MrGoose
Active Member
You keep saying this but this is a meaningless statement. How does Metrolinx design infrastructure in cooperation with local communities? How does that work and how does that square with trying to keep projects in budget, and on time and retain infrastructure effectivity? Is ML supposed to ask communities for where they are permitted to build infrastructure. Will the community themselves pay for the extra 800 million dollars to bury the OL in their neighbourhood? Because if you let every NIMBY give input on where your train line is going to go, its how you end up with shit like the EWLRT being buried, or the 3 stop SSE extension.2) & 3) None of this seemed to matter when the discarded the previous plan to build a new one (the OL). If Metrolinx had designed this plan in cooperation with local communities instead imposing their will on them, we'd probably see much less resistance.
Of these 3
1. Transit Line efficiency
2. Cost Control
3. Community (NIMBY) input
you can pick 2 when you build infrastructure of any kind.
The community is voicing their concerns, it's what all these open houses have been.The community has no right that their concerns be taken seriously if their concerns are not serious.4) It is important that communities are able to voice their concerns and that they're taken seriously. I'd also argue that many of their concerns are valid, especially when it comes to safety. I do not live in the area and I'm in favour of not using the GO corridor for practical reasons.
When it comes to safety, give reasons specifically why. Just saying "I'm scared of the new trains running through my neighborhood" isn't a valid concern. It's paranoia and/or fearmongering.
With proper maintenance, overground trains have been running safely and amicably in and around residential neighborhoods for hundreds of thousands of train-running hours.