[ehlow]

FYI lane reductions east of Bayview apparently starting Monday:

http://thecrosstown.ca/news-media/w...nstruction-north-side-of-eglinton-at-donlea-d

I'm guessing we'll see construction ramp up quite a lot on the eastern part of the underground section this summer (between Yonge and Leslie)

 

[M II A II R II K]

By densifying Eglinton, we can fight congestion

Read More: http://www.thestar.com/opinion/comm...sifying_eglinton_we_can_fight_congestion.html

.....

If we truly want to reduce congestion, and if we truly care about becoming a more sustainable city, increasing housing choice and affordable housing near the places where people work should be at the top of our city-building agenda.

- So when we think about the 19 kilometres of light-rail transit currently under construction on Eglinton Ave., running through the heart of our city, we will miss the mark once again if we treat this investment — and opportunity — as simply a transit infrastructure project, as opposed to a critical city-building initiative.

- Densifying Eglinton through midrise development that provides more opportunities for people to live in the heart of the city with high frequency transit access, and as part of walkable neighbourhoods, is about providing housing choice. And more housing choice along key transit corridors is essential to unlocking the congestion puzzle.

- But, skeptics may wonder — thinking of the noisy, traffic nightmare that Eglinton is today — is this a real choice? A livable choice? A choice for families? Our avenues will only become desirable, linear neighbourhoods if we reconceive them as complete streets where people move in a variety of ways, including as pedestrians on widened sidewalks lined with shops, medical services, daycares and schools, and separated cycle tracks, as they densify.

- Building transit on our existing corridors and leaving them primarily for cars would neglect the opportunity to create these new neighbourhoods, which is as critical to addressing congestion as the transit investment itself. And transit users are pedestrians, so a quality, safe public realm is essential to well-designed LRT.

.....

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

By densifying Eglinton, we can fight congestion

Read More: http://www.thestar.com/opinion/comm...sifying_eglinton_we_can_fight_congestion.html

.....

If we truly want to reduce congestion, and if we truly care about becoming a more sustainable city, increasing housing choice and affordable housing near the places where people work should be at the top of our city-building agenda.

- So when we think about the 19 kilometres of light-rail transit currently under construction on Eglinton Ave., running through the heart of our city, we will miss the mark once again if we treat this investment — and opportunity — as simply a transit infrastructure project, as opposed to a critical city-building initiative.

- Densifying Eglinton through midrise development that provides more opportunities for people to live in the heart of the city with high frequency transit access, and as part of walkable neighbourhoods, is about providing housing choice. And more housing choice along key transit corridors is essential to unlocking the congestion puzzle.

- But, skeptics may wonder — thinking of the noisy, traffic nightmare that Eglinton is today — is this a real choice? A livable choice? A choice for families? Our avenues will only become desirable, linear neighbourhoods if we reconceive them as complete streets where people move in a variety of ways, including as pedestrians on widened sidewalks lined with shops, medical services, daycares and schools, and separated cycle tracks, as they densify.

- Building transit on our existing corridors and leaving them primarily for cars would neglect the opportunity to create these new neighbourhoods, which is as critical to addressing congestion as the transit investment itself. And transit users are pedestrians, so a quality, safe public realm is essential to well-designed LRT.

.....

There are still people (mostly drivers) who still don't see congestion is the cause of increased automobile use. Reduced automobile use, to create a more walkable and transit-oriented neighbourhood, should be the target.

 

[MisterF]

The Queenway right-of-way should be used as grass test beds, to get experience and test which grass species would be best for the Toronto climate.

I don't see why a test would be needed, it's not like grass is unknown in the city or something. Of course it would stop growing in the winter, but that's no different from every lawn in the city. Salt shouldn't be an issue either; there are countless busy, salted streets in the city with grass medians and boulevards. I get the impression that the issue is cost. A grassed ROW is simply more expensive than concrete or gravel. The question is whether grass is worth the extra cost. It sure does look nice.

BTW, the article mentions Kenosha, Wisconsin as an example of a city with grass LRT lines. Kenosha has a colder winter climate than Toronto, if only slightly.

 

[innsertnamehere]

The problem is that too many see congestion as something that only occurs with cars, and that if we want to get rid of "congestion" we need to make it so cars are never in a traffic jam. In reality, its quite different. we have to make it so that people don't have to be stuck in a traffic jam, and that means bike lanes and transit. There will always be vehicular congestion, its impossible to get rid of. We need alternatives to it so that people don't have to sit in traffic, not try to get rid of the traffic itself.

 

[junctionist]

There are still people (mostly drivers) who still don't see congestion is the cause of increased automobile use. Reduced automobile use, to create a more walkable and transit-oriented neighbourhood, should be the target.

John Tory doesn't see it. He wants to be mayor.

 

[rbt]

John Tory doesn't see it. He wants to be mayor.

Tory knows.

You can't fix anything until you get elected. Getting elected sometimes requires promising to keep certain things broken, but at least you can tackle other problems.

 

[StatGeek]

My problem with Tory is that he's so wishy washy on everything. I heard him make one of the best arguments AGAINST the Scarborough subway (comparing it to an airline operating cost of having jumbo jets going to Timmins) and now flip-flops and being for it. He seems to be easily pressured and very easy to pander to the loudest voice. There is always going to be some of that when dealing with politicians but he seems to have done it as a talk show host and politician much more than others.

For me he's in the same category as Stintz. Could be smart at times, but too inconsistent with his transport ideas.

 

[innsertnamehere]

Jumbo Jet planes to timmins is a horrible comparison, the subway will be fairly busy. the reason its so "bad" (its not as bad as people make it out to be either), is that an LRT can handle the capacity as well. (The ridership falls into the area where its busy enough for a subway but also empty enough for LRT)

 

[howl]

Jumbo Jet planes to timmins is a horrible comparison, the subway will be fairly busy. the reason its so "bad" (its not as bad as people make it out to be either), is that an LRT can handle the capacity as well. (The ridership falls into the area where its busy enough for a subway but also empty enough for LRT)

On that thought, I hope all the suburbanites in Scarborough realize that the LRT will create modest growth pressure along the transit corridor while the subway will result in much more growth pressure and very urban-levels of development. If you start flying taxpayer subsidized jumbo jets from Toronto to Timmins on a daily basis then Timmins may become a reasonable place to live or set up a business. Transportation is one of the main drivers of new development.

 

[salsa]

Jumbo Jet planes to timmins is a horrible comparison, the subway will be fairly busy. the reason its so "bad" (its not as bad as people make it out to be either), is that an LRT can handle the capacity as well. (The ridership falls into the area where its busy enough for a subway but also empty enough for LRT)

You really trust those ridership numbers? We've been fooled before with the Sheppard subway.

 

[innsertnamehere]

the ridership numbers for it are immediate (opening day), while Sheppard was justified using 20 year growth projections. big difference. Especially because sheppard projections had STC and NYCC at almost equal employment levels to downtown.

 

[Dan416]

The Bloor-Danforth extension has existing ridership from the SRT. Hardly comparable to the previous bus on Sheppard.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

As long as we are talking, I just want to say how I am still pissed Eglinton West is not being built right now. For the BD? I wish it was going up to finch honestly.

 

[MrsNesbitt]

As long as we are talking, I just want to say how I am still pissed Eglinton West is not being built right now. For the BD? I wish it was going up to finch honestly.

Agreed on Eglinton West; I'm not entirely sold on the BD extension but really as things go it's a better candidate for subway than, say, Sheppard. It won't be as bad as some think.

But the fact Eglinton isn't getting into Etobicoke, or especially the airport, is a shame.