Quote:
Originally Posted by Doady
Most of Toronto's high rise buildings are located in Etobicoke, Scarborough, and North York, these places are some of the most transit-dependent places in North America, the TTC has the highest farebox cost recovery ratio in North America, yet you speak of these places as if they are Arlington, Texas or something, and somehow you wonder why people complain about "downtown elitism".
Mississauga is building bike lanes everywhere, and no doubt North York, Scarborough, and Etobicoke would be doing the same if they were separate from Toronto. If these places aren't dense enough to support cycling, then they should cancel the Finch West LRT. Let cut all those 3-minute bus routes down to 30-minutes while we are at it, then the "suburbanites" will no longer be such a massive burden upon the real city.
|
I didn't say anything about suburbanites at all other than that many were against the downtown relief line which they were. Well, other than that some infrastructure is basically invisible to them, but that applies to people in general. Or if you're talking about suburban areas being subsidized by more urban ones, that is just a fact. Pointing out that people in lower density areas can still be getting full value (or more) for their tax dollars without having the intensity of infrastructure found in denser areas is not an insult, it's just reality.
And do you understand the concept of "relativity"? You can say that place A can need something more than place B without it meaning that place B doesn't need it at all. Saying that some places are inherently better suited to certain transportation modes is NOT saying that the modes can't be used in the less optimal location. In the case of bike infrastructure, it simply means that if a city is building a network over time and can't do everything at once, it should focus on the places where it'll get the most use first. And having transit users doesn't make an area the most suitable for a specific type of transit project like a high capacity underground metro line. There are lots of transit upgrades one can make from bus lanes to LRT and commuter rail based on the specific use case. And yes, that can also include metro projects. But denser areas tend to have a greater need for those.
And what does having highrises have to do with anything? That doesn't inherently make a place more urban. It can increase an area's density if the highrises aren't separated by too much parking or lawn space but we know that neither the 416 nor the 905 suburbs are as dense as the old city so there's no point is even bringing that up. This seems to be a case of you getting defensive about someone disagree with you and you reacting without actually reading what you were reacting to. Which is why your whole response is shadow boxing against things I didn't say.
Threaded Mode