salsa
Senior Member
That doesn't mean she doesn't support it.
- Thread starter JasonParis
- Start date
That doesn't mean she doesn't support it.
denfromoakvillemilton
Senior Member
Be honest, this must annoy you that they have to do study after study.
cplchanb
Senior Member
I hate to be pessimistic but those 2 terms do not belong in the same sentence.
If the city council actually made the right decisions transit city would have been half done by now. Because they have continuously backpedaled on numerous politically influenced decisions our infrastructure remains
one of the poorer ones amongst all north american metropolitan areas. Ontario should make it illegal (or prohibitively costly) to stop/change infrastructure projects of this scale once it has been greenlit and especially if shovels are on the ground.
As for the DRL, I support this entirely, but if they are just going to make it a political weapon to backtrack on projects that have already been started and heavily invested on, the city is seriously going to waste much more of our tax dollars than if they had just finished what they have already started. Why cant these goons in city hall just make a decision and stick with it?!
spider
Senior Member
What could "planners" possibly be planning except maybe funding their retirement portfolios by stretching out this phase of the delightfully nebulous project that has fallen into their laps.
No one knows the final route or class of equipment to be purchased and operated or the time frame or anything else, just that they are making out like bandits and being encouraged to continue to do so.
Here's a thought, only when all the base parameters are agreed upon and carved in stone do we start studies and estimates as is done in the real world where real money is being spent.
No one knows the final route or class of equipment to be purchased and operated or the time frame or anything else, just that they are making out like bandits and being encouraged to continue to do so.
Here's a thought, only when all the base parameters are agreed upon and carved in stone do we start studies and estimates as is done in the real world where real money is being spent.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
^lack of funding. Your a little too cynical there I believe. The vote in may would presumably be for an increased rate of funding as well as a presumably larger fund to address the need of more people working on the project and the accelerated schedule.
nfitz
Superstar
And then there's the smart ones, who are just walking to Liberty and Atlantic to jump on the suprisingly frequent and speedy 63 Ossington bus to Ossington station (and north on Ossington and Oakwood to Eglinton West station). It's always faster post-game than the Bathurst streetcar, and I'm yet to not fit on the first one (heck, normally I even get a seat).
In addition to that, you do see a good stream of people walking to the Dufferin Gate entrance, and also along Princes' Boulevard to Princes' Gate.
Truth be told, surprisingly few use the Ossington bus and King streetcar postgame, compared to the massive hoards using GO and the streetcars at Exhibition loop. I've never had enough opportunity to properly gauge the Dufferin bus usage post-game, but it certainly seems better used than the Ossington bus, despite being as far (if not farther) from BMO Field.
I'd think in theory a King/Dufferin station would serve BMO Field well enough.
BurlOak
Senior Member
It has taken 4 years of study, discussion and consultation and we still have not implemented a transit tax. This exercise is normally done in a few months prior to a budget.
Of course it will take this group a lot of time to determine the need, determine the route, and finalize the stations. Then add another 10 years for construction.
We need to admit that the DRL is not a priority - at least according to the various politicians.
Last edited:
innsertnamehere
Superstar
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/comm...x_transit_we_need_a_relief_line_and_more.html
Other than Ford, it seems to be a priority for every mayoral candidate.
as for the Transit tax, Metrolinx was never scheduled to release its report until it did. This is the budget the taxes were supposed to be implemented in, and it is the budget they are in. The Metrolinx plan has never had the revenue tools implemented before now. Of course it could be delayed if an election is called and the PCs win, but with any luck it will still occur.
The DRL routing could be ready by the start of next year, and construction be ready by 2016. That is about as fast as a timeline as you will get. If we can get funding secured by the end of 2016 and construction started in 2017, I will be happy.
Other than Ford, it seems to be a priority for every mayoral candidate.
as for the Transit tax, Metrolinx was never scheduled to release its report until it did. This is the budget the taxes were supposed to be implemented in, and it is the budget they are in. The Metrolinx plan has never had the revenue tools implemented before now. Of course it could be delayed if an election is called and the PCs win, but with any luck it will still occur.
The DRL routing could be ready by the start of next year, and construction be ready by 2016. That is about as fast as a timeline as you will get. If we can get funding secured by the end of 2016 and construction started in 2017, I will be happy.
Last edited:
rbt
Senior Member
She's still right.
The current council needs to decide whether to fund the accelerated EA (decision takes place long before the new council will have a choice). The "slow" option is waiting for the next council to present a budget with EA funding included; the only way the new mayor has input is through the delayed option.
Second, funding of actual construction is a provincial problem. The new mayor can support, or not, Metrolinx's tax scheme but that decision should be finalized within the next month, again long before the new council is in place. Keeping those tax changes will be a provincial election issue.
The new mayor might choose to kill Scarborough subway in order to provide funding room for the DRL on the cities books but the city still can't go it alone.
In short, the DRL either will or won't happen before the municipal election takes place or will be severely hamstrung by events outside their control. The new mayor is not going to be given a choice on the matter; it's not an election issue for them.
They can have an opinion, but the opinion of the next mayor has far less weight than the opinion of your MPP. It is prudent for the mayor to make proposals they can actually contribute toward.
The Stintz "lets reorganize everything" proposal is probably best for the long-term but is bound to cause 2 year general delay during restructuring (refining process takes forever to get back up to speed). It should be fascinating to see that new board tackle something like transit street-light priorities.
Last edited:
BMO
Senior Member
rbt
Senior Member
Yeah, a 10% property tax hike for transit (in addition to usual hikes) would be something the mayor could do and that would be an election issue. No candidate has considered this.
Scarborough subway, downtown LRTs, and TTC SOGR work put us well beyond our current borrowing capacity at current tax rates. The hike needs to be significant to catch up on maintenance, committed projects, and allow additional expansion.
In fact, no mayoral candidate has a funding strategy for keeping the basics maintained (keep tunnels from collapsing, pipes from bursting, trains from derailing, etc.). I can't blame Chow or Tory for not having something for that; but both Ford and Stintz should be very aware of the SOGR shortfall (5% property tax increase by itself).
What candidates are really saying is that they promise to ask for money from other levels of government. Has Toronto, or any other municipality for that matter, ever not asked for money from federal/provincial governments? In short, I see making the DRL a top priority without any mention of funding as a pledge to do the minimal work possible as mayor.
Last edited:
Woodbridge_Heights
Senior Member
SOGR and operational aren't the sexy platforms that a new subway line (or LRT line, or name whatever project) are/is. The projects allow politicians to show up for ribbon cutting and shovel turning so that they can ape for the camera and news coverage. SOGR while the meat and potatoes of the network simply don't provide the same opportunity for politician.
That said I have always said that any politician who's platform is to come up with a formula to cover operational costs of a transit system will have my full support.
rbt
Senior Member
True, but SOGR has huge impact to city finances which can enable or hinder implementing new things. It directly impacts our day to day as citizens. This should be an election issue and any candidate saying they'll keep tax increases at inflation level while expanding the transit system needs to specifically address this.
They have a lot to sling at Ford and Stintz for their neglect in that area.
Last edited:
blixtex
Active Member
Would building a plastic type tunnel over the current RT to help shield against the elements have made any sense?
Keep the current route? Replace the tracks and 'RT' with something more commonly used. I've seen lighter rail trains in SF that are like subways but smaller and seem alot less expensive. The Stations are all there already.
As for a DRL, I think the most that would make sense is an express line of sorts all the way up to Richmond Hill. Stops at Steeles, Highway 7, Finch, Shepphard, Eglinton, Bloor, Dundas, King and finally Union. NY has 3 lines side by side often.
The main issues with everything is that the OMB pretty much dictates everything that gets built, so Developers just develop where they please. And leave the city to 'fix' the transit problem. You have the city building subway lines and expect developers to build by those stations (which never works)
Then you have the people living there, complaining that they need a subway line.
Finally, you need the Suburbs of Richmond Hill, Vaughn, etc contributing to this since alot of people crowding the YUS line are from the 905. The problem is the TTC really doesn't like to relinquish control to outsiders.
Keep the current route? Replace the tracks and 'RT' with something more commonly used. I've seen lighter rail trains in SF that are like subways but smaller and seem alot less expensive. The Stations are all there already.
As for a DRL, I think the most that would make sense is an express line of sorts all the way up to Richmond Hill. Stops at Steeles, Highway 7, Finch, Shepphard, Eglinton, Bloor, Dundas, King and finally Union. NY has 3 lines side by side often.
The main issues with everything is that the OMB pretty much dictates everything that gets built, so Developers just develop where they please. And leave the city to 'fix' the transit problem. You have the city building subway lines and expect developers to build by those stations (which never works)
Then you have the people living there, complaining that they need a subway line.
Finally, you need the Suburbs of Richmond Hill, Vaughn, etc contributing to this since alot of people crowding the YUS line are from the 905. The problem is the TTC really doesn't like to relinquish control to outsiders.
Conrad Black
Senior Member
The TTC is responsible to its owners. The City Of Toronto and respective taxpayers. Relinquishing control to outsiders has nothing to do with it.