutely and of course for the healthy willing people close to the stops. But reality is these stops are spaced far apart and cycling long distances in the suburbs before for a 1-2 hour commuter is a non starter for the majority, then you factor in weather, age, family and health. Still most people will take the bus or drive. We should cater to both but face the reality that one could actually get more people onto public transit in these areas.
Click to expand...

I think cycling would actually be the perfect solution to the "last mile problem" for most GO stations, you only have to bike a couple kilometers to the station then for 90% of your trip you are on a train. Those kind of medium-distance trips are perfect for cycling. Taking away some road space for separated bike lanes (roads are generally very wide in the suburbs), and taking away a handful of car parking spaces closest to the station for (protected) bike parking would be a great encouragement.

Of course, this isn't doable or preferably for everyone. But I think if cycling were made more attractive through safe/curb separated lanes, transit fares were integrated, excess parking were converted to high density development, and parking charged for, you would be able to go from 90% car, 9% bus, 1% active transport arriving at the station (my estimate of current mode share) to something like 45% car, 35% bus, 20% active transport.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top