[Filip]

There are numerous articles that show his anti-subway bias. The recent one I remember is when Metrolinx initially decided that LRT was wrong for Eglinton and pushed for a full subway line, Miller literally lost his marbles and began going on about how building subways is not the answer. After speaking to a few councillors on the Eglinton corridor, they said the same thing. Go ask the normal people living on Eglinton what they think about the LRT, and they'll tell you - gauging your opinion based on a few LRTistas from this forum is laughable.

If he's pro subway, then tell me this: the DRL being the most important subway expansion for Toronto and one that would benefit everyone, has had its study funding pulled. I believe last year, the $2 million for the study was removed for 'budget cuts'. I'm sure you could remove a stop or two from his beloved TC to cover that, but no, subways are evil in Miller world. Also, if it was that important, then he'd include it in TC, but no, originally he said, and very clearly: "NO DRL UNTIL TC IS FINISHED". After cancelling the study, I can just imagine when we might be getting this fabled subway line - instead we're going to get suburban streetcar lines that nobody uses.

 

[EnviroTO]

There are numerous articles that show his anti-subway bias. The recent one I remember is when Metrolinx initially decided that LRT was wrong for Eglinton and pushed for a full subway line, Miller literally lost his marbles and began going on about how building subways is not the answer.

Metrolinx never pushed for a full subway line. They pushed for ART which is like the SRT... it is light rail.

gauging your opinion based on a few LRTistas from this forum is laughable.

Bias is easy to spot when it really exists. A guy who fixes up subway stations, hires station managers, builds new subway, and gets new subway cars has an "anti-subway bias". But a guy using the term "LRTistas" is unbiased and completely objective in his analysis right?

If he's pro subway, then tell me this: the DRL being the most important subway expansion for Toronto and one that would benefit everyone, has had its EA funding pulled.

Are you telling me that Lastman started a DRL EA and Miller pulled the funding? I doubt that.

Also, if it was that important, then he'd include it in TC, but no, originally he said, and very clearly: "NO DRL UNTIL TC IS FINISHED".

If it was clearly said then you MUST have a source you can provide for this! Explain how the Don Mills LRT would get built if there was no DRL. Don Mills passengers would arrive at Pape and go where, onto the crowded Danforth line to the at capacity Bloor station?

 

[Filip]

-Metrolinx pushed for heavier rail, the technology was never agreed upon - but I doubt it would've been SRT-style considering they're trying to get rid of it.

-He's fixing subway stations because they're literally falling apart. Have you seen Islington lately? Hiring new subway managers is a goal from the TTC to improve customer service, what does that have to do with an anti-subway bias. The new subway cars are necessary to replace hundreds of old Hawker Siddeleys that are at the end of their lifespan and the subway extension is basically a provincial project, and the only reason its going ahead is because of MPP Sorbara.

-They started a study, and then cancelled it.. Unfortunately the National Post article for it is now unavailable, but I'm sure there's info in the DRL thread buried in here somewhere.

-Oh, he most definitely said that, here's a direct quote from his pet, Giambrone: "The TTC is currently focusing on its Transit City plan, which will build a $6-billion network of above-ground streetcar-type light-rail lines in the city by 2021. Aside from two suburban subway extensions, the Downtown Relief Line would likely come next, Mr. Giambrone said."

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/...ider-relief-line-by-2018-giambrone-says.aspx]

You're welcome

 

[Justin10000]

Good lord! Take your stupid fight elsewhere! How many times must we have this idiotic debate? You're no better than Fresh Start.

 

[gweed123]

Not co-incidentally. It was with great pressure from Miller that funding was given and Miller didn't get half of his plan funded and then less than a year later half the committed funding was pulled away. If you believe there is no funding issue then why isn't Miller's plan fully funded?

Transit City WAS fully funded. The original estimate was $8B, the City got $8B. It wasn't until the cost ballooned to $15B that the cutbacks started to occur. The Province has covered the full ORIGINAL cost of Transit City, they just couldn't support the nearly 50% inflated cost of Transit City.

 

[Dan416]

Good lord! Take your stupid fight elsewhere! How many times must we have this idiotic debate? You're no better than Fresh Start.

Agreed 100%. Calrissian is really annoying.

 

[nfitz]

There are numerous articles that show his anti-subway bias.

A preference for not building subway where it is not necessary perhaps; and prioritizing so that not all the infrastructure expansion is subway; still on a dollars spent basis, he's still spending more on subway expansion than LRT expansion.

 

[reaperexpress]

I came to this thread expecting news or discussion about the Ottawa LRT plan, but all I found was two pages of bickering about Toronto's politicians.

 

[EnviroTO]

-Metrolinx pushed for heavier rail, the technology was never agreed upon - but I doubt it would've been SRT-style considering they're trying to get rid of it.

A source which shows it was heavy rail?

-He's fixing subway stations because they're literally falling apart. Have you seen Islington lately? Hiring new subway managers is a goal from the TTC to improve customer service, what does that have to do with an anti-subway bias. The new subway cars are necessary to replace hundreds of old Hawker Siddeleys that are at the end of their lifespan and the subway extension is basically a provincial project, and the only reason its going ahead is because of MPP Sorbara.

An anti-subway bias would allow stations to continue to fall into disrepair with the minimum work to keep them safe, not a huge revamp like is being seen at Dufferin, Museum, Victoria Park, etc. Rob Ford's anti-streetcar bias means streetcars get replaced with hybrid buses. I don't see anything like that happening with subways under Miller. You say that the subway extension is a provincial project but it was the TTC which wanted it extended to York U. Who cares that Sorbara came through with the funding... the funding also came through for LRT.

-They started a study, and then cancelled it.. Unfortunately the National Post article for it is now unavailable, but I'm sure there's info in the DRL thread buried in here somewhere.

Who started this study?

-Oh, he most definitely said that, here's a direct quote from his pet, Giambrone: "The TTC is currently focusing on its Transit City plan, which will build a $6-billion network of above-ground streetcar-type light-rail lines in the city by 2021. Aside from two suburban subway extensions, the Downtown Relief Line would likely come next, Mr. Giambrone said."

Yes, it would come next because Transit City was already kicked off. A couple of months later they announced Bus Transit City, and then a couple of months later kicked off the Downtown transit study. He says the DRL would come next... why not more LRT if they have an anti-subway bias? Why would someone against subways say subways will come next? Wouldn't it make more sense to say subways won't come next? If Rob Ford is against perks for council would he say we will spend more on policing, and perks for council come next? It makes no sense to say what will be built next is what you are against.

 

[EnviroTO]

Transit City WAS fully funded. The original estimate was $8B, the City got $8B. It wasn't until the cost ballooned to $15B that the cutbacks started to occur. The Province has covered the full ORIGINAL cost of Transit City, they just couldn't support the nearly 50% inflated cost of Transit City.

I'm pretty sure there was never funding for Jane LRT, Don Mills LRT, Waterfront West LRT, and Scarborough-Malvern LRT. There was full funding for Finch West LRT, Eglinton LRT, Sheppard East LRT, and the SRT replacement. If funding is no issue why wouldn't the province cover the inflated cost? If we are to believe that whatever Miller asked for would get funded, why isn't it all funded?

 

[gweed123]

I'm pretty sure there was never funding for Jane LRT, Don Mills LRT, Waterfront West LRT, and Scarborough-Malvern LRT. There was full funding for Finch West LRT, Eglinton LRT, Sheppard East LRT, and the SRT replacement. If funding is no issue why wouldn't the province cover the inflated cost? If we are to believe that whatever Miller asked for would get funded, why isn't it all funded?

I just know that the initial pricetag quoted for Transit City was $8B, or at least that's what it was when City Council approved it. Is it coincidence that that's how much the province had initially contributed?

As for the 2nd part to that, in 2007 when it was approved the Province was in spending mode. They continued to fund the increased costs of these projects because they wanted to save political face (fearing a backlash if they turned around and said "these costs continue to rise, we're not going to fund these increases anymore"). Fast forward to late 2009 early 2010, and the government is in cut mode, and these increases couldn't be managed anymore, so they cut the funding back to just over what the initial pricetag was ($8.15 billion). The government didn't arbitrarily cut funding for TC. The amount that was cut corresponds pretty accurately to the amount that the costs have increased since TC was initially announced.

 

[nfitz]

I just know that the initial pricetag quoted for Transit City was $8B, or at least that's what it was when City Council approved it. Is it coincidence that that's how much the province had initially contributed?

If you don't like how it was done, why not just go vote for Rob Ford; it's your type of opposition to a good plan just because it isn't your plan that leads us to electoral situation we have now.

 

[Dan416]

If you don't like how it was done, why not just go vote for Rob Ford; it's your type of opposition to a good plan just because it isn't your plan that leads us to electoral situation we have now.

Be careful what you wish for. It looks like his lead is cementing

 

[gweed123]

If you don't like how it was done, why not just go vote for Rob Ford; it's your type of opposition to a good plan just because it isn't your plan that leads us to electoral situation we have now.

What? All I was doing was stating the fact that the reason why the funding was cut was because of the ballooning cost. This has nothing to do with the plan itself, but rather the faulty estimates that were provided as the basis for the plan. How does me pointing out the nearly doubling in cost of a "more affordable" plan make we want to go out and vote for Rob Ford?

And no, I don't like how it was done. I don't like how Transit City was sold as being a cheaper alternative, and then nearly doubled in cost before a single shovel hit the ground. To me that smells of dishonesty towards the electorate. That is not a left vs right comment either, because it is all too prevalent on both sides of the spectrum (sell it as affordable, then jack up the price once it's been approved).

If Transit City had stuck to its initial cost (or at least within 20% of it), I would be much more in favour of it. Unfortunately, it didn't. It was a good bang for the buck when it was first proposed. However, with nearly double it's original pricetag, it's not worth it. It was a good investment of $8B. But there are better things we could be investing in for $15B.

 

[nfitz]

I don't like how Transit City was sold as being a cheaper alternative, and then nearly doubled in cost before a single shovel hit the ground.

You know well that most of the bloat on the Transit City costs are because the tunnelled section of Eglinton was very much under-estimated. Essentially an LRT in a subway tunnel costs about the same as a subway.

To use that to justify subway over LRT ... except perhaps for the 10-km of Eglinton that costs as much as a subway .... seems dishonest to me.