[SashaLemon]

Multiple existing subways lines have had refits for PEDs; but I'm not sure exactly why that is an issue here. No one is talking about removing PEDs from the design and installing them later.

Honestly this side argument has gone off the tracks. This whole platform screen door thing was not even my main point, if anybody cares to read my post.
My argument is that we are nitpicking the hell out of probably one of the better transit projects happening in North America at the moment. Like its already designed, saying that station "A" needs to be over there instead of here? Seems like punching sand to me.

 

[crs1026]

It's not that simple. Many of the people in this protest are people would be affected by the line in their own ways. I think there are several Save Jimmie Simpson and Small Creek folks in there. These people are either people that are affected by other parts of the Ontario Line, or are impacted by other Metrolinx projects. If you noticed, much of the rhetoric spouted by the group is on the evils of Metrolinx as a whole. It's basically a group of various different NIMBYs using the trees as a soapbox to cancel transit projects.

They aren’t trying to stop transit projects…. but they are trying to change the rules of engagement once and for all. You don’t stop a bully by saying, “OK, but next time…….”

One person’s rabble is another person’s meeting of the minds. It may prove harder and harder for Metrolinx to step around community opposition if this coalition continues to attract new members…. the old members aren’t leaving just because their own particular interest has passed. This group didn’t come together by chance, nor do they individually spend all that much passion and energy about trees in other forums. But, some members had been having conversations with each other about Ml shenanigans….. and along came the trees…….

Honestly, the trees are not all that big a thing in the center of this. What brought this group together is - Metrolinx. Don’t be surpsised if the same players show up again in the future.

- Paul

 

[T3G]

"Please construct a poll that does not actually talk about the substance of the matter, so that I can win."

Did you get advice on polling from the 1995 Parti Quebecois?

For the average person (and voter) who isn't a transit nerd, this is a very simple problem.

The hypothetical question I put forward talks about the substance of the matter about as much as would a poll about the instituting of a rapid transit line being framed as "Do you support adding a way for the homeless and drunks to get to your neighbourhood so they can break into your home and terrorize the local population?"

It's slimy, and dishonest. Outline the facts, the benefits and drawbacks, in a neutral way. Let the public decide for themselves. And if you and anyone else arguing on this side of the argument really thinks this all boils down to a bunch of trees, and not a larger principle about not giving a corrupt organization such as Metrolinx a free pass to do whatever they want without any consequences, you clearly have not read the arguments put forth, and are not arguing in good faith, and I refuse to do further debate with you.

Have a good day.

 

[kEiThZ]

Honestly, the trees are not all that big a thing in the center of this. What brought this group together is - Metrolinx.

And this is why this protest is seen as driven by NIMBYs.....

This is not to say the complaints about Metrolinx aren't well founded. But the time to address those complaints was during recent provincial and municipal elections. People concerned about ML overreach should have been pushing politicians to reform the organization. But complaints about Metrolinx, in and of itself, shouldn't be enough to bring major projects to a halt.

 

[APTA-2048]

And this is why this protest is seen as driven by NIMBYs.....

This is not to say the complaints about Metrolinx aren't well founded. But the time to address those complaints was during recent provincial and municipal elections. People concerned about ML overreach should have been pushing politicians to reform the organization. But complaints about Metrolinx, in and of itself, shouldn't be enough to bring major projects to a halt.

People tend to only realize there's a problem when it affects them. So I'm not entirely surprised Metrolinx was not on the ballot. But what all these community fights with Metrolinx do have in common seem to be poor planning, lack of transparency, and poor engagement. Even the issue of the Ontario Line's MSF seemed to have been decided before people in Thorncliffe Park were even aware of it being located there.

 

[kEiThZ]

Let the public decide for themselves.

I would argue that the public has settled this when they voted for politicians who approved this project and Metrolinx's approach.

Critics may not like the answer. They may think the public is ignorant. And they won't even be entirely wrong on that! But this is how representative democracy works.

By the way, why isn't this coalition of groups running such polling as you suggest? If the public is onboard, showing polling should be a no-brainer.....

 

[Northern Light]

Elections are not referenda on the design details of one component of one capital project.

That said, the local Councillor is on record as opposing this particular design choice (Osgoode); as is the Mayor, so those locally elected were mandated in this regard, however, peripherally, it should be conceded.

The current government provincially has not elected anyone near downtown Toronto, so there too the voters spoke; the fact that (some) voters supported this government in Barrie or St. Kitts or Haldimand or Brampton, where one imagines this project is of little interest, can hardly be considered a mandate to push this project through at this location, in this form.

***

As noted, I'm not militantly opposed here so much as I feel this is a poor choice, insufficiently justified, which ought to be discussed more openly. Had that opportunity been afforded by Mx at an earlier date, the current discussion would not likely be happening.

Community meetings in which designs were not shared; and where they were, alternatives were not shared, costs were not shared, and the staff sent to the meetings lacked the requisite expertise to speak to the issues are not really a good faith effort to engage the community in an honest and fair discussion of the trade-offs being made.

 

[kEiThZ]

People tend to only realize there's a problem when it affects them. So I'm not entirely surprised Metrolinx was not on the ballot. But what all these community fights with Metrolinx do have in common seem to be poor planning, lack of transparency, and poor engagement. Even the issue of the Ontario Line's MSF seemed to have been decided before people in Thorncliffe Park were even aware of it being located there.

Sure. Like I said, I don't think the concerns are unwarranted. But in the broader pantheon of issues, it's pretty telling that this didn't come up as major issues during the campaign. Is it really hard to imagine that the wider public just doesn't care as much as critics think? I wouldn't even go so far as to suggest that the public might even support the aggressive ML approach (not me personally to be clear)....

The current government provincially has not elected anyone near downtown Toronto...

If we're only allowed to build transit where the provincial government wins seats, hhhhooooo boooooy, is it going to be interesting.

 

[APTA-2048]

If we're only allowed to build transit where the provincial government wins seats, hhhhooooo boooooy, is it going to be interesting.

That's not they said. You claimed that the election results were reflective of community approval of the project.

Sure. Like I said, I don't think the concerns are unwarranted. But in the broader pantheon of issues, it's pretty telling that this didn't come up as major issues during the campaign.

It's not really. Like I said, nobody thinks about it until it affects them personally.

 

[kEiThZ]

Elections are not referenda on the design details of one component of one capital project.

Elections are referenda on how governments are governing. I would argue that a major public agency not consulting enough would be an issue if it was sufficiently concerning to the wider public.

 

[evandyk]

It's a bit strange that discussions over a $17B transit line in Toronto wasn't much of an issue in an election campaign, but none of the parties were trying to win seats in Toronto. The election was won and lost in the 905 mostly. They might care about $17B, but they certainly don't care about 5 trees at Queen and University.

 

[kEiThZ]

That's not they said. You claimed that the election results were reflective of community approval of the project.

No. I said:

I would argue that the public has settled this when they voted for politicians who approved this project and Metrolinx's approach.

That was speaking to more than just the local MPP or councillor. The whole region has a stake in how Metrolinx is run. Not just the ridings along a given project.

 

[picard102]

That was speaking to more than just the local MPP or councillor. The whole region has a stake in how Metrolinx is run. Not just the ridings along a given project.

So you think people were voting on Metrolinx issues when they elected a OPC member in Kenora - Rainy River? Or at the very least should have been, lest there be no issue to see here?

 

[kEiThZ]

It's a bit strange that discussions over a $17B transit line in Toronto wasn't much of an issue in an election campaign, but none of the parties were trying to win seats in Toronto. The election was won and lost in the 905 mostly. They might care about $17B, but they certainly don't care about 5 trees at Queen and University.

Even aside from this project and controversy itself, I don't recall any discussion on how Metrolinx is run during the provincial or municipal election. In a city and region starved for transit investment, I'm going to suggest that most people don't care.

Are there wider issues than these 5 trees? Absolutely. Is the average Joe or Jane going to see it that way? Absolutely not. And every headline is going to be about saving 5 trees. Can't wait for the BlogTO piece on it....

 

[crs1026]

And this is why this protest is seen as driven by NIMBYs.....

This is not to say the complaints about Metrolinx aren't well founded. But the time to address those complaints was during recent provincial and municipal elections. People concerned about ML overreach should have been pushing politicians to reform the organization. But complaints about Metrolinx, in and of itself, shouldn't be enough to bring major projects to a halt.

Well, actually - the way to build public awareness to a problem is to seize the moment and build the awareness as it unfolds. Waiting until an election and then reciting all ML's ills is not good political or activist strategy. Better to point out the bad behaviour and build the support now, so that when the opposing candidate announces their campaign platform and says "My first priority will be to change ML's Board" the public already knows the issue and endorses the direction. That's what the next two years' speechmaking will be about. Drip, drip, drip......

ML is actually playing into this strategy because they can't help themselves from pulling these stunts and handing out the examples that more and more people are seeing clearly. And maybe they are being egged on from above. The heart of the issue is that ML has been given a mandate to get these projects underway, no pauses or excuses. Some of that may drive from frustration with past municipal council disfunction, but I suspect it's also the true modus operandi of Ford and some of his colleagues. The voters elected a Premier, but not a King. And many people do defer to the engineers without asking if the engineers considered options and are there better ways.....

If I had to bet money, as opposed to express opinions, I would bet that the trees will come down after the next round of court activity. In a strict legal sense the Province does hold many levers over local decisions. Personally I have run out of energy to debate this one. I suspect we've all reached positions that we won't be moving off of.

What will be interesting is what happens this year with the Eglinton-Jane-Humber issue. More than with Osgoode, the solutions may be more obvious to the layperson. None of us can really say with confidence what the engineering solution at Osgoode can or can't be.... but the impossibility of tunneling under the Humber River with steep grades on either side is harder to dispute. But don't think that the opposition will come from naive tree-huggers. I bet this one is harder fought and by a coalition that makes strategic hay out of ML's missteps. i would bet there will be those missteps, too - some people are counting on them..

- Paul