JGHali
Active Member
Oh are they? Leaving it to Metrolinx, we would be paying some kind of "premium" fare for subway travel. We shall see.
Otherwise, the public transit tax credit was eliminated in the 2017 Liberal budget.
|
|
|
Oh are they? Leaving it to Metrolinx, we would be paying some kind of "premium" fare for subway travel. We shall see.
Otherwise, the public transit tax credit was eliminated in the 2017 Liberal budget.
OneCity
Senior Member
He's battling cancer.
FWIW his likely incumbent is very much pro subway
https://seanmarshall.ca/2015/02/17/mapping-the-2014-toronto-election-wards-43-and-44/
JGHali
Active Member
Specifically, she supports a three-stop subway extension:
http://torontoist.com/2014/09/meet-a-council-candidate-jennifer-mckelvie-ward-44/
http://torontoist.com/2014/09/meet-a-council-candidate-jennifer-mckelvie-ward-44/
OneCity
Senior Member
She's completely on board with Tory's plan as long as the Eglinton East LRT is included. And I think there is a substantial number of Scarborough residents in the same camp who will have no interest in the one stop without a firm commitment to Eglinton East from the Province.
Last edited:
Palma
Senior Member
too bad someone did not play it on council for all to see
Leo_Chan
Senior Member
Is there any chance that Mayor John Tory is secretly regretting his SmartTrack plan? He doesn't want to reveal that the thing that got him elected was a bad idea.
rbt
Senior Member
It wasn't a bad idea; he just doesn't have nearly as much money to work with as he need (or hoped for).
His original cost estimate was $8B in addition to the provinces RER investments. Tory doesn't have much more than $1B to work with. So, no quadtracking Lake Shore East ($1B) or Stouffville ($1.5B) or ...; and without that you get 15 minute frequencies.
The general concept of 5 minute frequencies on a grade separated surface corridor isn't a broken one. We achieve it on Lake Shore for a small fraction of the day, it can be done elsewhere too. It's not free but it's not terribly expensive (versus tunnelled) either.
Last edited:
APTA-2048
Senior Member
Well thats what I mean. The downtown needs to realize/accept that people in the suburbs want a fast convenient connection to the core and other destinations. The way the suburbs are laid out mean that the distance for even local trips can be large. At the same time, the suburbs need to understand/accept that the car is not king downtown. With the density, walking, cycling, and public transit are way more efficient and should be given priority.
Midtown Urbanist
Superstar
That would be an interesting compromise.
We allow this one-stop subway to happen, Scarborough wants it after all. In turn, Scarborough councillors do not get in downtown's way when it comes to approving bike lanes, transit malls, and raildeck parks.
But "muh car".
pman
Senior Member
We all need to accept that we have limited transit investment dollars and a growing population. If we continually allocate what little capital we have to projects that will move the fewest riders for the highest cost, then we shouldn't complain when mobility gets worse and worse. If we continually choose the wrong mode for a particular purpose, specifically tunnelled subway to low density areas fulfilling a function properly served by surface commuter rail, we shouldn't complain when we're incapable of funding anything like the transit we need. If we continually build the most transit to the lowest density sites on the grounds that some day in the future they'll have sufficient development, while we ignore already heavily developed sites like Liberty Village or Queen east of Carlaw, where commutes are already an absolute misery for tens of thousands of people, then we're idiots who pander to the worst in Ford-Nation suburban identity politics.
junctionist
Senior Member
It would be rich to tell Scarborough that spending several billion dollars on a subway extension is a waste, but spending several billion on a downtown raildeck park is fine. It would make people more sympathetic to the old Ford Nation slogans, even if LRT would in fact represent a better use of transit funding in Scarborough.
Leo_Chan
Senior Member
How about how he is not willing to give up SmartTrack to fund the 3 stop extension, but instead keeping SmartTrack and reducing to a 1 stop extension? Would that be admitting defeat? Since having more stations for SmartTrack will acutally reduce ridership and increase congestion, diverting those extra stations and funds to the subway would be better.
Midtown Urbanist
Superstar
I guess the nuance that most of the raildeck park money would be coming from different sources would be lost on the average voter.
But we can forget that for now. I would still like to add more cycling infrastructure on downtown streets, eliminate cars from King Street and reduce Yonge Street to two lanes south of Wellesley. Add implementing road tolls to the Gardiner to that list too. I don't think that is an unreasonable set of demands considering that our property taxes are going up to fund a white elephant subway no expert endorses because of Scarborough's feelings.
pman
Senior Member
Sadly, the Wynne government is for SSE and against road tolls, so nothing sane could happen on transit without a change of provincial government. Probably not then, either.
OneCity
Senior Member
I found it funny he voted Yes to study the design for the Lawrence stop. That should hint how tied he is to Smarttrack in the long run. If he wins the next election I could see him just letting it fade as GO RER proceeds as per the original plan. If the following plans of DRL, SSE and both Eglinton East and West LRT's proceed uninterrupted and have funds committed by election time he will have pretty good support. People elected him for less polarization and action. Whether we agree with his plan or not, he might offer the best chance for action this decade. The alternatives require pause, further studies, likely new EA's and a new start to the endless circle of rage and debate that our Politicians have made a custom.
Last edited: