Not quite. We are discussing catching up which is the first step to taking it seriously. Catching up requires finishing the detailed planning (thank you Ms. Wynne) and then digging deep holes. Memo to John Tory: Put this sticky on your mirror when you are shaving. "REMEMBER to talk to Kathleen and Justin about how many voters will be late for work for the next fifteen years without a RL. Emphasize how a city the size of Toronto needs a NETWORK."
Or, um, a region like the GTA!
Agreed on a terminus at Steeles (just not yet).
You can agree on riding unicorns. It's still never going to happen. and the irony is that the longer this goes, the more politically impossible it becomes, to say nothing of how untenable from a planning perspective.
An unbiased look at YNSE's numbers that takes into consideration the realities of overestimation, past "Centre" development proposals, historical evidence,
We're lucky to have you here for that - the one unbiased guy!
As for the point about YNSE's new yard near 16th Ave, I'd be interested to know how many are even aware of this change in plans. Last TTC estimate I saw pegged the project at $4.6bn (2016), yet recent YR/Mlinx quotes undercut this estimate considerably. Re: the possibility of a station at 16th...frankly I wouldn't doubt it will be added. Nor would I doubt another addendum that has the project terminating even further north.
There's no "change in plans." They did a study to figure out where to put the yard. that was its conclusion. So, to clarify - you think it should end at Steeles but may actually go north of 7. Sure, why not?
You've been writing more or less the same rhetoric for many years. You could be writing it for the next decade. Then it could be another decade before you're ever riding this train.
You realize, I'm sure, you're the pot to my kettle, right? My "dreams" of a subway up to 7 continue to inch ever closer to reality while your visions of Metrorail (or whatever it was) stopping at Steeles recede ever more into the mists of fantasy. I'm not bragging - not any more than if I looked out the window and saw it was dark at night while you went on and on about how much better it would be if only the sun came out at midnight.
You've also put considerable effort into insulting people and their "fantasy maps", trying to ensure that the Big Move 1.0 is carved in stone and will be built as envisioned.
a) surprisingly little effort but I'm good at being thorough
b) I never said that about Big Move 1.0 but I know you have to play that tune at every show, like how the Stones do Satisfaction. I wouldn't mind one concert where they didn't. Same goes for you.
But just for the 1000th time: I expect it to change, obviously plans change blah blah blah. But then you have to admit this project has NOT changed over a DECADE. it's still a subway, it's still going to Highway 7, it's still obviously a priority for the province and the region and is on the books with the city and there is no indication it's shifting any time soon.
Who cares what UTers propose? Crikey - you're arguing as if these things exist in the real world. I can spend all day devising trades I just KNOW the Blue Jays should make to win the pennant this year but I dont' work for the owners or the president or the GM and real people do and they don't care what I think. They're the professionals and they have their own maps and those are the only ones that count. This is just talk radio.
It's a great forum for discussing stuff and thinking outside the box, but a little perspective, please.
You argue those who think Steeles is an optimal/realistic terminus must move on from such fantastical beliefs. But again it could be 20yrs before anyone is riding a subway on Yonge north of Steeles.
I'd guess 10-15 but it's a red herring. It doesn't make sense from a political or planning perspective. Did you know that in the term "fantasy map," that FANTASY is an adjective that modifies the noun, MAP? Stop trying to explain to me that your fantasy is as viable as my reality. It just is not, even if it actually made sense and was a better idea than what's happening in reality.
Raise a reasonable question and I'll acknowledge it but I'm not ceding my grasp on reality to give equal weight to hypotheticals.
the modeling? Fine, it needs to be updated. But whatever the number is I guarantee it will be double SSE. There may be legit things to question or wonder about regarding the extension but low ridership is not one of them. Crikey, that's why they're building the DRL in the first place! It's all John Tory and his minions say on the news, over and over again, is that we can't build the extension because all the riders will overwhelm the system. It's a reasonable bet and the numbers aren't getting lower the more people move into the region.
We have a century of unbuilt transit plans collecting dust, and there's no logical reason that a $0.7bn/km deep bore subway extension to fields at Langstaff or a Montana's at Hwy 7 can't sit on a shelf alongside them.
And yet, $55M. All you dust-gathering projects that got $55M this week, raise your hands!
No - just the one I keep saying is real that 44north keeps saying isn't really real?
Oh, and there's a Montana's, a Kelsey's AND a Milestones. They've got it all up there, OK?
