|
new subway system! (wishful thinking for the TTC, lol) (pg. 5)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| dEsidEL |
| quote: | Originally posted by ShadoWolf
Subways are incredibly expensive to build.
We should be looking at LRT's / trams / above-ground rail as an alternative. Expanding GO Transit is an option. |
with the weather we get here i don't know about that .. the Scarb RT isn't the most reliable thing ..
sometimes you gotta think if city planners really think about the things that hav been talked about here .. but if we're really serious about what's being said, i hope someone takes some initiative to actually find out if they hav
|
|
|
| St_Andrew |
| quote: | Originally posted by ShadoWolf
Subways are incredibly expensive to build. |
you can still afford it, so many other cities does. |
|
|
| St_Andrew |
| quote: | Originally posted by dEsidEL
sometimes you gotta think if city planners really think about the things that hav been talked about here .. but if we're really serious about what's being said, i hope someone takes some initiative to actually find out if they hav |
i guess they have, but i guess the problem might be that they are into a certain way of thinking, and therefore have problems with new ideas that are not along the lines of what they have planned. Just a guess tho |
|
|
| Crazy Serb |
| quote: | Originally posted by St_Andrew
i guess they have, but i guess the problem might be that they are into a certain way of thinking, and therefore have problems with new ideas that are not along the lines of what they have planned. Just a guess tho |
in that case, fire the crackheads and hire people that can make it happen... simple, really. |
|
|
| swilly |
I dont have time to write a proper response for this but here are my thoughts for now.
1)The city of toronto as already outgrown its transit system substianlly and the argument that we would need to increase our population by 3x is absurd. Barcelona has a subway system with almost 4x time the amount of lines as toronto and a population of only 1 million.
2) Street cars are in fact a very feasable and worthwhile component of the transit system. More closed access routes such as that scene on spadina would be a big improvment and would increase the viability of the transit system. The major problem with transit operating on the streets at present is that often the vehicles get caught in traffic. In order for public transit to be competitive with the auto it has to be given closed access routes to operate so that users of the transit system can bypass traffic. Also i would suggest switching to a light rail system in place of the current streetcars. There are many that dont require overhead wires. Switching to bus based transit is not workable as many studies have shown that people are more responsive to rail based transit then bus based transit. The apperance of a fixed rail provides a sense of continuous movement and a more "real" mode of transit. Similar to the feeling of waiting for a subway and that of bus.
3) Although there are some merits to having the private sector involved in transit... one need only look to the UK for the problems that creates. The UK used to have one of the most advanced rail and transit systems in europe. Now places such as spain have superior systems. The rail system is now a joke and is almost completly owned by virgin rail. The bus systems in many cities are a joke as well. Competition between bus companies reduced service to alot of areas with low volume. Thus reducing many potential transit users. BUses would all line up in the high volume areas trying to get as many customers as possible and then after intial crunch there would be nothing. Overall service was subpar to poor in many areas. Also you would see many buses operating with only 2-4 people at at time totally inefficient. The only city in the UK with a good transit system is in london and that is because the city still runs it.
With a public administration planning can conicide with transit provision and transit can be provided to areas of low intial demand with the ulimate goal of creating areas of high transit usuage. A private operation would not be able to do so as it would lack
1) the economic incenctive
2) no powers of land use planning with the city. The city of london transit system and many other public systems work togethor with the planning departments to create new regions of high transit usuage and also to provide necessary amentiies in those areas to service the population there.
the proposed subway line looks briliant and i would be the first one to support it |
|
|
| Pettiscool |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
There are three main factors that will decide a person's choice of transportation, and in order of priority they are:
1. Time
2. Comfort
3. Expense
|
Your joking right?!?!?! if this was true NOBODY would ride the ttc... |
|
|
| StereoPrincess |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
Ask Durafei how much he "hates" his job at Google. I'm quite certain he will have very few negative things to say about it. |
probably the only negative thing is the weight he put on from all the food they are feeding him. ;) |
|
|
| dEsidEL |
btw. if that proposed subway line existed today and i was still in school @ Ryerson .. i could take a bus to either Steeles East station or Agincourt Station and be downtown in less than an hour instead of the average 1hr 15mins - 1hr 20 mins it takes.. :D
they need an extension to a "Pacific Mall" station tho and then i'd be really happy .. :tongue2
|
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by swilly
I dont have time to write a proper response for this but here are my thoughts for now.
1)The city of toronto as already outgrown its transit system substianlly and the argument that we would need to increase our population by 3x is absurd. Barcelona has a subway system with almost 4x time the amount of lines as toronto and a population of only 1 million.
2) Street cars are in fact a very feasable and worthwhile component of the transit system. More closed access routes such as that scene on spadina would be a big improvment and would increase the viability of the transit system. The major problem with transit operating on the streets at present is that often the vehicles get caught in traffic. In order for public transit to be competitive with the auto it has to be given closed access routes to operate so that users of the transit system can bypass traffic. Also i would suggest switching to a light rail system in place of the current streetcars. There are many that dont require overhead wires. Switching to bus based transit is not workable as many studies have shown that people are more responsive to rail based transit then bus based transit. The apperance of a fixed rail provides a sense of continuous movement and a more "real" mode of transit. Similar to the feeling of waiting for a subway and that of bus.
3) Although there are some merits to having the private sector involved in transit... one need only look to the UK for the problems that creates. The UK used to have one of the most advanced rail and transit systems in europe. Now places such as spain have superior systems. The rail system is now a joke and is almost completly owned by virgin rail. The bus systems in many cities are a joke as well. Competition between bus companies reduced service to alot of areas with low volume. Thus reducing many potential transit users. BUses would all line up in the high volume areas trying to get as many customers as possible and then after intial crunch there would be nothing. Overall service was subpar to poor in many areas. Also you would see many buses operating with only 2-4 people at at time totally inefficient. The only city in the UK with a good transit system is in london and that is because the city still runs it.
With a public administration planning can conicide with transit provision and transit can be provided to areas of low intial demand with the ulimate goal of creating areas of high transit usuage. A private operation would not be able to do so as it would lack
1) the economic incenctive
2) no powers of land use planning with the city. The city of london transit system and many other public systems work togethor with the planning departments to create new regions of high transit usuage and also to provide necessary amentiies in those areas to service the population there.
the proposed subway line looks briliant and i would be the first one to support it |
Good points. Id counter the arguement against privatization by saying that it could work as long as it were heavily regulated to ensure service on less populated routes much like what the government now requires of Air Canada. Air Canada MUST service remote communities by law in order to be able to fly in Canada. It was part of the agreement worked out in it's privatization. |
|
|
| samhouse |
holy
subway line to longbranch...:O :O :O
purrrfect...no more annoying 2 hour streetcar rides on home on the queen line :D :D |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by Pettiscool
Your joking right?!?!?! if this was true NOBODY would ride the ttc... |
How do you figure?
Expense is the least important item on people's lists but that doesn't mean it can't be an overriding factor. Some people just cannot afford a car! I'd say that accounts for at least 8 out of 10 TTC riders.
Same goes for comfort - I mean, if I could ride in the trunk of somebody's car for free, I think I'd still prefer to take the TTC. Just because time is the #1 factor does not make the other factors irrelevant - that's the reason I listed them all! |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by Crazy Serb
in that case, fire the crackheads and hire people that can make it happen... simple, really. |
Want to start a lobby group? Or negotiate a contract with the city? :p
Seriously though - maybe none of us here have enough money or resources to do anything about it, but all someone needs to do is come up with a sales pitch and rally up enough support among the people who DO have enough. |
|
|
|
|
