|
St. Clair ruling derails city plans (pg. 4)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| swilly |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
i read in the paper that it would be a 2-4 minute difference on average.
Its not a brilliant idea. How many tens of millions are being wasted on an EXISTING LINE? Why not use that cash to start new service? St Clair is already adequately served. The only thing that could make a significant change there would be a subway. |
You should read up more on the impacts of transitways. There are several books on sustinable transport planning that cover this area. I recommend "Sustainablity and the city. Overcoming automobile dependance" its by newman and kenworthy and is pretty standard reading for anyone with a background in transportation planning. Although creating new lines is a good idea it makes more sense to increase the efficiency of existing lines. In areas of low transit service it can take awhile for the population to switch over to transit. However, if there is already large transit population and the service is improved than more people will switch over particulary if it is a fast and realiable service.
| quote: |
Isnt the TTC always crying poor? If they are so poor then why are they wasting money on something of insignificance? Why not use that money to maintain the current fleet since all i hear about is how dire the situation is when it comes to funding. I guess they arent so bad off after all? |
The TTC does not have enough money and as such it cant afford to build a subway. At least a transit way will be able to improve transit and increase ridership and reduce congestion at an affordable level.
| quote: |
Lastly ive attempted many times to take transit. After living in argentina and taking the train and subway to work every day i wanted to do the same here. Its MUCH MUCH more relaxing when you dont have to drive and instead you can sit and watch the world go by while listening to a good mix set. But in Toronto the service is not very frequent, the costs are high and in many cases its actually impossible to get where you are going. The very fact that i am pretty well forced to drive to the train station in the GTA prevents me from bothering in the first place. If i need a car to drive to the GO station, i might as well just keep going. Not to mention they have no started charging for parking in some GO lots and TTC lots. So now i have the cost of parking, the cost of owning a car, the GO fare, and the TTC fare plus added hours of inconvenience. |
I agree that transit service in the suburbs is poor. However, that is due to the urban form more than anything. When you have street layouts based on the radburn design it is very difficult to provide transit service. In neotraditional residential developments residents are able to take a local bus to the station and this reduces the need for parking and the associated costs. |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by swilly
Right so the rest of the population should suffer high levels of traffic congestion so some small furniture shops can take thier deliveries during the day whatever. In many other cities in the world deliveries are made during the night because there is high levels of traffic congestion. That trucks are able to double park on a major aterial road makes no sense. It holds up traffic and causes major problems for the network. In the pedestrian areas and high traffic regions of london manchestor leeds and other major cities deleveries are all made at night because there is heavy traffic both pedestrian and vehicular. |
Should the rest of the population suffer high levels of traffic congestion just so we can have cute streetcars with dedicated lanes and right of way? Should the rest of the population suffer high levels of traffic congestion just so petty environmentalists can feel good about themselves for ruining the planned expressways? Should the rest of the population suffer high levels of traffic congestion because higher levels of government see fit to squander and embezzle our tax money instead of spending it on transportation in densely populated areas?
Shops take deliveries at night either because it is economical or because they have to (due to oppressive legislation like what you're suggesting). They don't do it to relieve traffic congestion, nor should they.
Oh, and what the hell is with that double-park comment? Trucks aren't allowed to double park anywhere - they just do it anyway. If it's already against the law, then what we need is better enforcement of the existing law, not more laws.
| quote: | | Transit ridership along the spadina line experienced an significant increase in the first year of operations. Same as the queens Quay line. If people know that transit will be able to get them to a specific stop in a specified amount of time they will make the switch. |
One would hope that transit experienced a significant increase in the first year of operations, since it would have been zero before the first year of operations. :rolleyes: What kind of ass-backwards argument is that?
| quote: | | However, if transit is held up by traffic than there is no incentive to switch over. A transit system is desigined to operate in a unimpeded manner when a street car is held by traffic there are no advantages to taking the transit system. The only way people will get of thier car is if transit can get them to thier destination in faster manner than driving can or at least comparable amount of time. This does not occur however if the street cars are held by people in thier automobiles. |
This doesn't occur with streetcars at all. The reasons why people drive instead of taking transit have been made clear dozens of times in this thread and hundreds of times in previous threads, and have been proven conclusively by 30 years of assuming the contrary. For decades, poor city planners have been taking the approach that marginal improvements to public transportation will get drivers off the roads, and for decades, that approach hasn't worked. When an assumption turns out to be false, do you just start kicking and screaming like a 3-year-old until everybody else is too tired to argue or care?
In order to get more people to use public transit, we need TRAINS, SUBWAYS, and INEXPENSIVE RAPID TRANSPORTATION TO AND FROM SUBURBAN AREAS. Get it through your head already, streetcars are ridiculously inefficient and AT LEAST need to be replaced by buses, NOT given special treatment.
| quote: | | I looked it up on the TTC report and its actually closer to 6-10 minutes. However, that figure is based on a ideal situation where traffic is moving freely and the street car is not held up by traffic. Thus the stat is based on a comparison between a transit way operating free of traffic and a street car operating on the road where traffic is flowing at a good pace. However, the reality is quite different and more often than not particulary during rush hour those street cars are held up quite a bit due to traffic. Thus real time savings would be higher. |
So basically, you're taking the statistic straight from the horse's mouth (the TTC), and telling us all that you know better. :rolleyes: You don't know about the "reality", and if you do, then let's see PROOF. Show us PROOF that the figure is based on an ideal situation, and show us PROOF that the non-ideal situation would result in a BETTER time savings rather than WORSE.
| quote: | | I would take your opinion seriously if actually used the TTC. |
Do you listen at all? I TOOK THE TTC TO WORK FOR FOUR YEARS YOU DIP. And guess what? ONE OF THE OFFICES WAS ON ST. CLAIR. What are you saying, that just because I don't take it RIGHT NOW means I'm not qualified to have an opinion?
| quote: | | Also one should also note that st clair historically had a transit way.It was torn down though during the 1930s depression as part of a make work project in toronto. St clair was actually laid out with a transit way from its start. Moreover, much of the dense residential development in that region is due to the presence of the transit streetcars. Additionally, one of the major reasons why the TTC wanted to create the transit way now is because the rails along st clair are due to be replaced and thier refurbishment and the creation of the transitway could of been done at the same time. The arguement that creating the transit way would slow up traffic was at least partially flase if only because there was going to be construction replacing the existing rails anyways. |
Wow, where on earth do you get your information from? It was torn down because it was a piece of CRAP! How about instead of replacing the rails along St. Clair, they just get rid of them and replace the streetcars with buses? That would save money AND improve traffic flow.
| quote: | | PS I studied Urban geography and Urban planning at Uni. |
God help us all if this is the kind of crap they're teaching their students. No wonder Toronto has such a ty infrastructure. |
|
|
| ShadoWolf |
| quote: | Originally posted by swilly
Honestly, this was a brilliant idea and its been held back by unfounded beliefs on the detrimental on bussiness. Here are some of the major problems with thier theories.
1)Local bussiness groups claim that they will lose alot of bussiness by losing parking in front of thier stores. Most stores along st clair have a small street frontage. At most there is access to 2-3 parking spots directly infront of thier store. The elimination of street parking then is only eliminating 2-3 parking spots per store. Are the local bussiness operating at such a small margin that the loss of two parking spots will make or break thier operations? What do people do at present when the road side parking is full(as it so often is)? Usually they will park up on one of the sidestreets. Thus what is the difference?
Moreover,how much bussiness in the area is pedestrian based? With improved transit along this corridor how many more people will walking along those streets? Planning studies have shown that people are more likely to stop at a unusual store while walking by than driving by. The hassle of parking is a major disincentive for people to stop. However, pedestrian based traffic does not have that problem. |
Who knows better about those businesses - the owners of those businesses or you? |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by ShadoWolf
Who knows better about those businesses - the owners of those businesses or you? |
Exactly..
I wish people would get this through their head.
Businesses know whats best for businesses.
Whether it be transit or dumb smoking laws. |
|
|
| MarkT |
^^^ no offense to ma and pa running their antique store, but I don't think they are the most qualified commentators on urban planning.
they presumably know their customers and their own business better than some politicians...but they probably aren't transportation and infrastructure experts.
my point is that there are macro and micro issues at hand...transportation and urban planners and small business need to work together...it's not a case of who "knows best" at the expense of the other (at least it shouldn't be). |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| i definately tend to trust ma and pa more than some stuffed shirt in city hall who has no grip on reality aka our mayor. |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
i definately tend to trust ma and pa more than some stuffed shirt in city hall who has no grip on reality aka our mayor. |
Exactly.
First off, I don't know why people keep describing business owners on St. Clair as old fogeys running antique stores - WTF? I'm sure there may be a few stores like that but there are also a huge number of restaurants, clothing stores, technology stores, etc... and several big chains/franchises.
More importantly, even if all the stores were tiny family-owned businesses, I'd still trust them more than a bureaucrat, because most bureaucrats know NOTHING and only have jobs because those jobs are mandated to exist by a government that doesn't have to be accountable for the money it spends.
People really need to start accepting that Toronto is a city for business. If you want a pretty city with fewer cars then move to Barrie or Oakville. Everybody comes to Toronto in order to get where the action is - no matter what "action" that is, employment or nightlife or even the arts, it's all run by business. Therefore, we all need to stop putting so much focus on making the city "nice" and start putting focus on making it more accessible and business-friendly.
Yes, years ago, before we started accepting millions of immigrants and refugees and letting them all jam themselves into downtown Toronto, we had a nice clean polite city. Those days are over and they're never coming back. That's what the 'burbs are for - downtown Toronto is a business area. We should be dumping as much money as possible into accessibility (i.e. a transportation infrastructure) and as little as possible into the things that don't matter anymore (like bylaw enforcement and low-income housing). |
|
|
| swilly |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
Exactly.
Yes, years ago, before we started accepting millions of immigrants and refugees and letting them all jam themselves into downtown Toronto, we had a nice clean polite city. Those days are over and they're never coming back. That's what the 'burbs are for - downtown Toronto is a business area. |
Ya i am with you on this one. Stalin and hitler had the right idea. Build internment camps and furances and sort all them foriegners out! That way you can have your nice little happy polite city
You racist twat!!!! You stupid . What is your background? Unless you are a member of the first nations you are as much an immigrant as anybody else in this nation.
I almost thought about engaging further in this debate with you guys until you said that. On a final note realize this
1) no matter how many highways or extra expressways you build you will never be able to meet demand. Every first year transporation planning class covers that sad truth. Supply side management is part of modernist planning from the 1950s. There is little debate about the fallacy that if you build more highways you will be able to meet demand. One subway line moves an amount equal to a 6 lane highway. If they started criss crossing the city with expressways it would wreck it for those that live there. Transport demand management is what is needed.
2) As opposed to simply stating that all planners are government workers and hence thier opinions are invalid i suggest you do some research in the field of transportation planning. Its one thing to have an educated opinion its another to be opinionated. Planners and urban geograpers studies these issues for at the very least 4 years. how many years have you been studying?
At the very least you should read up on some of the literature. Try to find some actual academic journals as well. You went to university you should be able to use your alumni card.
The very fact that you suggest that the answer to Toronto's transportation problem is to build more highways shows you have done little to no reading in the field of transportation planning. For 1 if you think creating a transit way has an impact on local bussiness and small bussiness owners imagine if they ran a expressway through st clair. Moreover, you can only expand the roads so much eventually you will run out of land. The amount of land consumed by transit in comparision to expressways is substianally less.
On a final note here is the source for the information on why they tore down the transit way in the 1930s. This is the actual report produced by the TTC. If you look it states that they tore down the transit way as a make work project not because it didint work. It also talks about the impact of the TTC on the local area.
http://www.toronto.ca/ttc/pdf/streetcar_stclair.pdf
Honestly, you should really do some reading into this area before you start shooting your mouth off. At least you would be able to come up with better arguments than " oh a report from urban planners well they work for the government and the current government is run by liberals therefore they must be stealing my money and anything they do is invalid and they are lazy and useless anyways therefore thier report and anything they say is useless. Far better to let some ma and pa convience store decide what is better for the transit network at least they are not in cahoots with my sworn enemy the liberal party of canada".
Stupid
Swilly San |
|
|
| swilly |
The younge university line moves the same amount of people per day as a 27 lane highway. Ya creating expressways is a way more efficient way of dealing with the transportation problem
Swilly San |
|
|
| ShadoWolf |
| quote: | Originally posted by swilly
The younge university line moves the same amount of people per day as a 27 lane highway. Ya creating expressways is a way more efficient way of dealing with the transportation problem
Swilly San |
What about the people who don't and won't use the subway, but who are currently clogging up Toronto's streets with cars?
:rolleyes: |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by swilly
You racist twat!!!! You stupid . What is your background?
|
so u call him a racist and then ask what his background is? Presumably to ostersize him based on his race?
LOL ok then....
| quote: |
Unless you are a member of the first nations you are as much an immigrant as anybody else in this nation. |
I take exception to this comment. This is a very racist comment in itself and i am highly offended by it. I was born in Canada. I am as much a canadian as anyone else including a native. I did not move here from another country. If you really want to get nitpicky about this then natives arent real canadians either since they crossed the land bridge from asia to settle here.
Enough of this racism from you please. You have a few issues u obviously need sorted out.
As for the transport issue. There is not doubt that BOTH cars and public transport need to be accomodated. We cannot have one and not the other. Unfortunately no one is doing much about either. |
|
|
| swilly |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
so u call him a racist and then ask what his background is? Presumably to ostersize him based on his race? |
NO i asked him his background because he was going on about immigrants making this city of his not a polite and nice place to live. I pointed out that unless you are a memeber of canada's first nations than you have no right calling anyone else an immigrant. Because every member of this country is equal in that respect as we all came over one a boat or something at some point in time.
| quote: |
I take exception to this comment. This is a very racist comment in itself and i am highly offended by it. I was born in Canada. I am as much a canadian as anyone else including a native. I did not move here from another country. If you really want to get nitpicky about this then natives arent real canadians either since they crossed the land bridge from asia to settle here. |
i didint say you were less canadian or not. What i did say was though is that unless you are a member of canada's first nations then you have no right to call anyone else here an immigrant. The argument that " well the natives moved here as well " is also moot as there is a massive difference between 300 years and 15,000 years. England or france or any of those nations did not exist, greece and rome eygpt where still some 10,000 years sumer and babylon were still another 5,000 years down the road when the aboriginals first came to canada.
If you can honestly, say that there is a similarty between the migration of canada's aboriginals here some 15,000 years ago and colonials from 300 years ago then technically noone has no claim to any land as much of england is full of normans who although were french were originally from scandanavia, some 900 years ago. The germans originally came from the goths who migrated there as well. hungarians originally came from central asia. Technically no european has any claim to europe as they were originally from the middle east an migrated there with the indo europeans several 1,000 years ago and really we all CAME FROM AFRICA. Therefor ethier we all have no claim to anything.
My original point was that digitwat was hassling immigrants in this country a country who is almost entirely composed of immigrants. Its the pot calling the kettle black.
swilly san |
|
|
|
|
