[muller877]

I think, it is a bit more complex than that. Certainly, downtown has been overlooked in the past few decades in terms of transit investments, and it needs more transit (for the benefit of the whole city).

Really?

Downtown
- New subway cars
- New union station platform
- New streetcars
- UPX airport express

Mid-town
- New St Clair Streetcar
- Eglington Line

Outer Toronto
- use of the new subway cars
- on again off again frequency for buses
- a promised LRT network that we won't see for 10 years (if ever)

Toronto has always had this issue...before and after amalgamation. The core area thinks they are so hard done by and give more than they take. In fact, the outer cities were living within their means and Toronto was spending way too much money before the amalgamation (and I still expect the same after)

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Really?

Downtown
- New subway cars
- New union station platform
- New streetcars
- UPX airport express

Mid-town
- New St Clair Streetcar
- Eglington Line

Outer Toronto
- use of the new subway cars
- on again off again frequency for buses
- a promised LRT network that we won't see for 10 years (if ever)

Interesting - you made it as if the new subway trains or Eglinton only serves downtown/midtown. Beyond forgetting to note the Spadina extension, GO RER plans (plus frequency increase for GO), the suburbs chose to reject the LRT network on their own accord for far more expensive subway options covering far fewer riders. Also note that there is no significant capacity related expansion in downtown at all, beyond what comes by from vehicles that simply had to be replaced.

In fact, the outer cities were living within their means and Toronto was spending way too much money before the amalgamation (and I still expect the same after)

Evidence please? Also keep in mind the effect of property tax reassessment that saw suburban taxes decreased.

AoD

 

[Riverdale Rink Rat]

Sorry, was I stepping on the hyperbolic bullshit too heavily?

You'll note that I've also posted responses to angst-filled comments basically saying people should calm down. You were, IMHO, completely dickish about it. I apologize if that was not your intention. But, given the term 'hyperbolic bullshit' above, I don't thinks that's the case.

 

[buildup]

So! What gives here? After 4 years of bizarre leadership from The Fords, the first major decision by our new mayor appears to be an unmitigated disaster with permanent consequences. Every urban planner and thoughtful reporter basically concluded the tear down option was half as expensive and much superior from a planning angle. I'm dumfounded and disgusted. It appears Tory is one of those guys who cant move off a decision once he's made it.

Not good enough, dammit.

 

[pman]

So! What gives here? After 4 years of bizarre leadership from The Fords, the first major decision by our new mayor appears to be an unmitigated disaster with permanent consequences. Every urban planner and thoughtful reporter basically concluded the tear down option was half as expensive and much superior from a planning angle. I'm dumfounded and disgusted. It appears Tory is one of those guys who cant move off a decision once he's made it.

Not good enough, dammit.

Tory is simply Ford in a better suit. He's a mayor exclusively for the suburbs, and he willfully disregards latte-sipping (his reference in a Gardiner debate) elite stuff like data, analysis and expert advice.

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

So! What gives here? After 4 years of bizarre leadership from The Fords, the first major decision by our new mayor appears to be an unmitigated disaster with permanent consequences. Every urban planner and thoughtful reporter basically concluded the tear down option was half as expensive and much superior from a planning angle. I'm dumfounded and disgusted. It appears Tory is one of those guys who cant move off a decision once he's made it.

Not good enough, dammit.

Unless its carding.

 

[Eug]

Since my previous post was deleted, I will rephrase:

I am quite surprised at how many people are now talking about Olivia Chow in this context. First, she has absolutely nothing to do with this so she really shouldn't be part of the discussion. Second, she ran an absolutely horrible campaign, with no evidence she'd do any better as a mayor. Really, she's ancient history in this context, and frankly from my perspective, I'm glad she's not in the mix.

People, John Tory won, and hybrid also won. Now, hopefully, John Tory will actually be able to get this implemented. Not convinced, but hopeful. We need to move forward to get these projects done. In fact, that's my main complaint here, that Council decided to put those stupid tunneling add-ons. Basically NOBODY thinks it's a viable option, so it just ends up being a total waste of time and money.

So! What gives here? After 4 years of bizarre leadership from The Fords, the first major decision by our new mayor appears to be an unmitigated disaster with permanent consequences. Every urban planner and thoughtful reporter basically concluded the tear down option was half as expensive and much superior from a planning angle. I'm dumfounded and disgusted. It appears Tory is one of those guys who cant move off a decision once he's made it.

Not good enough, dammit.

"thoughtful reporter"

I guess that means "reporter that agrees with buildup".

I've read some thoughtful pieces that may have somewhat preferred remove, but did acknowledge the drawbacks of remove, and I'm not willing to discount U of T's study like so many hardcore remove supporters did.

 

[nfitz]

Really?

Downtown
- New subway cars
- New union station platform
- New streetcars
- UPX airport express

Mid-town
- New St Clair Streetcar
- Eglington Line

All projects initiated when Miller was mayor ... well, the UPX was late Lastman ...

Can't wait for those Ford and Tory projects to come on line. LOL.

 

[ttk77]

Since my previous post was deleted, I will rephrase:

I am quite surprised at how many people are now talking about Olivia Chow in this context. First, she has absolutely nothing to do with this so she really shouldn't be part of the discussion. Second, she ran an absolutely horrible campaign, with no evidence she'd do any better as a mayor. Really, she's ancient history in this context, and frankly from my perspective, I'm glad she's not in the mix.

People, John Tory won, and hybrid also won. Now, hopefully, John Tory will actually be able to get this implemented. Not convinced, but hopeful. We need to move forward to get these projects done. In fact, that's my main complaint here, that Council decided to put those stupid tunneling add-ons. Basically NOBODY thinks it's a viable option, so it just ends up being a total waste of time and money.

Problem is, it sounds like he didn't have enough votes to win without promising the tunneling investigation and the various other promises to look for a better hybrid option. This is going to come back for another vote in September, so the matter is far from settled yet. Even if everything was smooth sailing from here, construction won't start for four more years. With the expected lawsuits and appeals to the OMB it could draw out even further, and that's assuming that Tory wins the vote again in September. Hopefully between now and then they can come up with a plan that isn't so divisive.

 

[Eug]

Yes. The tunnelling was put in for political reasons, which is unfortunate.

 

[clarkburglar]

I've read some thoughtful pieces that may have somewhat preferred remove, but did acknowledge the drawbacks of remove, and I'm not willing to discount U of T's study like so many hardcore remove supporters did.

The reasons for discounting the U of T study are clear. The 10 minute figure assumes that there won't be an island in the middle of the blvd. Therefore pedestrians would need to cross the road in one shot, so red lights would last a lot longer. This adds 4.5 minutes on to the commute time bringing it down to a 5.5 min plus difference for the boulevard. On top of that, the trip they used is of someone driving almost the entire length of the gardiner/dvp. Few people, if anyone will drive this route. By the studies own metrics, someone driving just the east-west portion of the gardiner will only have 2 minutes added onto their commute.

You can read more about it here: http://www.thestar.com/news/city_ha...sleading.html?referrer=http://t.co/xuDD7IsVNt

All of this makes Tory's campaign for the gardiner seem incredible sleazy. Even referring to it as the "hybrid," is total bull, and all the evidence he gave for it was anecdotal, or an incorrect statistic. Not to mention, passing motions into law that he knows are terrible in order to win a few votes.

 

[Eug]

Yes the other conclusion was that if we assume they don't cross in one shot the delay may be 5 mins. Still not the same as the city's 2-3 mins

Also important to realize that 5 mins on a good day means 10 mins or longer on a bad day, in the real world.

 

[clarkburglar]

Yes the other conclusion was that if we assume they don't cross in one shot the delay may be 5 mins. Still not the same as the city's 2-3 mins

Also important to realize that 5 mins on a good day means 10 mins or longer on a bad day, in the real world.

5 minutes if you're driving almost the entire length of the gardiner. As stated in the article, The U of T study found only a 2 minute delay when driving the east-west portion of the gardiner. The same as the city study. And of course there will be inexplicably bad days, but those are extremely rare on this travel route, which is incredibly under used. Look up rush hour reports for the eastern gardiner and you'll see how few cars there ever are using it. Even at peak hours, barely anyone drives it.

 

[Eug]

5 minutes if you're driving almost the entire length of the gardiner. As stated in the article, The U of T study found only a 2 minute delay when driving the east-west portion of the gardiner. The same as the city study. And of course there will be inexplicably bad days, but those are extremely rare on this travel route, which is incredibly under used. Look up rush hour reports for the eastern gardiner and you'll see how few cars there ever are using it. Even at peak hours, barely anyone drives it.

And of course, as mentioned, the other assumption is that large and currently completely unfunded transit projects are already built to make those numbers viable.

Another option: Build those transit projects, then tear down the east Gardiner. That is still an option for the future after all.

 

[clarkburglar]

And of course, as mentioned, the other assumption is that large and currently completely unfunded transit projects are already built to make those numbers viable.

Another option: Build those transit projects, then tear down the east Gardiner. That is still an option for the future after all.

But then you have to pay for both options. Based on the price and the scarce advantages of the hybrid, this would be doubly stupid.
Also the boulevard will have to go along the waters edge because the space where it's supposed to will be developed over. As for the unfunded transit projects: The fact that transit is unfunded is exactly the reason why we shouldn't be wasting money on transit projects that serve so few commuters.