News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.7K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.5K     0 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Tewder said:
Let's not quibble. That decisions surrounding the gas plant were politically motivated - along with the cover up/willful underestimating of the associated costs - rather smacks of corruption to me. Perhaps you prefer you governments to be cagey?
Click to expand...

Can someone explain why Liberals and removing gas plants being politically motivated is a bad thing, but when Ford wants to spend an extra $1 billion to build a subway in Scarborough instead of the LRT, or Hudak wants to extend the Sheppard subway instead of the LRT (to buy votes in those areas) at much higher cost when an LRT fits perfectly fine - is okay?
 
nhui06 said:
Can someone explain why Liberals and removing gas plants being politically motivated is a bad thing, but when Ford wants to spend an extra $1 billion to build a subway in Scarborough instead of the LRT, or Hudak wants to extend the Sheppard subway instead of the LRT (to buy votes in those areas) at much higher cost when an LRT fits perfectly fine - is okay?
Click to expand...

Cancelling LRT lines (which simply means cancelling part of the Bombardier contract) costs a lot less than $1 billion. No construction contracts have been awarded for these lines yet.
 
andrewpmk said:
Cancelling LRT lines (which simply means cancelling part of the Bombardier contract) costs a lot less than $1 billion. No construction contracts have been awarded for these lines yet.
Click to expand...

I am talking about the idea of 'buying votes' at the expense of the tax payers. For example, if the Sheppard LRT has been studied and shown to be more than adequate given the demographics, but subways are 'sexier' but will cost a lot more, how is switching over to the subway plan not buying votes?
 
nhui06 said:
I am talking about the idea of 'buying votes' at the expense of the tax payers. For example, if the Sheppard LRT has been studied and shown to be more than adequate given the demographics, but subways are 'sexier' but will cost a lot more, how is switching over to the subway plan not buying votes?
Click to expand...

Why was Sheppard East LRT at the top of the Transit City list ?
 
Transit City is probably the most politicized transit plan in Toronto's history, devised entirely by politicians for political purpose. And you tell us it's not about buying votes, what a joke.
 
doady said:
Transit City is probably the most politicized transit plan in Toronto's history, devised entirely by politicians for political purpose. And you tell us it's not about buying votes, what a joke.
Click to expand...

I am primarily a driver. I will likely NEVER use the SELRT or the FWLRT or the WWLRT or the DMLRT or the SRT/LRT. I might use Eglinton. Yet I would vote for TC.
 
doady said:
Transit City is probably the most politicized transit plan in Toronto's history, devised entirely by politicians for political purpose. And you tell us it's not about buying votes, what a joke.
Click to expand...

I don't agree with that.
 
Juan_Lennon416 said:
Why was Sheppard East LRT at the top of the Transit City list ?
Click to expand...

Miller wanted to kill the Sheppard subway for political reasons. So he fudged the ridership projections to deliberately underestimate demand on that line. Just like Mel Lastman deliberately overestimated demand on the Sheppard subway.
 
The Sheppard subway is a money pit--high cost and low ridership. To not extend it is a matter of reasonable governance and not petty politics. The only way to build low-ridership subways like Sheppard is with an elevated or trenched corridor and basic outdoor stations. It's either that or surface LRT.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top