Today Sat Sun
It is forcast to be Thunderstorm at 11:00 PM EDT on May 25, 2012
Thunderstorm
30°/16°
It is forcast to be Mostly Cloudy at 11:00 PM EDT on May 26, 2012
Mostly Cloudy
27°/19°
It is forcast to be Chance of a Thunderstorm at 11:00 PM EDT on May 27, 2012
Chance of a Thunderstorm
30°/16°

70 Comments

politics

After the Vote: What Does the Future Hold for Council and the TTC?

Light-rail proponents were thrilled by Wednesday's transit vote, but the path forward is far from clear.

Transit construction on Eglinton near Black Creek.

This week’s historic vote to resurrect parts of the Transit City network is unprecedented in the history of the relationship between the Toronto Transit Commission and city council. Never before has a sitting TTC chair challenged and defeated a mayor on a major transit-policy issue.

Light-rail transit (LRT) supporters may have partied into the night, but the question for the days ahead is: What now?

Mayor Ford and his team categorically reject the council vote as “irrelevant” and expect Premier Dalton McGuinty to continue building subways as if nothing happened. Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure Bob Chiarelli held a press conference yesterday, less than 24 hours after the vote, to convey a different message: “I’ve always respected the role of council as a whole to exercise their authority,” he said, adding that transit projects are of necessity a partnership—there can be no unilateral deciders. And then, this entreaty: “Leave your politics at the door.… Further prolonged debate borders on being irresponsible.” At the Canadian Club the same day, Premier McGuinty reiterated that message.

That hardly sounds like an endorsement of subways.

TTC chair and city councillor Karen Stintz may be the heroine of the moment, leading the charge against Team Ford, but will she and her coalition stay the course? What tasks lie ahead?

Why Don’t People Understand LRT?

A frequent complaint about all of Toronto’s transit plans—but especially about former mayor David Miller’s Transit City—is that people do not understand what the plan will actually do. This was complicated by the fact that Torontonians did not understand what “LRT” was all about. Any new plan based on light rail faces the same obstacles. Council, the TTC, and Metrolinx must redouble their efforts at selling the “new” plan, and do this convincingly. That will require honesty about the effects, positive and negative, of each aspect of the plan.

Metrolinx and the TTC are known for their “good news” public styles—for telling only the stories that make people happy, rather than those they need to hear. Both agencies shield professional staff from criticism of plans that are insensitive to local concerns instead of bringing those matters to open debate. If citizens cannot believe that their views are heard and that a project’s design is the best, even if unpalatable, choice, then both the project and its advocates lose all credibility.

Toronto currently lacks a true LRT line, which would be the best demonstration of what LRT does and how it works. When making the case for LRT, agencies must instead choose examples that reflect environments comparable to proposed sites such as Eglinton, Sheppard, or Finch, rather than “beauty shots” of grassed light-rail boulevards in the hearts of European cities. These images don’t properly capture our own future.

The plan must be sold on both a regional and a local level. Residents must be able to envision what will happen in each neighbourhood. They must understand how transit will be improved for major groups of riders along a route. And we collectively need to talk more about how embracing LRT as a new mode of transit for Toronto will prepare the city for transit growth in the 2020s and beyond.

Scarborough Is Not “Screwed”

Stintz’s opponents waged a disinformation campaign throughout council’s meeting, and the biggest lie was the claim that Scarborough was “being screwed again” by the new transit plan. Let’s look at what was really on the table.

The Sheppard LRT:

The original Transit City plan had the Sheppard LRT run from Don Mills Station east to beyond Morningside, with possible extensions east to Meadowvale, northeast to the Zoo, and south to the University of Toronto Scarborough (UTSC) campus. Mayor Ford’s plan would extend the Sheppard subway east to Kennedy and then southeast only to the Scarborough Town Centre. The new proposal puts all of the options for Sheppard back on the table for detailed study and comparison.

The Scarborough RT:

According to initial plans, the Scarborough RT was to be refurbished and extended northeast to Malvern Centre. In the plan’s 2009 revision, this was cut back to Sheppard, and the technology was changed to LRT; the Malvern extension remained on the books as a future project.

The Scarborough-Malvern LRT:

The Scarborough-Malvern line, another of Transit City’s original routes, would have run east from Kennedy Station via Eglinton and Kingston Road to Morningside and then north to Sheppard. It was a lower-priority project, and it never had provincial funding. It is not part of any current plan, but remains on the books with a completed environmental assessment. Part of this line, from Sheppard south to UTSC, could be built as a spur from the Sheppard LRT to provide a direct link from the UTSC campus to Don Mills Station.

The Eglinton LRT:

In Transit City, the Eglinton LRT would have run on the surface from Victoria Park east to Kennedy, and would then dive underground to enter Kennedy Station for an easy connection both to the subway, the revised SRT, and the bus station. This was updated in 2009 to through-route Eglinton with the SRT.

In Ford’s campaign plan, there was only a Sheppard subway, but no route on Eglinton. In the subsequent Ford/Metrolinx plan, Eglinton reappeared and would be underground all the way, but with fewer stops than the surface alternative. We are now back to a surface Eglinton line in Scarborough through-routed to the SRT.

If Scarborough has been “screwed,” it is by the gradual disappearance of routes from its transit map long before the current vote. If the panel of experts commissioned by council recommends something akin to the original LRT proposal, then Scarborough will get far more new transit than the Ford plan, with its Town Centre terminus, would ever provide.

The money released from the Eglinton project can go to build a Finch LRT west from Keele (the future Finch West Station on the Spadina subway) to Humber College. Until yesterday’s debate, all that Finch seemed likely to get was “improved bus service” with more vehicles, a few “express” signs, and maybe some paint on the roadway. A more extensive scheme with stations, signal priority, and properly reserved bus lanes would be cheaper than the LRT line, but would have less capacity for growth to meet expected demand—and nobody advocating for bus-based improvements mentioned the question of lost road space.

Eglinton itself will have a technology that can be extended west to Pearson Intentional Airport, where the line could share a station with an extended Finch LRT. This won’t happen until the 2020s, but shows the flexibility at moderate cost that a surface LRT network can provide. This does not preclude tunnels with light rail or full subways, where the demand or the local conditions warrant.

Will council, the TTC, and Metrolinx seize this challenge of showing what can be built, with a vision for the future that is tempered by the reality of what Toronto and Ontario can afford?


Taking Control

Events at the TTC show that the Ford Faction does not respect the will of council. Last month, millions allocated by council for service restoration were scooped with the connivance of Chair Stintz to fund a Wheel-Trans budget shortfall; Stintz herself used a smokescreen of legal nuance to thwart council’s desire in that case. A real transit advocate would have been at council to demand proper funding of transit for the disabled, rather than pitting regular service against Wheel-Trans cuts.

Will Stintz now pursue restored funding for TTC service, or will she continue to lecture about “sustainable” spending and ignore options for a revised TTC budget? Will she persist in claims that TTC vehicles have room to spare, and that riders should sacrifice what comfort they might have to the greater good of the Ford budget cuts?

Will the Ford-dominated TTC even acknowledge council’s firm position on the LRT network, or will it attempt to continue with the subway-only plan? Metrolinx pays the bills, and working on a plan with no official support would leave the TTC holding the tab.

Will council replace the existing TTC board with a new, better-balanced group? Doug Ford thinks a coming review of TTC governance will be a chance to flush out the organization, but he forgets that council controls the vote, and council appoints the chair.

Will council set the terms for crafting the city’s budget and direct the city manager to follow its dictates, not the mayor’s, for 2013?

Will council, if necessary, use its powers to change City bylaws and strip powers from Mayor Ford, including his ability to appoint the standing committee chairs, and thus to control the executive committee, the gateway to council’s agenda?

Mayor Ford may think that council’s vote is “irrelevant,” but it is he who risks fading to a shadow with council taking the lead on all votes that matter.

Running an opposition government in Toronto won’t be easy: we don’t have a party system to provide order, and there’s an abundance of ambitious potential leaders on council. But it must be done if this week’s transit vote is to be more than a passing victory.

Comments

  • Anonymous

    Thanks again Steve for another nuanced and reasonable analysis. It’s sad that the people who most need to read this won’t.

  • NGD

    There is only one thing worse than being out of your depth; Its knowing it and Mr. Ford must surely be. He has gone from embarrasing to dangerous in his dismissal of a democratic process..Its he who should resign to prevent the City from regressing.

  • Hamish W

    Schadenforde is a good feeling, along with a return to relative sense, but we aren’t necessarily going to be through with needing to be attentive. Mayor Ford’s density on transport//transit is such that, yes, it might merit a subway to his doorstep, but we’ll need to keep working on a lot of Councillors and people to continue this good trend.
    We’re lucky to have a lot of caring and knowledgeable people already; and yes, thanks Steve – I try to tell everyone about your site and perspectives.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/William-Paul/100002519071197 William Paul

    what a bunch of drivel… you are proud of this rambling??? you consider this informative??? My god man, let me know when you stop shovelling it and I’ll take notice. Off-base, disrespectful and out of your depth… I guess that is just the norm isn’t it? You are furthering your own agenda and appear not to care about the city anymore… I’ll change the channel……….

    • Anonymous

      ???!!?

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/William-Paul/100002519071197 William Paul

        yes, sezmesez, you heard precisely what I said. Mr. Munro’s “in-your-face” one-sidedness is overwhelming all parts of his message. His point-of-view, IMO, is as old and antiquated as some of the fossils that are supposedly running the TTC. My vote is to go with LRT, BUT, let Metrolinx, the province completely take over the TTC. They can certainly run it better than nay of the folks there now and in recent memory. We are in need of a Gunn, or a Gerry Brolley, or Dr Pill badly. Steve can barely contain his excitement that he will soon be able to take pictures of sleek little LRT cars zooming all over the city streets. Get a real commentator and a real advocate…please!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

        • Anonymous

          The same Metrolinx that is doing a bang up job on the Airport line as far as communications are going? To respond when my bus route has issues? No thank you.

          And Gunn, he of the don’t do a single thing until its all in a state of good repair? His sort of leadership doesn’t fit now.

          I disagree with Mr. Munro on a few things too, but to think that his opinion should be shunted because he doesn’t support Metrolinx is vacuous.

        • Anonymous

          You sound angry.

        • Anonymous

          What factual errors did Mr Munro make in his article?

        • Anonymous

          What factual errors did Mr Munro make in his article?

    • Anonymous

      Troll.

    • http://paul.kishimoto.name Paul Kishimoto

      U MAD?

    • Anonymous

      Cute red herring there. Why not discuss what you find wrong about the article, rather than claim it is a nonsensical rant.

      I’m sorry. It is not your fault your mother drank a bottle of vodka everyday while she was pregnant with you. I shouldn’t expect someone in your situation to use any of the higher logical functions of the brain. I should just be proud that you tried to be not dumb.

    • Anonymous

      All rant no content. Just like Ford.

  • Anonymous

    Once again, an incisive summary of the history and issues. Thanks for outstanding work on this story — you have pretty much put the rest of the media to shame.

  • Darwin O’Connor

    Would The Queensway be the closed local example of an LRT? It has a centre of the road ROW, wide stop spacing and large platforms, fairly generous green time and a few grade separated road crossings.

    • Anonymous

      But even then you pay on board and the trains are small. And streetcar lines don’t even appear on the “RT” map. Once the new cars are in service, with full Presto, it will be closer to a piece of LRT but a lot of how these rail lines is treated has to change. It is much easier to simply go snap a photo (or crib one from Flickr) of comps from other cities — Seattle, Boston and Philly have central LRT tunnels that emerge into the median of suburban streets, a la Eglinton LRT. Finch will be similar to lines in Phoenix or San Jose. LRT on the SRT elevated trackway will be like the Airtrain JFK in New York or some of the Docklands lines in London. These are the images that Torontonians need to see.

  • Anonymous

    Question: as I understand it, the current proposal has the Eglinton LRT surfacing on the west side at Black Creek. In the original plan was it supposed to surface further east than that? Anyone?

  • Andrew

    The existence of an 18 lane, severely congested highway called Highway 401 in the north of our city strongly suggests we need subways on Eglinton and Sheppard. Slow streetcars will not get drivers out of their cars and have a much lower capacity than the 401, and forcing people to transfer at Don Mills and Sheppard will encourage people to drive.

    • Vampchick21

      LRT. Not. Streetcar. Different. Very. Different.

      This has been explained over and over and over again, by many different people in many different places. What is it that’s causing it to not sink in?

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/William-Paul/100002519071197 William Paul

        well, on Eglinton, because we have no medians or right of ways, it’s kind of the same thing. The LRT will make stops at all intersections and red lights to allow for pedestrians and left turns and so on. It should stop at Birchmount, Warden, etc. Hardly a fast ride like other cities that have dedicated rights of way. Other cities have gates that one down when the train passes but we will not have that and I doubt, given the way city traffic engineers work, that LRT will be given any special priority at intersections, probably they wil be given the same as streetcars now use at red lights. So this LRT will be faster, but not much faster……

        • Vampchick21

          I’d have to actually dig up the plans and read them for myself before I can agree or disagree with what you’ve said.

        • JG

          You really are ignorant. Eglinton and every other LRT project will run on a dedicated right-of-way above ground. Period. There will be signal priority at intersections. Period. You make ridiculous personal attacks at Mr Munro and then go on to make unsupported assertions.

          • WeAreDoomed

            JG or Steve Munro ;
            Is there signal priority on Spadina or St.Clair.
            Saying its up to the road designers is not an answer.

          • Anonymous

            Running cars of up to 800 people only every 10 minutes allows for different priority options that Spadina and St. Clair do not have.

          • Anonymous

            One of those options is, “no signal priority”. Just like how signal priority has been promised for years on St. Clair and Spadina. Where is it?

          • OgtheDim

            Hard to discuss with somebody who just says it won’t happen when it is planned and a lot easier to implement then on St. Clair or Spadina. If you are going to say no to LRT because of past TTC errors with streetcars, then we are going to end up doing nothing.

          • Anonymous

            It is surely possible for city engineers to demonstrate signal priority on lines where it has been promised for years — and improve other poor operating practices on streetcar ROW lines — where Transit City advocates promise that these improvements will be made. Why is this too much to ask before spending $8 billion, especially when “value for money” goes to the core of the rationale for the program? Is it rational for you to think that city agencies, which have repeatedly broken promises about signal priority, will listen to the planners this time?

          • OgtheDim

            As stated elsewhere, signal priority as possible on Eglinton is not possible on Spadina and St. Clair.

            Should it be better on the streetcar lines? Yes.

            Does the lack of decent signal priority on those lines mean we spend billions putting something underground and deny rapid transit to Finch West? IMHO, no.

          • http://www.facebook.com/people/William-Paul/100002519071197 William Paul

            Hey all I’m saying is yes, dedicated way etc BUT from Kennedy there will be stoplight at Ionview, next light Birchmount, next light Sinnott Rd, then Prudhomme Gate, Warden, LeBovic, Pharmacy and there will still be stoplights at O’Connor/Golden Mile, then 400ft more at Victoria Park and so on. No these will not all be LRT stops BUT the train will have to stop for pedestrians and cars etc. People need to know that these LRT will not run from Kennedy to Birchmount , Birchmount to Warden, Warden to V and so on without stopping. The Trains WILL STOP at all lights. This is not being made clear. Yes the ride will be marginally faster.

      • Anonymous

        I think its because the only surface rail Torontonians have been familiar with are streetcars. Which operate in a local sense.

        I also think that its due to the technology between tram / LRV / etc is pretty much the same, if it isn’t heavy rail, its a light rail. And its flexible, flexible things are hard to define.

        A lot of the definition / distinction I can find comes from the stop spacing and ROW. If its apart from traffic, and isn’t a local stopper, its a light rail.

        That being said, The city hopefully is paying attention to stop and station designs. And what they encase the tracks in. Those are going to be more important to longevity than necessarily the kind of track. Just my opinion.

      • Anonymous

        Constantly being an idiot and (maybe) masturbation are the main culprits, I’d wager.

    • Anonymous

      What streetcars are you talking about?

    • avidrider

      Get out and actually ride the LRT systems (e.g., San Francisco, Los Angeles, Portland). (I have.) They’re popular, efficient, and fun to ride. Even Houston, land of car, is keen on light rail. Go ahead and drive. I’ll take light rail any day!

    • Dave Kates

      Ok, I know Rob Ford and his buddies have all made a habit of making no distinction between streetcars and LRT, but I think this act is getting a bit old. Sure, they like to conjure up images of getting stuck behind a streetcar on Queen, but that’s simply not what’s being planned.

      LRVs are not streetcars. They’re faster, hold more people, have fewer stops and run in dedicated lanes.

      As for subways, well, unless Torontonians are prepared to pay tens of billions of dollars for a city-wide network of unnecessary subway lines, the choice we face is between LRT and buses. It should be a no-brainer, if it weren’t for the fact that the man running our city keeps sowing anger and confusion about “streetcars running down the middle of the road.”

      It’s true we all like subways. But at the end of the day, I think most of us just want good, affordable, effective and reliable transit more than anything else. And for this to happen, we simply don’t need to waste all that money building subway lines in low-density areas. LRT will do just fine.

  • D R

    Thanx again Steve. How unlike the so called leader of the City you are. Each argument is given its due by you.

    And what a reasonable, positive and charismatic leader our present Mayor is, for I just heard another intuitive sound bite from Hizzzonour on CFMZ’s news.

    Paraphrasing on his deep concern at the errors of the clear majority of his ill informed Councilors, he blustered that ‘this fight is not over, for 75, umm I mean ahhh 80 % of Scarborough residents want subways and the Premier will have to face those voters’. Inferring here that Mr, McGuinty (the turncoat) will lose the next election because the eastern portion of the olde Metro won’t get the miniscule portion of, ahem, improved? transit he, the one and only Rob Ford, has promised them. And this mere days after RF categorically stated that 55% of those in Scarborough want subways. Sooo, as I said in a previous post on your Blog, our Mayor works on the polling and scientific research theory of SWAG (Scientific Wild Ass Guessing)! The principles of this theory of authoritative research, are that it works on the premise that hot magic rises, as RF’s ‘quoted?’ poll numbers are so doing, usually within the heat of a fevered mind! Even shown to rise while sentences are being formed. Wow that’s soaringly fast magic! Must be a roiling boil it’s so hot.

    Boy oh boy will all of those Noreast Scarboroughites and Norwest Etobians ever be disappointed when they wake up and discover that 81.493% of them are now slated to have access to improved transit service. They’ll miss out on the dubious, wastefully costly Mayor’s proposal, giving questionable benefits to only a tiny group in the western portion of that former Borough of Scar.

    But what of the 91% of other Torontonians? Will their neighbourhoods not now benefit from the redistributed $$$$? Does their interest, concern and vote not matter to the Mayor of the people? Obviously they won’t be voting for Mr. McGuinty either due to his slight of the Scarborough contingent, right Robbie!

    It’s certainly nice to see that our Bobby Boy loves the East so much. But the rest of the City be darned? Is that his policy? I guess so. Until he sees a perceived necessity in arguing for civic improvements that he is in favour of and any clearheaded ‘Pinko’ thinker opposes him when issues arise in say S. Etobicoke, then Hogg’s Hollow, then Lambton, then…….. How will hot magic polling appear then? Possibly something like, ’115% no ummmm clearly 120% of all Lambtonians want monorails and ferris wheels and ice cream shops and….’! Do ya think maybe this might be what we’ll hear from the next of his insightful sound bites? Shhhhh, whisper now, …. or maybe that bit of penetrating observance might come from twin thinker Dougy F. eh!

    But more importantly, what does that pillar of astute Civic humanitarian wisdom, Don Cherry think though eh Ford’s? Now he’s a thoughtful Maji well worth consulting!!! Just think of the numbers he could conjure up for youse two eh!!! He knows dogs and he knows hockey, but boy does he know hot magic!

    Yours, D R

  • EL72

    The important question as far as I am concerned is whether the ‘old/new’ x-town line now approved by council revert to the original TC stop spacing scheme East of Laird (bad) or keep the new Ford/Metrolinx stop spacing in the above ground portion of Eglinton?

    • Anonymous

      Hopefully the new one.

  • Tyler

    I can’t understand why people want to discuss transit in the north end of the city when it’s clear that the improvements that need to be made are south of Dundas. Whether it’s King or Queen this city needs reliable, rapid transit to accommodate the growing number of residents in these lines. Not only are the streetcars complete cattle cars but the traffic moves so slow due to the lack of a right of way and the allowed parking on both streets. The problems downtown should be resolved first before worrying about anywhere else.

    • Anonymous

      What you are expressing is a downtown version of the “Scarborough gets nothing” approach. Zero sum game transit policy is no way to build a city. And, like it or not, the social well being and economic prosperity of Toronto is dependent upon the critical mass of people we all serve through out this CMA being able to get around.

      i.e. Downtown needs the inner suburbs to get to where they want to go too.

      Given limited resources, we need to do something with what we have. I’m not sure why King or Queen or Scarborough or Finch West or Eglinton deserve more then another part of the city. All I know is that having been studied, doable was identified in the inner suburbs and along Eglinton.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Robert-Smith/539771062 Robert Smith

      The “downtown versus suburbs” problem is a joint problem, not an “us versus them” problem. With insufficient transit in the suburbs, suburban commuters must take their cars, increasing the crowding on the downtown streets. Create better public transit city-wide and fewer people will need to drive.

  • Anonymous

    Eh, I still don’t think it’s going to get built. And even if it is, how well is it going to work?

    Constructing great LRT is not about drawing lines on paper and waving your hand in the general direction of Calgary. Putting rail on the surface, by its very nature, requires cooperation among city departments, most notably Transportation Services: it’s TS that is going to permit traffic priority, modify left turns, and do all the other street redesigns that will give the LRT space to operate properly.

    Even under Miller, TS was notoriously intransigent; we’re still waiting for traffic priority on streetcar ROW lines; St. Clair signal timings and intersection designs are more favorable to vehicles than streetcars, and so on. And council can only set policy, it legally can’t give orders to the city bureaucracy.

    It is with a likelihood approaching 100% that, if construction starts before the end of Ford’s tenure, design compromises will be required that will turn Transit City into a solidly mediocre and flawed system. Shovel-ready and value for money, indeed; and thanks for nothing, city council.

    • Anonymous

      Give it up. No system is going to perfect. This is the one council has chosen to go forward with.

      • Anonymous

        I agree, sure. This is the system on the table so let’s build it. But I do think it’s going to be a disappointment. I’m rather shocked at the lack of critical thinking surrounding Transit City, especially among people who are knowledgeable about transit.

    • Michael Forest

      Even with no traffic signal priority, LRT is better than a mixed-traffic bus. LRT will run in dedicated lanes and will not get caught in traffic jams.

      Plus, traffic signal priority might be enabled in 10 or 15 years, even if there is no political will to do that now. For example, if the gas prices rise to the point where a significantly larger percentage of commuters are forced to take transit, there will be more pressure on the TS department to prioritize transit. And if the LRT line is already built, a very small additional investment will be needed to implement the signal priority.

      • Anonymous

        “Better than a mixed-traffic bus” is an awfully low bar to clear for $8 billion. If that’s all we’re getting, then the value-for-money argument is nonsense.

        • Michael Forest

          First of all, people who are regularly stuck on the mixed-traffic buses will probably regard LRT as a pretty good value for money.

          Secondly, about $4 billion out of those 8 will be spent on the 13-km tunnel under the central section of Eglinton, where the trains will run at the subway speed.

          • Anonymous

            Surface portions of the LRT are estimated anywhere between $50 million and $100 million per kilometer.

            The BRT to York University, at a total cost of about $40 million and a length of about 6 km, comes in at around $7 million per kilometer. Estimated speedups along that route are about 5 min per one-way trip; not too far off the estimated savings from LRT.

            So if ALL WE ARE GETTING on the surface is something slightly faster than buses running in mixed traffic, you could save about $3.5 billion using BRT. You could even stick $1-2 billion in an annuity to cover the excess operating costs in perpetuity and still have over a billion left over.

            I demand that the system operate properly from day 1, and if it does not, then it should not be built. If it’s all about value for money, then I don’t see why that is controversial.

          • Ed

            No, you can’t use the York BRT as your example.

            First of all, half of the 6 km which you mention simply uses existing bus lanes on the Allan. Cost for these lanes = $0/km.

            Second, the York U BRT passes through the back of nowhere, meaning that there a minimal intersections (one traffic light and one railway crossing) between Dufferin and Keele. This makes it cheap, but it also makes it impossible for anyone on Finch Ave to access the BRT.

            Third, there are no station structures for the York U BRT. Zippo. Not even a shelter. That makes it cheap.

            You try to put BRT along a major street, you will quickly find that it will cost way more per km than your misleading example of York U BRT.

          • Anonymous

            I didn’t want to complicate the issue, but now that you bring it up: the York BRT required the construction of a completely new road from Dufferin to Keele through the hydro corridor. If it ran along Finch, then indeed people would be able to access it more and it would have been even cheaper (maybe they could have used that money for bus shelters?). So, thanks for making my argument look even better!

          • Ed

            What on earth is your view of BRT then? If they don’t build anything, it’s just a restriped lane. That would be cheap, but it’s ineffective and anyway we can’t be taking lanes away from cars.

            It’s going to be a lot more *expensive* and *complicated( to put BRT along a major road than it was for the York U busway. Unless it’s just a restripe. In which case, hey we already have BRT here and there!

          • Anonymous

            I think BRT is fine. I ride the York BRT every so often and like it. It’s way better than it was before; even the restriped part on Dufferin is quick.

            I’m okay with taking lanes away from cars. But I’m not okay with taking lanes away, and then making lots of other design compromises that make LRT crappy and mediocre. If it’s going to take “10 to 15 years” to do it right (as the original poster argued), then why bother? Cheap mediocrity is not “value for money”. I’d rather have a subway.

          • Michael Forest

            The cost of a proper street-median BRT will be in the $30 – $40 million per km range (as Ed mentioned below, York U busway is a very special case). No doubts that BRT is cheaper than LRT, but the cost difference is not as dramatic as you stated.

            And if the line is successful as BRT, it might hit its capacity limit in the near future. To handle just 3,000 pphpd with buses, you will need 40 regular buses (75 persons per bus) per hour, or a bus every 90 s. Even if you bring artics (120 persons per bus), you will need 25 of them per hour. That’s a significant labor cost (each bus needs a driver), and not much room to grow above 3,000.

            With LRT, you can easily handle 4,500 pphpd (4 min headways, 15 trains per hour, 300 persons per train), and go even higher if needed.

          • Anonymous

            It speaks volumes about LRT advocacy in Toronto that you must insist on gold-plated BRT to win the value-for-money argument — while ignoring recent experience in Toronto and elsewhere. I can’t speak to the capacity argument but I suspect it has been similarly skewed.

            Toronto has been sold a bill of goods by fantasists who would prefer to draw rail lines on maps than think about actual value in transit. Good day.

          • D R

            Well Andrew, I once thought that the BRT ideal was a possible solution for some corridors if they are perceived naver to grow in 30 years. But if those corridors are going to grow, then LRT is the option which capacity and bang for the buck will satisfy. All of the projections, amateur, TTC and Metrolinx suggest so in the Transit City case.

            BRT’s platform , fuel, shorter vehicle life and maintenance costs will all be higher due to the nature of the technology. This is a fact of life that also needs to be considered before the capital outlay into the lesser ridership appeal that the BRT option is.

  • Anonymous

    First and foremost finish building the Sheppard Subway out to Scarborough. Secondly, an LRT is just a politically correct term for a streetcar. The difference is the spacing between stops. The further the stop the more its considered an “LRT” and the closer, a streetcar. Third Transit City was not a well thought out plan. It was poorly designed and none of the projected costs included the most essential part of the plan. The vehicles. Also, some of the TC lines did not connect. Thus increasing operating costs as the vehicles break down or taken out of service for repair they have to be sent to another facility, like Hillcrest Yards on Bathurst St by truck instead of using interconnecting rail lines. To build repair facilities on each line is expensive and ludicrous.

    • Anonymous

      “Third Transit City was not a well thought out plan.”

      In order to have the “perfect” plan, you’d have to build transit first, and then add the city around it. Retrofitting transit into an existing city (and working with existing transit lines) is hard. No matter how it’s done, at least some people are going to be inconvenienced and dissatisfied. They will have to pay more taxes. It gets in the way of their car. It doesn’t stop at their doorstep. It breaks down. The drivers are union. And so on. And so it becomes a political football: “people want subways… they just want subways. They don’t want streetcars, they want subways.”

      Rob Ford says he can build/finish/whatever the Shepard subway with no tax money. He can do it all with private money. Great. Let him do it. That’s still an option.

      Transit City is a political compromise that uses available funding to provide transit to the most people in some of the most under-served areas of the expanded city. It’s not perfect nor was it ever meant to be. Council has just decided, in their inscrutable wisdom, it’s about the best we can do, that we can get started on today (actually, a year ago). Not subways. (though for what it’s worth, at least part of the Eglinton LRT will still be buried).

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/William-Paul/100002519071197 William Paul

    As Rosie DiManno said in the Star .. we are doomed to be second-class and she is right. No one has been honest as to how an LRT will work in Toronto. All we ever see is great pictures of trains zooming along right-of-ways and if they ever hot an intersection, gates come down and the train zooms through. This is obviously not how it will work in TO. We do not have any rights of way (except for Queensway sort-of) These trains will be stopping at all lights on so on. Not that it’s a bad thing, we are just not being told the truth!

  • Anonymous

    The real truth is that you are an ignorant fool who won’t even try to learn about this issue, and won’t even READ what’s been posted already! Okay, then, here’s the REAL INFO, straight from the horse’s mouth (so to speak.)

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/William-Paul/100002519071197 William Paul

      yes I know the informal site well. It’s a nice little information page. The train (inToronto) will still stop at intersections and will only have signal priority IF traffic control says so. Right now they do not operate that way. Streetcars have a ‘sort-of’ priority as you know certain intersections green or yellow lights are held by the streetcar for another cycle or so. BYW you really sound fanatic about this, desperate almost. I’t only a streetcar (or LRT) you know. Not the end of the world. Our city will do just fine without a new subway or an LRT. We’re just getting a freebie from Queens Park where they will pay the full shot. That is until McGuinty leaves office at eh next election(or sooner). Then we will see if provincial money shall flow as freely to us, regardless of how far things are or are not. McGuinty has already derferred most of the money until after he leaves off ice so we shall see sir. In the meantime have fun dreaming of your new streetcars! (and Rosie DID write a very good article-you just do not like it as you LRT nuts have only one speed…. your way or the highway….no other opinion is recognized))!

      • Anonymous

        Given you began your input into this discussion with the phrases…”what a bunch of drivel… you are proud of this rambling??? you consider this informative???” calling people with opinions other then your own fanatic and using the phrase “no other opinion is recognised” is a bit rich.

        Pot meet kettle.

        Would talk about your comments but you tend to ignore ideas that disagree with you and call posters names.

        Some of us would rather help build a city.

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/William-Paul/100002519071197 William Paul

          Hey Og …are you one of those who “would rather help build a city”???? Sure doesn’t sound like it. Yes, This “puff=piece” article is exactly that – a bunch of ramblings… IMHO Munro can gather all of his “yes-boys” who will all rally around hi no matter what is printed so I must assume you are one of those also. Your way or the highway eh? really a cool approach to re-building this city. You are out of your depth Og, go retreat to Steve’s blog where you can cuddle and be coddled as long as you say “LRT”… good place for you!

          • Anonymous

            Is this is meant as a satire of Ford Nation, because it’s pretty funny?

          • JG

            Don’t feed the troll.

          • D R

            Well William, it appears that your mind is made up, don’t confuse you with any of the facts eh? If you were as informed as you suggest that you are then you would be open to real discussion rather than the drivel you and your ill informed, ham-fisted and bilious Mayor smear all over the outhouse walls.

      • http://twitter.com/ChrisDartCOTF Chris Dart

        Is it safe to assume that you’ve worked at traffic control?
        And if they’re the only thing that’s really standing in the way of this project shining, surely that can be fixed, no?

  • Anonymous

    Was a reply to someone, cell screwed it up.

  • junctionist

    We have to start building LRT to address transit needs in suburban Toronto, where many streets have bus routes that are crowded, unreliable, and quite unsatisfactory. Multiple streets need better transit than buses; the demands are more spread out than what we could meet with a new subway line on one street. LRT fits the bill nicely. It can be built on wide suburban arterials without loses to car lanes and without the expenses of tunnels. Nonetheless, we also need new routes built to the subway standard for the unmatched speed and reliability–routes that span the entire city and serve as critical connections to many destinations such as employment, commercial, and residential centres, educational institutions, and entertainment options. In my opinion, that’s what Eglinton Avenue is, and it’s too prominent, central, and long for the Transit City version of LRT. It’s not going to work that well outside of the buried section. LRT would have been better for Sheppard, but we already started building a full-fledged subway line there which has proven popular. We shouldn’t mess up transit on Sheppard by changing course after already completing one phase. Let it be expanded incrementally. But on-street LRT needs to be part of our transit expansion today. If not, we’ll be neglecting the needs of many transit riders on overcrowded bus routes.