Palma
Senior Member
Protected for or from what? How is anything in Toronto protected when you constantly hear about developers going to the OMB and re-zoning?
|
|
|
OneCity
Senior Member
Standard protocol. Serious alternatives to the ideology in power only come during elections.
- The only way it will be above ground is if the subway Opposition candidate proposes it and cancels ST
- The only way it will have stops in the tunnel is if a Ford like candidate proposes it and cancels ST
- Otherwise if Tory is re-elected I see little reason why we wont be under construction for the one stop, ST, and Eglinton East
- The SLRT is very unlikely but ill put it here because some still like it but dont ever see it going past Scarborough council without chaos.
Cobra
Senior Member
No clue but that what city planners said. Can't rezone the industrial area in the SRT corridor according to them
Hopkins123
Senior Member
Kennedy Station is not a destination, there's no reason to arbitrarily end a line there if most of the commuters heading there are through riders en route to other places: to western 416 or Scarborough Town Centre in the reverse.
If the Bloor-Danforth was already a light rail, the decision to continue an extension of a one-seat ride through to SCC would be so widely acceptable it'd already in be operation by now. The rub is in forcing commuters en masse to transfer services.
A reasonable compromise would have been the LRT fans accepting that the S(L)RT is not worth the effort to fight, and put their efforts towards seeing a surface subway in the SRT corridor instead that could fulfill the 7-stop coverage that the light rail would have provided had they gone with that. The as-of-yet not-built section between SCC and Malvern could just as well be built as an elevated/partially tunneled subway as it could have been an elevated/partially tunneled light rail. Then they could fight easier, more winnable battles like ensuring the Eglinton East LRT gets built.
But no, the debate has primarily boiled down to technology rather than what the debate should have been about: customer convenience - what offers the best metrics for speed, carrying capacity, frequency, uninterrupted one-seat travel, and potential for future growth and development of surrounding areas.
salsa
Senior Member
So just to clarify, all of you want politicians to be the ones literally designing a transit line. Politicians.
And instead of asking the rabid subway supporters to find a way make their subway work, it's councillor Matlow who's supposed to do that for them? Is that what you're implying, Cobra? That's exactly what he tried to do when he passed a motion a few months ago to study the feasibility of a surface subway. “This motion is not a debate between LRTs and subways — this is a question, if we are able to build a subway to the town centre is it possible to do that and save hundreds and millions of dollars?” Why did this effort have to come from Matlow, of all people? Where were all the so called 'fiscal conservatives' when you need them?
Meanwhile, thus far the subway councillors make it clear that they refuse to have the SRT shutdown for an extended amount of time. They went apeshit over the possible expropriation of a shitty strip mall and a couple of houses. Their sacred woodlot shall not be touched under any circumstances. If that's too much for them, then there is no way they will agree to have an entire road torn up by cut-and-cover construction, or impose an elevated structure next to peoples' homes. So how is one supposed to "compromise" with these people? The best effort to date was the one-stop subway + Eglinton LRT package, but that deal has quickly fallen apart because of the cost. Now guess which side is not keeping their end of the bargain? For starters:
- The provincial Liberals refuse to provide more funding for Eglinton
- Glen De Baeremaeker, who claims to support Eglinton, tried unsuccessfully to get all of Ainslie's motions ruled out of order and prevent the project from advancing
- Eleven councillors (all of which support the subway) voted against one or both of Ainslie's motions
- Glen De Baeremaeker, who claims to support Eglinton, tried unsuccessfully to get all of Ainslie's motions ruled out of order and prevent the project from advancing
- Eleven councillors (all of which support the subway) voted against one or both of Ainslie's motions
I agree that the LRT advocates can do better. But how about you say a few words about the subway or nothing idiots who have proven to be the real obstructionists to transit in this city. Who don't care what happens to other transit lines as long as Scarborough gets a subway and that's all that matters. No matter what cost, shape or form it comes in. And even when it's built, those councillors will never be satisfied until they get the Sheppard subway too.
salsa
Senior Member
No it wont. You're just making that up. It's been studied already and much of the line would still require plenty of tunnels and trenches, unless you rebuild Kennedy station. Among many other things: the GO tracks must be shifted east to the current RT ROW. The stations must be demolished entirely (instead of just retrofitted) and rebuilt to fit subway trains. Lawrence station would be moved to the other side of the GO line and require some additional property. The elevated guideway would have to be rebuilt for subway trains and wider curves.
Same cost as LRT? I don't think so.
Attachments
denfromoakvillemilton
Senior Member
Member Bio
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2008
- Messages
- 7,496
- Reaction score
- 1,556
- Location
- Downtown Toronto, Ontario
This is coming next and we'll all be back here in a year talking about this.
micheal_can
Senior Member
Would a 3 stop Line 2 extension to STC and a 5-7 stop Line 3 extension be a bad thing?
Leo_Chan
Senior Member
Watch them save costs and have an "express subway" from Don Mills to STC. I know this is extremely unlikely to happen, but just a what if?
TOareaFan
Superstar
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Rainforest
Senior Member
Obviously, politicians are not expected to do the technical design. They have to give the city staff the list of options that are acceptable for the majority of Council, i.e. for the majority of City's voters. Then the city staff can select the best of those options.
Exactly. At that time, Matlow did the right thing.
However, your previous sarcastic remark suggests that he shouldn't have done that.
To be fair, the city staff recently studied the surface subway option anyway. They found that it will be cheaper, but not that much cheaper, something like $200 or $250 million.
BurlOak
Senior Member
Here is how the past 8 years have gone. between the LRT supporting downtown and Borough who want transfer free ride.
Downtown: must have LRT with transfer.
Boroughs: want transfer free ride.
Downtown: transfer LRT only solution.
Boroughs: how about connected SRT/ECLRT.
Downtown: transfer LRT only solution.
Boroughs: how about B-D subway to Sheppard.
Downtown: transfer LRT only solution.
Boroughs: how about 1 of 9 other subway extensions to STC.
Downtown: transfer LRT only solution.
Boroughs: only thing left is 1 stop SSE
Downtown: transfer LRT only solution.
OneCity
Senior Member
The City has recently taken a serious stance against re-zoning business, commercial or any lands for residential. I would love to think they have a long term plan but as we see here that is questionable. These are mainly manufacturing lands and manufacturing is never going to be what it was and likely never not coming back in anyway that will be significant with the cheap labour, and lower hydro costs available in the global market.