This video is funny, but it demonstrates how some people get certain thoughts and ideas stuck in their head…
This entry was posted
on Wednesday, November 10th, 2010 at 2:56 pm under Municipal Politics, Humour, General LRT.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
“Transit City was a communist plot by that dictator David Miller. That will now become new subway lines instead.”
“I do not want to take LRT to Jane & Finch. That place is YUCKY. I want to ride the subway to the Wal-Mart in Scarborough. Rob Ford will build this for me.”
“Those are all terrible hockey teams. Light rail is for LOSERS. Rob Ford is a WINNER. WINNERS ride the subway.”
“I’ve never been to any other city. What is this New York you speak of? Is it in Etobicoke?”
“Now where is that streetcar? I must ride it to get to my SUV that I left parked in a bike lane.”
Hi-larious!
“Your lack of comprehension and foresight is starting to worry me.” I agree there.
Transit City’s one-size-fits-all approach to LRT implementation is no better than a lines-on-the-map subway scheme. This is what disenchanted me from Smitherman (who sought to take credit for preapproved and funded projects like TYSSE, waterfront streetcar expansion and Transit City) and drew me towards Ford, whose modest plans by comparison to TC’s appear to be the most workable. If LRT advocates are so rational (compared to us wingnut Fordites), then perhaps some compromise on what corridors NEED the suited mode ought to be discussed here.
Fighting in earnest to salvage the ECLRT and SELRT - when both corridors are better suited to, and should be relinquished to subway technology - might be the catch 22 situation that costs LRT supporters the entire Transit City Plan. No one looks at YUS or BD or even the SRT nowadays and deems them a failure, bad investment so why all the scurtiny over the construction of new subway lines? Sheppard has grown from 45k to 55k daily passenger usage in less than 6 years. Infill growth is occuring now between Bessarion and Leslie Stns, and so far the corridor has generated $3 billion in revenue for the city (unlikely to have happened without the incentive of a subway at one’s doorstep attracting developers). The Golden Mile, Richview, Bay Mills, and the vast brownfield sites between Agincourt and Scarborough Ctr would offer similar intensification triggers.
Cal’s comment: There are a few points that need addressing here. First, what is the basis for the statement that Eglinton and Sheppard “are better suited to, and should be relinquished to subway technology”? Neither corridor warrants the capacity requirements anywhere close to where full HRT subway is justified, and that goes 22 years into the future. The core of Eglinton, for all intents and purposes, will be an LRT subway which extends its usefulness to nearly 20,000 ppdph, instead of the approximate 12,000 that median LRT on the surface can provide. Given that the 2032 projections suggest only 6,000 ppdph, which I believe is low, there is plenty of capacity well beyond the foreseeable future.
I would go so far as to say that 2032 ridership along the core of Eglinton could very well be double that, which puts it in the subway-justifying range. Significant extensions to this will never be justified and Eglinton would be doomed to buses, likely with BRT lanes, at each end feeding this core subway line. If we are lucky, LRT might end up serving this purpose eventually. Why not build it from the beginning LRT to get an entire route using a more rapid mode that still plenty of capacity to spare in the core for future needs? Added to this is a bonus: while the core will need more frequent service, the ends won’t and one-seat through service can be provided. We often can’t provide a one-seat ride for everyone, but if we can while providing a higher-order transit service for more people, why shouldn’t we? I don’t expect there will be very many people who would ever need an end-to-end one seat ride on Eglinton, but there will be a significant number of people who would benefit from a Yonge to either end one-seat ride.
Why the scrutiny of new subway lines? Simply because we don’t have an endless supply of cash. The fact that the only totally new subway line ever built since the initial 1954 Yonge line has been such a bust also highlights the need for scrutiny. The ridership levels of the Sheppard line still do not warrant subway construction and all the development along that line would have been spurred on by a decent LRT implementation that could have been built to cover a greater distance for the same money.
When gov’ts invest wisely in their cities, they reap the benefits tenfold. I for sure won’t be sitting on-board a streetcar/tram/LRT/whatchamacallit for 80 minutes from eastern Scarborough to the Mississauga border, when a subway in a fully exclusive, unmitigated right-of-way could cover the same trip distance in 45 minutes. If people are really serious about alleviating gridlock, please don’t pretend like LRT is the sole solution. You will never psychologically condition enough car-owners to switch to using it in any meaningful number. Drivers today may see a virtually empty 510 Spadina car rolling on by but STILL feel content in knowing that they’ve avoided endless transfers and waittimes with their direct drive to work/school/home. The response video to this one, actually sums up quite nicely why the subway vs. LRT issue’s so contentious from the subway advocate’s point-of-view. I don’t mean to be mean, I know that this is a pro-LRT website, but my concerns about TC’s suitability for Eglinton and Sheppard are legitimate and stem from years of dissatisfaction with the TTC’s mismanagement of surface routes in general.
The eastern Scarborough to Mississauga border trip example is a poor example. There will be a low number of people who need such a trip, and those that do are now doing it using several buses, so any higher-order mode will be a significant improvement. More importantly, LRT is the only mode that is capable of carrying the people needed AND provide a no-transfer ride to the extremities from the core. Full HRT subway will not likely go beyond the Jane to Don Mills core in any meaningful way, and continuing further will require a transfer to a bus. I should point out that a transfer to a bus will require climbing two or more flights of stairs, unless the escalators are working that day. People get hung up on speed differences such as 24 km/h (surface LRT) versus 32 km/h (subway) but ignore the extra time one must spend going up and down stairs/escalators to get that faster trip. When this is considered, the two are not so far apart and often the “slower” mode gets one there quicker.
While this site is pro-LRT, I am not adverse to any subway construction. I have stated many times that the eastern leg of a Downtown Relief Line should be a top priority project and that this should extend to Eglinton and Don Mills, thus replacing the southern portion of the proposed Don Mills TC line.
I do concur with your dissatisfaction with the TTC’s mismanagement of surface routes in general. One of my biggest fears is that the TTC (and the Roads & Traffic department, who will be involved with signalling priority) will mess up the implementation of TC. Actually, “mess” wasn’t my first choice word, but I’ll keep it polite!
November 12th, 2010 at 5:21 pm
“Transit City was a communist plot by that dictator David Miller. That will now become new subway lines instead.”
“I do not want to take LRT to Jane & Finch. That place is YUCKY. I want to ride the subway to the Wal-Mart in Scarborough. Rob Ford will build this for me.”
“Those are all terrible hockey teams. Light rail is for LOSERS. Rob Ford is a WINNER. WINNERS ride the subway.”
“I’ve never been to any other city. What is this New York you speak of? Is it in Etobicoke?”
“Now where is that streetcar? I must ride it to get to my SUV that I left parked in a bike lane.”
Hi-larious!
“Your lack of comprehension and foresight is starting to worry me.” I agree there.
November 23rd, 2010 at 2:29 am
Transit City’s one-size-fits-all approach to LRT implementation is no better than a lines-on-the-map subway scheme. This is what disenchanted me from Smitherman (who sought to take credit for preapproved and funded projects like TYSSE, waterfront streetcar expansion and Transit City) and drew me towards Ford, whose modest plans by comparison to TC’s appear to be the most workable. If LRT advocates are so rational (compared to us wingnut Fordites), then perhaps some compromise on what corridors NEED the suited mode ought to be discussed here.
Fighting in earnest to salvage the ECLRT and SELRT - when both corridors are better suited to, and should be relinquished to subway technology - might be the catch 22 situation that costs LRT supporters the entire Transit City Plan. No one looks at YUS or BD or even the SRT nowadays and deems them a failure, bad investment so why all the scurtiny over the construction of new subway lines? Sheppard has grown from 45k to 55k daily passenger usage in less than 6 years. Infill growth is occuring now between Bessarion and Leslie Stns, and so far the corridor has generated $3 billion in revenue for the city (unlikely to have happened without the incentive of a subway at one’s doorstep attracting developers). The Golden Mile, Richview, Bay Mills, and the vast brownfield sites between Agincourt and Scarborough Ctr would offer similar intensification triggers.
Cal’s comment: There are a few points that need addressing here. First, what is the basis for the statement that Eglinton and Sheppard “are better suited to, and should be relinquished to subway technology”? Neither corridor warrants the capacity requirements anywhere close to where full HRT subway is justified, and that goes 22 years into the future. The core of Eglinton, for all intents and purposes, will be an LRT subway which extends its usefulness to nearly 20,000 ppdph, instead of the approximate 12,000 that median LRT on the surface can provide. Given that the 2032 projections suggest only 6,000 ppdph, which I believe is low, there is plenty of capacity well beyond the foreseeable future.
I would go so far as to say that 2032 ridership along the core of Eglinton could very well be double that, which puts it in the subway-justifying range. Significant extensions to this will never be justified and Eglinton would be doomed to buses, likely with BRT lanes, at each end feeding this core subway line. If we are lucky, LRT might end up serving this purpose eventually. Why not build it from the beginning LRT to get an entire route using a more rapid mode that still plenty of capacity to spare in the core for future needs? Added to this is a bonus: while the core will need more frequent service, the ends won’t and one-seat through service can be provided. We often can’t provide a one-seat ride for everyone, but if we can while providing a higher-order transit service for more people, why shouldn’t we? I don’t expect there will be very many people who would ever need an end-to-end one seat ride on Eglinton, but there will be a significant number of people who would benefit from a Yonge to either end one-seat ride.
Why the scrutiny of new subway lines? Simply because we don’t have an endless supply of cash. The fact that the only totally new subway line ever built since the initial 1954 Yonge line has been such a bust also highlights the need for scrutiny. The ridership levels of the Sheppard line still do not warrant subway construction and all the development along that line would have been spurred on by a decent LRT implementation that could have been built to cover a greater distance for the same money.
When gov’ts invest wisely in their cities, they reap the benefits tenfold. I for sure won’t be sitting on-board a streetcar/tram/LRT/whatchamacallit for 80 minutes from eastern Scarborough to the Mississauga border, when a subway in a fully exclusive, unmitigated right-of-way could cover the same trip distance in 45 minutes. If people are really serious about alleviating gridlock, please don’t pretend like LRT is the sole solution. You will never psychologically condition enough car-owners to switch to using it in any meaningful number. Drivers today may see a virtually empty 510 Spadina car rolling on by but STILL feel content in knowing that they’ve avoided endless transfers and waittimes with their direct drive to work/school/home. The response video to this one, actually sums up quite nicely why the subway vs. LRT issue’s so contentious from the subway advocate’s point-of-view. I don’t mean to be mean, I know that this is a pro-LRT website, but my concerns about TC’s suitability for Eglinton and Sheppard are legitimate and stem from years of dissatisfaction with the TTC’s mismanagement of surface routes in general.
The eastern Scarborough to Mississauga border trip example is a poor example. There will be a low number of people who need such a trip, and those that do are now doing it using several buses, so any higher-order mode will be a significant improvement. More importantly, LRT is the only mode that is capable of carrying the people needed AND provide a no-transfer ride to the extremities from the core. Full HRT subway will not likely go beyond the Jane to Don Mills core in any meaningful way, and continuing further will require a transfer to a bus. I should point out that a transfer to a bus will require climbing two or more flights of stairs, unless the escalators are working that day. People get hung up on speed differences such as 24 km/h (surface LRT) versus 32 km/h (subway) but ignore the extra time one must spend going up and down stairs/escalators to get that faster trip. When this is considered, the two are not so far apart and often the “slower” mode gets one there quicker.
While this site is pro-LRT, I am not adverse to any subway construction. I have stated many times that the eastern leg of a Downtown Relief Line should be a top priority project and that this should extend to Eglinton and Don Mills, thus replacing the southern portion of the proposed Don Mills TC line.
I do concur with your dissatisfaction with the TTC’s mismanagement of surface routes in general. One of my biggest fears is that the TTC (and the Roads & Traffic department, who will be involved with signalling priority) will mess up the implementation of TC. Actually, “mess” wasn’t my first choice word, but I’ll keep it polite!