[zang]

Our fearless leader John Tory came out to increase funding to the TTC today, albeit not enough to ward off a fare increase of $0.10 to adult and student fares:

At this point I think it's time to just abolish the kids ride free non-sense policy.

So, your wish is to make things harder for low-income families? Because your suggestion does exactly that.

At a time where the TTC is using it's resources inadequately, and many routes are overcapacity, i'd rather have that additional money from there used to deploy additional safety resources on the system and free up capacity that's being wasted by kids hopping on for a couple stops only to leave other riders stranded

"Kids" isn't free-roaming teenagers, it's children 12 or younger. And at that age that they're almost always accompanied by an adult.

The fare increase, combined with increased violence on the system, and decrepit faltering service is just a recipe for disaster. The TTC is just begging to lose riders at this point.

We could demand proper operational funding subsidy from the provincial and federal governments comparable to anywhere even close to the same size as Toronto.

Or, y'know, stop shovelling money into propping up a rotting elevated highway to the tune of billions, and actually put it towards a service that can be used by everyone and not just car owners.

 

[T3G]

Or, y'know, stop shovelling money into propping up a rotting elevated highway to the tune of billions, and actually put it towards a service that can be used by everyone and not just car owners.

And replace it with what?

I am not part of the motorist lobby and I also despise the Gardiner, it cuts downtown in two and is an eyesore of biblical scale, but knocking it down without replacing it with anything, such as your suggestion of diverting the funds to the TTC which offers zero options for people outside of the city, would make the living situation in the city even worse than it currently is. Even with GO expansion, our transit system is nowhere near robust or useful enough to justify knocking down the Gardiner, and it won't be for decades to come.

 

[DSC]

And replace it with what?

I am not part of the motorist lobby and I also despise the Gardiner, it cuts downtown in two and is an eyesore of biblical scale, but knocking it down without replacing it with anything, such as your suggestion of diverting the funds to the TTC which offers zero options for people outside of the city, would make the living situation in the city even worse than it currently is. Even with GO expansion, our transit system is nowhere near robust or useful enough to justify knocking down the Gardiner, and it won't be for decades to come.

I am not sure that anyone thinks one could just magically 'remove the Gardiner' and do nothing else. I think many of us regret that the City chose the most expensive option (repairing it) rather than demolishing (at least) the east end of it AND improving Lake Shore Blvd. It is really quite scary what a huge % of the City's road repair budget is being consumed by the Gardiner and it is far from finished.

 

[zang]

And replace it with what?

A widened Lakeshore, as has been an option given by the planning department for about 20 years now?

It's not like this is unproven territory here. Plenty of cities have successfully scrapped their elevated and urban highways in favour of slower thoroughfares, only to see less overall traffic in their cores and greater economic development. It's a win-win on many fronts.

I am not part of the motorist lobby and I also despise the Gardiner, it cuts downtown in two and is an eyesore of biblical scale, but knocking it down without replacing it with anything, such as your suggestion of diverting the funds to the TTC which offers zero options for people outside of the city

You mean the people who aren't paying taxes to prop up the crumbling red carpet into the downtown? Not such a loss there.

Also, the DVP still remains an option into the core. It may not be the easiest option for those coming from the West, but it has access to the 401, and lets out right onto Bloor, Richmond and Lakeshore, and doesn't cost anywhere near as much to maintain.

GO service needs to be drastically increased, but that's already a problem regardless of whether the Gardiner stays up. And that's provincial domain. The Gardiner is completely owned by the city.

[…] would make the living situation in the city even worse than it currently is. Even with GO expansion, our transit system is nowhere near robust or useful enough to justify knocking down the Gardiner, and it won't be for decades to come.

Well, building the Waterfront LRT, which was planned and ready to go over a decade ago, would be a damn big step.

 

[T3G]

A widened Lakeshore, as has been an option given by the planning department for about 20 years now?

Hahaha, you jest, surely? Where would you out this widened ROW? There's been a massive condo boom along Lakeshore in the last 20 years! Most of the street is flanked on all sides by construction! The amount of expropriation you'd have to do to widen the ROW will surely not yield any net savings. In the meantime, halving the road capacity into the core is going to cause a massive traffic tragedy on surrounding streets.

It's not like this is unproven territory here. Plenty of cities have successfully scrapped their elevated and urban highways in favour of slower thoroughfares, only to see less overall traffic in their cores and greater economic development. It's a win-win on many fronts.

I bet a lot of those cities you mention have a robust regional system and aren't held hostage by freight companies dictating who does and doesn't get to make use of their trackage. We don't, and a lot of GO services free of corporate interference suffer from issues such as very poor frequencies.

You mean the people who aren't paying taxes to prop up the crumbling red carpet into the downtown? Not such a loss there.

Sorry, but this kind of chauvinistic attitude doesn't impress me. Infrastructure must be built to satisfy the needs of the whole region, not just that of people sitting inside an arbitrarily defined border. And remember, those are people who are travelling into Toronto, usually to spend money that contributes to Toronto's economy.

It's also worth noting that a lot of these people live outside of Toronto because the city has oh so graciously priced them out.

so, the DVP still remains an option into the core. It may not be the easiest option for those coming from the West, but it has access to the 401, and lets out right onto Bloor, Richmond and Lakeshore, and doesn't cost anywhere near as much to maintain.

I don't much get the impression the DVP has a lot of capacity free as it is, especially the catastrophic interchange with the 401.

ell, building the Waterfront LRT, which was planned and ready to go over a decade ago, would be a damn big step.

Unless the Waterfront LRT runs westward beyond the city limits, that's really not a solution.

I'm all for reducing car dependence, but it must be done in a realistic way. We are not at the point where we can afford to discontinue an expressway without replacement and will not be for an extremely long time, thanks to decades of very poor urban and transit planning decisions.

 

[Northern Light]

The Mayor's daily preview of the 2023 City budget continues......

https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/20...d-2-billion-to-tackle-the-housing-crisis.html (paywalled)

From the above:

**

***

Not yet clear on the various details, I will report them as I get'em.

 

[zang]

Hahaha, you jest, surely? Where would you out this widened ROW? There's been a massive condo boom along Lakeshore in the last 20 years! Most of the street is flanked on all sides by construction! The amount of expropriation you'd have to do to widen the ROW will surely not yield any net savings. In the meantime, halving the road capacity into the core is going to cause a massive traffic tragedy on surrounding streets.

The Gardiner runs from the 427 to the DVP. A small bit of it runs through the condo boom, and a good portion of that runs parallel to the Gardiner (tear the Gardiner down, gain that space)
Halving the road capacity is kind of the point. The inverse of induced demand applies here. If it's more of a hassle, more people will chose to take other means.

Ever try to get downtown via the Gardiner within an hour of the start of any one of our sports teams' games? It's packed. Why? When there's easy access to both the TTC and GO near all their arenas? Because we've made it as easier for them to get to where they want to by car, and not by transit.

I bet a lot of those cities you mention have a robust regional system and aren't held hostage by freight companies dictating who does and doesn't get to make use of their trackage. We don't, and a lot of GO services free of corporate interference suffer from issues such as very poor frequencies.

It's not like we can't build more tracks. We've just chosen not to; mostly because we'd rather cede any space to cars that could be used for trains for cars. Taking out the Gardiner would sure make space for a whole lotta trackage.

Or should we just wait until those freight companies throw us a bone before we can decide we need more regional trains?

Sorry, but this kind of chauvinistic attitude doesn't impress me. Infrastructure must be built to satisfy the needs of the whole region, not just that of people sitting inside an arbitrarily defined border. And remember, those are people who are travelling into Toronto, usually to spend money that contributes to Toronto's economy.

No, they're "usually" (ie; statistically) traveling for work. As for the living in other cities/towns part, they "usually" live there because that's where they want to live, and the jobs are here. They drive for the higher paying jobs that we make it incredibly easy for them to get to (while ignoring city transit that could open up those jobs to people living within the city limits). You try getting from the Brown's Line to the downtown core at just about any time during the working day without a car in less than an hour. You'll be waiting for a GO train that runs a handful of mostly inconvenient times during the day, or you'll be taking mostly busses and making a half dozen line changes on the TTC. So, in short, it's not likely. And yet it's a 20 minute drive. There's no reason that level of disparity needs to exist even with the Gardiner still around.

And should we as Toronto taxpayers deprive our city of much needed services because a bunch of people from Oakville want to have their cake and eat it too?

It's also worth noting that a lot of these people live outside of Toronto because the city has oh so graciously priced them out.

We are talking about the city of Toronto's needs, and a rather hefty line on the city budget here. We have a regional transit system, and a provincial government to make regional decisions. Yes, there needs to be coordination, but I'm not expecting much to come out of Doug Ford over the next four years, are you?

I don't much get the impression the DVP has a lot of capacity free as it is, especially the catastrophic interchange with the 401.

Again, the inverse of Induced Demand applies here. It's not like I'm just making stuff up here; there are plenty of studies out there showing that the best (and ultimately only) way to reduce traffic is by reducing capacity.

Unless the Waterfront LRT runs westward beyond the city limits, that's really not a solution.

Really? Don't ignore transit hubs. A GO and MiWay hub at the west end wouldn't be there to just look pretty.

Besides, plenty of people already park within city limits to take the TTC. Seen the parking lots at Kipling, Wilson, etc. on any given weekday.

I'm all for reducing car dependence, but it must be done in a realistic way. We are not at the point where we can afford to discontinue an expressway without replacement and will not be for an extremely long time, thanks to decades of very poor urban and transit planning decisions.

No, we totally can. The $1.9B to be spent on restoring the Gardiner is a whole helluvalotta money that could be used elsewhere.

Someone, somewhere has to kick change into motion. If all the city agencies just sit around waiting for X to be in place first, you end up with what we've had the last 30 years. We can no longer sitting here wishing a bone is gonna get thrown our way. If we do not build out transit, it's very obvious it's not going to happen.

 

[T3G]

If it's more of a hassle, more people will chose to take other means.

Ever try to get downtown via the Gardiner within an hour of the start of any one of our sports teams' games? It's packed. Why? When there's easy access to both the TTC and GO near all their arenas? Because we've made it as easier for them to get to where they want to by car, and not by transit.

You are making three flawed assumptions here: 1) that people will elect other means, as though driving on the Gardiner isn't plenty of hassle already, 2) that everyone has easy access to transit (never mind downtown, what is the transit access like at the places where these people live?), and 3) failing to account for anyone not going to the immediate vicinity of Union station.

Here's an anecdote for you: my most recent concert was before Christmas at History, at Kingston Road and Queen. I live near the 21 Milton GO bus. As of this typing, it is a 51 minute drive from Milton GO station to the venue. By transit? It takes a whopping 2 hours and 29 minutes! And then the same amount of time to get back! I don't like taking the car and would MUCH rather leave it at home, but I don't think Torontonians appreciate just how incredibly worthless our transport network is. For someone who lives in south Oakville, or Mississauga, along the Lakeshore West line? Yeah, there's no excuse for driving, if you're going to sports arenas in the immediate vicinity of Union. For many other people who live further out, transit is just not time competitive at all. I could leave my house an hour and a half ahead of the show, and get back before midnight by car, or I could leave my house more than 2.5 hours in advance, preferably earlier to account for any delays, breakdowns etc, and then get back at home at 1:30 am. Why, in my right mind, would I ever choose that?

The worst delay I've ever experienced along the Gardiner stretched the journey to an hour and a half, driving to Roy Thomson Hall. This journey by GO bus takes, as of this writing, 2 hours and 15 minutes. A catastrophic traffic jam still made the journey faster, by almost a whole hour, than the GO bus under ideal conditions!

One last example is the journey Milton - Exhibition. By car, this is a 35 minute drive. By bus, it is 2 hours and 8 minutes if you care to transfer twice in Mississauga, or, if you go all the way into Union and back track, 2 hours and 35 minutes! The Gardiner is a hassle, but to rely on GO means losing a much bigger chunk of your day. And remember, the 21 doesn't have any private lanes, so any delay a car would be subject to, so would the bus, which already has a much longer trip time to begin with.

It's not like we can't build more tracks. We've just chosen not to; mostly because we'd rather cede any space to cars that could be used for trains for cars. Taking out the Gardiner would sure make space for a whole lotta trackage.

What are you talking about? There is already a rail corridor, fully owned by Metrolinx, in the immediate vicinity of the Gardiner. It's called the Lakeshore West line. What good would a railway line running parallel to it be? How would it account for GO lines that don't run all day, like the Milton line? And more importantly, where do you run the line past the city limits that would make it a competitive alternative to the Milton line?

We are talking about the city of Toronto's needs, and a rather hefty line on the city budget here. We have a regional transit system, and a provincial government to make regional decisions. Yes, there needs to be coordination, but I'm not expecting much to come out of Doug Ford over the next four years, are you?

Yawn. More self interested chauvinism. How is this any better than any place outside of Toronto complaining that they have to pay taxes to fund transit expansion in Toronto?

What's next, checking the ID of anyone who uses the TTC to ensure that they live in the city and aren't some good-for-nothing from the suburbs causing undue wear and tear on "your" system?

The $1.9B to be spent on restoring the Gardiner is a whole helluvalotta money that could be used elsewhere.

I think you are massively overestimating how much value $1.9B can actually buy you. Such a sum would barely make a dent in our region's transit woes. That's somewhat less than the price tag of a single LRT line (Finch West cost $2.5 billion). If you think that building one LRT line would suffice as a replacement for the Gardiner, then I don't know what to tell you.

If we do not build out transit, it's very obvious it's not going to happen.

You need to build transit BEFORE demolishing a critical piece of infrastructure. And much, MUCH more of it.

One other thing that needs to be mentioned: the population of the GTA is constantly growing. Halving the roadway capacity into downtown and pretending our transit system can handle the displaced people + population growth is myopic. To make the city pleasant to live in and visit, you need to have the equivalent carrying capacity on the transit system. Cutting back on capacity will just clog the local roads and transit system, and then you've helped no one at all.

 

[rbt]

You mean the people who aren't paying taxes to prop up the crumbling red carpet into the downtown? Not such a loss there.

Those downtown office buildings also pay property taxes: millions per year per tower.

The owners of those towers want to attract tenants (in fact, it's an essential step for them to pay property taxes); and some of those tenants have employees, including executive level decision makers deciding where to lease office space, who want to drive to work.

Toronto's residential taxes, alone, are far too low to keep the city running.

 

[Amare]

So, your wish is to make things harder for low-income families? Because your suggestion does exactly that.

No matter the age group that faces a fare increase, it makes things tougher for low-income families so I dont see your point. Additionally the city now has the Fair Pass Transit Discount Program in place which is there to assist low-income families.

"Kids" isn't free-roaming teenagers, it's children 12 or younger. And at that age that they're almost always accompanied by an adult.

Some are, some arent. Not all parents have the time to hold their kids hands to use transit due to various obligations.

We could demand proper operational funding subsidy from the provincial and federal governments comparable to anywhere even close to the same size as Toronto.

Yes, a song and dance we've been going through for decades since Mike Harris hacked up Toronto transit funding and that money clearly isnt coming. So we have to work with what we dont have unfortunately. The TTC is not properly funded and service levels have been going down for years, so use the money (however "small" it may be) from the kids ride free program and use it to improve service.

Or, y'know, stop shovelling money into propping up a rotting elevated highway to the tune of billions, and actually put it towards a service that can be used by everyone and not just car owners.

I'm not going to open up this debate again, but John Tory can also you know, actually increase property taxes above the rate of inflation for once in his life and actually fund properly fund several city departments which have been neglected under his watch (which includes the TTC).

 

[zang]

You are making three flawed assumptions here: 1) that people will elect other means, as though driving on the Gardiner isn't plenty of hassle already, 2) that everyone has easy access to transit (never mind downtown, what is the transit access like at the places where these people live?), and 3) failing to account for anyone not going to the immediate vicinity of Union station.

1) Not flawed assumptions. The Gardiner most times is free of traffic and fast. But in being so, it's extremely enticing to drivers.
2) This will be the last time I point this out; we're talking CITY OF TORONTO here, not provincial or other city needs. Horror Vacui applies here; needs will arise to be filled. Those are the responsibility of those suburban towns who thrive on building out car infrastructure to the detriment of Transit. Some (see; Mississauga) have finally started to come around. The TTC itself is currently in a state of low ridership, which generally leads to service cuts and lacklustre routes. Create a vaccum, and TTC ridership will go up, new routes will be created.

3) The core is not that big an area. It's accessible by the DVP, and not that far from Allen Rd. Convenience for cars should not trump Transit that benefits everyone.

Here's an anecdote for you: my most recent concert was before Christmas at History, at Kingston Road and Queen. I live near the 21 Milton GO bus. As of this typing, it is a 51 minute drive from Milton GO station to the venue. By transit? It takes a whopping 2 hours and 29 minutes! And then the same amount of time to get back! I don't like taking the car and would MUCH rather leave it at home, but I don't think Torontonians appreciate just how incredibly worthless our transport network is. For someone who lives in south Oakville, or Mississauga, along the Lakeshore West line? Yeah, there's no excuse for driving, if you're going to sports arenas in the immediate vicinity of Union. For many other people who live further out, transit is just not time competitive at all. I could leave my house an hour and a half ahead of the show, and get back before midnight by car, or I could leave my house more than 2.5 hours in advance, preferably earlier to account for any delays, breakdowns etc, and then get back at home at 1:30 am. Why, in my right mind, would I ever choose that?

Please, ignore again my statement that transit (and especially GO) service needs to be massively increased. Frankly, all train lines should be running all day long (including weekends), instead of parking trains 95% of the hours of a given week.

But sure, you've just proven my point; that you, as a suburban GTA driver, choose to take the Gardiner into the city because it's the easiest and most convenient route. Bravo!

Yawn. More self interested chauvinism. How is this any better than any place outside of Toronto complaining that they have to pay taxes to fund transit expansion in Toronto?

The city already pays out more to the province than it receives in services. The province isn't going to change that any time soon, and other towns always argue that somehow they're entitled to more of a share. The city of Toronto already gets punished for economies of scale.

We are in a literal service deficit not faced as badly by the towns and cities we support by keeping the Gardiner alive. We tried tolling it (under a less car-centric government even!) and that was kicked to the curb. It doesn't pay for itself, y'know. So yes, I think the GTA has far less of a stake in how our city taxes should be spent. Either that, or next time Orangeville creates yet another Opera House, Lobster Fest or Busker Fest, I should be able to tell them to eff off and widen Broadway instead.

What's next, checking the ID of anyone who uses the TTC to ensure that they live in the city and aren't some good-for-nothing from the suburbs causing undue wear and tear on "your" system?

No, the TTC is primarily funded by fares. I fully believe there should be distance-based fares though. That might help the city's transit subsidy.

I think you are massively overestimating how much value $1.9B can actually buy you. Such a sum would barely make a dent in our region's transit woes. That's somewhat less than the price tag of a single LRT line (Finch West cost $2.5 billion). If you think that building one LRT line would suffice as a replacement for the Gardiner, then I don't know what to tell you.

The Finch line also has some buried tunnels and stations, which dramatically increase costs. Not comparable.

The LWLRT would be entirely outdoors. Outdoor tracks and stations are far, far cheaper.

No, it wouldn't suffice as a replacement for the Gardiner. Again, see my numerous mentions of expansion of existing transit as well as creating new.

And it's also not like Lakeshore Blvd would disappear; you keep conveniently ignoring that we currently have two eastbound lakeside routes into the downtown. One just happens to be a lot faster than the other (most times).

You need to build transit BEFORE demolishing a critical piece of infrastructure. And much, MUCH more of it.

So, in the land of Mass Transit, cars dictate all?

Long gone apparently, are the days when we'd do something like rip up the entireties of Yonge or Bloor/Danforth Streets to build transit. Can't offend entitled car owners these days.

One other thing that needs to be mentioned: the population of the GTA is constantly growing. Halving the roadway capacity into downtown and pretending our transit system can handle the displaced people + population growth is myopic.

So is assuming that the Gardiner in any state can handle that growth. Either the Gardiner needs to be expanded (not really possible), or it will just become a elevated patch of useless gridlock 10 hours out of every day.

Fewer cars need to be taking that route, period. The Gardiner is the biggest factor here.

To make the city pleasant to live in and visit, you need to have the equivalent carrying capacity on the transit system. Cutting back on capacity will just clog the local roads and transit system, and then you've helped no one at all.

Actually, you've discouraged needless car trips when both the TTC and GO are at ridership lows. When those lines are at full capacity, running constantly, then you might have a point. Until then, adios.

 

[zang]

No matter the age group that faces a fare increase, it makes things tougher for low-income families so I dont see your point. Additionally the city now has the Fair Pass Transit Discount Program in place which is there to assist low-income families.

You can't tell the difference between a parent with two kids in tow paying for one fare/transit pass vs paying for three fares/transit passes? The TTC does not sell family passes.

Some are, some arent. Not all parents have the time to hold their kids hands to use transit due to various obligations.

Your argument was that "unpaid" unattended children are somehow crowding large numbers of "paid" riders off the line. That's not happening.

Yes, a song and dance we've been going through for decades since Mike Harris hacked up Toronto transit funding and that money clearly isnt coming. So we have to work with what we dont have unfortunately. The TTC is not properly funded and service levels have been going down for years, so use the money (however "small" it may be) from the kids ride free program and use it to improve service.

A bit penny wise/pound foolish when we're spending billions to keep the Gardiner alive.

I'm not going to open up this debate again, but John Tory can also you know, actually increase property taxes above the rate of inflation for once in his life and actually fund properly fund several city departments which have been neglected under his watch (which includes the TTC).

Agreed. Those who live in large rentals already pay (by proxy) a higher amount in property tax than homeowners. How about equalizing all property tax rates for a start?

 

[T3G]

This will be the last time I point this out; we're talking CITY OF TORONTO here, not provincial or other city needs.

Last I checked, Toronto doesn't exist in a vacuum.

Maybe the city should declare independence so that it no longer has to suffer suburbanites mooching off its services?

Please, ignore again my statement that transit (and especially GO) service needs to be massively increased. Frankly, all train lines should be running all day long (including weekends), instead of parking trains 95% of the hours of a given week.

I didn't ignore your statement. I challenged you on what form exactly you expect that to take shape in.

You suggested ripping out the Gardiner would leave plenty of room for rail lines, despite the already existing Lakeshore West line being situated literally right next to the Gardiner. This would be a) of zero value to people living along the Milton line, and b) doesn't explain what exactly we're supposed to do with those rail lines past the city limits of Toronto. It's all well and good to say "this should happen", how exactly do you plan to make it happen? How do you force CP to allow GO to run all day service on the Milton line?

No, the TTC is primarily funded by fares. I fully believe there should be distance-based fares though. That might help the city's transit subsidy.

And I'm sure the people of remote, low income communities like Rexdale will be super thankful to you for that.

So, in the land of Mass Transit, cars dictate all?

This is such an absurd conclusion to come to that I almost feel I shouldn't dignify it with a response at all.

Let me put this in a different way: we have spent the last 50 years building up car-centric infrastructure and screwing over transit. We have spent the last 20 years funneling an IMMENSE and unsustainable amount of people into the region. You can't just tear down a major motorway and tell everyone "screw you, use the starved out transit system, have fun doubling or tripling your trip time" and expect people to be okay with that.

Build a sufficient, first-class replacement for the Gardiner, in whatever form that might be. Then, and only then, can you talk about dismantling the Gardiner.

Long gone apparently, are the days when we'd do something like rip up the entireties of Yonge or Bloor/Danforth Streets to build transit. Can't offend entitled car owners these days.

The only suggestions you have made as to what should be done is to widen Lake Shore Boulevard and build a new rail corridor right next to an existing rail corridor. I shouldn't flatter yourself to think this idea is anywhere near the level of replacing the streetcars on Yonge or Bloor with rapid transit; more like halving the frequencies on the streetcar lines while coupling an extra, half size trailer behind the standard rolling stock. .

Actually, you've discouraged needless car trips when both the TTC and GO are at ridership lows. When those lines are at full capacity, running constantly, then you might have a point

So, the fact that these trips are not time competitive is not a valid point to bring up until you have scores and scores of sardine packed transit vehicles, filled with people making those non time competitive trips?

 

[picard102]

Long gone apparently, are the days when we'd do something like rip up the entireties of Yonge or Bloor/Danforth Streets to build transit. Can't offend entitled car owners these days.

Eglinton would like a word.

 

[zang]

Last I checked, Toronto doesn't exist in a vacuum.

Maybe the city should declare independence so that it no longer has to suffer suburbanites mooching off its services?

So, it's okay for non-Torontonians to dictate how Toronto spends a whopping 45% of it's transportation budget?

I didn't ignore your statement. I challenged you on what form exactly you expect that to take shape in.

Seemed pretty ignored to me.

You suggested ripping out the Gardiner would leave plenty of room for rail lines, despite the already existing Lakeshore West line being situated literally right next to the Gardiner. This would be a) of zero value to people living along the Milton line, and b) doesn't explain what exactly we're supposed to do with those rail lines past the city limits of Toronto. It's all well and good to say "this should happen", how exactly do you plan to make it happen? How do you force CP to allow GO to run all day service on the Milton line?

East of the 427, the Milton line makes one single stop; at Kipling station. Everything east of there could easily be routed south on a new track through almost entirely aging industrial areas to the Gardiner.

As for "forcing CP", that would be the domain of the governments higher up (and is certainly not outside of the abilities of said governments). But also, if the province can buy land for a Bradford bypass, it can certainly buy land for GO train tracks, and there are hydro and highway corridors that I'm sure could spare a couple of dozen feet for trackage.

And I'm sure the people of remote, low income communities like Rexdale will be super thankful to you for that.

What about the people hopping on at Vaughan "Metropolitan" Centre (ie; a handful of parking lots with some banks and the SmartCentres HQ)? Distance-based fares aren't some kinda crazy, untested idea. It works for San Francisco and Paris.

Rexdale is also a massive outlier when it comes to car ownership in the inner suburbs. But it also happens to be an area with one of the lower population densities. Should our transit system be focused solely on what's best for Rexdale, or what's best for everyone?

It's a bit disingenuous to argue about low-income communities while simultaneously defending a luxury like car ownership.

This is such an absurd conclusion to come to that I almost feel I shouldn't dignify it with a response at all.

Let me put this in a different way: we have spent the last 50 years building up car-centric infrastructure and screwing over transit. We have spent the last 20 years funneling an IMMENSE and unsustainable amount of people into the region. You can't just tear down a major motorway and tell everyone "screw you, use the starved out transit system, have fun doubling or tripling your trip time" and expect people to be okay with that.

Growing pains are to be expected, and that's why I brought up the Yonge/Bloor lines. They disrupted the ever loving crap out of the city. Short term pain for long-term gain.

Do you think people deprived of the Gardiner would just "take" it? Or would they demand better regional transit? Would they vote more transit-friendly politicians in? VERY LIKELY.

Build a sufficient, first-class replacement for the Gardiner, in whatever form that might be. Then, and only then, can you talk about dismantling the Gardiner.

What a ridiculous statement. Dismantling the Gardiner leaves room in most places for widening the Lakeshore to accommodate more traffic.

We have several levels of governments who do absolutely nothing proactive. We only ever react to problems, instead of heading them off when we first identify them. You'll NEVER get a first-class replacement for the Gardiner unless it is forced.

The only suggestions you have made as to what should be done is to widen Lake Shore Boulevard and build a new rail corridor right next to an existing rail corridor. I shouldn't flatter yourself to think this idea is anywhere near the level of replacing the streetcars on Yonge or Bloor with rapid transit; more like halving the frequencies on the streetcar lines while coupling an extra, half size trailer behind the standard rolling stock. .

The Gardiner accounts for about 7% of all daily commuters into the core, and almost half of the city's transportation budget.

So, the fact that these trips are not time competitive is not a valid point to bring up until you have scores and scores of sardine packed transit vehicles, filled with people making those non time competitive trips?

If only "time competition" were the only factor. I'm sure too many (like you, obviously) it's the most important thing, but those who bought homes in the outer suburbs and commute via car have chosen to do so. Again, something something, "cake and eat it too." Each GO train has the capacity to take 900 cars off the road. We run a whopping six of them a day round-trip to Milton and back; not because of lack of commuters, but because we capitulate to the car every damn time and make driving the absolute easiest way as a result.

We have the ability to make transit easier, faster and more convenient for all concerned, but we can't be beholden to suburban car owner's convenience for something that will improve the lives of so many more.

Car-owner entitlement is not a reason to keep the Gardiner, sorry.