News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 9.6K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5.5K     0 

I think this is everybody's ideal subway network. (Including mine - needs way more stops on the DRL, though.)
Seems a bit weak in the northwest of the city, though.

I don't think she's suggesting that the money would have to be raised before the subway is built. It might have to be built on deficit-funding and paid for as the toll money pays it off. Given that, it's still ambiitious.
 
I think this is everybody's ideal subway network. (Including mine - needs way more stops on the DRL, though.)

This isn't just an ambitious plan, though - it's literally impossible. Raising billions of dollars in road tolls alone so the city can fund dozens of kilometres of subway expansion, all within a decade? That just shows how politically naive this candidate is.

Like GraphicMatt said, this is impossible.

Sure it's bold, but it's unrealistic and over the top. Are building multiple transit infrastructure projects (subways especially) all at once really gonna happen as such? I'll be surprised if all of Transit City is built out. But yeah.... get real guys.

And if you vote for Thomson, you're nothing more than a sucker.
 
Last edited:
I think her version of the DRL is pretty useless. The western leg should be dropped for one and the eastern leg should be extended to Eglinton at the very least - ideally to Sheppard.

Everyone can draw lines on a map - not everyone can survive the mayoral race, cut through the morass and get those lines implemented (particularly when they aren't really the ones paying for most of the cost). That is an unknown quantity with this candidate.

AoD
 
Last edited:
James: Bold transit vision based on $5 road tolls

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/tor...old-transit-vision-based-on-5-road-tolls?bn=1

Would you pay $5 per auto trip on the Don Valley Parkway and the Gardiner Expressway to deliver a spectacular subway network in Toronto?

Before you rain down curses on your morning paper, spilling into your brew, think of a subway line along Eglinton Ave. from Kingston Rd. to the airport. Add a downtown relief line linking Pape Ave, to Dundas St. W., via Queen St. And while you’re at it, finish the Sheppard subway line out to Scarborough Town Centre and link it to the Bloor-Danforth line, via the current route occupied by the Scarborough RT. And expand the Yonge and University lines up to Steeles.

It takes your breath away — and only for a minor fee.

On a glorious March morning, mayoral candidate Sarah Thomson unveiled this bold vision of transit nirvana for the price of a $5 road toll — a tease whose allure is surpassed only by its trenchant impossibility.

In all, 58 kilometres of subways at a cost of $14 billion, Thomson estimates. It will cost a lot more, no doubt. But unlike many other transit proposals, this one has a funding line attached to it — one that does not run directly up to Queen’s Park.

That alone makes it worthy of serious consideration, a coup for a tiny campaign that seemed doomed to irrelevancy.

The transit proposal is courageous and maybe politically suicidal all at once — an idea anathema to the political right that spawned Thomson. But it puts the issue squarely on the agenda for the mayoral campaign heading into the October election to replace Mayor David Miller.

History suggests it is doomed to the trash bin. Tolls are a lightning rod for public anger. Drivers universally oppose them, though road pricing produces enormous cash amounts that can fund transit. More transit means fewer cars on the road, relieving traffic, leaving more room on the road for drivers who must use their cars.

The only thing better for a subway lover would have been a similar announcement from front-running mayoral hopeful George Smitherman and an endorsement from Rocco Rossi, Smitherman’s closest rival.

Candidate Joe Pantalone, Miller’s deputy on city council, is expected to continue with Miller’s preference: a light rail network called Transit City.

Few would argue with the idea that subways are preferred to streetcars. They run underground, leaving the surface routes for cars. They are faster. They are more winter-friendly.

The city is now in the midst of building streetcar lines because Mayor Miller and his allies have determined Toronto can’t afford subways. Toronto can’t because no one is prepared to impose road tolls. And yet everyone knows we cannot have a good transit system without some kind of money machine akin to road pricing.

Thomson is also prepared to look at public-private proposals to build subways. And she’ll continue to require that the kind of money the province has pledged towards the streetcars be diverted to subways.

“Great cities build great subways; great subways build great cities,†Thomson says. Toronto has fallen short because of “budgetary impotence and political trepidation.â€

In announcing the bold transit plan, Thomson made some declarations that opponents might challenge. But they resonate among many who prefer subways to streetcars. She said:

“While surface networks appear cheaper to build, they only have a 30-year lifespan and must be completely rebuilt three times in order to match the 90-year life of a subway system.†The offsetting benefits make subways a good investment.

She’d end the tolls as soon as the subways are built and guarantee the money goes to transit only.

It’s a tough sell. Credit the only woman in the contest for having the gonads to put it on the agenda.
 
OK Torontonians, once again from a great height - DUMP.

There is a map like this as a work of art in the Bangkok Centre for Contemporary Art and Culture (maybe not exact name but I can't be bothered googling it; you get the idea of the venue though). It is entitled something like:

WTBSSWLLWC *

* What The Bangkok Subway System Would Look Like Without Corruption

The proposed system could be entitled:

WTTSSWLLWPIFAN *

* What The Toronto Subway System Would Look Like Without Petty In Fighting and Nimbyism

Work with it. Ask the other candidates what their proposals are for mass rapid transit in Toronto. Could be interesting.


.
 
Last edited:
Did she just say in that last article that subway lines have a 90 year life span? Wow... she should at least try to understand the issue before making it the pillar of her election platform.
 
Like GraphicMatt said, this is impossible.

Sure it's bold, but it's unrealistic and over the top. Are building multiple transit infrastructure projects (subways especially) all at once really gonna happen as such? I'll be surprised if all of Transit City is built out. But yeah.... get real guys.

And if you vote for Thomson, you're nothing more than a sucker.


The only way I see this could be done is to "borrow-debt" the money upfront and then use the road tolls to pay the loan back.
Is that what she meant??? maybe we'll get more info later on but she should have gave more details on this.

As an exemple, the money used by Montreal for the olympic games of 1976 to build the stadium was "borrow-debt" and they used
a special tabacco taxe to pay the loan back...which took over 30 years...

The question is: Torontonians wants subways but are they ready to do what is necessary to get them?


Comments on the map:

-Where's Sheppard Wes?
-Where'st the RT/ extension to malvern?
-Not enough stops on the DRL and it should end on Eglinton on both sides


Comments about Metrolinx...

-Can she make Metrolinx go backwards on Transit City?

Not impossible. So far Metrolinx haven't been that independant to me so far. So far they pretty much said yes to every Transit City projects and ruled out subways just like Miller wanted.... I see them more as project managers than decision takers so far.
 
Did she just say in that last article that subway lines have a 90 year life span? Wow... she should at least try to understand the issue before making it the pillar of her election platform.

Are you going to argue that it is longer or shorter than that?

The most depressing part is that the tolls would likely not cover the additional operating expenses associated with that number of additional manned stations; and subway in Toronto means manned stations. Capital remains uncovered, particularly if the plan was to remove the tolls after 10 years.
 
My fear about this election campaign, which seems to becoming centred on transit options for the city, is that with a new Mayor we will see the cancellation of existing Transit City plans, and the development of a new plan. A new plan, such as this, will take quite a while to flesh out, and even longer to attract funding for, and will be just as susceptible to a sudden change of heart in the election after next, or perhaps the provincial election after next. This has been the problem with our transit planning for the past 30 years. There is always a better plan around the corner.

So, when I see Sarah's plan, or Rossi's stated intention to call a moratorium on Transit City, essentially I read these as a complete cancellation of all existing plans and starting from scratch. Debating the merits of their proposals has little meaning for me, because all I see is nothing stretching off into the future.
 
Are you going to argue that it is longer or shorter than that?

The most depressing part is that the tolls would likely not cover the additional operating expenses associated with that number of additional manned stations; and subway in Toronto means manned stations. Capital remains uncovered, particularly if the plan was to remove the tolls after 10 years.

The TTC should start to consider completely changing their perception systems.

The new Montreal chip card and magnetic transferts with readers on every buses and stations with on top of that Pass and tickets sold buy automatic distributors taking credit cards and debit cards...

With all that, they could have every station operated by just 1 person and even eliminating the collectors from the stations if
they wanted too. TTC should start look into that
 
I have a few issues with the subway plan:

1. Her priority is Eglinton. Huh? It'll only add more congestion to YUS while the DLR is being built

2. Sheppard not extending west

3. The DLR could be longer E/W if it were further south.
 
Are you going to argue that it is longer or shorter than that?

The most depressing part is that the tolls would likely not cover the additional operating expenses associated with that number of additional manned stations; and subway in Toronto means manned stations. Capital remains uncovered, particularly if the plan was to remove the tolls after 10 years.

She implied that a subway line does not need major overhauls or rebuilding during the first 90 years, which is nonsense, but of course they can last longer with required overhauls.

She also claimed LRT's need to be "completely rebuilt" every thirty years and need to be rebuilt three times in order to last 90. The rails and top layer on concrete need to be replaced along with a few other components but it does not need a complete rebuilding, and my math may be wrong but I believe this would only need to be done twice, not three times in order to get 90 years of service.
 
I think this is everybody's ideal subway network. (Including mine - needs way more stops on the DRL, though.)

This isn't just an ambitious plan, though - it's literally impossible. Raising billions of dollars in road tolls alone so the city can fund dozens of kilometres of subway expansion, all within a decade? That just shows how politically naive this candidate is.

I think she might be smarter than we think. Right now she's kept it simple, and brought an important topic (and one that could get her a lot of attention) to the forefront. Let's face it - everyone would love more subways. She's offering the possiblity with a plan that's now easy to understand.

As the election progresses, I have no doubt more details will come out, and it will also put pressure on other levels of government to at least comment...in the unlikely event she wins, there's going to be a lot of pressure on them to provide funding.
 
My fear about this election campaign, which seems to becoming centred on transit options for the city, is that with a new Mayor we will see the cancellation of existing Transit City plans, and the development of a new plan. A new plan, such as this, will take quite a while to flesh out, and even longer to attract funding for, and will be just as susceptible to a sudden change of heart in the election after next, or perhaps the provincial election after next. This has been the problem with our transit planning for the past 30 years. There is always a better plan around the corner.

So, when I see Sarah's plan, or Rossi's stated intention to call a moratorium on Transit City, essentially I read these as a complete cancellation of all existing plans and starting from scratch. Debating the merits of their proposals has little meaning for me, because all I see is nothing stretching off into the future.

Well said. The problem is that she's proposing a multi-step process where only the first step (cancel existing projects) is easily achievable. The rest is incredibly complicated and unlikely to happen.

But I suspect this is more a PR move than it is actual policy. It certainly got everyone's attention.
 

Back
Top