saveoursubways (SOS)

[Ansem]

Ansem:
You seem to have a rather naive view towards transit politics in the city. Please remind me what is the singular effect of regieme change on transit in the say, oh last 25 years? Let me answer it for you - projects getting cancelled and nothing got built.

I unfortunately have to agree that the change of regime in Toronto did not improve the transit situation in our city for the last 30 years...

They proposed many time, studied many time and did not do anything.

I was pointing out that's what politicians always do. They want their legacy to stay and if they make it to power, they rarely fulfill their predecessor/rivals' vision. Which is why I used the Lastman/Miller in this example.

Lastman started the Sheppard subway and had in mind to complete it. Since Lastman left, there was no way to guarantee it would be completed.

Then came along Miller and scrapped it and came with Transit City. If Miller stayed or Giambrone gets elected, then Transit City would have been built.

If Smithersman or a guy who's not part of Miller's cliq gets elected Transit city will be in danger. Keep in mind my comment was a political point of view. Can you seriously imagine Smithersman continuing Miller's legacy espacially with the heat he got last summer?

The difference between here and Montreal/province of Quebec is that once Montreal submit a subway proposal,

A)Studied by Quebec (provincial)
B)Quebec approuve the project, funds and find a contractor to build the subway
C)Contractors accountable to the Province of Quebec and not the city.

In Montreal, regardless of who takes power at the next election, it won't stop the plan which is a good thing.

Ontario created Metrolinx...which should help avoid these problems. The problem is that in the matter of "building subways", the city in my point of view holds to much power, which is power that should have been removed from them a long time ago like in Montreal.

And if you think that there is more inertia for building a subway after you canned an LRT line, you are probably even more mistaken. As DavidH mentioned, no politician is crazy enough to force a new EA for a line like that (and if they do, I would be more suspicious of their intent for using it to delay and ultimately scrap projects, not replacing them with the "right choice") - not to mention the even more difficult act of scraping up yet another, more cost intensive tripartite funding agreement that necessitated multi-jurisdictional political maneuvering. If I were you, the SOS should pick their fights and focus on DRL and Eglinton instead. And it's too bad, because BD extension would have been a more appropriate solution and a much more worthwhile battle IMO.

AoD

One thing we learn in politics is

-NEVER underestimate a politician who wants to be elected.

-Their main objective is to be elected and in this scenario, if Smithersman wants to keep the lead, you will see him very soon trying to propose things that are different or the opposite of what Miller had done... Just like Miller did to Lastman.

-Sorry to break it to you, but Transit City is already in danger unless Giambrone finds a way to miraculously win...

-Sure the new guy will propose something else and that will need new studies, new EA, more time...

which is why we are presenting a report to find the better alternative instead of starting from scratch: which includes DRL, Eglinton, Bloor Danforth to Scarborough...using the billions already on the table.

 

[SimonP]

For reference here is how we ended up with the Shepperd line back in 1995:

There were rumors the government was after both the Eglinton and Sheppard subways.

But Al Leach had been hollering that Metro ought to start work on four subways, not just two, when he was general manager of the TTC.

Leach always claimed the provincial government could find the money.

Then Leach got elected in Rosedale and became part of the provincial government himself - minister of municipal affairs.

If Harris had cut both subways, Leach would have looked damned foolish.

So would Harris for giving a cabinet job to someone who obviously didn't know what he was talking about.

Couldn't have that.

The Eglinton subway runs through the ridings of Bob Rae and Liberal transportation critic Mike Colle. York Mayor Frances Nunziata also is a well-known Liberal.

Bye-bye Eglinton subway.

The Sheppard subway, on the other hand, runs through the riding of Charles Harnick, whom Harris has just appointed attorney-general.

Moreover, the mayor of North York, Mel Lastman, is a Tory, who so noisily and desperately wants the Sheppard subway, he tells people: ``The line is my Sheppard, I shall not want . . .''

It's not the future of Sheppard Ave. itself that makes Lastman feel religious. Even though Metro Council first approved a Sheppard subway back in 1986 and some important developers talked to North York officials, the city's planners won't present their final master scheme for the future of Sheppard Ave. until this fall.

No, the real reason Lastman desperately needs the Sheppard subway is to keep his Yonge St. dreams alive.

The Ontario Municipal Board said that if developers were going to keep building on Yonge St., Sheppard Ave. had to be widened.

But Metro killed the Sheppard widening. If Harris had also killed the Sheppard subway, the Yonge St. game would have been over.

Getting developers to put up big, shiney buildings on Yonge St. has been Lastman's passion ever since he first got elected mayor 23 years ago.

So it looks like Harris is going to cover Harnick's behind and let Lastman keep playing in his Yonge St. sandbox even if it does cost taxpayers almost $1 billion.


Politics, not common sense, saved Sheppard subway;
By David Lewis Stein. Toronto Star. Toronto, Ont.: Aug 11, 1995. pg. A.21

In summary:
*Sheppard Line ran through the riding of powerful Tories, who had just narrowly been elected
*Eglinton Line ran through the riding of powerful rivals to the Tories
*North York developers were strongly in favour of the Sheppard line
*Said developers had bankrolled Lastman's campaigns for the last 23 years (and I'm sure were also generous to any councillor who backed the plan)

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

You're framing the debate incorrectly in assuming that that political and funding realities would facilitate a subway as easily as they would the current LRT plan. It's not a question of better. It's a question of what we're likely to get.

Is an LRT better than nothing? I think so. Is it better than subway in this corridor? I don't know, really; I don't live there. Is this corridor where the city should be spending money on subways right now? No.

Wrong. The city asked for funding for TC and senior governments said "sure, who do we address the chq to?". York Region asked for funding for VIVA and the YUS extensions and senior governments said "sure, who do we address the chq to?". Brampton is planning it's own BRT network and it will get funded. Mississauga as well. Nowhere in this chain did senior governments say you have $X millions to spend on transit, do with it as you wish. We got exactly the funding that we asked for, for projects that we planned. Had the plan been a subway and/or a subway+LRT plan I see no reason why it wouldn't have been funded just like the TC plan was. Now had we asked for $100 billion then obviously we likely wouldn't have got that, but a similar plan at similar cost would have been funded.

To imply that somehow we only would have gotten funding for TC and not a subway plan shows either an LRT bias or a serious case of distrust of our governments.

Face it Eglinton was a hole in the ground when Harris cancelled it, just like Sheppard E will be. If someone comes along with enough will and enough courage (and stubborness) to stop the Sheppard E LRT and revive the Sheppard Subway plan. Then I don't see why it can't happen.

 

[SimonP]

Wrong. The city asked for funding for TC and senior governments said "sure, who do we address the chq to?". York Region asked for funding for VIVA and the YUS extensions and senior governments said "sure, who do we address the chq to?". Brampton is planning it's own BRT network and it will get funded. Mississauga as well. Nowhere in this chain did senior governments say you have $X millions to spend on transit, do with it as you wish. We got exactly the funding that we asked for, for projects that we planned. Had the plan been a subway and/or a subway+LRT plan I see no reason why it wouldn't have been funded just like the TC plan was. Now had we asked for $100 billion then obviously we likely wouldn't have got that, but a similar plan at similar cost would have been funded.

To imply that somehow we only would have gotten funding for TC and not a subway plan shows either an LRT bias or a serious case of distrust of our governments.

Face it Eglinton was a hole in the ground when Harris cancelled it, just like Sheppard E will be. If someone comes along with enough will and enough courage (and stubborness) to stop the Sheppard E LRT and revive the Sheppard Subway plan. Then I don't see why it can't happen.

I'm sorry, but this is exactly the sort of lack of political consideration that I am talking about. York Region, Kitchener-Waterloo, and Peel are prominent Liberal/Conservative swing regions. Both Harper and McGuinty have ample political reason to spend billions there. What reason do they have along Eglinton or in Scarborough?

Toronto got a few hundred million for the Sheppard line out of the feds, but was turned down for the new streetcars. The city is now paying for 2/3rds of those. Harper and Baird, like any politician, do what will get them votes. There are no seats for them in funding new downtown Toronto subways, so why should they do it? That is the question that you have to answer if you expect federal funding.

 

[kEiThZ]

SimonP

1) Who said we had nothing for Finch in our plan?

2) If your argument is that nothing gets built in the Liberal heartland, then how do you explain the current funding for TC in the first place?

3) You completely ignore the regional implications of subway lines. If it can be shown that the DRL will make subway rides for Yorkies more comfortable, you can bet there will be support for the DRL.

4) ...and who said we've ignored the 905 in SOS plans?

We are aiming this effort at more than a few forum subscribers. The goal is to educate the public about what is possible using the money that's spent on TC. If the public chooses TC then so be it. But at least they should know what they are giving up.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

1) I'm sorry, but this is exactly the sort of lack of political consideration that I am talking about. York Region, Kitchener-Waterloo, and Peel are prominent Liberal/Conservative swing regions. Both Harper and McGuinty have ample political reason to spend billions there. What reason do they have along Eglinton or in Scarborough?

2) Toronto got a few hundred million for the Sheppard line out of the feds, but was turned down for the new streetcars. The city is now paying for 2/3rds of those. Harper and Baird, like any politician, do what will get them votes. There are no seats for them in funding new downtown Toronto subways, so why should they do it? That is the question that you have to answer if you expect federal funding.

1: Are the Eglinton and Scarborough LRT lines not funded? What reason do Harper and McGiunty have to fund those lines?

2: Proof positive that it was Toronto that gave up on the subway track. Not senior governments somehow pulling strings behind the curtains.

 

[kEiThZ]

You're framing the debate incorrectly in assuming that that political and funding realities would facilitate a subway as easily as they would the current LRT plan. It's not a question of better. It's a question of what we're likely to get.

Is an LRT better than nothing? I think so. Is it better than subway in this corridor? I don't know, really; I don't live there. Is this corridor where the city should be spending money on subways right now? No.

I would not shed tears if Sheppard got canned. It's not a choice between nothing and LRT. That's just Miller talk. Effective transit can be delivered on Sheppard with curbside bus lanes and a better entrance into Don Mills station. And that can be done for a fraction of the cost and time of the LRT line. And past about McCowan, no improvement is needed, but curbside bus lanes could be built for dirt cheap with little to no impact from construction on the neighbourhood.

Anybody who wants to talk about Sheppard, should just drive the length of the SELRT and see how the money is being spent. Higher order transit is needed from Don Mills till about Brimley. Beyond that even local buses would suffice. Not saying that's what SOS would offer but let's not pretend Sheppard would grind to a halt without an LRT down the middle.

As for the work being done now..again, no big loss. The Agincourt grade separation was needed anyway. And the few sewer, water main relocations that they've done is largely planned work that's been done ahead of schedule and integrated into TC. It's not wasted if the project is canned. Sheppard still has not reached a point where the work being done will go to waste if the project is cancelled. When they start building that ROW and laying tracks, then we can see there would be a real loss to halting the project.

 

[SimonP]

1) Who said we had nothing for Finch in our plan?

A switch from LRT to subways will mean money is concentrated in fewer areas. If the total amount of money remains the same, some areas will see less investment. This means unhappy councillors, and it takes only a minority of vocally opposed councillors to give other levels of government an excuse not to get involved.

2) If your argument is that nothing gets built in the Liberal heartland, then how do you explain the current funding for TC in the first place?

What funding? Transit City is far from fully funded. No one can deny that the extensions to York Region are clearly the provincial priority. It is certainly in McGuinty's interest to invest some money in Toronto, but the billions that any of these plans call for are unlikely to materialize anytime soon. Propose four transit lines, end up building one. This has been the history of Toronto transit in recent decades. Even if a pro-Transit City council is elected, do you honestly expect the Jane and Don Mills lines to be built in the next couple decades?

3) You completely ignore the regional implications of subway lines. If it can be shown that the DRL will make subway rides for Yorkies more comfortable, you can bet there will be support for the DRL.

Regional implications are great, and you can present any number of studies showing how local traffic will improve, but unless a voter can point to a new transit line that is within walking distance from there house, is their vote really going to be swayed? Standard political wisdom says no.

4) ...and who said we've ignored the 905 in SOS plans?

We are aiming this effort at more than a few forum subscribers. The goal is to educate the public about what is possible using the money that's spent on TC. If the public chooses TC then so be it. But at least they should know what they are giving up.

I remember observing focus groups in another municipal election where transit plans were a central issue. In any electorate you have a good 30% of the vote whose favourite option is "cancel everything and give me a tax cut." My worry is that by dividing the 60% that is pro-transit, the tax cutters will get elected. This is exactly what happened in 1995 when Harris was elected and 2006 in Ottawa when Larry O'Brien won.

 

[nfitz]

Debating the Sheppard East LRT anymore seems to be fruitless.

We've documented that the demand doesn't support subway. We've documented that the subway cost far exceeds the project budget. We've documented that nothing in this precludes the future construction of subway, if demand ever does call for it.

The only thing I can add, over what we have been over, time, and time before is:

Get Over It

Effort should be focused on where it may be fruitful ... such as the DRL, rather than on projects already under construction.

 

[SimonP]

1: Are the Eglinton and Scarborough LRT lines not funded? What reason do Harper and McGiunty have to fund those lines?

2: Proof positive that it was Toronto that gave up on the subway track. Not senior governments somehow pulling strings behind the curtains.

The feds have not yet come through on funding for Eglinton. Transit City was announced three years ago, and the city has had that long to lobby the federal government. So far the feds have pledged $425 million to it. How much should we reasonably expect to get? Assuming a full third the bill for Transit City is cornucopian.

That three year period included an era of massive federal stimulus funding. For the next while the huge deficits will mean sharp cuts and restraint. Toronto might get an extra $500 million out of Harper, just so he can seem fair. Maybe a full billion if Harper seems to be getting to the end of his run and starts to look for some legacy projects.

 

[Ansem]

Debating the Sheppard East LRT anymore seems to be fruitless.

We've documented that the demand doesn't support subway. We've documented that the subway cost far exceeds the project budget. We've documented that nothing in this precludes the future construction of subway, if demand ever does call for it.

The only thing I can add, over what we have been over, time, and time before is:

Get Over It

Effort should be focused on where it may be fruitful ... such as the DRL, rather than on projects already under construction.

You know full well that the TTC DID NOT study Don Mills to STC...
RTES fully demonstrated that Don Mills to STC would be a success, profitable and the projected ridership justified its construction.

They studied Don Mills to Meadowvale...
Duh...of course subway makes no sense there
Nobody here is fighting for a subway past Agincourt.

A)One side says subway is not required for Don Mills to Meadowvale

B)The other side says subways is required for Don Mills to STC.

Were not even fighting over the same routes.
Let's agree that we disagree...

 

[kEiThZ]

A switch from LRT to subways will mean money is concentrated in fewer areas. If the total amount of money remains the same, some areas will see less investment. This means unhappy councillors, and it takes only a minority of vocally opposed councillors to give other levels of government an excuse not to get involved.

Nothing says that just because you build subway somewhere that you will not have money to do absolutely anything elsewhere. We set the constraint as operating within the funds of what Transit City is projected to cost. And we've laid out what we think should be built above and beyond that in a Phase 2 and how much that will cost. We're looking at a bunch of options for each corridor. That includes subways, LRT and BRT. It's not that we think LRT is bad. We just don't think that a one-size solution is appropriate for Toronto.

What funding? Transit City is far from fully funded. No one can deny that the extensions to York Region are clearly the provincial priority. It is certainly in McGuinty's interest to invest some money in Toronto, but the billions that any of these plans call for are unlikely to materialize anytime soon. Propose four transit lines, end up building one. This has been the history of Toronto transit in recent decades. Even if a pro-Transit City council is elected, do you honestly expect the Jane and Don Mills lines to be built in the next couple decades?

You said that a Liberal provincial government and a federal Conservative government would not fund transit lines inside the 416. Clearly, you are wrong. Just because all of TC hasn't been funded yet, does not mean that there's no support to build more transit lines. Politicians after all do want the luxury of making a huge deal of each and every transit line they build.

Regional implications are great, and you can present any number of studies showing how local traffic will improve, but unless a voter can point to a new transit line that is within walking distance from there house, is their vote really going to be swayed? Standard political wisdom says no.

Fair enough. I choose to be optimistic that an educated voter will make the right choice. Our goal is to educate the public. What happens next, nobody can predict. There's a good chance the public will ignore us. But if we have even the slightest bit of impact and can generate real discussion for once, I know I'll be happy. Right now, even the average resident along Sheppard, does not know what exactly is being built over there. I know, I'm from Malvern.

I remember observing focus groups in another municipal election where transit plans were a central issue. In any electorate you have a good 30% of the vote whose favourite option is "cancel everything and give me a tax cut." My worry is that by dividing the 60% that is pro-transit, the tax cutters will get elected. This is exactly what happened in 1995 when Harris was elected and 2006 in Ottawa when Larry O'Brien won.

1) Are you worried we'll have that big an impact? If so, then thanks for the compliment!

2) I will not be tossing and turning in bed if Sheppard is canned and taxpayer's dollars aren't wasted on a tram line to the zoo.

3) I am not worried about the Conservatives ignoring Toronto. Even Randy Hillier had the DRL in his plans when he ran for the Conservative leadership. It isn't 1995. Toronto is bigger and has more votes. And the 905 has a lot more sympathy for transit issues. I refuse to live in fear of the "Bogey Man".

4) I am glad Larry O'Brien cancelled the Ottawa LRT plan. That was as ignorant as Transit City. What else do you call a plan to spend a billion dollars to replace an existing north-south rail line in a city where most commuters go East-West? And what do you call a project who's very planners admit that it would not achieve the project objective (reducing bus congestion in the downtown core)? But I guess you are, the type that's happy as long as something is getting built, regardless of whether it's a billion dollar boondoggle or not. How else to explain somebody who supports a rail line that would not serve the bulk of a city's residents, runs for a third of its length through green space, terminates at a sprawling suburb, trades bus congestion for tram congestion, and most importantly replaces an already adequate and functioning service?

Debating the Sheppard East LRT anymore seems to be fruitless.

We've documented that the demand doesn't support subway. We've documented that the subway cost far exceeds the project budget. We've documented that nothing in this precludes the future construction of subway, if demand ever does call for it.

The only thing I can add, over what we have been over, time, and time before is:

Get Over It

Effort should be focused on where it may be fruitful ... such as the DRL, rather than on projects already under construction.

Why should we get over it? The Sheppard line impacts my community the most. So, of course, it's fair game for me. And I don't believe the fight is done. Like I said earlier, we still aren't at a point where there is significant losses from construction. Everything done until now is work that needs to be done regardless of whether the LRT was being built or not.

That does not mean, we'll give up on other priorities, like the DRL. All it means is that we don't think we should start off with a hopeless attitude.

 

[nfitz]

You know full well that the TTC DID NOT study Don Mills to STC...
RTES fully demonstrated that Don Mills to STC would be a success, profitable and the projected ridership justified its construction.

???? You say that TTC did not study Don Mills to STC ... but then you point to a TTC study that studies Don Mills to STC?

And then you say the projected ridership supports it's construction? And yet the projected ridership in that report, east of Don Mills, is well under 10,000 - which is the current criteria for subway. Yes, at the time, they used it to justify subway, but they weren't looking at intermediate capacity systems at the time.

And profitable? Not under the normal definition of profitable ... it wouldn't make money!

Why do you twist things so?

We've been over these facts time, and time again ... I just don't see the point - it's like trying to argue about religion with a believer.

Let me predict this ... not a single mayoral candidate will campaign on a platform of cancelling the Sheppard LRT ... or at least not a serious one, that get's more than 1% of the vote ...

 

[nfitz]

Why should we get over it?

Because it's done, and funded from 3 levels of government. Designs are being finalized, contracts tendered, and construction started.

These things don't get revisited at this stage; they only get cancelled (which is remote with the 3-party agreements).

By pushing forward with a plan that involves cancelling this project at this stage, simply devalues your entire plan, and means that anyone with any power in the city will be forced to ignore you. You have thrown out the baby with the bathwater.

 

[kEiThZ]

Because it's done, and funded from 3 levels of government. Designs are being finalized, contracts tendered, and construction started.

These things don't get revisited at this stage; they only get cancelled (which is remote with the 3-party agreements).

By pushing forward with a plan that involves cancelling this project at this stage, simply devalues your entire plan, and means that anyone with any power in the city will be forced to ignore you. You have thrown out the baby with the bathwater.

Hey. That's our risk to take. We are pushing for what we think is important. If you disagree, feel free to start your own community organization and add to cacophony.