|
|
|
Toronto's and Province's New 12.4B Eglinton/SRT/Sheppard Plan
- Thread starter adeel
- Start date
Dan416
Senior Member
I'm not a Ford supporter, and I can't defend this either.
k10ery
Senior Member
I see that if Ford goes ahead with tax increment financing for Sheppard, the MOU states that TIF will not include the education property tax. That was the last chance for Ford to get money for nothing here. In other words, Toronto taxpayers are paying for 100% of this boondoggle, no matter how Ford tries to disguise it.
I'm actually kind of glad this turned out this way. A boondoggle like this will be just what the city needs come the next mayoral election. The project will not be far enough along that any substantial money will be lost on it, but the project will be a showcase for Ford's stupidity. Adam Vaughan (as the next left mayoral candidate) will jump all over this.
If there's one thing that history has taught us, it's that really bad transit plans don't survive a municipal election (re: SELRT, Ottawa's first LRT proposal). By the time the next election rolls around, Ford's Sheppard project will be about at the point where he needs to start looking for funding commitments. When he hears crickets from the private sector will be around the time when the election is gearing up.
Ottawa's current LRT project was started immediately after the municipal election, and it took 1 term to get to getting the EA approved. Because work on Ford's Subway has barely started (almost 6 months after the election), I really doubt he'll have an approved EA in hand by the time he goes up for re-election. Without an approved EA in hand, and funding sources (more specifically, funding sources that aren't a shady back room deal with his developer buddies) secured, this project will be wide open for debate, and then a subsequent modification (truncated to just Vic Park, BRT on the rest for example).
I guess my point is that in order for this boondoggle to ever see a shovel, it will have to survive at least one more mayoral election, possibly 2. And if it continues to play out like this, Ford's plan could be un-ceremoniasly booted of the City's agenda, just like Ford will be booted out of his mayor's chair.
If there's one thing that history has taught us, it's that really bad transit plans don't survive a municipal election (re: SELRT, Ottawa's first LRT proposal). By the time the next election rolls around, Ford's Sheppard project will be about at the point where he needs to start looking for funding commitments. When he hears crickets from the private sector will be around the time when the election is gearing up.
Ottawa's current LRT project was started immediately after the municipal election, and it took 1 term to get to getting the EA approved. Because work on Ford's Subway has barely started (almost 6 months after the election), I really doubt he'll have an approved EA in hand by the time he goes up for re-election. Without an approved EA in hand, and funding sources (more specifically, funding sources that aren't a shady back room deal with his developer buddies) secured, this project will be wide open for debate, and then a subsequent modification (truncated to just Vic Park, BRT on the rest for example).
I guess my point is that in order for this boondoggle to ever see a shovel, it will have to survive at least one more mayoral election, possibly 2. And if it continues to play out like this, Ford's plan could be un-ceremoniasly booted of the City's agenda, just like Ford will be booted out of his mayor's chair.
M II A II R II K
Senior Member
LA's 30/10 plan does have a good political component to it as each mayor implements certain benchmarks to the improvements in transit that can be fulfilled within their terms and to get credit for it.
Automation Gallery
Superstar
Ford this, Ford that, what a freakin broken record..when Miller/Metrolinx announced this Eglinton transit project most people wanted it underground, they wanted the SRT to be an LRT..now that its going to be mostly underground and the SRT is going to be replaced by an LRT to the STC people are bitching that we are losing out on Sheppard, Finch, etc...which truthfully was all visionary and not set in stone. Dont get it.
Rainforest
Senior Member
Ford this, Ford that, what a freakin broken record..when Miller/Metrolinx announced this Eglinton transit project most people wanted it underground, they wanted the SRT to be an LRT..now that its going to be mostly underground and the SRT is going to be replaced by an LRT to the STC people are bitching that we are losing out on Sheppard, Finch, etc...which truthfully was all visionary and not set in stone. Dont get it.
The Eglinton project is sound, for the most part. However, tunnelling it between Don Mills and Kennedy, a section with arguably lowest ridership, is an expensive overshoot. Building those 6 km at grade would save about 1.2 to 1.5 billion dollars for other projects.
Dan416
Senior Member
I'd much rather the eastern section be above grade and use the savings to reach the airport. They could have built the western section in such a way to not get in the way of traffic but still be affordable and fast.
Eug
Senior Member
"Transit isn't about just about moving people from A to B... but about building the city."
- Hume
Seriously though, I would personally hope that whole Don Mills to Kennedy stretch is rezoned to support a better mix of commercial, retail, and residential development.
I asked Metrolinx and they responded saying that the intent is to connect up the western terminus of the Eglinton line Black Creek with the GO rail line to the airport. That's not in their April 28 summary, as they mention GO bus, but nonetheless that's what they said.
Last edited:
Dan416
Senior Member
M II A II R II K
Senior Member
Money can still be saved if sections were trenched or run parallel to the road outside. Especially in lower density areas.
Ed Drass
Active Member
Cringeworthiness notwithstanding, we got a difference in visions here. And it seems to be heavily informed by emotion. I cringe at the idea of soulless, gated high rise complexes. Where's the practical middle ground?
Is transport construction all about long haul? Does it play any role in serving the short-distance market, or is that for feet and bikes and cars? And what about economic development?
We appear to have swung entirely in favour of high-capital, high-density infrastructure development, leaving even minor surface upgrades blowing in the wind.
Perhaps the objection is to the state/the larger community having any say in urban design, which should be the purview or the private sector and their architects and engineers... Well, Sheppard is going to be so dependent on neighbourhood-transforming structures that we will be forced to consider how the corridor will function and yes, how it will look.
Urban design considers how people inhabit the space between buildings, and the effect of the visual and physical environment on our daily activities and experience. An architect can create a work of beauty, but is limited to the building's footprint. Who speaks for the impact of pleasing, vibrant urban spaces?
It seems to me surface transit upgrades change the scale of suburban avenues and benefit small and medium landowners more than large developers. If that's too government-interventionist -- to facilitate independent-type redevelopment through transport capital -- well then who is Sheppard facilitating?
It might be instructive to go for a walk in the Annex and then a take stroll in downtown North York, and consider that there may be a role for both long-haul as well as more intensive transit upgrades. Why does Finch have to be frequent bus stops in mixed traffic vs. 2km stop spacing? LRT or BRT within 416 is a compromise between doing nothing for surface and over-building subways.
-ed
Last edited:
Thoughtless Miscreant
Active Member
Hope you weren't expecting to use the Richview Corridor for that western section. http://stevemunro.ca/?p=5120
Dumbest. Decision. Ever.