Transit City: All Those Comments

As regular readers here will know, I have had a running correspondence with several people about the fine details of engineering various parts of the Transit City proposal.  Enough already.  The issue is that this is a proposal for a network to get people talking about what transit can do on a large scale.

Yes, there are details to be worked out for various sections, but it’s not my job to run a one-man mini-EA for each route.  People get paid a lot of money to do that and I’m sure Transit City will keep them in small change for years.

I have a few comments still in the hopper about alternate routes and technologies, and these will be answered in due course.  However, I will henceforth delete without mercy [you have to imagine mad cackling laughter here] comments asking me about details of engineering various stations and bridges, among other things.  I think that’s been done to death, other readers are probably getting bored, and I have better things to do with my time.

To all of you who have commented, many thanks even if I don’t agree with you.  At least there is a conversation going on here.

Let’s not turn Transit City into an exercise in Toronto negativism where people spend their time finding all the things that might be wrong with a proposal and concentrate instead on how we can build a better transit system.

7 thoughts on “Transit City: All Those Comments

  1. One thing that is clear from the recent funding anouncements was that vision and years of hard work was the basis for all of the processes that received funding. We have seen a vision that is more than simply an engineer’s dream, and from a poll in the star 75% of the people who responded liked what they saw. We must now work towards integrating the vision into a plan that is ready to go when years from now additional money becomes available. We must convince ourselves that this is worth doing and push it for all it is worth no matter how long it takes. And who knows. It may not take all that long. Politicians are attracted to projects that have a strong broad support.


  2. Just as I predicted Steve … LRT overdose! Ah well, Harper didn’t send money for this project today, so maybe things will quiet down for a while.


    the anti-lrt subway big-got


  3. You can delete this comment (mad laughter is optional)…

    Sorry, and thanks for taking the time to answer them. I’m not sure it’s a case of negativisim — the plan seems so much more doable than drawing random subway lines on a map that it’s tempting to get ahead of oneself and actually imagine the thing built.


  4. What do you think the chances are of getting “neighbourhood” names rather than streets/ intersections for the few underground sections? Could be a great way to get community buy-in.

    Steve: This only works if the “neighbourhood” is very long established and the name doesn’t become obsolete twenty years down the road. Also, there is still a potential for confusion. Take Bayview and Eglinton for which there are several options:

    It is the site of the first strip mall in Toronto called “Sunnybrook Plaza”, but this will cause confusion with the hospital further north.
    There is a park on the south side of Eglinton, but if someone gets the bright idea of renaming it after Jane Pitfield, we would have to change the station name to match the new name of the park, and nobody will remember who Jane Pitfield is in a few years, let alone two decades.
    It is the start of Leaside, but really only east of Bayview. Leaside High School is just down the road. Would Leaside want to identify this corner as its station? What would the good burghers of North Toronto (west side of Bayview) have to say about this?

    Bayview/Eglinton may be boring, but it has the advantage of being accurate and unlikely to change.


  5. I do not really think that there are any real structural or engineering issues in Toronto that would be hard to overcome. Just watch frontier of Engineering on discovery and you know that there is away around just about any major engineering challenges.

    I found it interesting to note that there were no examples of north American LRT systems (Minnesota example). I think it makes a more interesting argument when you show american cities that have a got LRT or LRT in progress. Their experience with the automobile is more like ours. In Europe already a part of the community and cultural environment to have some sort of LRT system.


  6. Transit City is a plan that I hope goes through more than any other plan for the city. I went to the City Hall meeting on Wed. March 21/07 and saw councillors Giambrone, Mihevc and others look and talk so enthusiatiacally about this proposal that there was not word of dissent among all the councillors present. There was some discussion on some of the particulars of each route but all endorsed the plan as a whole — just a few kinks to work out.

    So proud of Toronto to put forward a truly attainable plan that touches all corners of this city. A truly democratic proposal.


Comments are closed.