I can second this assertion of Steve's opinion, as I have engaged in a discussion over the SSE with him personally. Based on that conversation though, he found the Ontario Line to be a bigger pile of horseshit and wasted money than a logically planned and built SSE. That's not to say it's his first choice of technology, but it certainly shows that a 3-stop SSE is not at all the worst thing to come out of the Ford Government. That being said, he still had his (very obvious) doubts over whether the project would be built.
We get it, a lot of people don't like this project, largely because it has Rob Ford's name written all over it. That doesn't mean there aren't a bunch of benefits to this type of plan. Remember, one of the selling points of the SSE when it was first proposed was that it would not require the shutdown of the SRT, which is huge in hindsight. 5 years of no rapid transit in Scarborough is clearly a non-starter when you factor in the fact that running buses would cost at least 120 million dollars (probably closer to 200 million or more with inflation), the lost productivity from using buses over rapid transit (Half a billion dollars at least), and the fact that a shutdown of this magnitude would displace at least 30 buses from other routes (including spares), the subway seems like the least intrusive option.
Again, I don't hate the LRT, I don't even mildly dislike the technology (I take Light rail every day to get to work), but I don't think it's the most economical option or the option that improves the commute the most along this corridor. What pisses me off about this whole debate is when people frame the light rail network as "The rest of the city wanting good transit for Scarborough." That's not how it works — we know streetcars don't necessarily work well in this city in a lot of areas (even with dedicated lanes), and we have no real idea how Light Rail will work in this city, so framing an unproven technology in Toronto as "the best option" is a load of horseshit.
We don't know the challenges of the technology, and whether or not it is truly the best option given the heavily integrated bus-subway network, and we don't know how the Crosstown will be affected. These same people (I'm genuinely not referring to anyone on this forum, rather some journalists and politicians) often argue that the Ontario Line should be run with subway rolling stock (which I more than agree with) because the line is important, has a significant rider base, and operational issues cannot be risked.
People also have to remember that most people taking a line aren't just saving 5-10 minutes of their day, but 5-10 minutes per trip. Some people make the trip 2-4 times per day, meaning the actual benefit per person adds up to between 10 and 40 minutes per day (with an average of honestly being around 20 minutes per day).
When we talk about Kitchener line improvements that will cost billions of dollars, we're totally okay with that even though the line serves less than 20K people per day, costs significantly more to operate (since it's regional rail), and will only save up to about 20-50 minutes of improvement along the commute (for a total of 600 people) per day. I'm not arguing that we shouldn't invest money in the Kitchener line, it has huge potential, but context is still everything, and sometimes we forget that other projects only come out as more favourable because of inherent bias, and the fact that user fees are much higher.
