ARG1 said:
I'm not TGM but, the NDP have spent the last couple of months attacking the Doug Ford transit plans by claiming that an economic recession isn't a good time to be funding transit (which is absolute bullocks), and siding with NIMBY's in Leslieville that complain that the Ontario Line running above ground on the LSE Corridor would be too noisy (which if that's the case then these people have much more serious issues coming their way than the Ontario Line). While I'd love a return to 1989 NDP with them promising a ton of new subway lines and trying to compete with Doug Ford's rhetoric, I'm not sure that's the direction Horwath is planning to take.
Click to expand...

Have they literally said "an economic recession isn't a good time to be funding transit"? If that's paraphrasing, what's the closest statement quote for that?
 
We don't actually know whether this is going to be elevated above the rail corridor, or strapped onto the sides, because the plans are top secret. No one is allowed to see them until they are presented as final, sorry, too late to change anything.
 
CapitalSeven said:
We don't actually know whether this is going to be elevated above the rail corridor, or strapped onto the sides, because the plans are top secret. No one is allowed to see them until they are presented as final, sorry, too late to change anything.
Click to expand...
Is this actually the case or are you just fearmongering? Although there aren't detailed plans laid out at the moment, we are still in the early days of this project. Can you really expect all aspects of this line to be presented so soon? Why would a corporation publish designs that are not complete? The public would ridicule them even more for being incompetent.
So far Metrolinx has held open houses, they provide frequent updates on their website about drilling, site surveys, and other happenings. With other transit projects of a sizable nature, they have provided designs for public feedback in due course. I really feel that much of this negative rhetoric only stalls progress.
 
ARG1 said:

Enjoy
Click to expand...

Thanks for providing a time marked video. I enjoyed saving time.

So she's talking about Bill 197 which amended a lot of Acts and the transit piece was very small, was only for the four transit priority projects, and even then it only touches on certain permit aspects/utilities/expropriation. She was expressing general concerns that the legislation wouldn't do everything the government claimed. That's the normal role of the official opposition.

Thanks for confirming my question that you were paraphrasing your own view and she didn't say "an economic recession isn't a good time to be funding transit" (source: post No. #15,317).
 
CapitalSeven said:
I wouldn't be so hasty in criticizing people in Leslieville/South Riverdale for opposing the idea of approximately 100 trains an hour running approximately 100 feet, or in some cases 60 feet, from their windows. If above ground transit is intolerable in Scarborough and Etobicoke, what gives?
Click to expand...
The fact that transit is desperately needed in the city and like what’s already been mentioned by other users - new guideway technology like what’s been used on the newer Skytrain lines in Vancouver significantly help mitigate noise. People have to accept that a few residents living along the rail corridor will be effected by the train noise and there’s nothing they can do about it. It happens in Vancouver with the elevated Skytrain lines and every other city in the world with elevated tracks running through residential areas. It’s the only way transit gets built. I think it’s worth sacrificing a few residential properties to serve millions of people with public transit.
 
Allandale25 said:
Thanks for providing a time marked video. I enjoyed saving time.

So she's talking about Bill 197 which amended a lot of Acts and the transit piece was very small, was only for the four transit priority projects, and even then it only touches on certain permit aspects/utilities/expropriation. She was expressing general concerns that the legislation wouldn't do everything the government claimed. That's the normal role of the official opposition.

Thanks for confirming my question that you were paraphrasing your own view and she didn't say "an economic recession isn't a good time to be funding transit" (source: post No. #15,317).
Click to expand...
By saying that the legislation has "nothing to do" with COVID-19, she's suggesting that major investments into infrastructure do not help with COVID-19 which is a flat-out lie.
 
ARG1 said:
As for why it will be negligible, because its a small lighter train, and Metrolinx have said they will be specifically building it with sound mitigation in mind which includes single welded rails.
Click to expand...

You're giving too much credit to the marketing wank.

The TTC has been building its subways since the 1970s with those exact same "features" . In fact, they pioneered one of the primary methods for vibration mitigation - the "double tie" .

Dan
 
ARG1 said:
By saying that the legislation has "nothing to do" with COVID-19, she's suggesting that major investments into infrastructure do not help with COVID-19 which is a flat-out lie.
Click to expand...

The legislation only touched on some relatively small aspects of only the four priority projects (of which the OL is one of them). Your paraphrasing gave the impression of all transit projects. Thanks for confirming your opinion was that she was suggesting something, rather than it being a direct quote of "an economic recession isn't a good time to be funding transit".

If she believed that, I assume she wouldn't have held the Hamilton LRT press conference calling out the government for cancelling it and basically implying the project should immediately go ahead because it's shovel ready. Perhaps you missed that.
 
ARG1 said:
They chose to live right next to one of the busiest rail corridors in the province,
Click to expand...

That’s quite elitist of you to demean people who only had enough money to buy a house next to the tracks. I’m sure if they had the money, the would “choose” to live away from the tracks on a nice quiet tree-lined street in Rosedale.

ARG1 said:
NIMBY's in Leslieville that complain that the Ontario Line running above ground on the LSE Corridor would be too noisy
Click to expand...

It is interesting you play the NIMBY card without knowing all the issues. In addition to the noise you mention, there is the frequency of trains: Via, GO, RER and OL. Above the impact of noise and frequency, the bigger impact on the whole neighborhood is what will happen with adding more train tracks. Now there are 3, a 4th will be added for RER. Two more will be added for OL. From 3 lines to 6 will result in a lot of expropriation. If this happens, the result will be the loss of: a Community Center, two children’s playgrounds, parts of multiple public parks, two Seniors highrise housing buildings, dog park, multiple business buildings, an organization that provides shelter for older single women, a hockey rink and last but not least, many of the homeowners you originally demeaned. How much money will Ford give them when their houses are expropriated? Probably not fair market value as Ford passed a law to fastrack the OL which includes homeowners’ loss of the right to go court to contest how much they are offered in the expropriation.

Ford has always said “Subways, Subways, Subways” so one option is to continue the subway south of Gerrard and have the train portal ascend to grade before it crosses the Don River. How much more would that cost?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: syn
Nadnev said:
Is this actually the case or are you just fearmongering? Although there aren't detailed plans laid out at the moment, we are still in the early days of this project. Can you really expect all aspects of this line to be presented so soon? Why would a corporation publish designs that are not complete? The public would ridicule them even more for being incompetent.
So far Metrolinx has held open houses, they provide frequent updates on their website about drilling, site surveys, and other happenings. With other transit projects of a sizable nature, they have provided designs for public feedback in due course. I really feel that much of this negative rhetoric only stalls progress.
Click to expand...
A few points...

I don't think that there is any evidence that the project will be built on a guideway elevated above what is already an elevated ROW. Yet a number of posters have already presented that as their understanding. Which goes to show that clarity is lacking.

I am not asking for all aspects of the line to be presented "so soon." The project was worked on in secret for about 4 months before being announced publicly about 16 months ago. I think that is enough time to see some preliminary sketches for stations, rights of way, portal locations etc. Why on earth could incomplete designs not be published? The project is going to be paid for and owned by the taxpayers. We saw designs for the Relief Line project, some of which were subsequently changed. For decades preliminary design concepts have been tried out with the public so that they could stay on top of proposals and help influence their outcome. I think that's an aspect of democracy in action. I'm the first to admit that sometimes it gets to be too much, everyone opposes everything, and projects can stall.

My transit folder has a document with the Relief stations from June 2016 with a station at Queen/Pape and another at Eastern/Sumach. Two years later, drawings showed those stations at Carlaw/Queen and Cherry/King. We saw the design evolve over time, and I don't recall any ridicule about moving the stations around - it was partly done because of feedback from the initial plans. In fact some of the criticism of the plans for the line was what led to a whole new approach, the consideration of which I applaud, although I don't applaud the authoritarian and secretive way it has been carried out.

There hasn't been any real consultation on the planning of this line; there has been information about things being done and marketing (some of it intellectually dishonest) about why it is such a better idea than the relief line. But I can't believe for a moment that there are no preliminary plans that could be shown. There are, but we don't get to see them. We don't get to discuss with the planners where the stations go. If this does allow for the project to be planned and built more quickly than the typically glacial pace of Toronto transit projects, maybe we will say the lack of democracy was worth it.
 
bjrkz said:
The fact that transit is desperately needed in the city and like what’s already been mentioned by other users - new guideway technology like what’s been used on the newer Skytrain lines in Vancouver significantly help mitigate noise. People have to accept that a few residents living along the rail corridor will be effected by the train noise and there’s nothing they can do about it. It happens in Vancouver with the elevated Skytrain lines and every other city in the world with elevated tracks running through residential areas. It’s the only way transit gets built. I think it’s worth sacrificing a few residential properties to serve millions of people with public transit.
Click to expand...

Our illustrious Premier has made a career of telling the province that above ground transit is for 2nd class citizens.

There is actually something that can be done - use the original plan, developed closely with the community and transit experts. They could've got started right away.

It's clear at this point Ford's rhetoric on transit is a front to erode the democratic process and give the government more power. If he truly believed what he said, he would've stuck with the original DRL plan, and immediately begun planning a northern extension to Don Mills.
 
syn said:
Our illustrious Premier has made a career of telling the province that above ground transit is for 2nd class citizens.

There is actually something that can be done - use the original plan, developed closely with the community and transit experts. They could've got started right away.

It's clear at this point Ford's rhetoric on transit is a front to erode the democratic process and give the government more power. If he truly believed what he said, he would've stuck with the original DRL plan, and immediately begun planning a northern extension to Don Mills.
Click to expand...
As seen with the Yonge North extension and with the OL, the premier isn't saying that "ground transit is for 2nd class citizens". Instead what he's mostly been fighting against is on street median rapid transit like LRTs, which is certainly a respectable stance.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top