News   Nov 29, 2024
Feds Match $758 Million Investments for New Line 2 Subway Trains
 919     0 
News   Nov 29, 2024
Looking Back on a Year of Construction at Amexon's Central Park
 362     0 
News   Nov 29, 2024
33-Storey St Catharines Tower Would Retain Masonic Temple
 679     1 

saveoursubways (SOS)

Status
Not open for further replies.
What's Steve Munro gonna do, just call the premier and get a subway line built? The power of suggestion and persuasion isn't very useful once projects are underway. It's been 'too late' for 3 years. Storming city hall and petitions and so on are good at getting things stopped but bad at getting other things started. A few minor details have been altered and some lines are collapsing under the weight of their own bloated scale and cost, but most of this change is due to the fact that Transit City was always just a bunch of ill-thought out lines on a map and a plan that doesn't solve real problems or have real substance (like 'more at eleven!' teasers) and not due to secret meetings between powerful people.
 
Juan_Lennon416 said:
I think he just does not like to debate with people who would bash his charachter (i.e. calling him an irrelevant activist) versus his ideas. Stick to the facts, don't call him names, and I am sure he would welcome a debate.
Click to expand...

He should be called out on his leftist politics. That's why Transit City is the way it is. For all his talk about ridership and demand, there is a strong socialist element to the Transit City plans that should be addressed. Why else is there a line on Morningside? If he's going to play politics and support social engineering with transit dollars that needs to be made public. He's far from a politically neutral transit activist.
 
kEiThZ said:
He should be called out on his leftist politics. That's why Transit City is the way it is. For all his talk about ridership and demand, there is a strong socialist element to the Transit City plans that should be addressed. Why else is there a line on Morningside? If he's going to play politics and support social engineering with transit dollars that needs to be made public. He's far from a politically neutral transit activist.
Click to expand...

You seem to be combining Steve Munro and Miller and Giambrone and who knows who else into one great big left-wing conspiracy bogeyman. Steve Munro isn't spouting all the 'bring light rail to the troubled youths of Malvern and everything will be super-terrific' nonsense we've been hearing.
 
^ A lot of that maybe Miller, but from what I've seen of Steve, he's supportive of that approach and has mentioned the social justice aspect of the transit on occasion.
 
My vast influence is overstated

I have mentioned the social aspects of Transit City as simple reportage, although transit generally exists to support a variety of planning and city development benefits.

It's odd that it's ok to talk about how a subway will stimulate development, but when someone suggests that better transit of some other flavour might benefit neighbourhoods, then it's a waste of money.

I have not been active on this site because I'm tired of the bilge dished out by people attacking me personally.

Steve
 
I am calmly preparing a post on my own site where I can moderate the responses, and send the insults where they belong. It's important to recognize that it's not a Steve-vs-SOS debate because we actually agree on some things. My biggest concern is the desire to create a zero-sum arrangement financially, with the spinoff effect that LRT lines must be downplayed to justify removing them from the network in the short term to the advantage of subway lines of dubious value. I refuse to debate a straw man where the premise is that everything in Transit City is perfect, and everything in SOS is garbage.
 
Based on this thread, SOS has painted the whole situation as 'Steve versus SOS' and anyone who agrees with him is seen as a moron.
 
Last edited:
Juan_Lennon416 said:
Based on this thread, SOS has painted the whole situation as 'Steve versus SOS' and anyone who agrees with him is seen as a moron.
Click to expand...

+1

I could compare this debate to a very Bush-esque "you're with us or against us."
 
This thread just took a fun turn.

I would like to hear a response to scarberian's point that our current streetcar lines have a higher operating cost (and similar ridership) to many bus routes. I find this troubling. If I had to guess, it's because those figures take into account maintenance costs on our old and falling apart fleet of LRVs and possibly that more supervisors are required on the downtown lines to manage the schedule.
 
Juan_Lennon416 said:
Based on this thread, SOS has painted the whole situation as 'Steve versus SOS' and anyone who agrees with him is seen as a moron.
Click to expand...

I actually find that slightly offensive. The entire time my standpoint has been discussing the issues, the numbers, and the plan. I have NEVER been about attacking anyone personally. I for one welcome Steve into this thread, as it will bring new critiques. A group of 'yes men' isn't desirable, but a group of 'this plan sucks, SOS sucks, LRT is better' isn't going to help either.

So from here on, please keep the debate about the issues, the numbers, and the plans, and not about the people involved with them.

EDIT: The reason I find it offensive is because the views here are not the views of SOS as a whole. They're of some of the people in SOS. If you want the official standpoint of SOS on an issue, read the report.
 
Last edited:
Justin10000 said:
Yeah, SOS has really attempted to polarize the issue.
Click to expand...
I think that when their study came out showing that what they were going to do with the currently committed funding (Phase I Part I) was to cancel the Finch West LRT, Sheppard East LRT, Eglinton LRT from Jane to Pearson, Eglinton LRT from Don Mills to Kennedy, and the SRT extension to Sheppard ... and simply replace it with not one, but two subway extensions to Scarborough Centre.

SOS isn't about subways ... it's about subways to Scarborough Town Centre ... anything else is just window dressing. If they would instead take that money and build a DRL I could see a point ... but to spend the money on two unnecessary subway extensions is just astounding ... and exposes them.

Perhaps we'll see if their plan improves any when they finalize it.
 
Last edited:
nfitz said:
I think that when their study came out showing that what they were going to do with the currently committed funding (Phase I Part I) was to cancel the Finch West LRT, Sheppard East LRT, Eglinton LRT from Jane to Pearson, Eglinton LRT from Don Mills to Kennedy, and the SRT extension to Sheppard ... and simply replace it with not one, but two subway extensions to Scarborough Centre.

SOS isn't about subways ... it's about subways to Scarborough Town Centre ... anything else is just window dressing. If they would instead take that money and build a DRL I could see a point ... but to spend the money on two unnecessary subway extensions is just astounding ... and exposes them.

Perhaps we'll see if their plan improves any when they finalize it.
Click to expand...

All we did was follow the RTES, a plan which the TTC themselves drafted, as a guideline. And it would be very likely that parts I and II of Phase I will be built in tandum, particularly the section of the Eglinton line from Jane to Pearson.

And speaking for myself for a moment, it was not my first priority to build two subways to STC. The fact of the matter is, the idea that SELRT should be built first is what forced our hand. It's too late to cancel all or part of the project and replace it with nothing. Something has to be done there now, so we're doing something. Same with the Bloor-Danforth extension. If the SRT wasn't due to be replaced, it wouldn't be at the top of the list either. But it is due to be replaced, so it needs to be dealt with first.

In an ideal world, I would have preferred the DRL and Eglinton first, and then B-D to STC, then Sheppard to STC. But we're not in an ideal world.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top