Downtown Rapid Transit Expansion Study

[Dan416]

When are we going to get over this idea that every corner of the city is equally deserving of the same kind of mass transit? This is why the whole subway vs LRT debate has been so painful to watch - it's playing out like the debate is between subways and only subways doled out equally around the city or LRT and only LRT doled out equally around the city. This bizarre attitide that if Sheppard doesn't get its subway then neither should any other part of the city, ever, is completely mindless and has created a disfunctional transit planning environment. The real answer isn't either of the above. It's subways, LRT, and commuter/regional rail where the demand warrants each one. And the DRL is far, far more appropriate for heavy rail technology than Sheppard. Sheppard isn't entitled to a subway just because another part of the city gets one.

Sorry if I'm ranting, but this while debate is beyond ridiculous.

Sheppard isn't entitled to a subway because of what other parts of the city get one. Just to refresh your memory, Sheppard HAS an unfinished subway line.

NO ONE has EVER said Sheppard deserved a subway over the DRL.

The problem is the SELRT being foisted on Sheppard when you could simply finish the Sheppard Subway at a later date as was always planned.

 

[unimaginative2]

Sheppard isn't entitled to a subway because of what other parts of the city get one. Just to refresh your memory, Sheppard HAS an unfinished subway line.

NO ONE has EVER said Sheppard deserved a subway over the DRL.

The problem is the SELRT being foisted on Sheppard when you could simply finish the Sheppard Subway at a later date as was always planned.

I agree. Beyond ideology, it makes absolutely no sense to finish a subway line as surface LRT and makes even less sense to bypass the major hub of transit in Scarborough. Anyone who claims we desperately need to serve Sheppard east of McCowan hasn't ever been to that area. It's pretty obvious riders feel this way, since the study that "justified" the light rail line projected that the shorter subway line would have far more riders (i.e. would serve far more people) than the light rail line.

 

[nfitz]

Though it makes no sense to build a subway past Victoria Park, when there is not the demand there, and even TTC admits, that the 25-year old forecast showing a subway was needed, was no longer valid, as there hasn't been the development along this axis, that would require it, nor was it predicted to happen in the next 25 years.

As you would get many more riders with $4-billion of LRT than $4-billion of subway then the way forward was a no-brainer. Not sure why we are beating this dead horse.

 

[44 North]

LOL @ those who think the SELRT is the reason why the Sheppard line will never be 'finished'.

There are a dozen other reasons why it would never have been extended.

 

[JWBF]

Like it or not, the promise of extending the Sheppard Subway is all about dividing Toronto, and garnering votes; one just has to look at Hudak for the silliness.

 

[M II A II R II K]

Then turn the whole thing into LRT and be done with it.

 

[dunkalunk]

I second this as a permanent solution. The only other feasible option would be to extend the subway west and interline, but I honestly think priority signalled LRT would just be as effective.

 

[MisterF]

Sheppard isn't entitled to a subway because of what other parts of the city get one. Just to refresh your memory, Sheppard HAS an unfinished subway line.

NO ONE has EVER said Sheppard deserved a subway over the DRL.

The problem is the SELRT being foisted on Sheppard when you could simply finish the Sheppard Subway at a later date as was always planned.

I don't disagree with you that the Sheppard LRT is a flawed plan, but that's not what I was talking about with my rant. I was responding to this:

Although I fully agree with her premise that if there was no money for the Sheppard line, there's no money for the more expensive DRL, which will cost an arm and a leg more than simply finishing the Sheppard line.

See, it at least implies that the two corridors are equally deserving of subways, or that the technology of one affects the merits of the other. Saying "if there's no money for Sheppard than there's no money for the DRL" is a bit like saying "if there's no money for the Parks Department to get a fire truck then there's no money for the Fire Department to get one". The Parks Department might want a fire truck to water the trees when all they need is a garden hose...but that doesn't mean the Fire Department should settle for that too.

 

[BurlOak]

I don't disagree with you that the Sheppard LRT is a flawed plan, but that's not what I was talking about with my rant. I was responding to this:


See, it at least implies that the two corridors are equally deserving of subways, or that the technology of one affects the merits of the other.

I agree with the original statement - not because of need but because of politics. In 2003 Sheppard was the number one priority of TTC. In 2006 it was the SRT replacement. Then in 2008 it was the multi-phase Transit City plan. Now it is being changed again to DRL. How can we have confidence in the transit planners if they change there mind so often. How do we know which such decisions were transit related and which were politically motivated. After the past 2 months of debates that re-iterated that the transit experts agree that Transit City must be built, how can these same Councillors campaign to stop the Transit City plan and switch to another plan.

 

[W. K. Lis]

From Markham's Regional Councillor Jim Jones, at this link, comes this proposal:

Markham councillor shares vision on transit line

The much-needed relief for the Yonge subway line could be found by transforming the existing Stouffville GO line, according to a Markham councillor.

That is, get rid of the Stouffville GO line and replace it with I-METRO-E, or the Markham and East Toronto Rail Ontario-Electric.

The “I” stands for innovative, integrated, iconic, intelligent and immediate, said Regional Councillor Jim Jones, the author of the above-ground-electric-subway vision.

Mr. Jones tabled his 73-page vision document during last week’s council meeting to support his motion to pursue the I-METRO-E concept, on which he began working in December.

While GO is an “antiquated” system, I-METRO-E is a 46.7-kilometre rapid transit link, envisioned as a subway-like, quick-start rapid transit system that will offload the Yonge subway line, provide a downtown relief line and will temporarily use diesel-electric multiple units, popular in Europe, Mr. Jones writes in his book.

He said because Metrolinx owns the rail corridor and already had diesel-multiple units on order, capital costs are low.

Mr. Jones estimated it would cost about $1 billion to $2 billion to implement the entire system.

However, “The big thing is money”, Mr. Jones said. “There is no predicable funding source.”

That being said, Mr. Jones said his vision calls for a private developer to build I-METRO-E, design it and operate it for 35 to 50 years, with Metrolinx overseeing it.

It will develop the Stouffville corridor as the “Yonge Street of the east”, he said, adding it’s about connectivity, span of services, frequency and speed.

With the track elevated and with full electrification, I-METRO-E can travel 24 stops in just over 43 minutes, as opposed to 1 hour and 4 minutes currently on GO from Stouffville to Union Station, Mr. Jones said.

It will create a new north-south connection between Markham and Toronto and could be operational by 2015 and serve as showcase for the Pan Am Games, he said. “I’m not out to be a showman, I want to solve the problem,” Mr. Jones said, adding some Toronto councillors are supportive of his vision and think it’s a “no-brainer”.

Among them, Scarborough-Rouge River Councillor Chin Lee, who said Mr. Jones’s proposal to convert the Stouffville GO line will benefit residents in Scarborough and Markham as well as those who choose to live in Toronto, but work in Markham.

However, Metrolinx spokesperson Malon Edwards isn’t quite convinced.

Mr. Edwards said funding is an issue, whatever the option is.

He said Mr. Jones’s proposal isn’t possible on the existing Stouffville GO track because the line needs to be upgraded to increase rail service over the next 15 years, in order to have all-day service, two ways, every 20 minutes. That being said, the plan doesn’t have funding, Mr. Edwards said.

Mr. Jones deferred his motion to be discussed at a later day as he said he plans to meet with the general manager of TTC, TTC chairperson Councillor Karen Stintz and other Toronto councillors.

The matter is set for a workshop with town council May 2.

An alternative to the DRL?

 

[leopetr]

(I-Metro-E along the Stouffville rail line) An alternative to the DRL?

Worthwhile project, yes.

An alternative to the Sheppard subway, maybe. A reliable shortcut from Agincourt to Union is very welcome.

An alternative to the DRL, not really. DRL to me is defined by a transfer from the Danforth line. This would intercept Danforth subway at Main Street, which is pretty far east. It would also require Spadina Station-like amounts of walking even if a pedestrian tunnel were to be built.

It would, however, be relatively cheap to build, assuming nothing too stupid is meant by "elevated". All the line needs are a few more grade separations (moderately expensive), double-tracking (moderate), rolling stock (moderate), surface stations (cheap), and electric catenary (cheap).

 

[car4041]

An alternative to the DRL, not really. DRL to me is defined by a transfer from the Danforth line. This would intercept Danforth subway at Main Street, which is pretty far east. It would also require Spadina Station-like amounts of walking even if a pedestrian tunnel were to be built.

Well, the idea of the DRL is to divert passengers from Bloor-Yonge, which can be accomplished in more than one way. Aside from the inconvenient transfer at Main Street station, the "I-Metro-E" would take people off the Danforth line in other ways. A lot of downtown-bound RT riders would take the "I-Metro-E" at Kennedy rather than the Danforth line, thus removing them from Bloor-Yonge. It could also intercept riders on various bus routes in Scarborough who would otherwise eventually end up on the Danforth line. So it probably would provide a degree of DRL-style relief, though not as much as the "real" DRL.

None of this is to say that the particular "I-Metro-E" proposal is realistic. Can Union handle all of these trains and passengers?

In general, though, it's nice to see that politicians seem to be waking up to the rapid-transit potential of our existing rail corridors, even if the particular proposals need work.

 

[leopetr]

None of this is to say that the particular "I-Metro-E" proposal is realistic. Can Union handle all of these trains and passengers?

Re: Union train capacity, I believe that the bottleneck is the number of approaching tracks rather than number of platforms. In the West, there's a space crunch between Skydome and the Convention Centre where fewer tracks can fit than Metrolinx would like. I'm not sure what the situation is like in the East.

Re: Union pedestrian capacity, they are working on expanding that. They recently added a new PATH connection, they're building the new double underground concourse, and I think Front St will be upgraded with a better mid-block crossing after the Union's second TTC platform is finished.

 

[wilson_wu]

Well, the idea of the DRL is to divert passengers from Bloor-Yonge, which can be accomplished in more than one way. Aside from the inconvenient transfer at Main Street station, the "I-Metro-E" would take people off the Danforth line in other ways. A lot of downtown-bound RT riders would take the "I-Metro-E" at Kennedy rather than the Danforth line, thus removing them from Bloor-Yonge. It could also intercept riders on various bus routes in Scarborough who would otherwise eventually end up on the Danforth line. So it probably would provide a degree of DRL-style relief, though not as much as the "real" DRL.

None of this is to say that the particular "I-Metro-E" proposal is realistic. Can Union handle all of these trains and passengers?

In general, though, it's nice to see that politicians seem to be waking up to the rapid-transit potential of our existing rail corridors, even if the particular proposals need work.

Not to mention, the i-Metro-e would draw feeder bus riders from major east-west routes such as Steeles, Finch, Sheppard, that would normally ride the long bus journey all the way to Yonge St. The buses on Steeles/Finch especially see busy loads near Kennedy Road.

 

[M II A II R II K]

There would still need to be the express service on that line though as an option.