GenerationW
Senior Member
SOS has a map.
|
|
|
Whose vision of transit in Toronto do you support?
- Thread starter Dan416
- Start date
GenerationW
Senior Member
Nothing works for me. I bet the nothing vote would win if TC were to ever go to a referendum.
Hey, there's a transit vision I support -- referendums!
kEiThZ
Superstar
We are talking about supporting a vision here, not strictly about what's in play or implementable. Obviously that's going to be Transit City.
However, this is an important discussion to have. There is a strong possibility that a change in policy or direction with a new mayor could make Sheppard an orphan line....at least in Scarborough. That's why, it's extremely important to discuss our vision for transit at this stage before any shovels really hit the ground. There has to be transit vision that'll survive more than one administration. If that's not there, Scarborough will get another orphan line or two (if the next guy settles on ART Mk II for the SRT re-build). If that came to pass, it would be a disaster for Scarborough, nearly on par with the current SRT.
IMHO, there should have been a compromise plan. Some subway, some LRT. Unfortunately that didn't happen with TC, which in turn forced our hand. I honestly believe, that the planners of Transit City intentionally misled the public and the province. How else to explain costs ballooning from $6 billion to $15 billion before the first shovel is in the ground (water main movement and grade separation on Sheppard don't count...they had to be done). Had they said right from the start that they were going to spend $15 billion, people would be asking, why it was all going to suburban LRTs and why they weren't spending on at least partial subway extensions. They picked the routes, lowballed the estimates, and once it got rolling, started jacking up the prices.
Now we get new threats. If you don't build this, you won't get anything. Really? I don't buy it. Is anybody really saying, for example, no DRL if we don't build Sheppard? I want somebody to tell me how much the Sheppard LRT will help in the grand scheme of things. Nobody will diverting from any parallel avenues. It will still require some parallel bus services (ie. the 190). Yet, this is the most important priority for transit in Toronto, the sacred cow that can't be slaughtered? Are people so desperate to build something, anything, that they are willing to re-order their priorities to spend a billion dollars on not even the most highly trafficked or most urban avenue in Scarborough?
I don't buy the threats and fearmongering. We live in an era of Metrolinx. And transit has become important to every party in the political spectrum. The gridlock that will ensue if transit isn't fixed will be a threat to any elected government. That alone will ensure that whoever is in power will have to fund and build transit. The fact that Metrolinx is in control, also gives the higher levels of government peace of mind. It's no longer a mayor playing with his train set. And as long they feel they have control and some say, they'll be far more inclined to fund whatever we ask for (providing it's in line with their vision).
On the specific question here...I don't think TC was entirely a Steve Munro production. Steve is undoubtedly one of Transit City's biggest fans and proponents. But the mayor and his protege have more than their fair share of blame. I am willing to bet that the plan to cook the numbers and fool the province was entirely a Miller-Giambrone production. Ditto for the decision to ensure that subway construction in suburban Toronto would be all but be killed off by prioritizing potential subway routes for LRT construction. They played McGuinty and Metrolinx well. I'll give them that. Who else could have sold LRTs as a critical piece of a regional transit plan ensuring people can travel across the region? And who else could fearmonger like Miller? This is the supposedly transit friendly mayor, who when faced with a budget shortfall, threatens to close a subway line. With threats like that, no wonder people think it's Transit City or nothing.
However, this is an important discussion to have. There is a strong possibility that a change in policy or direction with a new mayor could make Sheppard an orphan line....at least in Scarborough. That's why, it's extremely important to discuss our vision for transit at this stage before any shovels really hit the ground. There has to be transit vision that'll survive more than one administration. If that's not there, Scarborough will get another orphan line or two (if the next guy settles on ART Mk II for the SRT re-build). If that came to pass, it would be a disaster for Scarborough, nearly on par with the current SRT.
IMHO, there should have been a compromise plan. Some subway, some LRT. Unfortunately that didn't happen with TC, which in turn forced our hand. I honestly believe, that the planners of Transit City intentionally misled the public and the province. How else to explain costs ballooning from $6 billion to $15 billion before the first shovel is in the ground (water main movement and grade separation on Sheppard don't count...they had to be done). Had they said right from the start that they were going to spend $15 billion, people would be asking, why it was all going to suburban LRTs and why they weren't spending on at least partial subway extensions. They picked the routes, lowballed the estimates, and once it got rolling, started jacking up the prices.
Now we get new threats. If you don't build this, you won't get anything. Really? I don't buy it. Is anybody really saying, for example, no DRL if we don't build Sheppard? I want somebody to tell me how much the Sheppard LRT will help in the grand scheme of things. Nobody will diverting from any parallel avenues. It will still require some parallel bus services (ie. the 190). Yet, this is the most important priority for transit in Toronto, the sacred cow that can't be slaughtered? Are people so desperate to build something, anything, that they are willing to re-order their priorities to spend a billion dollars on not even the most highly trafficked or most urban avenue in Scarborough?
I don't buy the threats and fearmongering. We live in an era of Metrolinx. And transit has become important to every party in the political spectrum. The gridlock that will ensue if transit isn't fixed will be a threat to any elected government. That alone will ensure that whoever is in power will have to fund and build transit. The fact that Metrolinx is in control, also gives the higher levels of government peace of mind. It's no longer a mayor playing with his train set. And as long they feel they have control and some say, they'll be far more inclined to fund whatever we ask for (providing it's in line with their vision).
On the specific question here...I don't think TC was entirely a Steve Munro production. Steve is undoubtedly one of Transit City's biggest fans and proponents. But the mayor and his protege have more than their fair share of blame. I am willing to bet that the plan to cook the numbers and fool the province was entirely a Miller-Giambrone production. Ditto for the decision to ensure that subway construction in suburban Toronto would be all but be killed off by prioritizing potential subway routes for LRT construction. They played McGuinty and Metrolinx well. I'll give them that. Who else could have sold LRTs as a critical piece of a regional transit plan ensuring people can travel across the region? And who else could fearmonger like Miller? This is the supposedly transit friendly mayor, who when faced with a budget shortfall, threatens to close a subway line. With threats like that, no wonder people think it's Transit City or nothing.
Last edited:
W. K. Lis
Superstar
HRT subway construction will continue with A.
nfitz
Superstar
The poll is a bit unclear. Steve has been against the Spadina extension in the past. And A says only Yonge and DRL. Stricly speaking, the way it's worded, if one is in favour of the Spadina extension (which I'd think anyone who ever tries to drive around that part of town in rush-hour is in favour of) then one could only vote B.
GraphicMatt
Looking forward to a FRESH START for Toronto
Making this a binary decision is crazy. Transit is all about pragmatism.
RedRocket191
Senior Member
+1
What if I want Transit City plus a BD west extension?
(option A says "basically Transit City plus subway expansion for DRL and Yonge only")
kettal
Banned
Most depressing post 2010
EnviroTO
Senior Member
The four funded projects have won the day and are advanced far enough (all funded, in engineering, two contracts out for Sheppard, one contract almost out for Eglinton) that I don't think they should be stopped. The next thing that should be focused on is the Jane LRT, Don Mills LRT, and Morningside LRT.
Personally I have no idea where the Jane LRT plan came from and I think it should be scrapped considering it simply dumps people onto the Bloor line at Jane station, meets Eglinton in a park which cannot be developed, and reaches York U where there is already a subway and when combined with the improvements called for in the Big Move including Georgetown corridor stations at Weston and Eglinton, St.Clair streetcar extension to Jane, Eglinton subway, Barrie corridor improvements, and Finch West LRT it is serving an area with many options already.
The Don Mills LRT should terminate at Eglinton and continue as the DRL subway into downtown and the north end should be bound for Markham Centre which is a "Places to Grow" centre. Leslie and Highway 7 aren't that far from Yonge where the subway connects them to VIVA so why send the Don Mills LRT line there when it isn't a "Places to Grow" centre?
The Morningside LRT should be scrapped. The Durham BRT/LRT will pass the UofT Scarborough campus so there is no point to the route considering Kingston Road should be getting either BRT or LRT from Victoria Park or Main station. The Eglinton LRT could be extended to Kingston Rd for connectivity.
The west side of the DRL should at least reach as far west as Humber Loop or Roncesvalles and Queen to prevent future Waterfront West and Queensway routes from needing to enter the congested downtown core by providing a transfer to the subway. Since there is no space in the Georgetown corridor for a subway and the Georgetown corridor will provide stops at Bloor, Eglinton, and Weston while the Barrie corridor provides stops at St.Clair, Sheppard West, and near Steeles and both corridors are slated for all-day service I'm not entirely sure a subway in the corridor is required. Once the corridors are electrified there is no reason, especially since GO has designed the Georgetown South corridor for two tracks per route, that GO couldn't eventually provide a frequent urban service making the idea of laying subway tracks in this area completely redundant. For this reason, and planned fare integration, I don't see a need for the DRL to go near the Georgetown corridor. I would send the DRL west to Kipling station, a "Places to Grow" hub with a GO station, and along the way it would provide access to the Waterfront West LRT at Humber Loop, and a Queensway BRT. Queensway west of Kipling and into Mississauga is ideal for BRT because there is very little urbanization potential considering the bridge over the railway tracks, the 427 interchange, and the hydro towers in the middle of the road.
The further north the DRL reaches the better the service the already funded east-west LRT lines will provide because the trips on the LRT will be shorter due to increased north-south connection options.
Personally I have no idea where the Jane LRT plan came from and I think it should be scrapped considering it simply dumps people onto the Bloor line at Jane station, meets Eglinton in a park which cannot be developed, and reaches York U where there is already a subway and when combined with the improvements called for in the Big Move including Georgetown corridor stations at Weston and Eglinton, St.Clair streetcar extension to Jane, Eglinton subway, Barrie corridor improvements, and Finch West LRT it is serving an area with many options already.
The Don Mills LRT should terminate at Eglinton and continue as the DRL subway into downtown and the north end should be bound for Markham Centre which is a "Places to Grow" centre. Leslie and Highway 7 aren't that far from Yonge where the subway connects them to VIVA so why send the Don Mills LRT line there when it isn't a "Places to Grow" centre?
The Morningside LRT should be scrapped. The Durham BRT/LRT will pass the UofT Scarborough campus so there is no point to the route considering Kingston Road should be getting either BRT or LRT from Victoria Park or Main station. The Eglinton LRT could be extended to Kingston Rd for connectivity.
The west side of the DRL should at least reach as far west as Humber Loop or Roncesvalles and Queen to prevent future Waterfront West and Queensway routes from needing to enter the congested downtown core by providing a transfer to the subway. Since there is no space in the Georgetown corridor for a subway and the Georgetown corridor will provide stops at Bloor, Eglinton, and Weston while the Barrie corridor provides stops at St.Clair, Sheppard West, and near Steeles and both corridors are slated for all-day service I'm not entirely sure a subway in the corridor is required. Once the corridors are electrified there is no reason, especially since GO has designed the Georgetown South corridor for two tracks per route, that GO couldn't eventually provide a frequent urban service making the idea of laying subway tracks in this area completely redundant. For this reason, and planned fare integration, I don't see a need for the DRL to go near the Georgetown corridor. I would send the DRL west to Kipling station, a "Places to Grow" hub with a GO station, and along the way it would provide access to the Waterfront West LRT at Humber Loop, and a Queensway BRT. Queensway west of Kipling and into Mississauga is ideal for BRT because there is very little urbanization potential considering the bridge over the railway tracks, the 427 interchange, and the hydro towers in the middle of the road.
The further north the DRL reaches the better the service the already funded east-west LRT lines will provide because the trips on the LRT will be shorter due to increased north-south connection options.
Towered
Senior Member
Pardon my ignorance, but why is Eglinton and Jane surrounded by acres of undeveloped parkland in all directions? There must be a very logical reason for that.
CDL.TO
Moderator
It's located in the Humber River floodplain.
Northern Magus
Active Member
So in other words, you and your Save our Stubways friends are simply trying to waste our time in order to indulge in pointless fantasy? Or ... are you really trying to get at something more?
Ah, allegations of corruption and malfeasance in the mayor's office and city bureaucracy?
All about Scarborough huh? Oh and btw ... do you know what a budget deficit is?
So Metrolinx are moronic puppets who'll throw cash at anything we ask for? Really?
Wow. If you're trying to make yourself look like a kooky conspiracy theorist, you're succeeding admirably. The ignorance behind your post is actually pretty breathtaking: before any funding is committed, all transportation projects are analyzed and vetted by the Ministry of Transportation's Policy and Planning division, which includes specialist branches in strategic policy and transit policy. So ... you're actually alleging that the planning departments at the TTC, City, Metrolinx and Province are simply rubber stamping robots who are too incompetent in their areas of expertise to even do proper due diligence?
Uh-huh.
Look, if you and your friends can tear yourselves away from SimCity and the Zapruder film long enough, maybe you should just run for office. Seriously. You have your platform, Rocco already wants to cancel TC, there's something like 7 or 8 open seats and 3-5 more are probably vulnerable, so take this to the people and let them decide. Otherwise you're 3 years too late with Save our Stubways and it's a pointless indulgence in wistful fantasy. So stop wasting people's time and do something constructive: walk your talk and run for office.
You've got the people and you've got the plan, right?
Northern Magus
Active Member
Actually the interesting thing is that even with 12-15 committed SOS members distorting the result with their votes, Option B still can't get a clear majority.
If you're trying to gauge the support of your group's plan among UT members outside of SOS, you should subtract their votes from the total.
Second_in_pie
Senior Member
Actually, you're right, they would be bias. In fact, anyone that agrees with the SOS plan would be bias too! I guess you'd just better subtract all the votes for B then
scarberiankhatru
Senior Member
Remember that there was no debate...Transit City was simply announced one day and funding was promised immediately after (the city knew money was coming, or it wouldn't have rewritten all of its plans and proposed the most expensive transit scheme in its history). This has happened before. Previous schemes that were heavy on the 'subway or nothing' side didn't fully materialize, only now, it's 'LRT or nothing.' Sorry downtown, you can wait. Sorry places like Finch & Warden, we'll try to get you a queue jump in a few years, if we don't forget, that is. Even with record levels of funding, Transit City is going down the same path as previous schemes of varying hare-brainedness, with some pretty big question marks surrounding at least 4 of the 7 lines...announced monies won't cover anywhere near all of it in the end due to some seriously escalating costs and seriously hasty plans. Government funding comes and goes like an unpredictable comet...parts of Transit City aren't moving forward because they're LRT instead of subways or buses or commuter rail or because of the lines chosen, they're moving forward *only* because billions of dollars - actual dollars - are flowing.
Re: Jane & Eglinton. Yeah, that parkland is where Jane meets Eglinton and where a Jane line would by definition intersect an Eglinton line, but, still, it's indicative of how little care we're giving to the location of our transit infrastructure. Something's wrong if the routes terminate and/or intersect in silly spots that do absolutely nothing for the city or if people are forced to transfer in some random spot just because that's where the money ran out back when there was no money. If we're going to have like six billion dollars worth of transit intersect in a place where there's absolutely zero people, it suggests that perhaps one of these lines isn't such a good idea. It's not like Jane is the next busiest route, or that its buses are the most dysfunctional, or that there's immense potential in ridership and development.
It really must be too much to ask that we plan based on what are the transit problems on Jane and how do fix these problems? rather than this part of the transit map needs a line drawn through it, so how do we best shoehorn an LRT line in on Jane?
Re: Jane & Eglinton. Yeah, that parkland is where Jane meets Eglinton and where a Jane line would by definition intersect an Eglinton line, but, still, it's indicative of how little care we're giving to the location of our transit infrastructure. Something's wrong if the routes terminate and/or intersect in silly spots that do absolutely nothing for the city or if people are forced to transfer in some random spot just because that's where the money ran out back when there was no money. If we're going to have like six billion dollars worth of transit intersect in a place where there's absolutely zero people, it suggests that perhaps one of these lines isn't such a good idea. It's not like Jane is the next busiest route, or that its buses are the most dysfunctional, or that there's immense potential in ridership and development.
It really must be too much to ask that we plan based on what are the transit problems on Jane and how do fix these problems? rather than this part of the transit map needs a line drawn through it, so how do we best shoehorn an LRT line in on Jane?