News   Nov 28, 2024
 106     0 
News   Nov 27, 2024
 888     4 
News   Nov 27, 2024
 727     1 

Danforth Line 2 Scarborough Subway Extension

That map shows how nicely Ford was able to compromise. Although he wanted B-D to go to STC, he accepted Eglinton being prioritized and being LRT as well, as long as it was grade-separated. Ford would have agreed to any grade-separated transit line, but for the Liberals in Queen's Park, and the City Councillors who proudly took the transit file away from Ford - it was not about building good transit, it was about defeating Ford. Even the Relief line - which many say is a priority - took a back seat for a half a decade just to advance the anti-Ford cause.
The ironic part is that with the drug abuse, Ford would have been gone anyways, and we could have had the DRL, plus no Ford.
The farther ironic part is that even if the drug abuse wouldn't have stopped Rob Ford, his medical issues did.
So we spend Billions of dollars and countless lost years of transit planning just to stop Rob Ford, when he wouldn't have been there in any case.

He didn't accept anything.

Ford was a complete and utter failure on the transit file - that's why council was forced to overrule him.

He campaigned on an impossible plan, which included canceling Transit City and having the SRT replaced by a subway extension in four years.

Ford is the main reason we are where we are now.

The dissonance is astounding.
 
He didn't accept anything.

Ford was a complete and utter failure on the transit file - that's why council was forced to overrule him.

He campaigned on an impossible plan, which included canceling Transit City and having the SRT replaced by a subway extension in four years.

Ford is the main reason we are where we are now.

The dissonance is astounding.
I admit that at the time, I was in favour of the B-D extension.

It was only after studying it in more detail that I realized that the B-D extension and the transfer SRT/LRT both force all the riders to the busy Y-B interchange. They were equally bad plans as they added congestion to the 1 station that governs the capacity of 2 transit lines. I don't doubt that Ford didn't realize this, but Metrolinx did realize that the transfer plan is inferior and that is why they proposed the connected route. Metrolinx even concluded this in their benefit case from 2012. Unfortunately, their Liberal masters would not let them release the report during all the transit debates that occurred in 2012 and 2013. This is what led to the transit mess we have now. the Liberals withheld all the facts and prevented fact based planning from occurring. The connected SRT/ECLRT would have also nicely supported the DRL extension - but again, defeating Ford was more important than a Relief line.

Without Ford, SELRT and SRT/LRT may have been built, FWLRT would be more advanced, ECLRT would be the same as it is now, and planning would be nearing completion for the Jane LRT and Don Mills LRT. The Relief line would not even be on anyone's radar.
 
I admit that at the time, I was in favour of the B-D extension.

It was only after studying it in more detail that I realized that the B-D extension and the transfer SRT/LRT both force all the riders to the busy Y-B interchange. They were equally bad plans as they added congestion to the 1 station that governs the capacity of 2 transit lines. I don't doubt that Ford didn't realize this, but Metrolinx did realize that the transfer plan is inferior and that is why they proposed the connected route. Metrolinx even concluded this in their benefit case from 2012. Unfortunately, their Liberal masters would not let them release the report during all the transit debates that occurred in 2012 and 2013. This is what led to the transit mess we have now. the Liberals withheld all the facts and prevented fact based planning from occurring. The connected SRT/ECLRT would have also nicely supported the DRL extension - but again, defeating Ford was more important than a Relief line.

Without Ford, SELRT and SRT/LRT may have been built, FWLRT would be more advanced, ECLRT would be the same as it is now, and planning would be nearing completion for the Jane LRT and Don Mills LRT. The Relief line would not even be on anyone's radar.


I believe it was Mark Towhey that said the TTC staff was pushing Ford to accept the McCowan corridor early in his tenure as their was already work done which surprised Ford and his team. Ford still compromised with the Metrolinx recommendation for the seamless Eglinton LRT- Sheppard subway combo which would have avoided the one stop fiasco we have today and left a great legacy. Council refused to work with Ford and soon after they were working with the Province who pushed to get the McCowan corridor. Ford verbally agreed at that stage but was powerless politically as to what was going on as he started his personal scandal and death spiral.

Crazy personal life aside if it wasnt for council working against his politics they elected him int Mayor we wouldnt be discussing the Keesmaat-Tory one stop subway nonsense which a few outsiders on council love to blame the Fords him for. Well see what happens as his brother has zero opposition to worry about hijacking his plan and all those that falsely blame the Fords for the one stop subway are also hoping Doug doesnt deliver here on the restoring the 3 stop as they know he'll look really good in the eyes of voters.
 
Last edited:
I admit that at the time, I was in favour of the B-D extension.

It was only after studying it in more detail that I realized that the B-D extension and the transfer SRT/LRT both force all the riders to the busy Y-B interchange. They were equally bad plans as they added congestion to the 1 station that governs the capacity of 2 transit lines. I don't doubt that Ford didn't realize this, but Metrolinx did realize that the transfer plan is inferior and that is why they proposed the connected route. Metrolinx even concluded this in their benefit case from 2012. Unfortunately, their Liberal masters would not let them release the report during all the transit debates that occurred in 2012 and 2013. This is what led to the transit mess we have now. the Liberals withheld all the facts and prevented fact based planning from occurring. The connected SRT/ECLRT would have also nicely supported the DRL extension - but again, defeating Ford was more important than a Relief line.

What led to the transit mess we have now is Ford declaring he'd have subways built in 4 years, funded by the private sector.

What led to the transit mess we have now is Ford's dangerous rhetoric that not having a subway in Scarborough equates to treating people as second class citizens.

Without Ford, SELRT and SRT/LRT may have been built, FWLRT would be more advanced, ECLRT would be the same as it is now, and planning would be nearing completion for the Jane LRT and Don Mills LRT. The Relief line would not even be on anyone's radar.

The ECLRT would arguably be further ahead.

Scarborough would have an LRT finished or near finished.

The idea that the Relief Line would not be on anyone's radar is ridiculous. It's been on the radar for a century.
 
Rob Ford didn't have a good overall transit plan. The reason the City Council ended up taking the transit file off his control, is that he promised to extend Sheppard Subway using private funds, and failed to do so. Not because of some the imaginary Liberal conspiracy to remove him from the office; most of the rebel Councillors weren't even Liberals. Stintz, one of his main challengers, was (and probably still is) a Conservative party member.

However, Rob Ford did agree to a plan that kept SLRT essentially intact, shortly after being elected. That's just a fact, which cannot be denied whether you like the Fords or not.

Overall, the biggest missed opportunity was probably related to George Smitherman, Ford's main challenger during the 2010 elections. Smitherman wanted to keep much of Transit City in place, but upgrade SLRT to subway. Basically, very close to the present plan, but we wouldn't lose several years; SSE would be half-way done by now if Smitherman was elected back then.

Unfortunately, it is hard to say who could accelerate the Relief Line. Certainly not Ford. But, neither Smitherman nor Giambrone nor Pantalone taught it as a priority back then.
 
Last edited:
I was browsing the Toronto Star archives looking for something else, and I found these articles. There has been so much claimed here about Scarborough wanting the SRT, not wanting the SRT, etc, that it's worth going back and checking the facts. These articles are from 24 June 1981 and 4 May 1981. One can argue that Scarborough kinda did it to itself.

And no, I'm not a fan of Paul Godfrey as a baseball mogul or a newspaper guy, either.

- Paul

Screen Shot 2019-02-07 at 10.21.02 PM.png

Screen Shot 2019-02-07 at 10.14.39 PM.png
 
I was browsing the Toronto Star archives looking for something else, and I found these articles. There has been so much claimed here about Scarborough wanting the SRT, not wanting the SRT, etc, that it's worth going back and checking the facts. These articles are from 24 June 1981 and 4 May 1981. One can argue that Scarborough kinda did it to itself.

And no, I'm not a fan of Paul Godfrey as a baseball mogul or a newspaper guy, either.

- Paul

Definitely fun to read the archives. Lots of interesting tidbits, and oh so much history repeating. Literally you can take a transit op-ed today and it can be identical to one from for 40, 50, 60yrs ago.

Still though I think this may be a bit of cherry picking. You can find articles where Scarb wanted a B/D extension to SC and nothing else, ones where they wanted LRT, and ones like you point out from a single year where they wanted ICTS. And who knows what went on behind closed doors to sell councillors so hard at the Kingston facility. Maybe it was the trains themselves, or lucrative wooing not unlike what later happened in Yongin, S. Korea (<-obviously not a direct comparison since UTDC was public then and not in the later Bombardier example).
 
^ Lol, we're paying a hefty price now for all that "futuristic transit", aren't we? If only someone had thought to extend the Bloor Danforth along the beautifully aligned diagonal right of way that was readily available in the 80s.
 
I was browsing the Toronto Star archives looking for something else, and I found these articles. There has been so much claimed here about Scarborough wanting the SRT, not wanting the SRT, etc, that it's worth going back and checking the facts. These articles are from 24 June 1981 and 4 May 1981. One can argue that Scarborough kinda did it to itself.

Is it a bit too much to ask from the common folks, or even from their elected politicians, to accurately understand the pros and cons of a new technology before the first example is built?
 
Definitely fun to read the archives. Lots of interesting tidbits, and oh so much history repeating. Literally you can take a transit op-ed today and it can be identical to one from for 40, 50, 60yrs ago.

Still though I think this may be a bit of cherry picking. You can find articles where Scarb wanted a B/D extension to SC and nothing else, ones where they wanted LRT, and ones like you point out from a single year where they wanted ICTS. And who knows what went on behind closed doors to sell councillors so hard at the Kingston facility. Maybe it was the trains themselves, or lucrative wooing not unlike what later happened in Yongin, S. Korea (<-obviously not a direct comparison since UTDC was public then and not in the later Bombardier example).

I think what's important to note in these articles is that Scarborough got the transit their politicians wanted - and the Mayor, who didn't want to see the switch, was an LRT advocate.The province didn't force the RT on them against their will, as is the common narrative.

Interesting to see how highly regarded the RT was a relatively short time ago.
 
Still though I think this may be a bit of cherry picking. You can find articles where Scarb wanted a B/D extension to SC and nothing else, ones where they wanted LRT, and ones like you point out from a single year where they wanted ICTS.

I will confess that I didn't do any sort of systemmatic search, I just stumbled over these while looking for something else. They just read so much like something out of a Simpsons episode that I had to share.

I do think that Paul Godfrey's role is hugely, um, ironic. As head of Postmedia, no one has done more to spread the distorted narrative that Scarborough was screwed by a bunch of downtown liberals, especially on SRT. Turns out, he was a key player in foisting ICTS technology on Scarborough, over the objections of its mayor. That fact never gets mentioned in the Sun's coverage of the issue.

- Paul
 
I will confess that I didn't do any sort of systemmatic search, I just stumbled over these while looking for something else. They just read so much like something out of a Simpsons episode that I had to share.

I do think that Paul Godfrey's role is hugely, um, ironic. As head of Postmedia, no one has done more to spread the distorted narrative that Scarborough was screwed by a bunch of downtown liberals, especially on SRT. Turns out, he was a key player in foisting ICTS technology on Scarborough, over the objections of its mayor. That fact never gets mentioned in the Sun's coverage of the issue.

- Paul

Also note the role of Ken Morrish and Joyce Trimmer in this. It's always been about the new and the shiny.

AoD
 
I do think that Paul Godfrey's role is hugely, um, ironic. As head of Postmedia, no one has done more to spread the distorted narrative that Scarborough was screwed by a bunch of downtown liberals, especially on SRT. Turns out, he was a key player in foisting ICTS technology on Scarborough, over the objections of its mayor. That fact never gets mentioned in the Sun's coverage of the issue.

If we're going down this road, it's incredible how many people forget Jack Layton's opposition to subway expansion to the core. Specifically because he was concerned about too much development in the core. And yet, he's a saint to so many Torontonians.
 
If we're going down this road, it's incredible how many people forget Jack Layton's opposition to subway expansion to the core. Specifically because he was concerned about too much development in the core. And yet, he's a saint to so many Torontonians.
It was the DRL, not subways.
[...]
One critic of the plan was Steve Munro, of Streetcars for Toronto, the group that had saved the Toronto streetcar system in the 1970s. He argued that the TTC planners were too focused on subways, and this made the programme too expensive and less likely to be built. He argued that options such as underground LRT were not considered by the TTC, and would have met requirements with a lower price.[7] The opposition to the plan was led by the Better Transportation Coalition, under the leadership of Gord Perks. Perks argued that a streetcar in a separate right-of-way along Sheppard would easily address the needed ridership, at a fraction of the cost.[8]

There were also concerns over the Downtown Relief Line. Munro noted that a line running from Danforth to downtown would serve mostly as a transfer for passengers coming from further east and would have little benefit to the local community, and should instead extend further north, additionally serving Don Mills. Local councillor Dale Martin agreed that the line mainly served the interests of developers looking for intensification rather than local residents.[9] Jack Layton emerged as the leader of the councillors opposed to the DRL, concerned it would lead to further intensification downtown. Layton and his allies were strong followers of Jane Jacobs, and believed in preserving downtown neighbourhoods as they were and redirecting office developments to the suburbs. The new developments in the suburbs would allow true urban communities to develop there, and create a multi-directional traffic that would make far better use of existing downtown infrastructure.[10] [...]
Network 2011 - Wikipedia
 

Back
Top