Transit City Plan

[DavidH]

Looks like Transit City may be rising from the dead:

Perhaps. It sounds as if Ford's opponents have a razor-thin majority in calling for the special meeting. All it will take for this effort to fail is a handful - perhaps a single one - member of council to change their mind due to persuasion.

And then there is the question of whether Ford could use his control of the Executive Committee and the TTC Commission to block work from being on on the LRTs. Council may need to strip him of his rights in naming Committee members in order to push TC through.

It's far from clear how this will play out.

 

[Thoughtless Miscreant]

Personally, I have to reluctantly take Ford's. While Transit City would serve more people, the stop spacing is too close to actually meet the travel needs of the city.

The travel needs of whom, exactly? The whole point of the closer spacing on the suburban stretches is that it more closely matches the travel patterns of people on those corridors.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

I thought you were looking at left vs right, not left vs centre. What about socialists?

I was looking at left vs. right. I hadn't even considered the socialists since they're so insignificant. But lets get back on topic. This isn't a conservative bashing forum.

 

[kkgg7]

The travel needs of whom, exactly? The whole point of the closer spacing on the suburban stretches is that it more closely matches the travel patterns of people on those corridors.

Although I prefer Karen Stintz's version, if choose between the two, I agree with OP for exactly the same reasons. The sheer fact of having a stop every 500 meters in the burbs disgusts me.
Ford plan gives us less, but at least we have the potential to build more in the future under the right leadership. Transit City will deliver a substandard plan we will be stuck with for the next 50-100 years.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Looks like Transit City may be rising from the dead:

Oh the irony. I'm fairly confident that we'll be returning to TC in the coming weeks. Ford could've gotten his way if he wasn't so stubborn.

 

[kkgg7]

The travel needs of whom, exactly? The whole point of the closer spacing on the suburban stretches is that it more closely matches the travel patterns of people on those corridors.

the needs of the city to move people RAPIDLY, which transit city won't deliver.
You will be hard pressed to find any other city where the rapid transit makes a stop every 500-600 meters in the suburbs. There is a reason for that.

 

[sixrings]

[video=youtube;xP4zBrieXtY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xP4zBrieXtY[/video]

this guy has some pretty good points, please watch and discuss

Things to Discuss

1. How is driving and talking on your cell phone illegal but driving and recording a video on your Iphone Legal?

2. Does this gentleman only get his information from talk radio and if so what station is he listening to? I thought only stations like SUNTV broadcasted this pro SUBWAY pro wasting money crap

3. Does anyone on this Forum own a Delorean because I desperately want the last 8 minutes of my life back!

 

[sixrings]

I dont think it makes sense to be against an above ground network because of the stop spacing. If its above ground you can increase or decrease the spacing to whats needed. I agree that there should be less stations btw. TC just covers so much of the city instead of cancelling it the station spacing should be re evaluated.

 

[DavidH]

I agree. If stop spacing is an issue, the correct response is to adjust stop spacing, not to build an overly expensive tunnel. The same thing applies to any problems with transit priority at intersections.

 

[kkgg7]

I dont think it makes sense to be against an above ground network because of the stop spacing. If its above ground you can increase or decrease the spacing to whats needed. I agree that there should be less stations btw. TC just covers so much of the city instead of cancelling it the station spacing should be re evaluated.

True. I also believe many oppose TC not because it is above ground, but because of the close spacing.
Being above ground and therefore a bit slower per minute than a subway is not a big deal， as it won't push up the travel time significantly at all. However, having twice the number of stops than necessary will because you can imagine the vehicle will need to slow down 20 seconds after it leaves a station and prepare for stopping for the entire journey.

 

[nfitz]

I was looking at left vs. right. I hadn't even considered the socialists since they're so insignificant.

And yet they hold more seats in Parliament current than centrists.

But lets get back on topic. This isn't a conservative bashing forum.

And yet you posted "Is it just me or do people on the right generally seem less intelligent then their more liberal counterparts.".

 

[kkgg7]

Things to Discuss

1. How is driving and talking on your cell phone illegal but driving and recording a video on your Iphone Legal?

2. Does this gentleman only get his information from talk radio and if so what station is he listening to? I thought only stations like SUNTV broadcasted this pro SUBWAY pro wasting money crap

3. Does anyone on this Forum own a Delorean because I desperately want the last 8 minutes of my life back!

1) It is different as recording a video doesn't require one of your hands off the steering wheel. If you think about it, what this guy is doing is no different from driving a car and talking to a passenger sitting beside him with occasional eye contact - something we all do.

2) Why is that relevant? People have the right to have their own opinions, even when they are different from yours. I thought Toronto still allows people to have non-left views?

Not that I agree with everything he says, but the point about swimming pools is correct. Nobody absolutely needs a swimming pool. Whoever needs it should pay for it. Shouldn't come from taxpayers.

 

[rbt]

The travel needs of whom, exactly?

People who would be better served by frequent all-day GO service between Kennedy and Union. $1B could buy a nicely integrated terminal at Kennedy and several decades worth of 5 minute frequencies on that segment with free transfers from/to TTC.

Sometimes I think people are in favour of the Eglinton tunnel because they have given up on any kind of fare integration with GO.

There is no local need for all of Eglinton to be subway speeds. It's also not the most direct route between the source and destination of most of the longer-distance trips.

10 trainsets with turnback at Againcourt makes for a 27 minute average trip from Kennedy to King. That time includes both waiting on the platform and the walk up to King. None of the Eglinton line plans approaches that travel time or offloads passengers from the Yonge line south of Bloor. That 27 minute time can be reduced with electrification and a better track layout at union, but isn't necessary to provide the service.

 

[EddyMCD]

If this Ford overthrowing goes through, Stintz for Mayor in 2014!

 

[sixrings]

1) It is different as recording a video doesn't require one of your hands off the steering wheel. If you think about it, what this guy is doing is no different from driving a car and talking to a passenger sitting beside him with occasional eye contact - something we all do.

2) Why is that relevant? People have the right to have their own opinions, even when they are different from yours. I thought Toronto still allows people to have non-left views?

Not that I agree with everything he says, but the point about swimming pools is correct. Nobody absolutely needs a swimming pool. Whoever needs it should pay for it. Shouldn't come from taxpayers.

1. I cant know what station he was listening to? Maybe I want to be a regular listener inbetween my espn channel and my CNN.
2. Im assuming you dont own a Delorean?
3. I never went to a school with a swimming pool either but I learned swimming at a school with a swimming pool. Anyways just because you may agree with a couple things he says doesnt mean that there is automatically more bad then good in the TC plan....

BTW I have yet to hear anyone argue against my main point. If in the future there is more demand the LRT can support on a line simply build a parallel route on a different street with the money you saved in the first place.

The TC plan on paper seems very reasonable. The problem is that it appears many people have lost faith in the TTC and dont have much hopes in its future. Especially regarding operation. AS a result it is difficult to believe if I line grows too much we can simply add more lines. Or if the lines need traffic light priority that it will happen (spanidna hasn't yet why would TC?). This scepticism is making some people believe that the only transit that will work is Subways. Its the defalt thought because we have scene them work and work well. However it appears to be that we need some out of the box thinkiking. Out of the box thinking does not lend itself well to scepticism. It is also a easy target because although many torontonians have been to europe and have scene LRTs there are many other Torontonians that havent. Also as much as the ones who have gone to europe and love the pedestrian friendly streets they are sceptical that their suburban areas of the city could ever see enough redevelopment, intensification, gentrification to compete. As a result people have given up. TC was a building block for the TTC to get back some of its mojo.