[Streety McCarface]

He didn't even know it was grade-separated. Also don't forget - he wanted to cancel Eglinton in the first place, the province didn't allow it in their tete-a-tete.



Not only did we not have redundancies - we are hell bent on extending the one U line at both ends to ensure that when it falls (and fall it will, just by increasing the overall probability of failure by adding more places for it to fail), it falls harder than ever. This is lunacy. You know what though, it won't be people living in downtown (who can walk) that gets affected by this - it is people trying to get to Finch, Scarborough, Vaughan, etc.

AoD

Finch and Vaughan people have the University Spadina Line, it's those living in Scarborough and Richmond Hill that will be screwed over. I believe there is a crossover at Union.

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

Finch and Vaughan people have the University Spadina Line

Spadina line is vulnerable too, as evidenced earlier this week.

Service disruptions on the Yonge side ~7:30am reverberate back into service delays on the Spadina line around ~8:20-8:40am.

By 2041, Spadina Line will have crowding equivalent to Yonge Line today. Best we don't speak about what happens to the Yonge Line by 2041.

 

[BurlOak]

Ford had the best transit solution in Scarborough when he proposed an interlined SLRT-ECLRT with a grade separated Eglinton in Scarborough.

But that was by complete accident. Ford did not give it any thought as to why that was the best plan, he could not support why that would be the best plan with evidence. It was just a matter of a broken clock being right twice a day.

It is a shame that plan never happened, but painting the picture as if Ford was flexible or had any clue what he was talking about is just rewriting what happened. Ford did not even know which corridor the SLRT was to operate in.

Ford was a simple man, and he had a simple request - transit that doesn't interfere with cars.
Of course the corollary of this was that cars don't interfere with transit.

 

[salsa]

Perhaps it's time to move transit planning back to the TTC...just like when it was before Ms. Keesmat took the reins of Toronto Planning. Personally I do think that the TTC has much more capacity and experience than Toronto Planning; it just seems that Toronto Planning is too focused on socio-economic change than actual transportation of the masses. If you take a look at the Eglinton West LRT project it's clear where Toronto Planning's interests lay.

We'd still be in a similar position today regardless. Remember that for the longest time the TTC was convinced that we didn't need the relief line.

 

[Rainforest]

We'd still be in a similar position today regardless. Remember that for the longest time the TTC was convinced that we didn't need the relief line.

Relief line, for all its importance, is a special case. It isn't City Planning department's fault that it got delayed so much.

But in a number of other, smaller scale projects, City Planning showed a tendency to focus on city building, to the detriment of the primary transit goal of moving people. I wouldn't blame that on Keesmaat personally; rather, on the modern "progressive" mindset that is actually short-sighted in some cases.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

But in a number of other, smaller scale projects, City Planning showed a tendency to focus on city building, to the detriment of the primary transit goal of moving people.

Transit is a means to an ends. It's not the end itself. I want to live in a great city, and part of living in a great city is a fantastic transit system. But a fantastic transit system alone does not make a great city.

When the TTC was leading things, there was a big emphasis on moving as many people as quickly as possible, with little attention paid to other city building concerns. This narrow vision can lead to some terrible decision making, such as deciding to pave over a neighbourhood to build a highway, because fast transportation is our one and only concern.

When city building, there are more variables at play than travel times and ridership.

 

[Amare]

Yes, but arguably John Tory's positions now are superior to the ones he previously held that he "flip-flopped" from. Say what you will about SmartTrack, but it did catalyze a lot of positive progressive things for Toronto:

- Eglinton West LRT now a priority again, and to be at least 60% grade-separated
- At least 6 new GO stations in the 416
- Kept a downtown relief line discussion ongoing, not just amongst us transit nerds, but the media and general public
- Got the DRL through the EA process stage
- Got all 3 Parties Provinicially and the Federal gov't committed to funding the DRL
- Got the King Street Pilot adopted as a stop-gap measure until the DRL is built

All this within one term. To say he's done nothing is disingenuous and to throw him out now puts all of the above at risk.

Let's hit off each of your points here:

1) Eglinton West is a "priority" because the city offered to pay 100% of the costs and took it off the province's hands. No one knows when it will be built, much in the same fashion no one knew when it would be built when it was under the control of Metrolinx. As for the 60% grade separation, we dont even know if their will be a single grade-separated point on the Crosstown West LRT due to the ineptitude of city planning. Tory wisely "directed" them to go back and further study the issue in depth.

2) 6 new GO stations are being built at the expense of Toronto taxpayers. Had Tory gone to the province and demanded that they included new stations for Toronto instead of inventing Smarttrack, the province would have caved in to build some stations in the city. Really there are about 3-4 stations we can give him credit for since Metrolinx wasnt being serious about those stations, the rest Metrolinx would have added in regardless. There was no point in time where Tory asked for additional GO stations, he just came up with his own plan.

3) He kept the Relief Line discussion going because of the ever worsening condition of the Yonge Line and how little the city has done to improve conditions.

4) The DRL hasnt even commenced the EA stage as Jennifer Keesmaat nicely pointed out for us, and it wont start until late 2018 due to city hall's stalling. It is still the design phase which is only ~30% complete.

5) The Feds were prepared to invest in the DRL regardless due to their infrastructure fund. All the city had to do was apply, which is what Tory did. Anyone could have done that with their eyes closed so we cant really give him credit for what he should have done. The province was committed but they never put a price tag on what they would contribute until the Feds came out with the infrastructure fund.

6) The King Street Pilot was designed for the crippling 504 service and has little to do with the DRL. It was spearheaded by the numerous complaints from residents who live around Liberty Village who could not get on a streetcar, and by riders who were stuck on a crawling streetcar. Keesmaat spearheaded the pilot and Tory had very little to do with it's inception. The one smart thing he did was to support it, so i'll give him credit there.

Essentially all Tory has done for transit is take projects that were under the control of Metrolinx, and put into Toronto's hands along with getting us 3-4 additional GO stations. One thing I will give him proper credit for is the TTC-GO co-fare which was long overdue, even though that got off to a pathetic start with the TTC/GO Sticker Metropass program. I have nothing against Tory, but I will call him out where he needs to be called out.

 

[syn]

He didn't even know it was grade-separated. Also don't forget - he wanted to cancel Eglinton in the first place, the province didn't allow it in their tete-a-tete.



Not only did we not have redundancies - we are hell bent on extending the one U line at both ends to ensure that when it falls (and fall it will, just by increasing the overall probability of failure by adding more places for it to fail), it falls harder than ever. This is lunacy. You know what though, it won't be people living in downtown (who can walk) that gets affected by this - it is people trying to get to Finch, Scarborough, Vaughan, etc.

AoD

What does that matter? The people of Richmond Hill, Scarborough and Vaughan deserve subways! As long as there are subways in their borders everything will be perfect.

 

[steveintoronto]

We'd still be in a similar position today regardless. Remember that for the longest time the TTC was convinced that we didn't need the relief line.

People forget why TTC Planning were taken off the subway file. Massive project mismanagement. City Planning has the same problem ultimately: Political interference...and not being able or willing to fund the planning stage to get quality results.

Right now, the King Project couldn't be a better example. $1.5M for a project that could...*should* transform relieving the subway to some extent, and showcasing what transit priority can do for efficiency of moving people in this city. Council gave a pittance on that, and TTC planning have also been asleep at the switch on many aspects.

2) 6 new GO stations are being built at the expense of Toronto taxpayers. Had Tory gone to the province and demanded that they included new stations for Toronto instead of inventing Smarttrack, the province would have caved in to build some stations in the city. Really there are about 3-4 stations we can give him credit for since Metrolinx wasnt being serious about those stations, the rest Metrolinx would have added in regardless. There was no point in time where Tory asked for additional GO stations, he just came up with his own plan.

There's a compound irony to that. Metrolinx had been claiming that "the stations would be too close", and for better or worse, Tory realized they were needed.(lol...most of them)

But now Verster has announced a *very* different realization of RER's purpose, you're right, QP would have had to build them. In the event, I don't see the City in any capacity being the master of the Relief Line. It now resides in the vision of Verster, and a rejigging of what RER is to be.

That could/should allow Tory and Council clowns to concentrate on such things as the King Project. If they can't play well with trams in their prams, then they can't play well with trains.

 

[syn]

I wish we could create a transit planning board completely independent of the government with projects approved based on need.

The transit system would look a lot different right now if that were the case.

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

Public transit should be considered a public utility like hydro, sewage, water and others.

 

[Rainforest]

Transit is a means to an ends. It's not the end itself. I want to live in a great city, and part of living in a great city is a fantastic transit system. But a fantastic transit system alone does not make a great city.

When the TTC was leading things, there was a big emphasis on moving as many people as quickly as possible, with little attention paid to other city building concerns. This narrow vision can lead to some terrible decision making, such as deciding to pave over a neighbourhood to build a highway, because fast transportation is our one and only concern.

When city building, there are more variables at play than travel times and ridership.

I want to live in a city where life is convenient. I am less concerned about it being "great" in the eyes of other groups of people. For example, some may love streets with wide sidewalks and outdoor patios; I am basically indifferent to those. On the rare occasion I go to a restaurant, I am just fine staying indoors. I don't want those patios to slow down my trip to or from work.

I certainly don't suggest paving over neighborhoods to expand highways, and I am not against reasonable investments in the streetscape.

However, transit is a very expensive utility to build. Transit advocates appeal to the need to address growing congestion when advocating for construction funding; and doing so rightfully. Then, using those funds to improve the street scape instead of improving mobility seems like misappropriation.

There are many cheaper ways to improve the streetscape. Once the funding is allocated for transit, it should be used primarily for transit, in my humble opinion.

 

[Rainforest]

I wish we could create a transit planning board completely independent of the government with projects approved based on need.

The transit system would look a lot different right now if that were the case.

Not sure how it can be independent on the government, if it is funded by the government.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Not sure how it can be independent on the government, if it is funded by the government.

Not entirely independent no, but you have a governance structure that is more arms length and allows it to levy taxes for transit. On top of legitimate accountability concerns (not that we have a lot of good things to say about how accountable successive governments are on this file even with direct control), governments of course loath giving up power.

AoD

 

[Rainforest]

Not entirely independent no, but you have a governance structure that is more arms length and allows it to levy taxes for transit. On top of legitimate accountability concerns (not that we have a lot of good things to say about how accountable successive governments are on this file even with direct control), governments of course loath giving up power.

AoD

I get you point. However, that arms-length relationship may be hard to maintain, precisely due to the high visibility of the transit file.

Any act passed by, say, the Provincial assembly and giving powers to the transit authority, can be later repelled or amended by the same Provincial assembly, if the public is unhappy with the direction the transit authority is taking.

To my knowledge, arms-length public bodies work better in areas that are important but less visible. Nobody demands that Bank of Canada raises or lowers its lending rate, because nobody except a few wizards understands how that rate works. But, everyone thinks they know how to build transit.