Transit City Plan

[scarberiankhatru]

All of this worrying about Don Mills and Jane is based on assumptions that ridership will actually see big increases post-streetcar...

 

[drum118]

"When the St Clair line gets extended to Kipling, it will have to be in mix also as there is no room there now."

Drum, where did you hear this from?

That came out when the EA was started, but I heard it been around for some time before that.

There was talk about spiting the line west of Jane with one branch going to the airport while the other goes to Kipling.

 

[CDL.TO]

So there's talk of extending the streetcar down Dundas West to Kipling, which would replace a bus (30 Lambton) that just a couple months ago was on the chopping block due to its comparatively low ridership?

 

[drum118]

According to Steve Munro's conversations with planners, the idea is to eventually run the Don Mills and Jane LRT into the core, which would essentially be the downtown relief line.

There have been proposals to convert the Junction bus to streetcar in the past, and i think that redevelopment in Lambton and Etobicoke's new downtown will bring the ridership.

What I would like to see is 512 St. Clair extended to Scarlett Road & Dundas (on the other side of the bridge from where St. Clair ends), 540 Junction Streetcar to meet it there, and the Mississauga-Dundas LRT extended from Kipling to connect with those two lines.

Since you sit where you do today, you and your group can look at everything in planning of the RTP and this includes all routes in all systems.

I sit on Waterfront EA's and have push to get the Don Mill LRT extension south of Bloor added to the Master Waterfront LRT from Day one and it has been opposed by both the City and TTC.

The extension south of Bloor is a must to help to take some of the load off Yonge line.

There was strong opposition by TTC to get the Lake Shore LRT written into the Terms of Reference for the master EA and they lost in the end. During the EA for East-Bay, the consultant and TTC try to get the LS line remove and got shot down.

By extending Mississauga LRT to where you want to go is opening a can of worms as it been TTC and City of Toronto goal is to get MT 100% out of the city. Getting it to Kipling is the first step.

Wrong step by both parties as MT provides service TTC cannot provide today.

I see the 512 ending up in Stoney Creek of all things and plans are been put in place for this to happen now.

I am on record calling for the merger of TTC 50 and 49 with MT 3/26, with MT operating the routes since they have a higher need for service than TTC can offer. Under the RTP, this can happen. It is the same thing about MT operating alone Dundas in Oakville since OT does not offer any service there now and may do so starting July if council approves the redesign setup of OT.

We got DRT wanting to operate into Toronto and there is no reason it cannot. Same goes other system operating in other systems.

It time to stop doing turf wars and build a system that will benefit everyone.

You need to look at the TTC Western Waterfront as how it connect Mississauga to the City core as the current plans by TTC does not server the western section of Toronto in the first place. TTC is going to waste about $150m doing their way and gain no real riders and create more problems.

As for the Jane line going to the core, it has to go underground from St Clair to connect with the Western Waterfront line. Otherwise, it will end up being a slow boat to China.

 

[RedRocket191]

^^

Well, I am personally of the opinion that at minimum Metrolinx should operate all the rapid transit lines in the region, including the subway, because municipalities cannot play nice.

Really, I would like to see one system, one set of fares, one set of service standards for the entire GTAH.

Having said that, I don't care who runs what line where, just as long as the system works and Presto works on all of them.

Isn't that the goal?

 

[unimaginative2]

It doesn't even have to be one system. European cities operate with a tariff union system. Different municipalities may have different transit operations, but from the rider's perspective all of them operate seamlessly as one system. It's called a traffic union in Germanhy.

 

[drum118]

The biggest problem with TC in theory is that it's entirely based on streeetcar-type service. Some proposals are glaringly supposed to be subways. I think downtown was deliberately omitted from the proposal because anything short of a new subway line is inconceivable to rational critics.

As for Jane and Don Mills, I don't see these as viable LRT nor subway lines in entirity, but rather BRT routes. Don Mills Proper (the area from Thorncliffe Park to Don Mills Centre) could conceivably be encompassed via an Eglinton line S-bahn. Dead-ending new TC lines at BD is indeed silly, BRT however ingeneous.

The problem with the core is getting the city to take their head out of the sand. Otherwise, you are asking TTC to throw money away trying to deal with problems created by the city in the first place. TTC has problems not dealing with things under their control for the core.

TC was something that could be done quickly and not cost a lot of money compare to subway expansion. $35m vs $250m/km. I can build an LRT to King City by the proposed route for less than 50% of the subway cost to Vaughan today.

You can get an LRT up and running with a few years compare to 8-10 years for a subway. TTC can start building the Sheppard line by 2010 where it would be finish before construction started on a subway.

TC can provide more service than a BRT and you have to look at this in the long run not the short term or present day issues. BRT will work in other places than here, but TC is something that was not there a few years ago and by doing so, it step forward that the government bought into. Huge subway extension would not hit the radar. There is a need for subway extension, but not what on the table as well order.

You can have a branch LRT going into Thorncliffe and I have call for it under my plan that TTC laugh at few years ago when I stated what I saw in the way of LRT's line in Toronto. TC is coming home to say "I told you so" along with other request LRT lines by other councilors.

LRT's has their place like BRT or subway, but there is a cost. At the end of the day, there is only a small amount of money in taxpayer pockets to these things. Is it better to service 500,000 riders or 60,000 with those $$?

 

[ShonTron]

West Vancouver has a separate "system" from the rest of Translink - they have their own published schedules, their own livery, their own drivers. Yet they share the same fare system as the rest of the GVRD, and have a compatable route numbering system. A Translink-type arrangement, with integrated fares (with zones and a premium for West Coast Express, which includes free transfer), separate operating bodies for rapid transit, buses, commuter rail and regional roads might be an ideal here.

Brampton, Mississauga, York, Durham, etc, can keep their own buses and operations if they want.

 

[RedRocket191]

West Vancouver has a separate "system" from the rest of Translink - they have their own published schedules, their own livery, their own drivers. Yet they share the same fare system as the rest of the GVRD, and have a compatable route numbering system. A Translink-type arrangement, with integrated fares (with zones and a premium for West Coast Express, which includes free transfer), separate operating bodies for rapid transit, buses, commuter rail and regional roads might be an ideal here.

Brampton, Mississauga, York, Durham, etc, can keep their own buses and operations if they want.

This is exactly what I'm talking about. I want the central agency to plan the major improvements, set fares and make sure that the customer can travel wherever they want without running into different rules or customs. If Brampton wants to run Brampton Transit and Mississauga wants to run Mississauga Transit, that is fine, as long as the rider doesn't see a difference in rules and privileges.

 

[DENTROBATE54]

The problem with the core is getting the city to take their head out of the sand. Otherwise, you are asking TTC to throw money away trying to deal with problems created by the city in the first place. TTC has problems not dealing with things under their control for the core.

LRT's has their place like BRT or subway, but there is a cost. At the end of the day, there is only a small amount of money in taxpayer pockets to these things. Is it better to service 500,000 riders or 60,000 with those $$?

LRTs are fine if land usage and development are far aback from the streetfront, whereby dedicated lanes can accomodate vehicles and passenger waiting areas safely. As such outlying proposals such as Finch West or Sheppard East could conceivably work.

The problem with subway planning for Toronto specifically is that its lost its focus (no longer reinforcing the existing metro area but piecemealing distinct neo-city centres far out of the natural scope of residential/commercial growth). If a small, but concise subway route were proposed it wouldn't matter the cost. Once Torontonians see the value, they'll support it. They just need a vision of what can be accomplished that bureaucracy currently can't offer.

People love to throw around inflated cost projections just to dupe people out of supporting subways. Ironically, TC is by far the biggest dupe, a subway proposal wrapped in a streetcar package. Yes many of the lines will never become subways but definitely potential is there for Lakeshore West, Sheppard East and Eglinton to become future east-west subways. Again why would downtown (the hub of all GTA-wide commuting) be so noticably absent from TC? Queen subway resurgence (albeit with a few adjustments) anyone?

It doesn't even have to be one system. European cities operate with a tariff union system. Different municipalities may have different transit operations, but from the rider's perspective all of them operate seamlessly as one system.

Great, we'll have one new system for TC and another for any future subway lines . I like personally like that one can travel continuously from Winston Churchill to Markham-Stoufville on a single fare and thanks to VIVA achieve better than subway speeds across York Region (now if only VIVA Purple or Orange had a non-York U branch, hmm).

 

[notyouagain]

There have been proposals to convert the Junction bus to streetcar in the past, and i think that redevelopment in Lambton and Etobicoke's new downtown will bring the ridership.

What I would like to see is 512 St. Clair extended to Scarlett Road & Dundas (on the other side of the bridge from where St. Clair ends), 540 Junction Streetcar to meet it there, and the Mississauga-Dundas LRT extended from Kipling to connect with those two lines.

I would love to see the streetcar in Islington Village.Will this really come to pass? If so, perhaps the six points interchange reconfiguration should take this into account. I would hate to see all of the new roads and landscaping being torn up again just a few years later to accommodate the streetcar (just like the city spent millions to repair the six points bridges just three or four years ago, just to see them demolished soon).

 

[Towered]

I would love to see the streetcar in Islington Village.

Amen to that!! I've been praying for that kind of upgraded transit infrastructure in that part of Etobicoke for years! There's no way they could fit a surface ROW through there though, so you'd either have to tunnel under that short section or endure quite the slow down, seeing how the area is already very slow to navigate even by car. I say bring it on no matter what! And with additional infill for all the "holes" on that street, this has much potential to be a very charming, pedestrian friendly area. Just today I was yet again dreaming of some ideas to redevelop some of the sites there.

 

[notyouagain]

Amen to that!! I've been praying for that kind of upgraded transit infrastructure in that part of Etobicoke for years! There's no way they could fit a surface ROW through there though, so you'd either have to tunnel under that short section or endure quite the slow down, seeing how the area is already very slow to navigate even by car. I say bring it on no matter what! And with additional infill for all the "holes" on that street, this has much potential to be a very charming, pedestrian friendly area. Just today I was yet again dreaming of some ideas to redevelop some of the sites there.

If they got rid of on street parking, there would be no net reduction in traffic capacity. I would be against tunneling. The ramps would truly be horrendous from a pedestrian p.o.v.

 

[DENTROBATE54]

How would an Eglinton S-Bahn work? Don Mills is high frequency and has bus lanes already, in any other city it would have been called a BRT already. All it's lacking is marketing.

My bad, what I had in mind wasn't S-Bahn but certianly S-shaped. Of course this would mean 25 Don Mills wouldn't have to venture south of Lawrence with 81 Thorncliffe Pk being the primarly link between BD and Overlea/Thorncliffe. I'm sure someone will claim a 'through' link IS necessary though but don't worry BRT obviously could still occur.

The image below depicts how an Eglinton Subway line could accomodate the densest quadrant of 25 Don Mills from the East York Town Centre through Gateway Blvd, Ontario Science Centre, Wynford/Barber Greene and the Don Mills Shopping Centre. Included also is relief to 100 Flemingdon Pk via stations along it's Wynford Heights section with vast office and condo clusters.

 

[MisterF]

IMO, a DRL going up Don Mills in the east and the Weston ROW to the airport in the west would be better than an Eglinton crosstown line. It would be a lot faster to get to the airport and would probably get higher ridership.

edit - oops, I was replying to posts on the first page and I didn't even realize it