saveoursubways (SOS)

[scarberiankhatru]

The Danforth extension does run up McCowan on the map, but whoever made the map either mistook Brimley for McCowan or the graphic got shifted over about 1cm (which ends up being 800m).

I would have made a branch of the Spadina line turn west onto Finch. Only half of the trains would service Vaughan, you could have had the other half go on the Finch West branch.

I'm puzzled why your document does not examine any branch extensions, which exist on almost every other metro in the world.

If you're gonna branch Spadina off along Finch, might as well just extend Sheppard there instead.

For the average citizen, it would have been good to include in your report the average speeds of the subways versus LRTs and buses and really rub it in that TC is a slow system. Also, I think the Eglinton line east of Kennedy will never be necessary and could easily be served by buses.

Eglinton east of Kennedy is already one of the busiest transit corridors in the entire city and could become much busier with better service and redevelopments like the proposed Markington complex. Even if you exclude routes like Brimley that only run on Eglinton for a short distance and would not pad an Eglinton line's numbers, there's still more than enough service and ridership on Eglinton to render the actual Eglinton bus unnecessary other than a rush hour supplement. It's these sorts of overlapping route segments that are ideal for replacement with actual rapid transit.

 

[kEiThZ]

Eglinton east of Kennedy is already one of the busiest transit corridors in the entire city and could become much busier with better service and redevelopments like the proposed Markington complex.

And there's no need to have unnecessary transfers at Kennedy. Extending Eglinton east would bring subway service to all of southern Scarborough and give Durham residents quick access to the subway as well.

 

[nfitz]

As far as I know, that's what it does? All of our lines follow previously planned routing. And of course it'll serve STC. The Danforth line and Sheppard line interchange at STC.

I'm not sure what the planned TTC alignment to Scarborough Town Centre was ... if there ever was one. But you haven't followed the planned Sheppard East alignment - that is clear from your map. And also how would both routes serve STC if your Sheppard East extension doesn't reach Brimley? The existing station is closer to McCowan than Brimley.

 

[gweed123]

I'm not sure what the planned TTC alignment to Scarborough Town Centre was ... if there ever was one. But you haven't followed the planned Sheppard East alignment - that is clear from your map. And also how would both routes serve STC if your Sheppard East extension doesn't reach Brimley? The existing station is closer to McCowan than Brimley.

The reasoning for not using the full Sheppard East alignment from the previous study is the station design at STC. The RTES alignment had the Sheppard platform and the SRT platform parallel running E-W. Since they were different technologies, interlining was not a possibility, and I would imagine they were going to do a Kennedy-esque transfer.

But since we're using the same technologies on both lines, interlining and transfers between lines are possible. I envision the new STC station to be similar to St. George, but with a much wider centre platform, with B-D on the top level, and Sheppard on the lower level. If you look just west of St. George, there is a section where the upper and lower level tracks connect. I envision this same thing for STC. That way, if the lines are one day interlined, the lower level can be closed off (much like Lower Bay), still leaving the upper level in use.

Also, the proposed alignment for B-D coming into STC would need a relatively N-S platform, forcing Sheppard to come in nearly N-S as well (or on a slight angle, but still running basically N-S).

 

[gweed123]

Can't say I see the point of converting the existing Lakeshore streetcar to BRT west of the Humber ... wouldn't that require people to transfer?

Why would they? Can a bus and a streetcar not run in the same corridor? The design may be somewhat unique for this section, but widening out the intersections to make room for a cue jump lane would make sense, and the streetcar lane could be encorporated into that. There is nothing the precludes the 501 from running to Long Branch even if there is a BRT Light route along the same corridor.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

The lines are clearly supposed to intersect at STC but there's an error on the map, which actually shows them intersecting roughly where the recycling plant is west of Brimley. Whoever made the map should shift it over a smidge to STC to prevent a thousand complaints of bafflement in this thread.

Sheppard and Danforth could always intersect at a / aligned station rather than a \ alignment. They could still be on top of one other and still have some kind of interlined upstairs/downstairs integration where it pulls in on one line and pulls out on the other. Not that it would ever be necessary or desirable, but this would also make future extensions possible. A / alignment also might make sense since Sheppard needs to begin dropping south of Sheppard west of Agincourt because it absolutely must connect with the GO interchange. One Sheppard station could be roughly at Brimley, while the terminus connection with Danforth could be at McCowan, with the NE exit near Consilium & Progress, which would be great for the growing cluster of towers. There's plenty of land immediately east of STC to fit a new transit terminal if the existing bus station can't be kept.

The city/TTC never really studied any subway alignments to STC because they had no interest in extending the subway. A general alignment through Brimley & Lawrence was the placeholder in the RT replacement process, but as far as I know no actual details were ever drawn up nor were comparisons made with options like Midland or McCowan...nothing was made public, anyway. Going through Brimley & Lawrence would be the shortest extension, with the fewest stations, so even as a placeholder it is the most efficient alignment and would be a serious option no matter what else was studied.

 

[Rainforest]

The report is to the point and easy to read. Now, some critisizm:

1). No LRT lines at all. In the Introduction, you critisized (and rightly so) Transit City for the one-size-fits-all approach. But then you are proposing $30 billion worth of subway projects, and have not found a single route where LRT would be appropriate (except a vague reference that some of BRT corridors might be upgraded to LRT in future).

2) Altough your subway lines are not unreasonable, the overall network looks very much core-oriented, to the detriment of rail transit (whether subway or LRT) to the north-western and north-eastern "inner suburbs". [And yes, Scarborough Centre is getting 2 subway lines - but Scarborough does not end there.] In that light, how essential is DRL West (from Spadina to Eglinton)? Sure it is nice to have, and may be even slightly cheaper per km than average - but it runs in parallel with the Brampton GO Express service.

3) The BRT plan can prompt a number of questions. First of all, what is the scope of your BRT? You are proposing about 75 km of BRT for $450 million, or 6 million per km. If you plan just for a few queue jump lines and some fancy stations (like VIVA), then perhaps 6 million per km will do; but if you are going to build continuous bus-only lanes, the cost will be quite a bit higher.

Jane BRT is particularly questionable. South of Wilson, Jane is, mostly, not wide enough for 6 lanes. It might be able to host a few queue jump lanes - but not necessarily where the queues actually occur. So, is that BRT just a mixed-traffic express bus in reality? Or, are you going to build an underground BRT tunnel? - that alone would cost more than $450 million.

The continuation of Jane BRT south of Bloor is even worse. As I remember, the street (South Kingsway) is 4-lanes wide with no space for even left-turn lanes. And, there is no demonstrable current demand on that route. So, why even bother investing there?

Finch BRT: looks like a straight line, but we know that the hydro corridor tilts south-west between Hwy 400 and Weston Rd, and leaves Finch. Do the buses switch to dedicated lanes on the street at that point? [And, I will not resume the HC-versus-Finch-proper debate here.]

Hwy 27 BRT: not sure what high-density, or even medium-density, nodes are (or will be) located around it, to justify such BRT.

 

[Second_in_pie]

^^ With Jane, in the case that an Eglinton Subway is built, I'd just make a BRT lane down to Eglinton, ready to convert to LRT when ready (like VIVA is apparently going to be.) You're right, the Kingsway section is pretty useless (IMO,) and could better be served by a DRL subway down Roncesvales to connect to the Queen streetcar/Lakeshore LRT whatever. As for that Queen streetcar, it'd really be quite painless to just do the tiny upgrades needed to the route and extend the DRL up to Roncesvales. That leaves room for an extension up to Dundas West, further west to Humber Bay, etc. etc. And it connects that LRT to downtown without a totally stupid LRT bypass.

Highway 27 BRT I see as a network linker. If all the upgrades were in place, a fast, express service along Highway 27/427 could actually be quite desirable. Starting at the Lakeshore Go, then heading up to Sherway Gardens, ECC, Pearson and the Eglinton line, Woodbine, and Humber College. It'd link up a lot of places, but it'd have to be a fast and well advertised service to be any good. Construction would probably be quite cheap (which is why I'd actually prefer some light metro for the route than BRT,) but it's a case of either go all the way and make it a fast route, or don't do it at all cause it wouldn't get any use anyways.

I agree with you 1) 2) and 3) criticism.

 

[Dan416]

The exact alignments of Sheppard and Danforth to STC aren't really anything to debate here in my opinion. They'll both reach STC which is the important thing. Whether they interline or not is not important. I envision a kind of N-S alignment at STC, but the exact alignment would be subject to an EA of course.

In my mind, the only real candidate for LRT would be Finch. The SOS plan has Finch as BRT, and Eglinton as subway. We could upgrade Finch to LRT and downgrade Eglinton to subway to fund it. Would that be preferable to people on here? Or is that compromising our principles?

 

[Rainforest]

... As for that Queen streetcar, it'd really be quite painless to just do the tiny upgrades needed to the route and extend the DRL up to Roncesvales. That leaves room for an extension up to Dundas West, further west to Humber Bay, etc. etc. And it connects that LRT to downtown without a totally stupid LRT bypass.

The idea of extending DRL subway to Roncesvalles to connect to Queensway LRT has merit. Indeed, LRT on Queensway exists already, but is almost useless because the mixed-traffic Queen section totally kills reliability. And if we want to fix it and bypass Queen with a fully grade-separate route, that could as well be DRL extension.

Regarding Hwy 427 / 27, I am not familiar with the area - but it seems that Kipling or Islington has a lot more potential. The Hwy 427 / 27 route may be very fast, but what major nodes will it connect? Kipling Subway to Airport and Kipling Subway to Humber Colledge are express buses already.

 

[nfitz]

The Danforth extension does run up McCowan on the map, but whoever made the map either mistook Brimley for McCowan or the graphic got shifted over about 1cm (which ends up being 800m).

Fair enough. Looks like just a mistake then ... as the other lines seem to match up. BTW, the map also shows the existing rail network, include the SRT. So that's remaining as some kind of rail?

Gosh, if one takes full-blown subway all the way to Pearson, it's tempting to take it one more station up to Derry/Airport Road and intersect the Malton GO Station.

Why would they? Can a bus and a streetcar not run in the same corridor? The design may be somewhat unique for this section, but widening out the intersections to make room for a cue jump lane would make sense, and the streetcar lane could be encorporated into that. There is nothing the precludes the 501 from running to Long Branch even if there is a BRT Light route along the same corridor.

Ah ... okay. May be worth adding in the existing LRT lines to the plan to avoid confusion.

The exact alignments of Sheppard and Danforth to STC aren't really anything to debate here in my opinion. They'll both reach STC which is the important thing.

Agreed, however the current draft inadvertently shows them not getting to STC.

When's the next draft?

 

[Rainforest]

In my mind, the only real candidate for LRT would be Finch. The SOS plan has Finch as BRT, and Eglinton as subway. We could upgrade Finch to LRT and downgrade Eglinton to subway to fund it. Would that be preferable to people on here? Or is that compromising our principles?

IMO, better to defer DRL West to retain room for Finch West LRT.

There are other LRT candidates as well (not necessarily from Transit City): Kipling or Islington; Jane (north of Eglinton only); Lawrence West; Wilson - Albion; Finch East; Lawrence East; Vic Park; Warden; McCowan. Which are highest priority and how they can fit the funding pool, is another matter.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

Exact alignments can be important, though...they show that the selection of routes and stations and technologies and so on has been made knowing what the real built context is, knowing what might be technically feasible to build, that choices aren't made based on map aesthetics, etc. Will a line run right by a mall or school or tower cluster or will it run 'in the general area'? Is there land available for surface running or stations? With something like the Danforth extension to STC, you could just say any alignment is important because what matters most is running up STC and removing the transfer at Kennedy, but it would be a mistake to ignore things like the connection to Lawrence East or the effects on N/S routes that it runs past. In the short term, though, it is fine to just put the idea of *any* Danforth extension to STC out there, and once people perk up and ask for details, then bombard them with some seasoned rationale.

There's many candidates for LRT lines, like Lawrence (East or West, even), Wilson/Albion (tailor made for it, perhaps), Dufferin, maybe even Steeles (which has absolutely enormous potential, though west of York U it starts competing with corridors like the 407), and on and on. Making a list of 20 corridors in the GTA where LRT might be worth building would not be difficult. There's some places where buses don't work well and won't get much better...yes, you can make good arguments for a Finch East LRT, but the 39 works well, unlike almost every other TTC route. Why Jane and not Dufferin or Wilson? Jane isn't any busier...its peak loads are probably less than either of the two Steeles routes. There has to be some kind of logical sieve at work here. Even if a plan robotically proposed the 5 busiest routes as subways, the next 5 busiest as LRTs and the next 5 busiest as BRTs, at least there's been something systematic and the lines aren't just the pet favourites of whoever wrote the plan down on a napkin or whoever's writing the provincial cheques.

 

[Rainforest]

Dufferin is a good LRT candidate considering the ridership volume, but unfortunately it will be extremely difficult and expensive to build. Almost all of it is too narrow for surface ROW, except the short, most northern fragment from 401 to Wilson. And if that LRT is tunnelled, the cost will rival many subway proposals.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

Dufferin is a good LRT candidate considering the ridership volume, but unfortunately it will be extremely difficult and expensive to build. Almost all of it is too narrow for surface ROW, except the short, most northern fragment from 401 to Wilson. And if that LRT is tunnelled, the cost will rival many subway proposals.

Pretty much every street is too narrow if you try to squeeze in 20 foot sidewalks, bike lanes, and landscaped medians, all while keeping every existing lane of traffic. The trick is to not immediately go for the most difficult and most expensive options. If we actually build useful transit lines in places where useful transit lines are needed (i.e., not Morningside & Sheppard), we'll soon reach the point where less of our streets are needed for car lanes. Torontonians already willingly smush themselves into buses and streetcars and subways even as driving around much of the city is still quite easy...there's no question that vast numbers of people would take good transit if we had good transit, almost certainly enough people to make an enormous dent in car traffic.

If you're looking for the cheapest option, that means building *no* LRT lines at all. They all have exorbitant pricetags and if we're worried about things like slightly higher Metropass usage causing a few million dollar shortfalls, that means we can't afford a single LRT line, anywhere. They aren't cheap and anyone who thinks LRT is cheap is delusional.

We're already spending many billions on a route like Eglinton West...Dufferin moves more people than Eglinton West, but it doesn't go across the city or serve concentrations of troubled youths, so no one cares. It makes ZERO sense to exclude Dufferin because of cost and then turn around and spend more money on routes that move fewer people.

What also makes no sense is to say "Kipling or Islington" just so that the Ride Guide looks more balanced. Yes, that's why you said "Kipling or Islington," to make sure that left part of the city gets a line and to fill in a north/south void in the Ride Guide.