Waterloo Region Connected
ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Printable Version

+- Waterloo Region Connected (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com)
+-- Forum: Waterloo Region Works (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=14)
+--- Forum: Transportation and Infrastructure (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=25)
+--- Thread: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit (/showthread.php?tid=14)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 967 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1165 1166

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - tomh009 - 08-30-2016

What level should the community-based fees or taxes be done? Should I pay less taxes because I don't have a swimming pool nearby? More taxes because I am close to Victoria Park? Less taxes because there is little on-street parking downtown? Or are you saying this should be done only at the "township" level, so Heidelberg, St Jacobs, Elmira and Breslau should all be treated the same? If so, why should they be?

And while there is limited transit service to the townships, many things are likely more expensive, per resident, in the townships: regional road construction/maintenance, snow removal, garbage collection, etc. This is simply because there are relatively few residents spread out over a far greater area. But these costs are covered by the region and charged equally across the cities and townships.

The same applies with the provincial and federal governments. All provide services that may benefit one region more than another, or cost more to deliver in one region than another, but the tax rates are generally uniform within that level of government. And I don't think we should have it any other way.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Elmira Guy - 08-30-2016

Having to take the bus to a swimming pool that is not in your neighbourhood is a far better option than not having a bus to take at all. Why is it acceptablle to you for all people to pay the same but on!y certain people deserve the service being paid for?
We're not talking about balking at paying for services you don't use, we're talking about thinking it unfair and unreasonable to pay for a service that does not exist in your community for you to use.

Unless you guys feel people should and are going to drive into the cities and then jump on a bus.

Clearly I'm the only one who sees this as unacceptable so there is little point in my discussing it further. I guess township residents should just shut up and not be so unreasonable.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Elmira Guy - 08-30-2016

I would have thought there would be more support here for transit service outside the cities but I was apparently mistaken. Being in favour of charging residents for services that you don't think they warrant is not going to further the cause of transit in the townships, hence my conclusion.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - JoeKW - 08-30-2016

(08-30-2016, 03:49 PM)Elmira Guy Wrote: I would have thought there would be more support here for transit service outside the cities but I was apparently mistaken. Being in favour of charging residents for services that you don't think they warrant is not going to further the cause of transit in the townships, hence my conclusion.

This is the ION thread which is really only concerned about the ION.  The GRT thread does occasionally delve into discussion about servicing the townships.

I'm totally up for the debate, I think there is a valid concern here, however I think it's important to look at the other side of the coin.  Overall, who is subsidizing who? Ken Seiling says the cities are supporting the townships.  If that is really true, maybe we should exempt the LRT development charges in the townships but also raise their property taxes to ensure that no one is subsidizing anyone else?

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Elmira Guy - 08-30-2016

My last comment on it here, for as you say, this thread is strictly concerned with the LRT and while it is that project that is at the heart of the matter here.
But one final point.

If the region ever decided that township residents warrant a transit service that saw all communities connected to the cities (some only a couple of times a day, others more frequently) but in order to do so, ALL households in the region would pay an increase to their property taxes to cover it, would those arguing here in favour of charging township residents for a service they cannot access in their community be okay with such an increase in their taxes?

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - BuildingScout - 08-30-2016

(08-30-2016, 03:14 PM)Elmira Guy Wrote: @ BuildingScout

So if you believe that residents of the townships should be subject to all the same fees as urban residents but should not expect or receive the same services for said fees, how far does this extend in your mind?

You are confused. There is no rule that all communities get the same services. Some cities have international airports, others don't.   Some cities have opera houses, others don't. Some cities have universities, hospitals or medical schools, others don't.

Quote:I cannot think of any service that residents of the townships receive from the region that urban residents do not, yet the reverse is true in the two issues being discussed here.

Makes sense. Services are generally provided as warranted and generally according to size,  because of simple economics. A hamlet with ten houses won't be given a public school. A community has to be of certain size before it gets its own school, and instead it gets free public busing for long distances.


Quote:Unless of course you think issues facing residents of the township should be considered less important than those facing urban residents. Not saying you are but it would not be the first time I (and I'm certain others who grew up or spent a lot of time living in the townships) I have encountered that sentiment.

False dichotomy. As I said above "services according to size" is a reasonable economic principle and has nothing to do with thinking more or less of township residents. This principle means that we do not get a provincially funded museum of the quality of the ROM, for example. I wish we had such a museum in the RoW, but I can perfectly understand why we  don't without ascribing bad motive to Toronto residents.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - danbrotherston - 08-30-2016

(08-30-2016, 03:14 PM)Elmira Guy Wrote: @ BuildingScout

So if you believe that residents of the townships should be subject to all the same fees as urban residents but should not expect or receive the same services for said fees, how far does this extend in your mind? Do you also support the removal of waste transfer stations from the townships, telling residents you must now drive into the city to get rid of yard waste and such? If you think they're all going to do so, they ain't.

And your argument that my point about residents having tp pay for transit while not receiving (and won't in my lifetime) is akin to someone saying I shouldn't have to pay taxes towards education because I don't have kids is not quite analogous. I think the dynamics change somewhat when switching from the microeconomics of one to that of a whole community. I cannot think of any service that residents of the townships receive from the region that urban residents do not, yet the reverse is true in the two issues being discussed here.
Unless of course you think issues facing residents of the township should be considered less important than those facing urban residents. Not saying you are but it would not be the first time I (and I'm certain others who grew up or spent a lot of time living in the townships) I have encountered that sentiment.

A service which townships receive from the region, which city residents don't?  Well you already mentioned one, waste transfer stations, but assuming those are going away or somehow not relevant, let's go with another, libraries.

But there are plenty of examples of things your taxes pay for which you will never use.  Yes, someone might have children, and we all benefit from an educated populace, but let's go back to transit then.  You pay for via rail, and go transit through federal and provincial taxes, but plenty of people who live in cities all over the province do not, and never will have Go or Via service.

This is just how taxes work.

If you don't think that urban residents benefit from a prosperous city, I'd direct you to the region's budget.  The rural areas most certainly do prosper as a result of a prosperous city.  And the region's urban dwellers also benefit from the rural area, in the availability of local foods, in the availability of nearby natural recreation options, and through the option to move to a more rural setting for those who wish to.  It goes both ways, there is no versus, we're in this together.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - BuildingScout - 08-30-2016

(08-30-2016, 04:26 PM)Elmira Guy Wrote: If the region ever decided that township residents warrant a transit service that saw all communities connected to the cities (some only a couple of times a day, others more frequently) but in order to do so, ALL households in the region would pay an increase to their property taxes to cover it, would those arguing here in favour of charging township residents for a service they cannot access in their community be okay with such an increase in their taxes?

I'll answer because this brings back the discussion to the LRT:

For sure they would be in favour, and this is not hypothetical. Most people here are in favour of building the LRT extension to Cambridge, even though most of us here are unlikely to benefit from it since most of the present readership is KW based.

p.s. I don't care if my tax monies go to the townships or the city, that is not the breakdown of expenses  I want from my government. I care that tax funds are spent wisely in the ways that make the most sense. When a new school is approved I don't ask: "is it in a township or in KW?", my question instead is "what are the demographics?". If they show a need because of increase in school age population, then I support the expenditure wherever that school is being built.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Elmira Guy - 08-30-2016

As I said, I have no wish to discuss it further as there is no point. I disagree with you and the others here. While I agree that there are some services that all residents must pay for whether or not those services are accessible, I think that where feasible, there should be genuine efforts made to provide the service being paid for to as many residents as possible. I don't think the region is, or has any future intentions to taking a serious look at improving transit connectivity to the cities, yet those fees will be ongoing.

So seeing as we disagree so fundamentally, there is no point to carry on the discussion.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - danbrotherston - 08-30-2016

(08-30-2016, 04:48 PM)Elmira Guy Wrote: As I said, I have no wish to discuss it further as there is no point. I disagree with you and the others here. While I agree that there are some services that all residents must pay for whether or not those services are accessible, I think that where feasible, there should be genuine efforts made to provide the service being paid for to as many residents as possible. I don't think the region is, or has any future intentions to taking a serious look at improving transit connectivity to the cities, yet those fees will be ongoing.

So seeing as we disagree so fundamentally, there is no point to carry on the discussion.

Out of curiosity then, I take it you also object to contributing to Via rail, Go Transit, LRT in Ottawa?  Where do you draw the line on your position?

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Lens - 08-30-2016

In ION related news, retaining wall blocks are now on site at Charles and Ontario. The wall area looks like it needs a bit of prep but I imagine they'll start working on it very soon.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - GtwoK - 08-30-2016

Track on Duke is all rebar'd and framed from Water all the way past College (but not yet to Young). A pour should be happening any day now!

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Elmira Guy - 08-30-2016

@ danbrotherston

No I do not object to my taxes going towards services elsewhere, especially when that same service is available to me here, so not quite an analogy.

Look, I get it. You and others feel township residents should pay for all the sane services as city residents without receiving those services. Message received.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - jwilliamson - 08-30-2016

(08-30-2016, 12:36 PM)Canard Wrote: You mean the completed crossing at FDB/Caroline is now covered in gravel? Why?

Sorry, I meant the trail crossing from FDB to the Laurel Trail between PI and Laurel Creek.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - tomh009 - 08-30-2016

(08-30-2016, 04:48 PM)Elmira Guy Wrote: I don't think the region is, or has any future intentions to taking a serious look at improving transit connectivity to the cities, yet those fees will be ongoing.

I think that's exactly what Route 77 is, a serious look at the feasibility of connecting the townships.