Rob Ford's Toronto

[dt_toronto_geek]

I feel more in danger crossing Spadina and King than Markham and Lawrence, which has a way higher volume of traffic by the way. I guess we do have vastly different standards.

I know that crossing Sheppard at Consumers Road where I go to the Neck Clinic is a whole lot more dangerous than crossing Spadina & King. Generally, in suburban areas drivers have a different more aggressive mindset with regards to cyclists and pedestrians as opposed to downtown where drivers are more cautious and, generally, give pedestrians right of way and more patience for cyclists.

 

[RC8]

I feel more in danger crossing Spadina and King than Markham and Lawrence, which has a way higher volume of traffic by the way. I guess we do have vastly different standards.

I'd feel more comfortable crossing Spadina and King on a red light than Markham and Lawrence with a right of way. Different standards indeed.

If you are interested I encourage you to look at the data of car accidents/pedestrian collisions in Toronto. Intersections such as Markham and Lawrence are orders of magnitude more dangerous than the likes of King and Spadina. Not only are you more likely to get hit - you are more likely to get killed if an accident does take place.

There's resources like this around that shed light on why that is:
http://www.toronto.ca/transportation/walking/pdf/ped_collision_study-full_report.pdf

 

[RC8]

And the link leads to something he tweeted on Feb 12:



And that link leads to this: http://mugshots.com/US-Counties/Florida/Broward-County-FL/Darrius-T-Heaven/details/

Three charges: two separate ones for cocaine possession, plus one for aggravated battery. And sure enough, if you Google his stated address it's also listed to Deco Labels & Tags.

http://deco-labels-tags-hollywood-fl.florida.usa.machineshopdir.com/

Anyone fancy giving them a call to find out what's the nature of their operations?

 

[JWBF]

I feel more in danger crossing Spadina and King than Markham and Lawrence, which has a way higher volume of traffic by the way. I guess we do have vastly different standards.

It has more to do with idiocy then volume, trust me on that.

Came across this quote from Doug Holiday in the Toronto Star today:

Ladies and gentleman, I give you the insane troll logic of Toronto Conservatives: "We want subways and we want them now! And by now, we mean when we have enough money! And if we have enough money to build a subway, we should cut taxes first and build a subway later! ...We want subways now!"

Watch a lot of AT&T commercials?

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Came across this quote from Doug Holiday in the Toronto Star today:

"We could have had a beautiful system in place right now if 30 years ago someone would have started building little bits of subway. We can get the ball rolling with this matter,” (Doug Holiday) added, referring to the Scarborough subway push as dismissing questions about the previous Conservative premier Mike Harris’s 1995 decision to fill in the Eglinton subway tunnel started under former NDP premier Bob Rae.

“There was simply no money to do it,” Holiday said.


Ladies and gentleman, I give you the insane troll logic of Toronto Conservatives: "We want subways and we want them now! And by now, we mean when we have enough money! And if we have enough money to build a subway, we should cut taxes first and build a subway later! ...We want subways now!"

Thank you for posting this - the logical incoherence is shocking to say the least. I suppose there is more money now than there was before - got to remind Doug the next time he bring the fiscal discipline stuff out.

AoD

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

scar_resident:

I'd be curious to know just what percentage of individuals living a certain distance (say 500m) away from the intersection actually walks to and from those amenities - vs. a comparable pre-war neigbhourhood. Those streets are deserted for a reason.

AoD

 

[Gavin]

"We want subways and we want them now! And by now, we mean when we have enough money! And if we have enough money to build a subway, we should cut taxes first and build a subway later! ...We want subways now!"

I'm stealing this.

 

[Tulse]

"We could have had a beautiful system in place right now if 30 years ago someone would have started building little bits of subway."

I would really like to know how one builds "little bits" of subway.

 

[GenerationW]

I would really like to know how one builds "little bits" of subway.

Extending existing lines is the closest you can come to doing that.

 

[ttk77]

Extending existing lines is the closest you can come to doing that.

There's also the little stub under Queen st. that never got finished if I'm not mistaken.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

tkk:

That's being generous - the roughed in bit is unusable.

AoD

 

[ttk77]

tkk:

That's being generous - the roughed in bit is unusable.

AoD

lol...true.

I think the real reason that they don't build in little bits is the impact that it would have on the rest of the transit system. Subways are the backbone of the system with other methods of transit feeding into it. If you're constantly building and opening small bits of subway then you're going to be constantly changing your surface routes/schedules to compensate. With a system as large as Toronto's, that would be time consuming, difficult and expensive, not to mention confusing for the transit rider.

 

[Tee]

Robo-Flop in Winnipeg. Apparently many fans were hurling insults at him...but, if you believe Dougie (is there anybody left who does?), he's a Rock Star down there!

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/br...at-Bombers-from-the-sidelines--216255471.html

 

[TOvp]

Interesting tweet from Jonathon Goldsbie (National Post)

A google search for this address brings:

http://www.ibegin.com/directory/us/florida/hollywood/deco-labels--tags/

Probably just a weird coincidence.

Possibly, but intriguing as it is a residential not industrial area.

 

[ahm]

I have seen it nosed about several times - from where exactly, I don't recall - by both politicians and members of the public that subway construction can be accomplished by as little as 100m at a time. Perhaps Holyday meant station by station - as in, build the tunnel to where the next station is to be located, and the station as well; and wait to build further out until the money is in place. I'm not certain. All I can say to that is that it strikes me as being more expensive as you won't see savings for the use of tunnel boring machines for one long stretch, as you will be using them for smaller sections of tunnel. Then there is all the other costs, be they equipment rental, insurance, project management staff and space (you have to lease or rent office space for the project management team...unless you've really got a crack team of facilities management folks who can shift office staffs around like they were General Motors in the late 90's), consultants, etc.

Given that the way so many government projects are costed out - savings achieved by averaging out the money spent over the course of so many years or by sheer volume of purchase - it strikes me as weird that conservative politicians consistently try this out as a way of convincing the public there are alternative methods of building massive infrastructure. They don't try to justify the costs by stating how much congestion costs the city per year; instead they appeal to emotion.

I'm willing to be convinced otherwise, however. If it can be demonstrated that it would be actually just as expensive or even cheaper (hell, I'll take it if it's even 10% more expensive) to build subway tunnels and stations a little at a time, then bring it on.