Ford era begins in Toronto

[nicky10013]

Yes...what kind of automobile driver would want to put money towards alleviating traffic on the streets they drive on, hmmm....

Ford wasn't elected to clear up traffic, he was elected to slash the budget.

[BubberMiley]

This thread is funny, but I liked the movie better.

[Black Dog]

Cops not consulted on Ford's hiring plan

Following through on a campaign promise, Mayor Rob Ford has vowed to hire 100 more police officers as soon as he finds the cash.

But there’s one problem: the Toronto Police Service doesn’t want them

[Shady]

Cops not consulted on Ford's hiring plan

Damn. It's too bad Ford wasn't responsible for blowing (no pun intended) a billion dollars of tax money like you're favourite candidate!

[Black Dog]

Damn. It's too bad Ford wasn't responsible for blowing (no pun intended) a billion dollars of tax money like you're favourite candidate!

Obvious troll is obvious.

[Michael Hardner]

The odd thing is that Ford is pushing for ostensibly more expensive changes for transit, while Miller's plan was smaller and more practical.

But, hey, let's keep arguing the stereotypes.

I voted for a leftish 3rd party candidate, but I refuse to be pessimistic about the new mayor until he starts doing things that give me cause to be.

[Oleg Bach]

First mistake - getting that horribly dressed vulgar vain - dithering and withering old man DON CHERRY to assist at the cerimony is utterly out of touch with reality.

[Black Dog]

The odd thing is that Ford is pushing for ostensibly more expensive changes for transit, while Miller's plan was smaller and more practical.

But, hey, let's keep arguing the stereotypes.

Nothing odd about it. Ford's platform showed him to have almost no grasp on fiscal matters: why would transit be any different?

I voted for a leftish 3rd party candidate, but I refuse to be pessimistic about the new mayor until he starts doing things that give me cause to be.

The fact that he doesn't appear to know what he's doing and may actually be mayor in name only is prettty alarming, is it not?

[Shady]

Obvious troll is obvious.

Aww, no more fat jokes.

[Michael Hardner]

The fact that he doesn't appear to know what he's doing and may actually be mayor in name only is prettty alarming, is it not?

Not really. The last two US presidents were fairly unqualified for the job, but they had their strengths. If Ford listens at the right times, to the right people he could walk that line.

I always vote left-of-centre, but I wouldn't be surprised if there was indeed a 'gravy train' somewhere... dripping gravy...

I probably won't ever, ever vote for him, but if he lays off the most at-risk citizens, and doesn't cut core services and manages to get a subway funded and planned I will at least be impressed.

[Oleg Bach]

The dithering half senile Don Cherry totally destroyed the crediblity of the new mayoral administration....Lord Jumping dirty Jesus - the lunitics with an IQ of 5 have taken over our economic and social hub.

[nicky10013]

http://www.thestar.com/news/article/902903--don-cherry-rips-left-wing-pinkos-at-council-inaugural?bn=1

“Put that in your pipe you left-wing kooks,” hockey commentator Don Cherry told a shocked inaugural meeting of the new city council, blasting “left-wing pinkos.”

Cherry was Mayor Rob Ford’s pick for a “special guest” for the pomp-filled ceremony. Cherry turned up in a pink-and-white silk jacket and patterned tie that was eye-popping even for the famously flamboyant TV star.

[Black Dog]

http://www.thestar.com/news/article/902903--don-cherry-rips-left-wing-pinkos-at-council-inaugural?bn=1

Cherry, like our resident troll Shady, doesn't even fucking live in Toronto. It's like the further you get from the core, the dumber people get.

[guyser]

Cherry, like our resident troll Shady, doesn't even fucking live in Toronto. It's like the further you get from the core, the dumber people get.

You should see how dumb one gets by the time they get to London...oh wait, you already know.

[Jack Weber]

You should see how dumb one gets by the time they get to London...oh wait, you already know.

He is now "The Professor"...This is because he's so knowledgable about...Well...Nothing,really...

[Shady]

You should see how dumb one gets by the time they get to London...oh wait, you already know.

I'm smart enough not to live in shit-hole Toronto!

[Shady]

Cherry, like our resident troll Shady, doesn't even fucking live in Toronto. It's like the further you get from the core, the dumber people get.

Aww, somebody's still upset that the vast majority of Torontonians rejected the small core of know-it-alls who think they're allowed to govern by decree.

[Bonam]

Hmm I dunno much about Toronto but looking at a map of its Subway system gives me the impression that it has less routes and stations and less ridership than for example the Montreal Metro. Given Toronto's higher population, this cursory analysis would suggest that Toronto needs a major expansion of its Subway system to be competitive with Canada's other major cities in this regard.

As for streetcars.. they are an obsolete technology belonging to the 19th century. The point of urban rail transit is to get people around quickly, and to reduce traffic on the streets. Street cars traveling on streets do not get around quickly, since they physically move slowly, must wait in traffic and at lights, and they do not reduce street traffic since they travel on the streets. They do not seem to hold any particular advantage over buses (besides reduced energy use), in fact, they have many disadvantages, such as the need for additional infrastructure and the inability to adapt their routes in case of accidents or weather conditions. In contrast, systems like Skytrain and Subways can move unimpeded by lights at speeds of up to 90 km/h, moving people around the city very quickly and reducing street traffic.

[M.Dancer]

Well You know, I have always said, If Shelbyville can have a monorail, why can't we?

[daniel]

….

Street cars traveling on streets do not get around quickly, since they physically move slowly, must wait in traffic and at lights, and they do not reduce street traffic since they travel on the streets.

Typically, subway stations are two kms apart from each other. So unless a patron lives within 1km of a station, he or she is likely to get there either by car or by bus. If he gets to the subway station by car, he’s (and the subway plan is) not helping to ease traffic. And furthermore, he’s going to need a place to park his vehicle at a price. Currently the parking lots along the Sheppard subway line are closed to subway patrons during rush hour – makes sense, huh?

Secondly, if he takes the bus to the station, he’s going by a surface route which is what the Transit City already is.

Bus and streetcar stops are typically at every street block or two. These surface services are much more accessible to a lot of patrons than subway stations. A bus would take the patron to the subway station, but the streetcar would take the patron to his destination. And because of their ease of accessibility, patrons can easily visit businesses along the way. And because of their ease of accessibility, most patrons won’t need to drive to the streetcar stop. A streetcar carrying 100 riders can represent 100 cars off the road. That's one streetcar waiting at a traffic light instead of 50 to 100 additional automobiles doing the same thing.

Replacing Transit City with subways is not a km-by-km comparison. Subways cost 3x more than the Transit City plan. Building a subway would in fact reduce the geographic area of service and thus reduce the impact it would have on mitigating traffic congestion simply because its routes would be 1/3 that of the planned Transit City routes. Imagine replacing 50kms of service for 17kms.

And of course there's the wasted money for work already done and the impending penalties. Not a good start for a Mayor who is supposed to be a penny pincher.

Edited December 8, 2010 by daniel

[Bonam]

Bus and streetcar stops are typically at every street block or two. These surface services are much more accessible to a lot of patrons than subway stations. A bus would take the patron to the subway station, but the streetcar would take the patron to his destination. And because of their ease of accessibility, patrons can easily visit businesses along the way. And because of their ease of accessibility, most patrons won’t need to drive to the streetcar stop. A streetcar carrying 100 riders can represent 100 cars off the road. That's one streetcar waiting at a traffic light instead of 50 to 100 additional automobiles doing the same thing.

What does a streetcar do that a bus or two cannot? If what is needed is just more surface transit that stops frequently at convenient locations, simply increasing bus service seems like all that would be needed. If the goal is rapid transit with high ridership between high density hubs, then some type of light rail is needed. Obviously subways aren't meant to go everywhere where buses do, they are meant to go between locations where there is high enough demand to make them economically viable.

[M.Dancer]

Typically, subway stations are two kms apart from each other. So unless a patron lives within 1km of a station, he or she is likely to get there either by car or by bus. If he gets to the subway station by car, he’s (and the subway plan is) not helping to ease traffic.

Off course he is. His car trip is shortened.

Secondly, if he takes the bus to the station, he’s going by a surface route which is what the Transit City already is.

But his surface clogging travel is still shortened...

Bus and streetcar stops are typically at every street block or two. These surface services are much more accessible to a lot of patrons than subway stations. A bus would take the patron to the subway station, but the streetcar would take the patron to his destination.

That's quite the assumption. I take the streetcar to the subway, and given that most streetcars connect to subways, I assume I am not alone...

And because of their ease of accessibility, patrons can easily visit businesses along the way.

There is no difference between the subway or streetcar in this example.

And because of their ease of accessibility, most patrons won’t need to drive to the streetcar stop.

A streetcar carrying 100 riders can represent 100 cars off the road. That's one streetcar waiting at a traffic light instead of 50 to 100 additional automobiles doing the same thing.

On my way home, I have to take the subway to catch a streetcar...unfortunately, I often have to wait for the 3rd streetcar 'cause the first two were sardine cans..

[g_bambino]

Reading Cherry's speech, I had to wonder: is the man brain damaged? There's hardly a single coherent sentence in there. "But again, I was asked why I was asked. And I asked Doug, Rob, why?... And I could go on right now, all the millions and thousands of dollars he's gonna save and everything..." I used to look forward to Cherry on Coach's Corner; but, man, I think he's gone senile.

[BubberMiley]

Cherry and people on this board demonstrate in victory how truly classless they really are. Only right-wingers would ever shout "suck it!" when they win an election.

[nicky10013]

Hmm I dunno much about Toronto but looking at a map of its Subway system gives me the impression that it has less routes and stations and less ridership than for example the Montreal Metro. Given Toronto's higher population, this cursory analysis would suggest that Toronto needs a major expansion of its Subway system to be competitive with Canada's other major cities in this regard.

Toronto's subway system is by far the largest subway system in Canada. Bloor-Yonge station sees 500,000 people pass through it per day. The TTC as a whole on a regular business day carries upwards of 2 million people.

I think the subway needs an extension, but I don't think there needs to be a Sheppard extension. The Sheppard subway is already a subway to no where. It doesn't need anymore stations into Scarborough. If anything, it should be extended west so it'll connect with the Spadina section of the YUS line but even that is a tough sell.

As for other lines, what Toronto needs is the Downtown Relief Line. A wider U shaped line that will circle up from union to Dundas West and to Pape in the east. In the future, a line under Eglinton may make sense but considering bus traffic along Eglinton, a subway isn't anywhere close to being warranted.

As for streetcars.. they are an obsolete technology belonging to the 19th century. The point of urban rail transit is to get people around quickly, and to reduce traffic on the streets. Street cars traveling on streets do not get around quickly, since they physically move slowly, must wait in traffic and at lights, and they do not reduce street traffic since they travel on the streets. They do not seem to hold any particular advantage over buses (besides reduced energy use), in fact, they have many disadvantages, such as the need for additional infrastructure and the inability to adapt their routes in case of accidents or weather conditions. In contrast, systems like Skytrain and Subways can move unimpeded by lights at speeds of up to 90 km/h, moving people around the city very quickly and reducing street traffic.

Streetcars are great. I still take them every time I'm downtown. They're as fast as cars downtown and when they're placed on dedicated lines with no car traffic impeding them, they'll be faster than cars.

Edited December 8, 2010 by nicky10013