allengeorge said:
I have to agree with @sixrings here. Notwithstanding BT’s incredibly impressive growth, the areas where those international students are is not downtown Brampton. It’s older, has far more long-term owners and the demographics are very different. Downtown Brampton has also struggled a lot to generate and maintain foot traffic.

Also, those international students aren’t gonna drive to Downtown Brampton to catch the GO, or take the LRT up from Steeles to do this. Far better to make it down to Bramalea.
Click to expand...

Algoma University's Brampton campus is downtown. It, too, has a lot of international students (which is probably why they're located in Brampton), but it's not a scam like the colleges; they are real university instructors using real classrooms and offering bit of student life. Yet I still wish the province didn't pull the rug out from under the Sheridan/TMU campus in 2018.
 
ARG1 said:
It’s a historic downtown with very limited roadspace that the city is interested in pedestrianizing part of. It’s not the greatest excuse, but it’s far from the worst excuse that has been made for burying a section. It’s no worse than burying the section of Eglinton between Mt Dennis and Bathurst that's for sure. It’s the same reason why burying the Yonge St Rapidway between Major Mackenzie and Levendale was on the books for a significant portion of the Yonge Rapidway's planning process.
Click to expand...
The only scenario in which a downtown Brampton tunnel is even close to being a reasonable idea is if they are planning density greater than the Golden Mile or Square One District. I don’t think we will see that much density in downtown Brampton.

Although I would certainly hope the Province is willing to push Brampton Council around a bit, considering they are giving them a huge carrot.
 
goodcitywhenfinished said:
The only scenario in which a downtown Brampton tunnel is even close to being a reasonable idea is if they are planning density greater than the Golden Mile or Square One District. I don’t think we will see that much density in downtown Brampton.

Although I would certainly hope the Province is willing to push Brampton Council around a bit, considering they are giving them a huge carrot.
Click to expand...
This could be what Brampton needs to do just that.
 
micheal_can said:
This could be what Brampton needs to do just that.
Click to expand...
Any real density for the area will be north of CN Bridge, west of the Downtown 3 blocks, east of CN bridge over Queen. You may see some density in the southeast area on the southside of the CN Queen bridge. To put density in the existing blocks of the Downtown will be hard if you are retaining the existing buildings.

If Rotterdam can do this on the same size as Brampton Street, then Brampton can do it. This is an S shape street at this location and became straight to the left that we walked along in 2022. Yes, transit will run in mix traffic for 2-3 blocks that will not be a killer.
 
drum118 said:
Any real density for the area will be north of CN Bridge, west of the Downtown 3 blocks, east of CN bridge over Queen. You may see some density in the southeast area on the southside of the CN Queen bridge. To put density in the existing blocks of the Downtown will be hard if you are retaining the existing buildings.

If Rotterdam can do this on the same size as Brampton Street, then Brampton can do it. This is an S shape street at this location and became straight to the left that we walked along in 2022. Yes, transit will run in mix traffic for 2-3 blocks that will not be a killer.
Click to expand...
We
Are
Not
Europe.

China can build an LRT within a year. That does not mean we can, or should.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: T3G
micheal_can said:
We
Are
Not
Europe.

China can build an LRT within a year. That does not mean we can, or should.
Click to expand...
If it can be done elsewhere, it can be done here, other than sticking their head in the sand and saying subway is the way to go. Norfolk Viginia Tide has something like this.

NA
Cincinnati

Norfolk 2014
 
Last edited:
sixrings said:
I was waiting for the anti Europe transit to come out despite the fact they have it figured out.
Click to expand...
I know they have. And so has China. However,I am not anti anywhere else. I just know that their politics is different than ours,and that makes the difference. Maybe if we swing a lot more to the left those things could happen. Or, we swing to the point of one party and only one party in charge, it could happen.
 
micheal_can said:
I know they have. And so has China. However,I am not anti anywhere else. I just know that their politics is different than ours,and that makes the difference. Maybe if we swing a lot more to the left those things could happen. Or, we swing to the point of one party and only one party in charge, it could happen.
Click to expand...
You think we should cater to the subways subways subways crowd. Or you think it’s easier to do that then to just stand up to them and say this is it despite the fact transit elsewhere suffers. That’s your winning strategy?
 
  • Like
Reactions: T3G
sixrings said:
You think we should cater to the subways subways subways crowd. Or you think it’s easier to do that then to just stand up to them and say this is it despite the fact transit elsewhere suffers. That’s your winning strategy?
Click to expand...
I think we should cater to what works for the area and the citizens that live and work there. So, if a section of it does not work for surface LRT for the citizens that live and work there, then we should not build a surface LRT. That is how simple I see it.
 
micheal_can said:
I think we should cater to what works for the area and the citizens that live and work there. So, if a section of it does not work for surface LRT for the citizens that live and work there, then we should not build a surface LRT. That is how simple I see it.
Click to expand...
But it can work for the area. The studies show that. And the previous city council was split almost right down the middle. If it was clear that it should have been underground then that would have been proposed no different than the middle section of eglinton and the council would have outright voted unanimously against it.. But it wasn’t a clear cut favourite in regards to going underground at the extra billion or two it takes to build it.

Once again every time we over build and throw billions away at making those who have no vision happy we are taking money off the table for other worth while projects.
 
sixrings said:
But it can work for the area. The studies show that. And the previous city council was split almost right down the middle. If it was clear that it should have been underground then that would have been proposed no different than the middle section of eglinton and the council would have outright voted unanimously against it.. But it wasn’t a clear cut favourite in regards to going underground at the extra billion or two it takes to build it.

Once again every time we over build and throw billions away at making those who have no vision happy we are taking money off the table for other worth while projects.
Click to expand...
So, we should ignore all the people who want it underground? If I lived in that area,I would hate "the government" shoving the cheapest option in just because it is the cheapest option.
 
micheal_can said:
So, we should ignore all the people who want it underground? If I lived in that area,I would hate "the government" shoving the cheapest option in just because it is the cheapest option.
Click to expand...
It isn’t the cheapest option. The bus is the cheapest option. You want to buy the most expensive option. If I was in the area I wouldn’t want my taxes to go to that.
 
micheal_can said:
The cheapest rail option.....
Click to expand...
A streetcar without its own lanes would technically be cheaper. Those curbs stopping traffic costs monies.

Does Brampton want elevated right down the middle of their Main Street. Sure built that and tell me how that goes for you.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top