News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 11K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 43K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 6.9K     0 
TorPronto said:
TBH, they way it read was that Metrolinx upended the Relief Line, not Ford. It was presented as something that Metrolinx presented to Ford and he ok'd it. OTW, it's likely we would have had the status quo with the relief line. Honestly, I expect a subway to be built for the Ontario line. I believe Metrolinx is doing an RFQ with specific performance requirements. Industry will likely come back and say you need to build a subway.
Click to expand...

Subway is a vague term, it was always going to be a metro line thing, but the question is how long are the trains and what are the frequency. Both should be high, but it sounds like train length might be low. Other than that, automated or not is less relevant

Given that this is likely to be a p3, then brace for shorter trains and 80m platforms. That's what industry will say, not subway in the traditional sense. Think of all recent p3s in Canada, the Canada line, the Confederation line and the REM. All use smaller trains and make up for it with high frequencies at launch, that's because that's the most cost effective (read cheap) way to build. But when you can't make the frequency the system fails spectacularly as happened last week in Ottawa.

Compare to the subway, which is running high frequencies and long trains , and it's only relying on frequency now 50 years later as it's at its design limit. It didn't launch that way but a new p3 line will look a lot like Vancouver, Ottawa, and Montreal's recent projects rather than the Sheppard subway
 
Last edited:
Kyle Campbell said:
Subway is a vague term, it was always going to be a metro line thing, but the question is how long are the trains and what are the frequency. Both should be high, but it sounds like train length might be low. Other than that, automated or not is less relevant

Given that this is likely to be a p3, then brace for shorter trains and 80m platforms. That's what industry will say, not subway in the traditional sense. Think of all recent p3s in Canada, the Canada line, the Confederation line and the REM. All use smaller trains and make up for it with high frequencies at launch, that's because that's the most cost effective (read cheap) way to build. But when you can't make the frequency the system fails spectacularly as happened last week in Ottawa.

Compare to the subway, which is running high frequencies and long trains , and it's only relying on frequency now 50 years later as it's at its design limit. It didn't launch that way but a new p3 line will look a lot like Vancouver, Ottawa, and Montreal's recent projects rather than the Sheppard subway
Click to expand...
Definitely. Easiest way to trim costs is to make shorter platforms.
 
Here's the link to the Western Works Open House Presentation

209461

209462

209463

209464

209465
 
Last edited:
Neutrino said:
^Plenty of other politicians responsible for that as well.
Click to expand...
Too true and I think many here may not get this point clearly. The only reason the province is involved is because the old (big) city council could not get its act together in ten years to deal with this. The city had ample time to get its ducks in a row. Instead, each little local councillor chose to focus on local issues and soft issues. Name a single city councillor who speaks with the authority and knowledge of a Steve Munro. Name one who has the courage to raise taxes. All would prefer the province did the taxing and the city did the building. Well folks, life doesn’t always work this way. The city got its just reward here.

Forgotten in this is that prosperous and successful cities are cities where people are mobile and the business climate is good. City council loves public health, speed bumps, parks, twinning our city with others, and recycling. I am human and I think all of that is hugely important, but it’s also all meaningless in a city where people can’t get around.

Aside. The four years of Ford’s mayoralty were a complete loss, but that was predictable from the moment the election results were in.
 
TransitBart said:
Too true and I think many here may not get this point clearly. The only reason the province is involved is because the old (big) city council could not get its act together in ten years to deal with this. The city had ample time to get its ducks in a row. Instead, each little local councillor chose to focus on local issues and soft issues. Name a single city councillor who speaks with the authority and knowledge of a Steve Munro. Name one who has the courage to raise taxes. All would prefer the province did the taxing and the city did the building. Well folks, life doesn’t always work this way. The city got its just reward here.

Forgotten in this is that prosperous and successful cities are cities where people are mobile and the business climate is good. City council loves public health, speed bumps, parks, twinning our city with others, and recycling. I am human and I think all of that is hugely important, but it’s also all meaningless in a city where people can’t get around.

Aside. The four years of Ford’s mayoralty were a complete loss, but that was predictable from the moment the election results were in.
Click to expand...
I think this also further drives the point home that Toronto as a single-tier city with only 1 council just doesn't work. However this amalgmation horse has been thoroughly beaten into the ground I see no end in site. Its no wonder why some of the worlds most successful cities tend to be two-tiered or atleast have some sort of regional authority above to handle the big things. The job of a City Councillor is to focus on the local level issues, the problem is that Toronto City Council is expected to perform the jobs of both a lower and upper tier municipality. This would be fine if the City was a single entity from the start, but it's not. The City isn't single tier by nature, but by law and while we can think we are one unified city, the truth is we are still 6 at our core, each with its own culture, and expecting a single Council to be able to handle this is stupid. The obvious solution would be to go back to the former Metro system and let local Councillors deal with the local stuff, while the Metro Councillors deal with the bigger regional stuff like you see in many major cities around the world; however we know the Liberals after 10+ years wouldn't do it, we know the Conservatives certainty won't because they believe they can do no wrong so nothing will change.
 
JSF-1 said:
The City isn't single tier by nature, but by law and while we can think we are one unified city, the truth is we are still 6 at our core, each with its own culture...
Click to expand...

Actually, people have always thought Metro as being synonymous with Toronto. Even signs on the 401 always signed Metro as if it were one city. While places like Cambridge and Vaughan, which have been amalgamated for decades, are still seen a collection of distinct places (especially the latter). Even Hamilton which has always had a city-and-suburbs relationship, is psychologically disunited.
 
Transportfan said:
Actually, people have always thought Metro as being synonymous with Toronto. Even signs on the 401 always signed Metro as if it were one city. While places like Cambridge and Vaughan, which have been amalgamated for decades, are still seen a collection of distinct places (especially the latter). Even Hamilton which has always had a city-and-suburbs relationship, is psychologically disunited.
Click to expand...

That's because for years it was called Metropolitan Toronto. Everything from Metropolitan Toronto Police to Metropolitan Toronto Zoo. It was 6 cities but it functioned as one so really.. you were headed to Toronto.
 
JSF-1 said:
I think this also further drives the point home that Toronto as a single-tier city with only 1 council just doesn't work. However this amalgmation horse has been thoroughly beaten into the ground I see no end in site. Its no wonder why some of the worlds most successful cities tend to be two-tiered or atleast have some sort of regional authority above to handle the big things. The job of a City Councillor is to focus on the local level issues, the problem is that Toronto City Council is expected to perform the jobs of both a lower and upper tier municipality. This would be fine if the City was a single entity from the start, but it's not. The City isn't single tier by nature, but by law and while we can think we are one unified city, the truth is we are still 6 at our core, each with its own culture, and expecting a single Council to be able to handle this is stupid. The obvious solution would be to go back to the former Metro system and let local Councillors deal with the local stuff, while the Metro Councillors deal with the bigger regional stuff like you see in many major cities around the world; however we know the Liberals after 10+ years wouldn't do it, we know the Conservatives certainty won't because they believe they can do no wrong so nothing will change.
Click to expand...

If Toronto's system of governance were applied to a similarly sized province, say Alberta, MPPs would be in charge of running the province, while also worrying about the placement of park benches in any random neighbourhood park.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top