The Great Canadian Transit Thread

[TorontoDrew]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Wow, that's a very good rethink for Toronto.

Brings actual rapid transit into Scarborough itself, connects the Eglinton LRT with the GO station there--a really useful connection--and ensures a set of services that work well together without being redundant.

It's also a very useful political compromise. Both the subway and LRT camps on Toronto City Council can get behind this.

I'm sure everybody but Rob Ford will get behind it.

[TorontoDrew]

I had no idea San Fran ended up with one.

[IMG]Transit Export by Jack Landau, on Flickr[/IMG]

[LeftCoaster]

San Fran has a great collection of streetcars in liveries from cities all over NA and Europe. It's quite cool really.

[franktko]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

San Fran has a great collection of streetcars in liveries from cities all over NA and Europe. It's quite cool really.

Yes it is. Great memories of being often surprised at every corner! But man, it must be hell on the maintenance side to keep all those old cars on the road

[LeftCoaster]

I wondered that myself. Wouldn't be surprised if the inner workings are all standardized and only the shells are unique.

[manny_santos]

Originally Posted by TorontoDrew

I'm sure everybody but Rob Ford will get behind it.

I wish they'd keep one station between STC and Kennedy, but I'm just happy to see the extension.

I would also like to see the Sheppard Subway extended both east and west. But I'm not holding my breath.

[Innsertnamehere]

The San Fran one actually isn't from Toronto, I believe its from Cleveland or something, they just painted it to make it look like a Toronto car.

[caltrane74]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

The San Fran one actually isn't from Toronto, I believe its from Cleveland or something, they just painted it to make it look like a Toronto car.

create a nice standardized fleet doing that.

[franktko]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

The San Fran one actually isn't from Toronto, I believe its from Cleveland or something, they just painted it to make it look like a Toronto car.

The one from Toronto is a "Tribute" livery. It's a kind of street car, the PCC street cars that were very popular accross NA and used in TO. All those PCC street cars were built in the 40s and 50s and have been restored. They also have a bunch of original street cars from around the world on that line, the Market Line.

See the list of cars: http://www.streetcar.org/streetcars/

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by manny_santos

I wish they'd keep one station between STC and Kennedy, but I'm just happy to see the extension.

I would also like to see the Sheppard Subway extended both east and west. But I'm not holding my breath.

If Sheppard was extended west to Downsview and east to STC, it might actually reduce the ridership on Bloor and the future Crosstown.

[manny_santos]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

If Sheppard was extended west to Downsview and east to STC, it might actually reduce the ridership on Bloor and the future Crosstown.

Not necessarily a bad thing. Could also help reduce traffic on Sheppard Ave and spur more high density development in North York. I know the building I live in wouldn't exist if it weren't for the Sheppard Subway.

[osmo]

TTC actually wants a west connection on Sheppard to Wilson to connect to the yard. They could squeeze out close to 24 hr service in the Yonge line if done.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by osmo

TTC actually wants a west connection on Sheppard to Wilson to connect to the yard. They could squeeze out close to 24 hr service in the Yonge line if done.

How so? Please explain.

[ssiguy]

The new plan actually makes sense for a change.

The 6km between Kennedy and STC is quite a distance and expensive but the route itself has not be finalized meaning it may come in MUCH cheaper if they use current rail and/or Hydro corridors. Tory is open to how it connects the 2 and seeing TOD is not an issue now and that the saved funds will be channelled into Eglinton, I really don't think you will see a tunnel or at least a much shorter one which would save huge funds, time, and have far less disruption.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

The new plan actually makes sense for a change.

The 6km between Kennedy and STC is quite a distance and expensive but the route itself has not be finalized meaning it may come in MUCH cheaper if they use current rail and/or Hydro corridors. Tory is open to how it connects the 2 and seeing TOD is not an issue now and that the saved funds will be channelled into Eglinton, I really don't think you will see a tunnel or at least a much shorter one which would save huge funds, time, and have far less disruption.

If they were to follow the current routing, how would they deal with the sharp corner?

[ssiguy]

As far as Edmonton is concerned, I hope they do this line right because the new tiny Metro LRT line seems to go from one disaster to another. Edmonton did a great job on it's first LRT line making it both rapid and reliable but the Metro line is neither.

They should fire the idiots in charge of the Metro line. When lines are poorly designed or created by urban planners who are more interested in "complete streets" than they are about moving people then you get results like the Metro line.

Lines like this can do a huge amount of damage that can take decades to repair because they bring the system and City planners into such disrepute that they lose all credibility. It reinforces opponents that these are white elephant lines built for politicians eager for ribbon cutting ceremonies before election time and a ghastly waste of taxpayer money. For those more lukewarm supporters it leaves a bad taste in their mouth and makes them very sceptical of throwing good money after bad.

Metrolinx in Toronto did this with it's UPX airport line which is bleeding money, has horrid ridership, is running at 10% capacity, obscenely high fares and cost $500 million. Metrolinx has done a lot of great things for transit in the GTA and more is on it's way but when people think of Metrolinx they think of UPX and how traffic chocked Toronto needed rapid transit and all they got was Toronto's answer to Montreal's Mirabel.

When transit lines are poorly designed and executed they undermine the public's impression of the transit agency and make the taxpayers {and hence politicians} far less likely to part with even more of their hard earner money for another line that may also be money down the drain.

People have a reasonable expectation that the tax dollars will be well spent and have real positive results for the city and when they don't it gives the agency a very bad reputation that can takes 20 years to change.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

As far as Edmonton is concerned, I hope they do this line right because the new tiny Metro LRT line seems to go from one disaster to another. Edmonton did a great job on it's first LRT line making it both rapid and reliable but the Metro line is neither.

What are the issues with it?

[Coldrsx]

^signalling. At the moment trains are line of sight I believe and maxed at 25km/h.

^^LOVE LOVE LOVE UPX!!!

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

As far as Edmonton is concerned, I hope they do this line right because the new tiny Metro LRT line seems to go from one disaster to another. Edmonton did a great job on it's first LRT line making it both rapid and reliable but the Metro line is neither.

They should fire the idiots in charge of the Metro line. When lines are poorly designed or created by urban planners who are more interested in "complete streets" than they are about moving people then you get results like the Metro line.

Lines like this can do a huge amount of damage that can take decades to repair because they bring the system and City planners into such disrepute that they lose all credibility. It reinforces opponents that these are white elephant lines built for politicians eager for ribbon cutting ceremonies before election time and a ghastly waste of taxpayer money. For those more lukewarm supporters it leaves a bad taste in their mouth and makes them very sceptical of throwing good money after bad.

Metrolinx in Toronto did this with it's UPX airport line which is bleeding money, has horrid ridership, is running at 10% capacity, obscenely high fares and cost $500 million. Metrolinx has done a lot of great things for transit in the GTA and more is on it's way but when people think of Metrolinx they think of UPX and how traffic chocked Toronto needed rapid transit and all they got was Toronto's answer to Montreal's Mirabel.

When transit lines are poorly designed and executed they undermine the public's impression of the transit agency and make the taxpayers {and hence politicians} far less likely to part with even more of their hard earner money for another line that may also be money down the drain.

People have a reasonable expectation that the tax dollars will be well spent and have real positive results for the city and when they don't it gives the agency a very bad reputation that can takes 20 years to change.

Isn't the only issue with UPX the extremely high fares? Because it does provide very fast service between Pearson and Union Station.

[1overcosc]

^Pretty much.

A lot of people forget what UPX is intended to be. It's not public transit intended for suburban families to take their kids to the airport. It's intended to be a premium transportation service to appeal to business travellers. Both the prices and service quality on board (trains have little TVs and stuff on each seat for customers to enjoy, they serve coffee, that kind of thing) reflect this.

UPX is running below ridership projections. If that doesn't improve over time Metrolinx may very well choose to scale it back a bit by both lowering fares and doing away with some of the on board amenities.