innsertnamehere
Superstar
On the currently under construction part of the Crosstown, the HOV lanes will be eliminated. While the Eastern Crosstown may be different, I find it unlikely.
I agree; several times, when posting about the billions saved by skipping the overbuilt, unwarranted subway, they could easily add heated floors and infrared overhead panels to every LRT stop, and still have billions left over.
Ford's crazy hardball Politics basically saved Scarborough from a legacy of poorly FUNDED and designed transit.
At first , that was the plan. But the plan has since been amended to keep 3 lanes of traffic along the Golden Mile intact. So no, traffic lanes will not be reduced.
I'm skeptical as well. My original understanding was that, since there is a diamond lane on either side, those 2 lanes would be replaced with LRT, and so no practical reduction of lanes. If the plan is to have 3 full lanes each way and LRT, that's new to me.
Shame they couldn't have put in heated shelters. It would do a lot to change the perception of the LRT.
Your comment really hits home. For years, I've been one of those downtowners, sermoning any and all about the suitability of light-rail for Scarborough, pulling hard numbers out of my Evernote stash, and being quite testy at monosyllabic Nayshunals and their blind repetition of every LRT/subway lie thrown their way. (See? I'm getting testy even now.)
I've tried to get into the mindset of Scarborough and Etobicoke voters since Ford was elected. I would love for you to expand on what, in your opinion, drives these residents. What reasons do they have for opposing appropriate transit that would make much more of a difference to many more of them?
Thats the thing. People prioritize twice, three times as many and even four times as much square feet then a downtown person. So the downtown person is sacrificing space but is getting better access to things which are walkable and transit. You just cant have it both ways. This downtown living thing has only taken off in the last 15 years. Before that everyone flocked to the suburbs. But thats what happens. People move to the suburbs to have bigger house, and more cars, and more space to put more clothes. I guess if you are so used to having more you wonder why you dont have more transit. Oh wait I know why. You dont want more taxes.
If you want to look at it that way, then there really isn't a rebuttal. Scarborough residents have a legitimate beef. I don't blame them for being upset. With that said, as badly as we want subways city wide, nobody wants to pay for them. One of my Scarborough friends once told me he isn't interested in the big picture or city building. All he wants is a subway in Scarborough and for his property taxes to be kept low. Ugh.
Edit: I'll just add that this same person also told me that if McGuinty didn't cancel the gas plants, the money used could have funded a subway. I don't disagree, but the idea that politicians are perfect and that there will be zero waste from their decisions is not realistic. He also thinks he pays enough in Federal and Provincial taxes that there should be money to 'get a subway done'. More 'bang my head against the wall' inducing stuff. Bottom line is that if we want more and better transit we have to be willing to pay for it. The current funding just isn't there.
Is [LRT] something people feel good about using? I doubt it.
And the ever-popular "So it's okay for a resident of Scarbororugh to freeze his/her ass of in the winter in the winter with an LRT , whilst a downtown resident enjoys the comfort of a subway stop?"
Has anyone found the most effective rebuttal to this argument? Much opposition to LRT is emotion-based and the "freezing" argument is right up that alley.
Not that I agree with those who want to underspend, and I argue with all my friends and family who take this line..... But given how much Toronto gets fleeced for by the rest of Canada, there is some legitimacy to this argument. Why should a poor family in Rexdale be denied a somewhat comfortable transit ride just so the province can build multi-billion dollar highways up north to service less users than any of these subway would or the Feds can fund perpetual welfare communities in remote parts of the country, all with their tax dollars?
Why can't Scarborough have subways like they have in New York City, to protect us again the snow?
Because New York City's subway are all underground. No, they're not. Just like most of SmartTrack will be like, above ground.
This is common almost everywhere else in the world, and is one of the reasons why other cities have so much more transit than us. Digging under low density neighbourhoods in Scarborough and Vaughan is one of the reasons why we don't have enough money to build a decent transit network.Same goes for London. Subways in the core are buried. As you venture out they come above ground (at least the lines I travelled on). This really isn't a bad thing, yet so many people in Toronto think it is. We have such strong transit envy without even understanding what we're envious of.
The first issue that the space argument ignores: families. What percentage of families in this city, live downtown? We're only now seeing more families in the core. The bulk of families in this city still stay in the suburbs. It's easy to argue that you need less space to a single person and/or married couple. Less so to families with kids.
The second issue is incomes. And this is exactly the kind of talk that is going to elect the next Ford. I'll say it now. Here's why. Go look at incomes. Not the space they have. Scarborough is decidedly poorer and darker skinned that core. For every politician who will argue, "You made your suburban bed. Now lie in it." there will be a Ford-esque politician reminding these voters that downtown elites with six figure salaries and 20 minute commutes don't care about them. You want another Ford, keep pushing this line.....
The problem is one that if you look historically houses were once much smaller in size. People would raise children in 900 square foot bungalows in my area. Children would share rooms together on bunk beds. That was a common thing. Now people want all their children to have their own room, the man to have a man cave and who ever the cook is to have something that belongs on the food network for a kitchen. Almost all the homes in my area are from pre 1920 and I am pretty sure they all at one time had families. It was in the 1950s when everyone started to go after the leave it to beaver white picket fence suburban house.
The second issue I have with your statement is that you look at the prices of property for the downtown houses and say oh look you would have to be rich to live there. In reality though, those same houses were cheaper then their suburban counterpart 20 years ago because no one wanted to live in the city and the white flight thing happened, maybe not as bad as the states but it still happened. So now these families have made their decisions to buy in the suburbs and when market trends changed they are complaining that only the rich people live downtown.
Third, there are still plenty of houses in the junction or near eglinton and dufferin which are well priced. But the area is not trendy despite being somewhat close to downtown. Instead people would rather move to places with similar prices like brampton.