Transit City Plan

[Dandy Horse]

the more we talk about it the less likely the people of eglinton, finch and shep will ever get anything better than a bus that comes less and less frequent as years pass. seriously lets build us some surface subways while the province is willing to foot the bill (because we know they're be fickle and we have to act fast).

Seriously! instead of blathering on, can we just decide who likes taking the bumpy crowded bus, and who is down for a surface subway, because, seriously, thats all thats on the table right now. anything else in the political arena right now is a time waster, and a massive vote for crowded busses for the next fifty years. you know its true.

 

[Justin10000]

It's Forum Research. Note that their "report" didn't say what the question they were asking was. The previous time they polled on this, they used something along the lines of "like St. Clair streetcars" to describe Transit City.

They also don't note who was paying the bill.

It really does depend on the question.

http://www.thestar.com/news/cityhal...how-you-ask-the-question#.Tz2xWa3Z18c.twitter

 

[Rainforest]

Residents of Toronto / East York were significantly more likely to prefer an LRT-based plan when compared to residents living in all other areas of Toronto (50%;compared to 37% North York, 31% Scarborough, 28% Etobicoke / York).

Ironically, residents of old Toronto and East York favor LRT but have no streets wide enough to install street-median ROW LRT (except St Clair that already has one, and University Ave that has subway underneath).

North York / Scarborough / Etobicoke have plenty of such streets, but do not want LRT on them.

 

[RichA]

Evidence for longevity of vehicles is hard to come by

And your evidence for these claims are...? Hell I'd even settle for elaboration of your original talking point.

There are political reasons why they won't let you know that companies like New Flyer, Orion and Bombardier will NOT build buses to last 30 years anymore, it just is that way. So don't expect any detailed studies. You'd have to submit a Canadian equivalent of the American "Freedom of Information" request (sorry, don't know the name of that) to get the repair and lifespan stats on them. No guarantee they'd give it to you either. As a side issue, whatever they decide, I HOPE they at least build the cars so the seats actually fit people who are over 5ft 7."

 

[CDL.TO]

I'm not sure why's he using Hong Kong as an example, it's the farthest thing from what's being proposed for Transit City

Wait! That link shows a single car, with doors on only one side (requiring loops)!

Haven't we been told that means it's actually a streetcar?!?

(My point being distinction is actually arbitrary and meaningless. I'm so sick of this streetcar vs. LRT semantic rolling stock debate. Toronto's streetcars are LRT, but that doesn't mean that Transit City is the same as the streetcar network.)

 

[smallspy]

There are political reasons why they won't let you know that companies like New Flyer, Orion and Bombardier will NOT build buses to last 30 years anymore, it just is that way. So don't expect any detailed studies. You'd have to submit a Canadian equivalent of the American "Freedom of Information" request (sorry, don't know the name of that) to get the repair and lifespan stats on them. No guarantee they'd give it to you either. As a side issue, whatever they decide, I HOPE they at least build the cars so the seats actually fit people who are over 5ft 7."

Are you kidding? Any other topics that you plan to spout off on without actually knowing any of the facts?

Buses have never - ever - been designed to last 30 years. Even back in the heyday of "everything was built better" of the 1950s having a bus last 20 years was a minor miracle. Buses since the 1970s have been built to last 12 years. Why? Because that's one of the funding clauses for receiving federal monies. In Canada, we replace them after 18 to qualify for federal and provincial funding but the buses are still built for the considerably bigger American market - meaning we have to do a bit more work to get them to last that long.

Rail vehicles on the other hand, have always been designed to last 25 or 30 years, or more. No reciprocating motors means less vibration, and electrical motors have a longer lifespan than combustion motors in any case. In fact, there are many situations where electrically powered vehicles - the best known in Toronto was the trolley buses - have had new bodies built but old mechanical bits installed as a cost-saving measure.

And yes, there is a "freedom of information request" in Canada. It is called the "Access to Information Act".

Oh, and by the way - Bombardier doesn't build buses. Just so you know.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

The GM new looks were in service for nearly 50 years so anything can happen.

 

[Electrify]

Ehhh. That was why Transit City was proposed. To improve the commute on heavily travelled bus routes that are currently slow, and overcrowded. But that's not good enough for you guys, because it's not fast enough, it's not "rapid transit"(by your definition), it should elevated, etc,etc.
There are many GO Stations in Toronto, so GO can easily provide service to the outlying areas that can attract riders, and provide an alternative.

I don't think you realize just how slow 20km/h actually is. Driving to York University in rush hour traffic from north-central Richmond Hill takes about an hour and averages 20km/h according to my Scan Gauge. Outside of rush blue the same trip takes about 35 minutes, or about 34km/h.

Not exactly apples to apples, for example I am far enough north that I can take back roads for the west-east portion of the drive, but consider this: Toronto has some of the worse commute times in the world. This is partially because we have a transit system which us not fast enough to meet the needs of the city. 22km/h shouldn't be the target for rapid transit, but local routes while rapid trunk lines should aim for at least 30km/h.

I'm not proposing an underground extension or line, but simply adjusting the stop spacing and running the line at or above grade to improve speed and reduce transfers.

 

[CDL.TO]

The GM new looks were in service for nearly 50 years so anything can happen.

No. That model of bus was built from 1959 to 1987. The ones that were still in service in 2011 were not the ones built in the 60s, they were the ones built in the 80s.

I doubt that any bus lasted longer than 30 years.

 

[RichA]

Watch the anti-Ford brigade go insane over that survey!

Well this is probably going to be working in Ford's favour on this issue: http://www.scribd.com/doc/81697448/Toronto-Issues-Poll-Forum-Research-20120213

Torontonians prefer subways to LRT

Public opts both for subways overall and for detailed subway plan

Toronto, February 13th, 2012 – In a recent survey conducted by Forum Researchamong Toronto residents aged 18 years or older, it was found that the majority of residents prefer a subway-based transit plan over an aboveground LRT-based transit plan (57%, compared to 38%. 5% of those polled approve of neither). .

Subways are in general better because they don't take up traffic spots, they are often more comfortable and out of sight. Lets face it, no public transit system looks "nice" so better to bury it.

 

[ssiguy2]

This poll does back up Ford's claim that Torontonians want subway based rapid/mass transit..............staistically speaking, 57% to 38% is a VERY big gap. He can go back to council {and McGuinty} and legitimately state they he is doing want the populas wants and what they elected him to do. During his election is was very clear and forthright in his views on TC and the need for subways and with these figures he can legimately state that a good part of his support was due to transit policy and a rebuking of Miller's.
TC supporters should try to look at many of the very legitimate concerns people have about the project. This poll also reveals that people really do want the high speed and reliability of subways which everyone knows has much, much larger spacing than what TC is proposing. People know what subway is and know that you sacrifice closer stops for more speed and that is what they want.
It is very telling that downtown/inner city folk want at grade LRT for all areas of the city but their own as the only part of TC that will be underground will actually be in Old Toronto City. Interesting how the people who think at grade LRT is a good solution are the people who already have or will have {along central Eglinton} an all underground system. In other words what's good for you isn't good enough for me. You can see why many of the suburban voters are a little pissed at the downtown crowd as they seem to have two transit standards..one for them and one for everyone else.
This kinds of polls also tend to humble many of the "experts"...........they can explain to you why one system is better for you than another or that it is better for "city building" but they often refuse to look at the simple fact that people want to get from A to B as fast as possible and only totally grade separated transit will do that and only that will be enough to make transit a true viable alternative to driving.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

The riders who get on the Spadina line in Vaughan are likely to be headed to a destination on the Spadina line, the same is not true for most people getting on at Don Mills or any station the line could be extended to. I don't think building the line past Steeles made sense from an anticipated ridership perspective, certainly less sense than a DRL or Yonge extension, but more sensible than a Sheppard extension.

While that may, or may not be true. For what it's worth there are trip generators along the Spadina line, York U, Yorkdale, the planned Downsview Park neighbourhood, Eglinton West. The subway line has by and large been advertised as a service to riders who want to go downtown. Read/listen to the marketing from Vaughan, from York Region, from YRT/VIVA and especially read the marketing by the condo developers building in the VCC area right now. Every single one of them not just mentions, but out and out markets that the subway extension would provide a one seat ride to downtown Toronto plain and simple.

Yes even if maybe 40 % of riders boarding at VCC (and 407) do disembark at some station north of St George, that still leaves the majority using the line as a route to the downtown core. This despite the fact that a GO line is nearby and all you would have to do is place a station at Hwy 7 and give the area an quicker trip to the downtown core, but to quote Ford "people want subways".

 

[RichA]

If Ford does go back and tries to pummel council with this survey...

...he needs to TELL the public what the cost will be and how the money will be provided. Yes, subways are clearly better than buses and especially street cars. But if it's going to take $300/year from everyone in the province plus the provincial kick-in, he should say so.

 

[Electrify]

Subways are in general better because they don't take up traffic spots, they are often more comfortable and out of sight. Lets face it, no public transit system looks "nice" so better to bury it.

Beauty is all in the eye of the beholder. There are plenty of surface and elevated systems out there which I think look very sharp. This includes those done in a pre-modern 19th century era and style.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

]What at-grade LRT system in the world carries 15000 passengers/hour? I think that this is greatly exaggerating the capacity of LRT.[/B]

Also if the average TTC trip is only 6km, this strongly suggests that the TTC is not competitive with driving on longer trips. GTA highways are congested for a reason.

Finally I wish that the LRT supporters would get rid of the claim that LRT serves more people. While LRT might put more people within walking distance of the lines than subway, people from all over the region will be able to take buses to subway stations. Subway lines will attract much more feeder bus traffic than buses because they are faster and higher capacity, and because subways usually include proper bus transfer facilities which LRT does not.

There's a bit of misdirection in Giambrone's piece as well. LRT costs $60-70 million per km ONLY IF you build it at grade. The Eglinton line is being built below grade and it's construction costs rival that of subway construction.