News   Jul 19, 2024
Menkes' Maison 77 Clarendon Topped Off in South Hill
 597     0 
News   Jul 19, 2024
TTC's Next Big Step: Replacing Rick Leary
 2.8K     6 
News   Jul 19, 2024
Third Phase of Quad Residences Advances at York University
 900     2 

Danforth Line 2 Scarborough Subway Extension

Rainforest said:
I think, it says a lot about Rob Ford and his management skills :) In just over a year, he managed to bring the normally docile majority to a state where they happily voted against him en masse.

A mayor worth his salt usually avoids open confrontation on the council floor. Looking at either the Miller or Lastman years, it was a lot more quiet and they worked with the councilors before actually putting anything up to a vote.
Click to expand...

Reminds me of a quote from when I was in University, I forget who it was actually attributed to though: "We don't need a Strong Mayor system. We need a strong Mayor."

The system doesn't need to be reconfigured to give the Mayor more power. The Mayor just needs to be able to build consensus.
 
TheTigerMaster said:
It's essy: for this to be built the city has to step up to the plate with it's own funding. Once that funding is withdrawn, we revert back to the SLRT.
Click to expand...

Or once the funding required goes over the amount the City has committed. If that is the case, someone should propose that any cost overruns will be borne by a Scarborough-specific tax hike. Support for the subway in Scarborough will drop like a rock once Ford Nayshun realizes that you actually have to pay for stuff like this.
 
A Scarborough-specific tax hike is as bad an idea as tolls on Toronto highways for 905ers. It's just ridiculous and hare-brained.
 
Coruscanti Cognoscente said:
A Scarborough-specific tax hike is as bad an idea as tolls on Toronto highways for 905ers. It's just ridiculous and hare-brained.
Click to expand...

I'm not too sure about that. The Scarborough situation is unique, because they had a perfectly workable transit solution in the works, and they chose to switch to a more expensive solution, which is being covered by the entire city. If the costs end up being even higher than what has been budgeted, I don't think it's unreasonable to ask the people who will be benefitting from that infrastructure most to pay the delta (cost overruns).

The idea of tolling 905ers only isn't exactly comparable because the 905ers haven't turned down a cheaper infrastructure option in favour of a Cadillac option.
 
gweed123 said:
Or once the funding required goes over the amount the City has committed. If that is the case, someone should propose that any cost overruns will be borne by a Scarborough-specific tax hike. Support for the subway in Scarborough will drop like a rock once Ford Nayshun realizes that you actually have to pay for stuff like this.
Click to expand...

Oh I wouldn't hit the entire Scarborough - just the section that is x-km away from the new route and ones with extant connector lines to the stations. Let Scarborough sort out the cost-benefit among themselves.

BurlOak said:
Another option is to find a solution within the available budget.
Click to expand...

Well, the option of reusing the old alignment and old infrastructure has already been turned down for not being underground.

AoD
 
Last edited:
AlvinofDiaspar said:
Oh I wouldn't hit the entire Scarborough - just the section that is x-km away from the new route and ones with extant connector lines to the stations. Let Scarborough sort out the cost-benefit among themselves.
Click to expand...

That's a good point. Perhaps a diminishing tax increase as distance away from the proposed line increases.
 
gweed123 said:
That's a good point. Perhaps a diminishing tax increase as distance away from the proposed line increases.
Click to expand...

Oh and if possible I would ding single detached housing along the route the hardest - you can't expect subway and want to stay in that housing format. It's like the worst argument ever.

Come to think of it, I think we should apply this model for ALL transit projects - that the city as a whole will pay for a certain base level, with the neighbourhoods/areas benefiting from the new/improved transit providing a surcharge. If it is DRL, it will be downtown that pays, etc. The free for all is a truly awful arrangement that creates a vicious cycle of irresponsibility on someone elses' dime.

AoD
 
Last edited:
AlvinofDiaspar said:
Oh and if possible I would ding single detached housing along the route the hardest - you can't expect subway and want to stay in that housing format. It's like the worst argument ever.

Come to think of it, I think we should apply this model for ALL transit projects - that the city as a whole will pay for a certain base level, with the neighbourhoods/areas benefiting from the new/improved transit providing a surcharge. If it is DRL, it will be downtown that pays, etc. The free for all is a truly awful arrangement that creates a vicious cycle of irresponsibility on someone elses' dime.

AoD
Click to expand...

I agree with that, to a certain extent. I do think that the people who will be benefitting most from a new line (both in terms of convenience and in real estate values) should be paying a greater share of the cost of that infrastructure. I suppose the argument can be though that their property values will naturally increase as a result of the infrastructure being in place, which will in turn increase the amount they pay in taxes. In that case, the distance-based formula for tax increases is largely based on market forces instead of being instituted as a fixed rate increase.

Of course, this is the principle that TIFs already use. Thinking about it more thoroughly, perhaps a TIF put in place along the Scarborough Subway route (or any subway route) would be the best course of action for raising additional funds if there are cost overruns. However, a TIF being successful along that route would certainly require densification in order to maximize additional tax revenue.
 
gweed123 said:
I'm not too sure about that. The Scarborough situation is unique, because they had a perfectly workable transit solution in the works, and they chose to switch to a more expensive solution, which is being covered by the entire city. If the costs end up being even higher than what has been budgeted, I don't think it's unreasonable to ask the people who will be benefitting from that infrastructure most to pay the delta (cost overruns).
Click to expand...

The subway didn't happen because of Scarborough councillors alone. And polls have shown that public opinion on the subway is divided at best.
 
Many of those single family homes have seniors guarding empty nests. Good luck dinging them for a dime on Tory's watch.
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
Oh and if possible I would ding single detached housing along the route the hardest - you can't expect subway and want to stay in that housing format. It's like the worst argument ever.
Click to expand...

Really? So how much are you going to ding all of the single-detached homes that are lying in wait along the Yonge, Spadina, Bloor-Danforth and Sheppard subways?

Dan
Toronto, Ont.
 
Honestly some of these ideas that get bandied about on here go from bad to worse. Sometimes I'm glad politicians make decisions and not bureaucrats/technocrats.
 
Coruscanti Cognoscente said:
Honestly some of these ideas that get bandied about on here go from bad to worse. Sometimes I'm glad politicians make decisions and not bureaucrats/technocrats.
Click to expand...

Be careful what you wish for. That's why you get subways to nowhere Vaughan and none in downtown where it matters, despite absolutely jammed systems.

AoD
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top