Toronto Ontario Line 3 | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx

[Whoaccio]

It's funny how the internet blogsphere regards him as some kind of Transit Deity/know-it-all, but the powers-that-be have continuously excluded him from participating in any advisory committees. You don't suppose it could have something to do with his views and overly critical attitude do you?

It probably has more to do with him being the transit equivalent of that pissed off housewife that shows up at every community consultation meeting going on about how whatever it is will upset her cats. At the end of the day, who the hell are they? I'm not trying to slag him, but he isn't a professional transport planner or engineer. He really isn't qualified to manage any kind of transit project. Its easy to write a blog about how this or that is great/awful but it's really just armchair. It's quite different to try controlling costs on a megaproject no matter how many times the word 'grassroots' is thrown around.

More substantially, I don't buy this argument some people have that Steve Munro is all of a sudden a fan of the DRL. Outside of the blogosphere, decisions have to be made in the context of other decisions. In other words, you can't boost a multi billion dollar transit megaproject consisting of running trams to the middle of nowhere while purposefully ignoring (in my view, at least) a far more important projects (the DRL) and claim to be for the DRL. You can, but we just had a transit spending bonanza and I never heard him saying 'wait a minute, maybe the DRL is more important than x,y,z', so why didn't he say it then? I am a fan of Ferraris, but if I spend all of my money on something else does it really matter what I think?

 

[LowerBay]

Sure beats a fetish about Lower Bay station!

Yes, I'm totally obsessed about Lower Bay. I blog about it like Steve does, and I've dedicated my whole life to watching its tiles rot. I also attend every TTC meeting and ask that it be un-mothballed. Get a grip.

We're talking about LRT advocates being out of touch with reality, and you're talking about a station and an abandoned section of track?

 

[Rainforest]

It probably has more to do with him being the transit equivalent of that pissed off housewife that shows up at every community consultation meeting going on about how whatever it is will upset her cats. At the end of the day, who the hell are they? I'm not trying to slag him, but he isn't a professional transport planner or engineer. He really isn't qualified to manage any kind of transit project. Its easy to write a blog about how this or that is great/awful but it's really just armchair. It's quite different to try controlling costs on a megaproject no matter how many times the word 'grassroots' is thrown around.

The problem with leaving all planning in the hands of transit engineers: where is the customers' input? It would be akin to calling a landscaping company to your house and letting them lay everything out the way they want, "since they are professionals".

More substantially, I don't buy this argument some people have that Steve Munro is all of a sudden a fan of the DRL. Outside of the blogosphere, decisions have to be made in the context of other decisions. In other words, you can't boost a multi billion dollar transit megaproject consisting of running trams to the middle of nowhere while purposefully ignoring (in my view, at least) a far more important projects (the DRL) and claim to be for the DRL. You can, but we just had a transit spending bonanza and I never heard him saying 'wait a minute, maybe the DRL is more important than x,y,z', so why didn't he say it then? I am a fan of Ferraris, but if I spend all of my money on something else does it really matter what I think?

The transit spending is probably not over, hopefully any next major bundle will include DRL.

Regarding Steve Munro's position, he recognized the need of DRL subway up to Eglinton ... but it is not fair to demand that he does all the heavy lifting. DRL has enough advocates.

 

[LowerBay]

It probably has more to do with him being the transit equivalent of that pissed off housewife that shows up at every community consultation meeting going on about how whatever it is will upset her cats. At the end of the day, who the hell are they? I'm not trying to slag him, but he isn't a professional transport planner or engineer. He really isn't qualified to manage any kind of transit project. Its easy to write a blog about how this or that is great/awful but it's really just armchair. It's quite different to try controlling costs on a megaproject no matter how many times the word 'grassroots' is thrown around.

More substantially, I don't buy this argument some people have that Steve Munro is all of a sudden a fan of the DRL. Outside of the blogosphere, decisions have to be made in the context of other decisions. In other words, you can't boost a multi billion dollar transit megaproject consisting of running trams to the middle of nowhere while purposefully ignoring (in my view, at least) a far more important projects (the DRL) and claim to be for the DRL. You can, but we just had a transit spending bonanza and I never heard him saying 'wait a minute, maybe the DRL is more important than x,y,z', so why didn't he say it then? I am a fan of Ferraris, but if I spend all of my money on something else does it really matter what I think?

The only way you'd know if Steve really supports the DRL is if they cancel TC to build it instead.

 

[Rainforest]

The only way you'd know if Steve really supports the DRL is if they cancel TC to build it instead.

Steve Munro has no authority to do that ... and even those officially in charge cannot do that (cancel the already funded Eglinton, Finch, or Sheppard lines). Even though DRL might be a better bang for the buck, outer 416 residents and their chancellors would feel severely shortchanged.

 

[Dan416]

Steve Munro has no authority to do that ... and even those officially in charge cannot do that (cancel the already funded Eglinton, Finch, or Sheppard lines). Even though DRL might be a better bang for the buck, outer 416 residents and their chancellors would feel severely shortchanged.

I'd be fine with cancelling Finch and Sheppard LRTs to fund the DRL. And so would a lot of other people. When Transit City first had that website of theirs, it asked which line people would probably use, and the vast majority selected Eglinton. Finch for me falls under "nice to have" but the Sheppard subway is already there, and could be extended in both directions rather than have a Finch LRT at this time.

And the DRL should be prio #1.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

Steve Munro has no authority to do that ... and even those officially in charge cannot do that (cancel the already funded Eglinton, Finch, or Sheppard lines). Even though DRL might be a better bang for the buck, outer 416 residents and their chancellors would feel severely shortchanged.

They most certainly would not feel that way unless told to feel that way by councillors, but the councillors could simply be told to feel a different way, as well, as was seen in something like the SRT replacement process.

If anything, suburban 416 folk would appreciate not putting up with years of construction for no end gains - and in the case of Finch East, possibly even a worsening of service. Do you really think people in suburban 416 don't use the subway system downtown? They probably use it more than downtowners do, who can walk or drive or cycle much easier.

 

[Second_in_pie]

I'd be fine with cancelling Finch and Sheppard LRTs to fund the DRL. And so would a lot of other people. When Transit City first had that website of theirs, it asked which line people would probably use, and the vast majority selected Eglinton. Finch for me falls under "nice to have" but the Sheppard subway is already there, and could be extended in both directions rather than have a Finch LRT at this time.

And the DRL should be prio #1.

I'd cancel the Sheppard LRT and the Finch East LRT to finish the Sheppard Subway to STC. I'd cancel the Waterfront West LRT and Don Mills LRT for DRL from Eglinton to Union. The Waterfront West LRT would probably be obsolete with a westward DRL extension, and Don Mills is the logical extension for the DRL northwards. Both these extensions would probably be funded in the future after Phase I is built. I'd also cancel the Scarborough-Malvern LRT and SRT Extension/Refurbishment for B-D to STC. I'd replace the Eglinton LRT with a subway from Don Mills to Keele, again to be extended with future funding.

If I'm not mistaken, those cuts/new projects should pretty much even themselves out. I figure that Finch West is the only LRT that really makes sense anymore, and I'm sticking with that story

 

[Dan416]

I'd cancel the Sheppard LRT and the Finch East LRT to finish the Sheppard Subway to STC. I'd cancel the Waterfront West LRT and Don Mills LRT for DRL from Eglinton to Union. The Waterfront West LRT would probably be obsolete with a westward DRL extension, and Don Mills is the logical extension for the DRL northwards. Both these extensions would probably be funded in the future after Phase I is built. I'd also cancel the Scarborough-Malvern LRT and SRT Extension/Refurbishment for B-D to STC. I'd replace the Eglinton LRT with a subway from Don Mills to Keele, again to be extended with future funding.

If I'm not mistaken, those cuts/new projects should pretty much even themselves out. I figure that Finch West is the only LRT that really makes sense anymore, and I'm sticking with that story

Or we can do that

 

[LowerBay]

Most people in the northern-416 don't really care about TC. If it was cancelled to build a DRL, I don't think they'd shed a tear.

 

[Rainforest]

I'd be fine with cancelling Finch and Sheppard LRTs to fund the DRL. And so would a lot of other people.

Assuming that it either one or the other - yes, DRL would probably be a better investment.

But, do you currently live in the north-west or north-east of 416? If not, than your opinion may not be representative. Not everybody travels downtown, and some people will feel jealous if the subway-rich downtown gets yet another line while their area gets nothing.

When Transit City first had that website of theirs, it asked which line people would probably use, and the vast majority selected Eglinton.

This is because Eglinton is the longest of TC lines.

 

[Dan416]

Assuming that it either one or the other - yes, DRL would probably be a better investment.

But, do you currently live in the north-west or north-east of 416? If not, than your opinion may not be representative. Not everybody travels downtown, and some people will feel jealous if the subway-rich downtown gets yet another line while their area gets nothing.



This is because Eglinton is the longest of TC lines.

Where I live is irrelevant. We don't build transit lines to serve each and every ward. Oh wait, yes we do. That's exactly what the TTC does these days.

 

[AKS]

I'd cancel the Sheppard LRT and the Finch East LRT to finish the Sheppard Subway to STC. I'd cancel the Waterfront West LRT and Don Mills LRT for DRL from Eglinton to Union. The Waterfront West LRT would probably be obsolete with a westward DRL extension, and Don Mills is the logical extension for the DRL northwards.

If they cancelled the waterfront west LRT, that would defeat their purpose of revitalizing the donlands. (Lower Donlands, East Bay Front) They're planning to house the olympic dorms at the lower Donlands. If they don't built waterfront west LRT, it will be hard for people to access, not many people would purchase there and their plan will fail.

 

[Second_in_pie]

If they cancelled the waterfront west LRT, that would defeat their purpose of revitalizing the donlands. (Lower Donlands, East Bay Front) They're planning to house the olympic dorms at the lower Donlands. If they don't built waterfront west LRT, it will be hard for people to access, not many people would purchase there and their plan will fail.

Umm are you getting West confused with East?

 

[nfitz]

If they cancelled the waterfront west LRT, that would defeat their purpose of revitalizing the donlands. (Lower Donlands, East Bay Front) They're planning to house the olympic dorms at the lower Donlands. If they don't built waterfront west LRT, it will be hard for people to access, not many people would purchase there and their plan will fail.

As the Waterfront West LRT runs from west Union Station, I don't know what it has to do with the Don Lands - which are East of Union.