Transit City: Sheppard East Debate

[kettal]

You first said "We can't afford Transit City...that's why the original $6B pricetag now covers only 2 of the 7 lines. It's a plan dependent on unlimited funding." you then said "Yes, we can afford some subway projects. Like, duh. What we really can't afford is LRT lines to nowhere that don't run any faster than buses. "

But maybe he can raise funds by selling the diamonds on the soles of his shoes?

 

[scarberiankhatru]

Why do you have to be so rude?

You first said "We can't afford Transit City...that's why the original $6B pricetag now covers only 2 of the 7 lines. It's a plan dependent on unlimited funding." you then said "Yes, we can afford some subway projects. Like, duh. What we really can't afford is LRT lines to nowhere that don't run any faster than buses. "

How is that not talking about subways?

And why do you need to use such rude phrases as "if you'd bothered to read the post" and "Like, duh" Such extreme rudeness does not advance the discussion.

Don't think you aren't rude and uncivil just because you feign shock and surprise and innocence.

I mentioned subways in an entirely different post...you bothered to go pick out some quotes from the two posts, so why not read them? Either you didn't read them, or you did and you just missed the point.

 

[yyzhyd]

Announcements have been made on the Stouffville GO the last few weeks that the "South" parking lot at the Agincourt station will be closed until further notice due to construction work for Sheppard LRT.
The south parking lot is the area closest to Sheppard Ave.

I also noticed from the train that some construction notices were taped to the station and shelters but since I don't use that stop I wasn't able to get further details.

Regardless looks like something is being started on this project soon...

 

[GTS]

SELRT Stops

In the Nov. 4/09 issue of the Scarborough Mirror community paper they have a map on pages 13 and 14, this map shows the existing stops for the #85 bus route and the planned stops for the SELRT. On the far right, or east portion of the route map, the SELRT stops at Morningside, which is marked as the 'Y' stop and then its next stop isn't until Rouge River driver/Dean Prk Rd, which is marked as the 'Z' stop. The present #85 bus has 6 stops between these two stops for the planned LRT.

I know the LRT is supposed to be rapid transit, but how are the needs for commters transit needs between these two stops. I know there isn't a lot of commuter traffic on this stretch but there must be something for the TTC to have 6 stops for the present bus route. I think one stop at Conlins Rd. might be useful, their is a seniors residence there, and the residence there might use this transit route if there were a stop at that signalled intersection.

 

[Second_in_pie]

In the Nov. 4/09 issue of the Scarborough Mirror community paper they have a map on pages 13 and 14, this map shows the existing stops for the #85 bus route and the planned stops for the SELRT. On the far right, or east portion of the route map, the SELRT stops at Morningside, which is marked as the 'Y' stop and then its next stop isn't until Rouge River driver/Dean Prk Rd, which is marked as the 'Z' stop. The present #85 bus has 6 stops between these two stops for the planned LRT.

I know the LRT is supposed to be rapid transit, but how are the needs for commters transit needs between these two stops. I know there isn't a lot of commuter traffic on this stretch but there must be something for the TTC to have 6 stops for the present bus route. I think one stop at Conlins Rd. might be useful, their is a seniors residence there, and the residence there might use this transit route if there were a stop at that signalled intersection.

This just adds to the stupidness of the SELRT. They have to skip out six stops of the bus to justify a stop for the LRT, just because there isn't enough ridership in that part of the city to justify LRT. So why do they build it? So they aren't building a 7 km LRT after building a 6km subway.

 

[nfitz]

So they aren't building a 7 km LRT after building a 6km subway.

So you are arguing that there's not enough demand for LRT ... but you think they should build subway, when there's not enough demand for that?

You can't have it both ways!

 

[Second_in_pie]

So you are arguing that there's not enough demand for LRT ... but you think they should build subway, when there's not enough demand for that?

You can't have it both ways!

You might want to note

They have to skip out six stops of the bus to justify a stop for the LRT, just because there isn't enough ridership in that part of the city to justify LRT.

 

[nfitz]

Yes, that was clear; and yet you want to build subway where there isn't enough ridership in the part of the city to justify subway.

 

[Second_in_pie]

Yes, that was clear; and yet you want to build subway where there isn't enough ridership in the part of the city to justify subway.

Okay, maybe we need to go back to the original post.

n the Nov. 4/09 issue of the Scarborough Mirror community paper they have a map on pages 13 and 14, this map shows the existing stops for the #85 bus route and the planned stops for the SELRT. On the far right, or east portion of the route map, the SELRT stops at Morningside, which is marked as the 'Y' stop and then its next stop isn't until Rouge River driver/Dean Prk Rd, which is marked as the 'Z' stop. The present #85 bus has 6 stops between these two stops for the planned LRT.

This is referring to the far east portion of the route, about twice the distance from Don Mills that Agincourt is.

This just adds to the stupidness of the SELRT. They have to skip out six stops of the bus to justify a stop for the LRT, just because there isn't enough ridership in that part of the city to justify LRT. So why do they build it? So they aren't building a 7 km LRT after building a 6km subway.

In this post, I was obviously referring to the idea that the Sheppard East LRT past Agincourt is only in the plan because of TC's "hit all wards" purpose, and that if the LRT only went to Agincourt, it would be more obvious that we need the subway instead of LRT. I was pointing out that because they needed to knock out 6 stops to justify a LRT stop, it shows how much demand there really is on that portion of the route, which is little to none.

Now I'm not personally attacking anyone here, but someone'd have to be pretty thick to think that all parts of Sheppard get the same ridership. It's been posted here dozens of times, the section east of Agincourt gets a huge majority of the Sheppard East passengers. If you think that Agincourt or Consumers is the same as Morningside in terms of density, ridership and general use as a route, you've certainly got some exploring to do.

 

[Voltz]

Now I'm not personally attacking anyone here, but someone'd have to be pretty thick to think that all parts of Sheppard get the same ridership. It's been posted here dozens of times, the section east of Agincourt gets a huge majority of the Sheppard East passengers. If you think that Agincourt or Consumers is the same as Morningside in terms of density, ridership and general use as a route, you've certainly got some exploring to do.

Someone would also have to be pretty thick to assume something was said when it was not. He did not say that morningside and consumers have the same ridership, nor did he say that you think the subway is not justified. He said the subway is not justified and asked why you think it is okay to build it but not LRT where it also is not justified, if I'm not mistaken.

 

[nfitz]

He did not say that morningside and consumers have the same ridership, nor did he say that you think the subway is not justified. He said the subway is not justified and asked why you think it is okay to build it but not LRT where it also is not justified, if I'm not mistaken.

Bingo. Nowhere along the proposed LRT route would carry even 6,000 passengers per hour per direction, when 10,000 is the point where one starts considering subway. Yet criticism is raised when part (but not all) of the LRT might not carry enough riders to justify LRT!

 

[Second_in_pie]

Someone would also have to be pretty thick to assume something was said when it was not. He did not say that morningside and consumers have the same ridership, nor did he say that you think the subway is not justified.

It was not explicitly said in either case, but it was said all the same.

In my case, I was referring to the post in which GTS commented that the LRT would skip 6 bus stops. I think that a very small demographic of people would have assumed that I was talking about the entire line instead of the section in question, specifically between Morningside and Dean Park Road.

In niftz's case, it was implied that I was referring to the entire line, essentially putting words into my mouth. I think we all know niftz is madly against the Sheppard subway, and in that post it was obvious he was attacking the idea of continuing the Sheppard subway rather than LRT.

He said the subway is not justified and asked why you think it is okay to build it but not LRT where it also is not justified, if I'm not mistaken.

I have never advocated to build subway past STC, which is the "unjustified" LRT part I was talking about. I was only referring to the section past Agincourt being unjustified. You might want to refer to my post again (referring directly to the section between Morningside and Dean Park)

They have to skip out six stops of the bus to justify a stop for the LRT, just because there isn't enough ridership in that part of the city to justify LRT.

I never said anything about the section between Agincourt and Don Mills being unjustified. In fact, I think it is very much justified. But whether that's a better than subway for the corridor is a totally different matter.

 

[nfitz]

In niftz's case, it was implied that I was referring to the entire line, essentially putting words into my mouth.

Did you not read what I just posted? I was simply comparing the hypocrisy of criticizing a portion of an LRT line not requiring LRT to any of subway line not requiring subway.

I think we all know niftz is madly against the Sheppard subway

More hypocrisy! You object when you think people put words in your mouth; but you have no problems putting words in the mouths of others? If I was "madly against the Sheppard subway" why then did I advocate previously that it be extended to Victoria Park ... while the EA was being done.

There's a time for discussion, and at time for action. We have long past the time for discussion, and have moved onto action. Trying to continue discussion at that point is a fools game, and will simply head the direction of the pathetic SOS group.

 

[Rainforest]

Maybe we could agree that majority of the transit lines, be it subways, LRT, or even bus routes, see lighter usage in their outer sections. This is just the nature of transit demand.

Therefore, light usage at the end should not be seen as a sole reason to reject any transit project. Usefulness of a line is always determined by a balance of several factors.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

The subway's already there...the LRT isn't. That's the difference, folks.