Debate on the merits of the Scarborough Subway Extension

[Hopkins123]

Are you saying that the even if (however unlikely) the Sheppard East Subway Extension will have less riders than the Scarborough Subway Extension, it should be built because the Sheppard Subway was already built?

Really makes you think
Idk if it’s a good or bad thing.

The longer the Sheppard Line is extended, the more ridership it'll attract. Every new station will likely garner a ~10,000 daily alightings average usage. The density alone in Bay Mills, Agincourt and Bathurst/Sheppard would be enough to fill trains.

 

[Rainforest]

This is completely ignoring that it's kind of silly to compare the entire daily ridership for one of the largest subways in the world to a single 5.5 km line. Of course the short line will have an advantage.

The highlighted statement is completely untrue. A short line has a massive disadvantage; it doesn't give the riders enough reason to get out of their way and use the subway.

Did London build suburban infrastructure before it had built subways in it's most dense areas? I'd have little problem with the idea of a Sheppard Line (or extensions to Scarborough) some point in the future - but not when there are very dense areas of the city completely unserved and/or underserved.

Do you realize that London started its subway construction many decades before Toronto? At that time, construction was more affordable, while the whole city fit into what is the "city core" today. Naturally, they saturated the city with multiple subway lines. Nobody asked for subway extensions into villages, forests, or farmlands.

Had London started their system several decades later, they would be facing same challenge of the neighborhoods competing for the scarce transit funds. Their core system wouldn't be as dense, due to the competing demands from the suburbs. The density in the suburbs may be lower than in the core, but the suburban residents get used to the urban lifestyle and demand better transit; such demands cannot be ignored.

 

[Voltz]

The longer the Sheppard Line is extended, the more ridership it'll attract. Every new station will likely garner a ~10,000 daily alightings average usage. The density alone in Bay Mills, Agincourt and Bathurst/Sheppard would be enough to fill trains.

No it won't, there is no ridership justification for a Sheppard Subway.

 

[Rainforest]

No it won't, there is no ridership justification for a Sheppard Subway.

That's not what Hopkins123 said though; the ridership for a longer line would definitely improve.

Whether it would improve enough to justify the construction costs, is another matter.

IMO, a longer Sheppard Subway would be totally justifiable based on the operating costs alone, but not justifiable (at this time or in the near future) based on the construction costs. If it got extended for free somehow (by a magic spell) and the city would have to pick up the increased operation subsidy, I'd say sure go for that.

However, the appetite for the construction funding is clearly limited at all levels of the government. In that situation, we can't do Sheppard before we complete (a) the Relief Line, and (b) YNSE.

Sheppard as a nice-to-have, while the Relief line is absolutely essential for the stability of the whole transit system.

 

[Streety McCarface]

Are you saying that the even if (however unlikely) the Sheppard East Subway Extension will have less riders than the Scarborough Subway Extension, it should be built because the Sheppard Subway was already built?

Really makes you think
Idk if it’s a good or bad thing.

No it won't, there is no ridership justification for a Sheppard Subway.

Although I was originally against it, the Sheppard East LRT will be an excellent intern solution to the situation east of Don Mills. SE won't be justified for another 20-30 years. They should build the LRT to increase ridership and densify the corridor, then when they have to replace structures, like tracks 30 years later, build the Sheppard East extension at Cut and Cover; sheppard is definitely big enough for it, and vibration issues can be mitigated with new technologies, but won't be a huge issue if larger buildings are built.

 

[syn]

Again, the argument is that we have something and should be doing something with it. Weirdly, the lines that should be LRT and subway were reversed (Eglinton and Sheppard), but we have a sheppard subway, now let's fix the corridor in which it is used.

This speaks directly to the problem I've been referring to this entire time.

It's not so much a problem to be fixed, as it is a market reality. Expecting mass development and booming ridership because you have a subway built isn't realistic, and it never has been.

This is why you build infrastructure suitable to the area it's in - the Sheppard corridor is going to take decades (nearly two decades after the line opened) to justify anything more than what an LRT could've handled very well. Meanwhile you have high density areas downtown, that continually get far more dense, bursting at the seams.

 

[syn]

Do you realize that London started its subway construction many decades before Toronto? At that time, construction was more affordable, while the whole city fit into what is the "city core" today. Naturally, they saturated the city with multiple subway lines. Nobody asked for subway extensions into villages, forests, or farmlands.

Had London started their system several decades later, they would be facing same challenge of the neighborhoods competing for the scarce transit funds. Their core system wouldn't be as dense, due to the competing demands from the suburbs. The density in the suburbs may be lower than in the core, but the suburban residents get used to the urban lifestyle and demand better transit; such demands cannot be ignored.

Exactly why we shouldn't be wasting billions of dollars on frivolous projects because a community bought into the insane ramblings of a crack-smoking, international embarrassment.

 

[Streety McCarface]

This speaks directly to the problem I've been referring to this entire time.

It's not so much a problem to be fixed, as it is a market reality. Expecting mass development and booming ridership because you have a subway built isn't realistic, and it never has been.

This is why you build infrastructure suitable to the area it's in - the Sheppard corridor is going to take decades (nearly two decades after the line opened) to justify anything more than what an LRT could've handled very well. Meanwhile you have high density areas downtown, that continually get far more dense, bursting at the seams.

Again, the argument was that something was built. Nothing particularly useful for the majority of people at the time being, but something. It's better than the money being spent in other cities (if I remember correctly, there was a lot of provincial funding), or the money going to freeways, which it likely would have.

Side note, if the city ends up opting for LRT, the city will have to foot the bill; the federal and provincial governments will likely not pay a dime if we revert to LRT (this is because the provincial government needs the corridor to upgrade the Stouffville corridor to RER, and this can't happen with an LRT running down the corridor without massive expropriations (which will probably cost more than tunnelling for the SSE). The LRT will likely cost at least 1.4 billion as is, but if costs rise (like with the subway, they likely will), the city will have to foot the entirety of that bill. 1.4 billion + inflation + capital cost increase. I estimate that it will cost around 2 billion dollars if it's actually built (for viaduct rehabilitation, rebuilding tracks, rebuilding of power and signal systems, rebuilding of all 7 stations, the extension of the line etc). Think about that for a second, the city is currently footing $800,000,000 of the $3.56 billion. It's much less than the 1.4-2 billion dollars required for the Scarborough LRT. Unfortunately, this is a no-win situation for everyone. The city is trying to make the best out of a bad situation by building the subway to the STC (where a lot of the buses in Scarborough terminate), building the EELRT to densify Eglinton and to promote mobility through scarborough, and by adding additional RER stops in scarborough to promote development and quicker travel to downtown (Note: taking the subway to yonge and Bloor or Yonge and queen would be faster than going to an RER station, heading into Union, walking the even longer transfer to the subway at union, then taking the subway to the downtown workplace. It's only useful to scarberians if you're travelling to Union, or anything south of King).

 

[Rainforest]

Exactly why we shouldn't be wasting billions of dollars on frivolous projects because a community bought into the insane ramblings of a crack-smoking, international embarrassment.

Fortunately, the City Council will ignore this kind of ridiculous rants, and proceed with building critically important infrastructure such as SSE.

 

[JGHali]

Fortunately, the City Council will ignore this kind of ridiculous rants, and proceed with building critically important infrastructure such as SSE.

Oh yes. What's a few billion for a "one-seat ride" from a mall to Kennedy at the cost of numerous other projects to serve more people in more areas of Scarborough and throughout the city.

 

[OneCity]

The Sheppard subway will likely start to be a focal point of the 2022 and 2026 elections. If the SSE doesn't get extended Sheppard the SELRT is officially dead politically. Even then it would be hard pressed to garner enough support to not proceed to finish the loop with the stub In place and the subway extended. I'd be shocked to see LRT west of Kennedy Sheppard

Might be an idea to open a Sheppard subway debate thread afer this election for venting and to start grieving the death of the second transfer LRT line.

 

[pman]

Fortunately, the City Council will ignore this kind of ridiculous rants, and proceed with building critically important infrastructure such as SSE.

Council has also voted not to allow a value for money audit of SSE. Which makes sense - the project would be unlikely to survive rigorous scrutiny.

 

[OneCity]

Council has also voted not to allow a value for money audit of SSE. Which makes sense - the project would be unlikely to survive rigorous scrutiny.

If there was an actual plan worth comparing it might have had a chance. You can't study a bad plan with an already rejected bad plan. And those looking for the "Value" study already rejected an LRT plan which was studied to provide greater value then the transfer plan.

Surface subway or seamless Crosstown LRT connection would have seen merit but unfortunately council rejected already and GO RER is now in conflict with that corridor. If material costs rise for the SSE they rise for all other plans.

Time to move on has past and the only item of value to consider will be the Lawrence stop.

 

[Disparishun]

Thank you for sharing the map - it actually provides great perspective. Broadview's density is relatively low compared to other stations on the Bloor Line, but it would be near the top on the Sheppard Line.

I see that the population numbers are for 2011. Wouldn't the Sheppard numbers have changed a fair bit since then -- condo construction, etc?

 

[Leo_Chan]

Might be an idea to open a Sheppard subway debate thread afer this election for venting and to start grieving the death of the second transfer LRT line.

Would you do the honours and make a great, detailed, and informative post #1?