Ford's 'must be underground' mantra is as infuriating as the 'must be streetcar ROW' mantra he's trying to shove aside...but Ford should know that the TTC's recent obsession with tunnels is one of the things holding back subway construction. Yes, we know people prefer subways, but when was the last time public opinion got a transit project built? Public opinion is irrelevant when consultation consists of displaying to people what's already been decided and then taking the words of the ten people who showed up at the event as the Gospel of Everyone. The point here is that putting anything 10 metres under the street will cost a lot of money, as we're seeing with Eglinton and Spadina. Got a valley? Elevate through the valley. Got a strip of grass or vast swath of parking lots? Trench it or maybe even look at some surface running. Yes, these options are good enough, and doing this on a system-wide scale will let us actually build all the lines people are drawing on napkins, and save billions of dollars along the way. The public would prefer a subway line that went outside sometimes.
Lines should be elevated in some places, typically to help ensure that lines are always as close as possible to the surface (the ideal). This saves a fortune and is best for riders. Some of Eglinton could be elevated east of Leaside. Same with parts of Sheppard, should have been with parts of Spadina, etc.
We're going to be subjected to months, if not years, of repetitive Sheppard vs Eglinton arguments and "Cancel this to pay for that" and so on. Here's some food for thought. There's reasons Eglinton was only cited to move 8% larger peak crowds than Sheppard east of Don Mills (5400 vs 5000). One reason, of course, is that these projections change daily according to whether or not assumptions A, C, and E were used instead of B, D, and F.
But the more important reason is simply the reality that one corridor is not overwhelmingly more important than the other. Eglinton is not the lifeblood of this city. Ooo, blasphemy! People in Peel are not going to transfer to the Eglinton line in any quantity. A downtown-airport rail link would eat up the to-airport crowds. The busiest point on Eglinton is east of Kennedy and that may never get built. Of course Eglinton would likely move more total people than Sheppard, but only because it's so long - much longer than Sheppard. But Sheppard could be made longer by running from Downsview along Finch West and even along, say, Ellesmere. Those corridors see no less current bus ridership than Eglinton and they'd connect more things than Eglinton would. Either way, we need to recognize that no, one is not sooo necessary and the other sooo not necessary. They're a lot closer than most are willing to admit (because then what else would people have to fight about on the internet?). Kill Eglinton for Sheppard or Sheppard for Eglinton? Meh, whatever.
I have no serious issues with ditching Eglinton to finish Sheppard, but I know other people disagree. That's fine. Ditching Sheppard to build Eglinton would be fine, too. Eglinton doesn't have an unfinished subway and it's just a feeder route. Scorning Eglinton a second time, though, would be kind of rude and congestion is a genuine transit problem, especially around the Allen. However, the real shame is that we're not going forward with the more pressing projects like the DRL, Danforth to STC, or Yonge, all of which would move bigger crowds and would fill key gaps in the rapid transit network in growing places where people are going. We need those and GO expansion and basic bus improvements before we need Sheppard or Eglinton. Still, even if Sheppard was 5th on your list of priorities, getting it first doesn't make it bad. Same thing happened with Spadina. It all has less to do with the merits or details of Sheppard or Eglinton or any other project and more to do with seething feudal jealousy and intense hatred of...what, Mike Harris? Not that one project can begin only after the other has finished.