M II A II R II K
Senior Member
Pardon my ignorance... but.. What's the difference between a "subway" and an "underground light-rail" line?
A subway is heavy rail and light rail uses a streetcar.
Pardon my ignorance... but.. What's the difference between a "subway" and an "underground light-rail" line?
Pardon my ignorance... but.. What's the difference between a "subway" and an "underground light-rail" line?
There is no new Metrolinx. The legislation is nowhere closed to being passed yet, and until it is, it's business as usual with the current board.Anyone else taking the omission of the Sheppard East LRT as a sign that the new Metrolinx is not so keen on the current proposal? If so, I'd call it a new and improved Metrolinx already.
Gotta start somewhere...
does that seem balanced to you?
Hate to break this to you, but Brampton isn't the most important part of the GTA and the Eglinton line does have regional importance.
Let's say we built the Brampton Acceleride first. What the heck does it connect to? Acceleride is to hook up to the Viva Highway 7 Rapidways and the Hurontario rapid transit service. They have to be built first or it won't work.
That being said, Acceleride is in MX's Top 15 Priorities and WILL be built or under construction by 2015. There is no question about that. Everyone who thinks this announcement is the only one needs to get their head around the fact that this is just step one of a bigger plan.
Now (again without questioning the individual validity of any of those)....does that seem balanced to you?
Unless the money runs out first....or the public tolerance for continued deficit financing of a recession that becomes yesterdays news wears thin....or we change priorities again.....obviously I am way more cynical/skeptical than otherse here!
TOareafan:
Easier to fund a $1B busway than a $4B subway/LRT under those conditions.
AoD
TOareafan:
It has to start somewhere - and given the funding announcements aren't even done, I don't see what's the point of getting all hysterical.
Besides, you are basically advocating that the project you favour should have priority in spite of the fact that other transit projects have been long identified as a need and have much greater regional implications. How's that for "balanced"?
BTW, you suggest that the RTP as an impartial, apolitical process that is achieved on the basis of need and merit - really?
AoD