Danforth Line 2 Scarborough Subway Extension

[ssiguy2]

You can't compare TransitCity with subway as TC is NOT rapid transit. Even the Eglinton line outside the tunnelled portion is not rapid. It has far too many stops, no rail crossing barriers, cannot travel any faster than the posted speed limit, and has to wait for advanced lights and street crossings. Improved transit yes but not rapid by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Yes good idea:

1. A replacement for the Scarborough Subway is 1 DRL (Mlvern to the Ex).
2. The traditional DRL is the second (Seneca College to City Hall to North-West??).

That's serious overbuilding with relatively little time benefit - you are probably better off using GO RER with local interchange to Malvern. Or eventually have some form of midtown GO RER (which will be the "fast" crosstown route that subways can never be)

My general point was that reducing capital (+operating) costs should be a more immediate goal than planning for a capacity crunch 50 years down the line. Shorter stations and rolling stock that can accommodate sharper turns and gradients are part of that. The lifetime costs of the Pape-St.Andrew DRL are up to 10b$ now. Toronto can't meaningfully expand RT coverage at such high prices.

AM peak-hour capacity in particularly is a bad metric to plan around. Assume we have a 15k/pphpd capacity route and that experiences peak demand of 20k/pphpd. People would be freaking out how this was a giant transit failure! The line would be under capacity for the rest of the day though, so we'd be talking about a massive expansion of capital costs (into the billions) to save 5,000 people from shifting their trips +/- an hour.

By this argument you'd never even get Line 1 off the ground - besides it's questionable as to how much you'd able to save by moving to a tunneled light-metro, particularly in the core area given the same building code requirements (see ECLRT).

AoD

 

[W. K. Lis]

You can't compare TransitCity with subway as TC is NOT rapid transit. Even the Eglinton line outside the tunnelled portion is not rapid. It has far too many stops, no rail crossing barriers, cannot travel any faster than the posted speed limit, and has to wait for advanced lights and street crossings. Improved transit yes but not rapid by any stretch of the imagination.

Depends upon how the transportation (AKA roads) department implements transit priority. At the moment, left turning single-occupant automobiles (plural) get priority ahead of everyone including 100+ people in a light rail vehicle.

It they implement like L.A. it would be rapid transit.

Or in Chicago (L).

Based on the current Toronto's transportation department, it'll be like on Spadina or St. Clair. Hopefully, someone in power will tell them that light rail MUST be given true priority.

 

[diminutive]

By this argument you'd never even get Line 1 off the ground - besides it's questionable as to how much you'd able to save by moving to a tunneled light-metro, particularly in the core area given the same building code requirements (see ECLRT).

That doesn't follow at all from what I said. It's disingenuous to apply an argument made in 2016 to 1954. Things change, obviously. I'd also note that the original Yonge line did take reducing capital costs quite seriously (eg. large amounts of above ground track).

I also don't agree that the ECLRT is representative of 'light metro' in this context. The ECLRT platforms are very long, more than 2x the length of the Canada Line for instance. As rbt pointed out, station volume is a major contributor to cost, so this isn't a trivial point.

The latest estimate for the Arbutus extension in Vancouver is 1,900$m for 6km versus 4,400$m for the 7.5km DRL. Obviously tons of caveats are in order with that comparison. It's not definitive. But it is the case that Vancouver has consistently been able to build cheaper underground transit thanks to smaller, lower capacity systems.

 

[ShonTron]

The SkyTrain was built well, in the sense that capacity can be increased simply by operating more vehicles. The original Expo Line is not yet near capacity. But sadly, the P3 Canada Line was clearly underbuilt from the start. Platforms should have been at least 50% longer.

The Eglinton-Crosstown is sort of a hybrid LRT - built to the top of the line in LRT standards in the tunneled and elevated section between Mount Dennis and Laird, but in a median through North York and Scarborough. The problem is Laird to Don Mills, which should have been fully grade separated as that's going to be a serious bottleneck if Laird is the turn-back point for half the peak-period trains. We can thank local residents and Metrolinx for that.

Edmonton's south LRT extension is built in a road median with 100% transit priority (standard railway crossings with crossbucks, lights, bells, gates). When I was in Phoenix, I found that trams in the median LRT alignment triggers traffic signals to change and flashing lights warning motorists not to enter the tracks. Same with the LRT I rode in Seattle. But I guess we can expect limited or no transit priority on Eglinton through Scarborough: the only difference then to Spadina and St. Clair is that intersections and station stops will be further apart on Eglinton, so it will be faster than on those streetcar lines.

 

[Forgotten]

That doesn't follow at all from what I said. It's disingenuous to apply an argument made in 2016 to 1954. Things change, obviously. I'd also note that the original Yonge line did take reducing capital costs quite seriously (eg. large amounts of above ground track).

I also don't agree that the ECLRT is representative of 'light metro' in this context. The ECLRT platforms are very long, more than 2x the length of the Canada Line for instance. As rbt pointed out, station volume is a major contributor to cost, so this isn't a trivial point.

The latest estimate for the Arbutus extension in Vancouver is 1,900$m for 6km versus 4,400$m for the 7.5km DRL. Obviously tons of caveats are in order with that comparison. It's not definitive. But it is the case that Vancouver has consistently been able to build cheaper underground transit thanks to smaller, lower capacity systems.

Why bring up the line that even people in Vancouver think is an undersized joke? Are you Michael Schabust?

 

[coffey1]

The City's Left media is out today with another stir the divisive pot standard subtle bias article. Nothing about LRT transfer location and integration, nothing about McGuinty chopping Funds and dropping the SMLRT, nothing about the past Subway plans, nothing about connecting to what exists, York regions, tc...... Just that Scarborough is ever so lucky to have Toronto council to save it and long rejected transfer LRT is great.

What good does this crap do? The anti inner suburb hate is beyond nauseating. York region is ver so lucky they don't have to deal with this crap. You can google the article if you care to read. I refuse to post links for the overly bias media outlets

 

[pstogios]

What good does this crap do? The anti inner suburb hate is beyond nauseating. York region is ver so lucky they don't have to deal with this crap. You can google the article if you care to read. I refuse to post links for the overly bias media outlets

One could ask the same question about what your crap paranoia conspiracy-theorizing. Nobody hates anyone. Perhaps you do.

Please stick to the topic of the thread. Cut the BS.

 

[coffey1]

One could ask the same question about what your crap paranoia conspiracy-theorizing. Nobody hates anyone. Perhaps you do.

Please stick to the topic of the thread. Cut the BS.

Here we go again. Please let the moderators do the moderating. Im discussing related topics which impact the line and again you choose to discuss me.

Its quite on topic and ill continue to post as the Politics and their media is one of the most important topics related to the future of this line. Media is very politically biased these days and Scarborough is not fairy represented on transit file whatsoever.

There is zero reason for an article right now aside from the ongoing clear agenda that doesn't reflect the majority of Scarborough and it not healthy for the entire City moving forward. They are just trying to what? Rally the base ? For what another nauseating debate. You don't have to agree. Just say you dont agree without the personal jargon or maybe give some proof to back up why you believe the City's Left media doesn't have an all out Political agenda to derail the Subway. Id love to discuss.

Cheers.

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

The City's Left media is out today with another stir the divisive pot standard subtle bias article. Nothing about LRT transfer location and integration, nothing about McGuinty chopping Funds and dropping the SMLRT, nothing about the past Subway plans, nothing about connecting to what exists, York regions, tc...... Just that Scarborough is ever so lucky to have Toronto council to save it and long rejected transfer LRT is great.

What good does this crap do? The anti inner suburb hate is beyond nauseating. York region is ver so lucky they don't have to deal with this crap. You can google the article if you care to read. I refuse to post links for the overly bias media outlets

I had to look to see what you're talking about - did you mean the one on Torontoist? It says it's a "brief" history so it doesn't go into every little detail (though it actually does mention McGuinty cutting funds). It even jokes off the top about how it would actually require a book to get into all the details; how much do you expect from a blog?

I'm also not sure what it is York Region doesn't have to deal with? A watchful media? A council that reverses its decisions multiple times, wasting taxpayer money instead of taking what the province has given them and executing a coherent transit plan?

And as for the timing, they did another one on Transit City a week or two ago so I guess it's a series or something. If the subway gets derailed it won't be because of Torontoist. I think you're reading too much in.

 

[44 North]

I had to look to see what you're talking about - did you mean the one on Torontoist? It says it's a "brief" history so it doesn't go into every little detail (though it actually does mention McGuinty cutting funds). It even jokes off the top about how it would actually require a book to get into all the details; how much do you expect from a blog?

I'm also not sure what it is York Region doesn't have to deal with? A watchful media? A council that reverses its decisions multiple times, wasting taxpayer money instead of taking what the province has given them and executing a coherent transit plan?

And as for the timing, they did another one on Transit City a week or two ago so I guess it's a series or something. If the subway gets derailed it won't be because of Torontoist. I think you're reading too much in.

That's funny, just recently you proudly proclaimed how you neither read nor commented on Torontoist articles seeing that it's one of those dreaded "downtown hipster sites" (which was odd at the time since you both read and commented on an article after announcing that doozy). And here you are again reading and commenting on this supposedly unreadable 'downtown hipster site'. It wasn't linked either so you had to go out of your way.

And while you continually rag on Toronto's council - while trying to tout the glories and transit-orientedness of Your Region (*eyeroll*) - why is it that you never bring up the Prov for meddling things? I mean really, that's what started the SSE issue (among many other multi-billion dollar election promises). Why is Toronto the baddie for taking the Prov up on the promise of a subway? If the Prov promised to bring SSE up to Markham before the next election, and York Region agreed, I'm almost certain you'd be front and centre applauding it.

 

[coffey1]

I had to look to see what you're talking about - did you mean the one on Torontoist? It says it's a "brief" history so it doesn't go into every little detail (though it actually does mention McGuinty cutting funds). It even jokes off the top about how it would actually require a book to get into all the details; how much do you expect from a blog?

I'm also not sure what it is York Region doesn't have to deal with? A watchful media? A council that reverses its decisions multiple times, wasting taxpayer money instead of taking what the province has given them and executing a coherent transit plan?

And as for the timing, they did another one on Transit City a week or two ago so I guess it's a series or something. If the subway gets derailed it won't be because of Torontoist. I think you're reading too much in.

Even in the quietest days of SSE planning and their most mild articles the same old Political narrative bias remains.

Setting the stage: "Scarborough is no worse than most post-war North American suburbs and better than many, largely thanks to Metropolitan Toronto’s growth planning efforts"

Oh yes thanks Toronto? Not sure why. No tax breaks like the 905, no integrated transit to the main center of the largest suburb in the City. Have they have really paid quality attention to detail for planning Scarborough's future and revitalization? No this is nonsense

To the Finish "Where would the extra money come from? How could we still build the subway and LRT? Stop asking questions, you negative naysayer! And what of news that the ridership projections were “problematic” and almost certainly way above anything that would justify a subway? Also irrelevant."

Again just the same old rhetoric. Problematic ridership my ass. Itll provide some of the best ridership numbers on the network. No need for this article right now. Anyone who cares already knows the history and this is just to keep the anti suburb subway sheep engaged to fight once more.

I wouldn't take issue if these Downtown left media organizations didn't just blast 6 years of all out bias trying to prevent the SSE by throwing out anything that "sticks articles" & slanted pictures. Nothing they put out is unbias. There's always a purpose.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

Even in the quietest days of SSE planning and their most mild articles the same old Political narrative bias remains.

Setting the stage: "Scarborough is no worse than most post-war North American suburbs and better than many, largely thanks to Metropolitan Toronto’s growth planning efforts"

Oh yes thanks Toronto? Not sure why. No tax breaks like the 905, no integrated transit to the main center of the largest suburb in the City. Have they have really paid quality attention to detail for planning Scarborough's future and revitalization? No this is nonsense

To the Finish "Where would the extra money come from? How could we still build the subway and LRT? Stop asking questions, you negative naysayer! And what of news that the ridership projections were “problematic” and almost certainly way above anything that would justify a subway? Also irrelevant."

Again just the same old rhetoric. Problematic ridership my ass. Itll provide some of the best ridership numbers on the network. No need for this article right now. Anyone who cares already knows the history and this is just to keep the anti suburb subway sheep engaged to fight once more.

I wouldn't take issue if these Downtown left media organizations didn't just blast 6 years of all out bias rhetoric to prevent the SSE.

Largest suburb is North York.

 

[coffey1]

QUOTE="denfromoakvillemilton, post: 1157040, member: 1817"]Largest suburb is North York.[/QUOTE]

Really? The high quality transit will certainly help North York pull away in population growth.

187 km squared - Scarborough 625,698 (2011)
176.9 km squared - North York 655,913 (2011)
123.9 km squared - Etobicoke pop. 347,948

Build the damn subway extension(s) to SCC and fund a full LRT/BRT network around it. Its an intelligent plan based on what transit exists in this City. Not to mention the subway(s) to York region City Centers. Absolutely mind boggling to continue fighting it so vigorously for something so well integrated to the Center of the large City suburb. Clearly the Politicians from the core and there media partners don't care about fine details for Scarborough's future.

And they wonder why we have such divisive politics in this City. Look at the numbers and look at the infrastructure. The RT was a disaster on many levels & its time to build a proper legacy.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Largest suburb is North York.

North York also has more subways than any former municipality in our city. Damn North York elites.