Danforth Line 2 Scarborough Subway Extension

[kEiThZ]

Keithz:



Except you can't play this BD extension will attract new riders (which is what's been put forward as a rationale) and then claim it won't create pressure on Y+B game. Besides, if SELRT feeds into anything - it'd probably go to Yonge/Sheppard, not Y+B like a BD extension would.

AoD

I didn't say no impact. I said marginal. Sure, the impact is higher. Should that single consideration (increased congestion at Y-B) forestall what may well be a better option in the long run? After all, something will be done about Y-B sooner rather than later. Building our transit system around a bottleneck that should and will be resolved, isn't great planning either.

 

[kEiThZ]

But spending more than a billion dollars to eliminate that transfer is a massive waste of money. Investing that money in other transit projects in Scarborough would be a vast improvement overall for transit riders in Scarborough, and I'm one of them.

Ugggh. And this is why I say very few people on UT actually understand the concerns of real riders.

It's not just about the transfer.

 

[M II A II R II K]

Visualizing Mayor Rob Ford’s 30-year debt plan for funding the Scarborough subway

http://metronews.ca/voices/ford-for...ords-plan-for-funding-the-scarborough-subway/

 

[Tulse]

Ugggh. And this is why I say very few people on UT actually understand the concerns of real riders.

It's not just about the transfer.

Is it about walking distance to transit? Because the subway option has fewer stops in less ideal spots, so those served within reasonable walking distance are significantly reduced.

...which again gets back to transfers, if those folks have to take a bus to get to the subway station.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Keithz:

I didn't say no impact. I said marginal. Sure, the impact is higher. Should that single consideration (increased congestion at Y-B) forestall what may well be a better option in the long run? After all, something will be done about Y-B sooner rather than later. Building our transit system around a bottleneck that should and will be resolved, isn't great planning either.

Supposedly marginal impacts on a system operating at (if not beyond) the limits is anything but marginal. Doing something about the Y-B situation is distinctively not on the books right now, and given the lead time involved any decisions about improvements must occur pretty much concurrently with this debate. That hasn't happened. Right now the whole debate around the BD extension is focused on pain avoidance (i.e. now to not antagonize the electorate). That is no way to build transit - the people need to know it will cost money - lots of it - and that can't be achieved just by trying to clobber existing sources of money together. All this talk about putting the skin in is pathetic when the mayor, council and by extension citizens can only commit to raising the bare minimum from their own pot and yet pontificate what the best option for them is.

AoD

 

[Tulse]

What's the likelihood that the feds would cough up another half-billion for an unplanned-for subway? I don't see the politics working for Ford on this -- certainly Harper doesn't want to be seen doling out bags of cash to Toronto. Is there something I'm missing that would make such largess likely?

 

[RC8]

But the LRT will require a transfer whether you are going downtown of to other parts of Toronto. It is good for those going from Malvern to STC, but to other, non downtown, parts of Toronto, it would have to be connected to the Eglinton LRT and not separate from it.

Do you take public transit?

Transfers are a perfectly standard procedure and I know dozens of people who have to transfer from the Bathurst streetcar to the King streetcar in winter, for instance, and they just get on with it.

The famous 'transfer' being discussed here would be one of the nicest most comfortable transfers in the entire TTC system. With the subway - which won't be within walking distance for pretty much anyone - people will have to get into a bus and then transfer into the subway - a much more annoying transfer.

 

[Voltz]

Ugggh. And this is why I say very few people on UT actually understand the concerns of real riders.

It's not just about the transfer.

Then what is it about?

Is it uniting the city with only three subway stops?

Ending the nonsense of people feeling second class because of that transfer?

Is it about the hopes and dreams of future generations?

Is it about 'doing the right thing for Scarborough?'



This is not about what's best for riders, it is a nonsensical sloganeering vote grab that will likely set transit back by a decade.


I take transit all the time in Scaborough, I can't imagine that there aren't more effective places to spent that billion dollars.

 

[Evening]

Sorry, don't know if this has been suggested before, but if the biggest issue in this LRT/subway debate is an extra transfer for people travelling to the Yonge-University-Spadina Line, why not just connect the Scarborough LRT with the Eglinton LRT as was proposed by Rob Ford himself some time ago? Yes the Eglinton LRT would travel slower than the Bloor Danforth Subway but people who really don't want to transfer to at Kennedy, don't need to. And the city will still benefit from a much more accessible LRT line in Scarborough which would require less people to have to take a bus to a subway station.

 

[scar_resident]

Sorry, don't know if this has been suggested before, but if the biggest issue in this LRT/subway debate is an extra transfer for people travelling to the Yonge-University-Spadina Line, why not just connect the Scarborough LRT with the Eglinton LRT as was proposed by Rob Ford himself some time ago? Yes the Eglinton LRT would travel slower than the Bloor Danforth Subway but people who really don't want to transfer to at Kennedy, don't need to. And the city will still benefit from a much more accessible LRT line in Scarborough which would require less people to have to take a bus to a subway station.

If you look at the movement of people, (begining to end destination) at Kennedy Station, the highest of incoming passengers (a.m) are from the RT. Most of these people (from visual analysis) are transferring to the subway, not the Eglinton bus (else the line for the 34 would be much longer than it is now). This would mean, logically, you would extend the BD subway, not the Eglinton LRT.

Many people forget the whole purpose around the Scarborough and North York subways were part of the vision of Metro Toronto growing Employment districts to discourage employment sprawl, (like the focus now on infill high density residential projects). Abandonning the subway plans and moving to LRT plans based of existing ridership levels and transit use shows that the city has pretty much given up on growing the employment districts and wants to continue focus job creation in the downtown core. The other policies outside of transit, like financial incentives and varying corporate property tax rates to make employment areas (outside of downtown) to be able to compete with the 905 have also been abandonned.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

If you look at the movement of people, (begining to end destination) at Kennedy Station, the highest of incoming passengers (a.m) are from the RT. Most of these people (from visual analysis) are transferring to the subway, not the Eglinton bus (else the line for the 34 would be much longer than it is now). This would mean, logically, you would extend the BD subway, not the Eglinton LRT.

They are transferring to BD subway with DT as the ultimate destination mostly. I think the better argument against that move is that the at grade section of ECLRT can't handle the RT load, plus it probably doesn't offer a speed advantage as currently configured.

Many people forget the whole purpose around the Scarborough and North York subways were part of the vision of Metro Toronto growing Employment districts to discourage employment sprawl, (like the focus now on infill high density residential projects). Abandonning the subway plans and moving to LRT plans based of existing ridership levels and transit use shows that the city has pretty much given up on growing the employment districts and wants to continue focus job creation in the downtown core. The other policies outside of transit, like financial incentives and varying corporate property tax rates to make employment areas (outside of downtown) to be able to compete with the 905 have also been abandonned.

The decentralization per Metroplan was an abject failure - there was literally little to no new developments at the two nodes that are connected by subway (NYCC - one new office tower since the 90s, ECC/Islington - zero). There is no reason to believe somehow a BD extension will change that (like does one seriously think that somehow the existing RT - as imperfect as it is - prevented office developments that would otherwise have happened if it was a subway?) There is a case for extending BD - it is current and future ridership and less the transfer issue or wishful future commercial development.

AoD

 

[M II A II R II K]

In the long term there would be some kind of viable electrified GO transfer for people going downtown at the Kennedy Station. Those wanting to go to Danforth Ave. can be the only ones that transfer to the subway.

 

[scar_resident]

The decentralization per Metroplan was an abject failure - there was literally little to no new developments at the two nodes that are connected by subway (NYCC - one new office tower since the 90s, ECC/Islington - zero). There is no reason to believe somehow a BD extension will change that (like does one seriously think that somehow the existing RT - as imperfect as it is - prevented office developments that would otherwise have happened if it was a subway?) There is a case for extending BD - it is current and future ridership and less the transfer issue or the wishful future commercial development.

AoD

Not saying that the transit was going to create job growth. Metro was supposed to focus on job creation in those employment districts and employees would have rapid transit capacity available to reach those new jobs. Macro events had jobs fleeing Toronto, 1.3 million in 1983 and it just recovered to 1.3 million in 2013. The jobs that have been recovered have been concentrated, out of all the designated employment districts, in the downtown region.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Not saying that the transit was going to create job growth. Metro was supposed to focus on job creation in those employment districts and employees would have rapid transit capacity available to reach those new jobs. Macro events had jobs fleeing Toronto, 1.3 million in 1983 and it just recovered to 1.3 million in 2013. The jobs that have been recovered have been concentrated, out of all the designated employment districts, in the downtown region.

No but you are suggesting that transit was going to shape the pattern of job growth, which in hindsight proves inaccurate. The centrifugal (and centripetal) forces are not something transit lines can overcome. The jobs that had been recovered, I would hazard to think, are fundamentally different in nature from the jobs that were lost.

AoD

 

[drum118]

This was posted by a transit expert in the US on another board.

Toronto has proven with Mayor Ford how crooked politics are there.A new Light Rail line on private right-of-way should not cost over
$ 40 million per mile x 5.5 miles = $ 220 million. A subway will cost
maybe $ 400 million per mile for 5 miles = $ 2 billion. I may be
wrong about 5.5 miles but adjust the cost to fit the mileage.
Both taxpayers and economists will agree you do not invest 80 %
more to gain 15 % in riders. If that were the case, just make transit
free and gain 33 % with no new investment except a few buses.
More to the point is operating efficiency to hold down cost while
attracting as many passengers as possible.
With 31 million annual passengers, Light Rail will probably need
60 car trips for the peak hour. They will cost $ 45 million per year to
operate.
The subway will need 60 cars but it will have to have 72 cars
because Bloor-Danforth schedules will determine how many.
72 cars will cost about $ 48 million per year.
Amortizing the investment annually will cost $ $ 13.2 million per
year for LIght Rail and $ 120 million for the subway. The total
cost will probably be:
Light Rail = $ 58.2 million per year = $ 1.97 per passenger
Subway = $ 168 million per year = $ 9.25 per passenger,
360 % more.
Who in their right mind would pay that.? What other better project
would they give up to pay for this one ? Fares might cover LRT but
sure won't cover subway extension.
If you think I have used the wrong mlleage or see some other
mistake correct it to see what you get.
I can not envision rebuilding Kennedy LRT station or strengthening
the bridge in Scarborough will make much difference as $ 40
million a mile for LRT implies a whole new line. 40 cars and 6
spares will probably cost $ 144 million million. The typical Light Rail
would have less than 46 new cars for 5.5 miles so add $ 144 million
to my $ 220 million for good measure, for more cars still only $ 364
million total and $21.84 million per year plus $ 68.2 million for
operations = $ 90 million total = $ $ 2.90 per passenger, 69 % less
than subway. With subway somebody will have to pay much more.
That is not true at Bloor at Yonge Street where the subway is full,
the subway is less costly than Light Rail with the speed and volume
they get.