It does not work like this.
I am glad they (the SOS) finalized their plan, but regard that plan as a prompt for the City Hall / TTC / Metrolinx to rethink parts of TC. No politician will take responsibility for cancelling all TC projects that are already in the pipeline.
Some sensible modifications of TC are possible nevetherless. IMO, that would be moving the subway / LRT transfer point on Sheppard further east (to Kennedy), and replacing Eglinton LRT with a subway that runs from Yonge to Pearson.
Reality check: Eglinton LRT
is a subway in the most important section of its route.
Ridership and a cost benefit analysis don't support building the rest of it underground.
And if your group is trying to deliver a prompt, it's going horribly wrong. Save Our Stubways is getting no attention beyond a small number of online transit geeks (myself included), and even then you''re failing to win over a majority of active UT members, even in an online poll with a strong self-selection bias for those in agreement with it. Outside of the immediate SOS group, reaction appears to be middling and mixed.
On top of that, no political candidates have aligned themselves with yourselves, let along a mayoral challenger. You've have received no media exposure. Nada. Unless you take the next logical step and run a slate of candidates, it's unlikely that this will change.
I believe SOS was right to present a plan that was the opposite of Transit City. Not because we don't believe in compromise, but because any compromise has to have the best elements of both plans. Had we started with a plan full of compromises, we would have simply ended with Transit City. In reality, we all fully expect that if we are successful all we'll get is compromises.
So there are compromises to make and that can be made. However, presenting a compromised vision to begin with is absolutely useless if you are trying to effect change.
What you're saying here is that the "plan" isn't really a plan that you believe in and stand for after all, but a bargaining chip. And anyone who wants your plan had better be ready for future disappointment once compromises are made: SOS is just another broken promise waiting to happen.
This makes no sense. Even if every member of SOS voted in this poll survey, that's only 16 votes. That'd mean, assumingly we all voted the same way (some SOSers might be less committed to the cause than others for all we know, or some just abstained from voting), 30 other non-SOS member forumers voted in favor of the SOS plan.
As usual, your analysis and reasoning are egregiously faulty. If SOS members aren't even bothering to vote for their own plan -- or are even voting against it as you have implied -- your group has even bigger problems that I thought. Good luck!
This only gives the official plan a 5 vote lead, all things fair and equal. That's its so close is indictative of just how many weaknesses there are in the established TC plan.
Um, no. Context is everything here: your group is unable to win over a significant plurality of UT members even though you've had a dedicated propaganda thread and been threadjacking for many, many months. Your group's spokespeople spew conspiracy theories,
engage in a "lynch mob mentality", and proffer arguments based on straw men, false dichotomies, double standards, and torqued stats. These numbers would be a big wakeup call to any reasonable person.
Given how ineffectual your group has been, if it is to have any hope at all, you'd better all run for office. Seriously. That way if you win, you win, and if not, the people have spoken. Realistically, you have little hope of influencing the public agenda otherwise.
That 15% of Torontonians might benefit from TYSSE but 85% would personally benefit from a DRL or Eglinton subway line is a reality lost on many Transit City supporters. The suburbs-dominated city council cannot see the woods for the trees.
The Spadina extension is unrelated to the LRT being built, and the tradeoff you suggest between it and a downtown line is a false dichotomy. An Eglinton subway (ie underground rapid transit) is indeed being built as part of the LRT. The stats you offer here are also torqued and misleading since you do not account for the number of Torontonians benefitting from both the Eglinton LRT and the Spadina Expressway.
And btw the reason that council is "suburbs-dominated", which you clearly imply is unfair, has something to do with a little notion called rep by pop.
I'm assuming anyone qualified enough to build/work on an LRT project is just as capable to build a subway. This mass unemployment you speak of is hypothetical at best. A few pipe relocations is not major too-far-gone-to-stop-now work that's been done, and consultants have been paid for their time.
"Mass unemployment" is yet another of your straw man.
I wish that transit planning and construction were as simplistic as you imply, I really do. You're talking about building a 32km subway line from scratch. It would involve halting everything, throwing out all the work and planning done and going back to the drawing board, allowing community groups to weigh in, plans to be drawn up, considered and discussed, budgets debated and approved by three levels of government and two transit agencies, and then $15-20b ponied up once adjusted for inflation. Good luck. You're looking at 5-10 years to start and 15-20 years to finish.
I'm sure you and your pals will counter with more pie in the sky dreaming, but the reality is that no government would be able to fund your luxury line for a very long time.
So don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
