Transit City Plan

[rbt]

What I DISLIKE, HATE, LOATH about James is that when Miller was mayor he was practically ready to crucify him especially regarding transit. Now hes got Ford and hes doing the exact same thing. Except now hes claiming the MILLER plan was better.

Good and better are comparative words. Millers plan is better than Fords strictly because it can actually be accomplished.

Miller was a pretty average mayor. Now we have absolute shit so average looks great. The next guy could be the second worst mayor ever and we will be thrilled to have them.

Lastman was actually pretty decent too. He was good at listening to council and coming up with a plan that generally treated all sides well. Lousy public speaker.

Compared to Lastman, Miller was lacking in some areas and good in a few others.

 

[Tulse]

Its not a burden. Its just unnecessary and 99.9% of the time the program is used illegitimate purposes by people too lazy to walk.

Where does the TTC report that statistic?

 

[kkgg7]

Ah but what if the majority choose the option of more stops? Do we respect their wishes or do we force residents to accept less stops and faster transit?

No, the majority don't choose more stops. They only choose a stop in front of where their houses are, or as close as possible. Most don't care if there is more or less stops between their house and Yonge st.

So if you ask, of course it would appear most prefer more stops. But that means close to nothing.

 

[BMO]

OMG, just build the Eglinton line once and build it right. Put it underground. Sure save $1.5B today, and then spend that amount or greater over the next 30 years when maintenance costs increase, not to mention operating costs, and the kicker will be that we will be replacing the above ground sections and putting them underground in the future.

Eglinton East is a perfect setting to implement tax-increment financing. it has so much opportunity for development. Development firms will gobble that land up. It's different than Bloor. Bloor was primarily built along stable residential neighbourhoods, hence the lack of development. Eglinton East is just commercial strip malls, and industry. Build it and they will come. It's a crosstown line, it's meant to be fast. It should be a subway. What's the point in saving the $1.5B to put it above ground? if you want the LRT to be quick there will be fewer stops, and then the regenerating effects of LRT go out the window.

I feel for the people on Finch (I live in York Central), but I'd rather see fewer projects get done RIGHT and improve some peoples' commutes considerably, rather than improve my shitty commute by 5 minutes with LRT.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Now Rob Ford is calling the October, 2010 election a referendum against Transit City. I don't remember any question on Transit City on the ballot?

If I remember right, BOTH George Smitherman (289,832) AND Joe Pantalone (95,482) were FOR Transit City. Only Rob Ford (383,501) was AGAINST. 289,832 plus 95,482 equals 385,314 FOR Transit City.

So if 385,314 were for FOR Transit City but only 383,501 for AGAINST Transit City, how was the election a victory for the AGAINST people? Again, there was no actual question on the ballot. I don't think most people even voted with Transit City on their minds.

 

[sixrings]

i agree in transportation case we need to look at whats best for the majority because we cant serve every single need. That goes for stop spacing(every single person cant have stops) Priority lighting (if a bus or streetcar or lrt is at a light it should have priority since it is carrying 150+ passengers and im sure there arent at minimal 75 cars waitingat the intersection), and finally what to do with funding (one part of the city shouldnt be receiving all the transit while the other areas are being starved)

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

Props to thetigernaster. This guy Ford is done. Lame duck.

 

[nfitz]

OMG, just build the Eglinton line once and build it right.

Agreed. Surface east of Don Mills Road, with limited stops, so you get a similar travel time to underground, at much less cost.

Put it underground.

Why are all the Ford supporters out lately?

 

[BMO]

Now Rob Ford is calling the October, 2010 election a referendum against Transit City. I don't remember any question on Transit City on the ballot?

If I remember right, BOTH George Smitherman (289,832) AND Joe Pantalone (95,482) were FOR Transit City. Only Rob Ford (383,501) was AGAINST. 289,832 plus 95,482 equals 385,314 FOR Transit City.

So if 385,314 were for FOR Transit City but only 383,501 for AGAINST Transit City, how was the election a victory for the AGAINST people? Again, there was no actual question on the ballot. I don't think most people even voted with Transit City on their minds.

I really can't believe you took a <2K difference at the votes as proof that more people wanted Transit City...When Ford was probably the only candidate who EXPLICITLY made a point of saying he would cancel transit city. George Smitherman was kind of in-between proposing a few subway extensions as well. I'm sure more than 2 thousand people who voted for Smitherman would be on the fence about the transit plan.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

Agreed. Surface east of Don Mills Road, with limited stops, so you get a similar travel time to underground, at much less cost.

Why are all the Ford supporters out lately?

He does not support Ford.

 

[voxpopulicosmicum]

What I DISLIKE, HATE, LOATH about James is that when Miller was mayor he was practically ready to crucify him especially regarding transit. Now hes got Ford and hes doing the exact same thing. Except now hes claiming the MILLER plan was better. When Miller was mayor all the same stats were there to support TC but because it was a MILLER project it had to be bad. I had the Star delivered to my house during the entire Miller days and James was often extremely critical of him. So much so I simply stopped reading his articles because I swear there was never going to be anything good to say anyways. But based on his writings since FORD took over you would have thought that James was PRO MILLER... People who support the SUN and who claim star writers are in bed with the liberals clearly werent reading these columns during the MIller days.

Thank you so much for saying this. Royson James is a "professional" contrarian (the quotes are there to indicate that he's professional only in the sense that he gets paid, not because he's a quality writer or journalist). James led the charge against Lastman's corruption when the only other people doing so seemed to be John Sewell, David Miller and Tooker Gomberg. Then James wrote polemics about Miller's "incompetence". Now he thinks Rob Ford is a disaster.

Now, I'll be the first to acknowledge that support for a politician ought to be earned by virtue rather than by default (see, e.g., Glenn Greenwald's critiques of Obama-defenders), but in all of Royson James's anti-Miller rantings, I was struck by the fact that I never found a critique that had any substance, and all James was doing at the time was feeding "anti-Miller derangement syndrome". (To be fair, I thought some of James's Lastman critiques were a bit weak, too, which is striking given how critique-worthy Lastman was.)

Anyway, thanks for calling Royson James on his BS. "F*ck Royson James" might be one of the nicer things I have said about him in the last few years.

 

[BMO]

Agreed. Surface east of Don Mills Road, with limited stops, so you get a similar travel time to underground, at much less cost.

yea and if there is an accident at an intersection above ground? I know problems can occur underground as well, but there is a greater control on these external problems that can occur on a subway. There's no way you can tell me that above ground can provide the same efficiency as underground. Especially for crosstown trips.

Ok fine, i'll give you the benefit of the doubt, say light priority was given to transit vehicles on Eglinton. What happens when capacity increases so much to warrant lower frequencies between LRT vehicles? I guess we can just have streetlights stopping every time a vehicle passes by, not to mention the fact that being above ground drastically reduces the ability for the line to run lower frequencies.

It's really not that difficult. When I purchase a computer. I purchase one that will last me a bit longer. I spend a bit more on it, and it lasts me substantially longer, and saves me money, rather than buying a newer computer that is somewhat better than what i currently have and is cheaper. I pay $1300 for 5 or 6 yrs, instead of $700 two or three times over the same period of time.

In terms of having such a big ticket item, it actually isn't so bad when you take into account the benefit of amortizing the line, and owning it as an asset.

Why are all the Ford supporters out lately?

I don't support Ford's reasoning and philosophy behind his plan, but I do support the plan, and think ultimately it is what the city needs and what will provide the longest lasting benefit to all Torontonians and Ontario taxpayers, not just drivers.

 

[Paleo]

i agree. its suppose to be a lrt but with all these stops we could be turning it into a streetcar. if we want to make street car lines id suggest bathurst and durrerin instead.

500m+ stop spacing is streetcar now? You make it sound like you've never been in Toronto before.

 

[nfitz]

He does not support Ford.

And yet not a single councillor that doesn't support Ford, supports wasting $billions putting Eglinton underground through Scarborough.

I really can't believe you took a <2K difference at the votes as proof that more people wanted Transit City...When Ford was probably the only candidate who EXPLICITLY made a point of saying he would cancel transit city.

Both the other two leading candidates were quite clear they'd retain it - certainly the currently funded lines.

However, I don't think the point was to justify Transit City based on the results of the election. It was simply pointing out the idiocy of Ford claiming that the election results were a referendum on Transit City - for if they were, he narrowly lost.

 

[voxpopulicosmicum]

omg, just build the eglinton line once and build it right. Put it underground. Sure save $1.5b today, and then spend that amount or greater over the next 30 years when maintenance costs increase, not to mention operating costs, and the kicker will be that we will be replacing the above ground sections and putting them underground in the future.

Eglinton east is a perfect setting to implement tax-increment financing. It has so much opportunity for development. Development firms will gobble that land up. It's different than bloor. Bloor was primarily built along stable residential neighbourhoods, hence the lack of development. Eglinton east is just commercial strip malls, and industry. Build it and they will come. It's a crosstown line, it's meant to be fast. It should be a subway. What's the point in saving the $1.5b to put it above ground? If you want the lrt to be quick there will be fewer stops, and then the regenerating effects of lrt go out the window.

bingo!