Danforth Line 2 Scarborough Subway Extension

[Rainforest]

Islington isn't 6km away from Kipling. It's not 5km north of Dundas/Bloor either.

Would someone at Bathurst and Bloor, a station that handles almost as many riders as the entire RT, be reasonable to demand they be able to get to Yonge and Eglinton (a station that handles 72,000+ /day) without any transfer??

When I get on the RT now, it's not like it even travels along Eglinton - it heads straight north, just as this extension will.

Apparently Scarborough riders are the only ones in the city who deserve to have a 5km trip north from the Bloor/Danforth Line without making any kind of transfer.

Once TYSSE opens, almost every resident of 416 will be within a 15-min bus ride from a subway station. Except the residents of Scarborough. Many residents of Scarborough will still need a 25 min or longer bus ride to the closest subway station.

It does not surprise me at all that they want to cut the middleman, the RT line that collects riders from the buses and then feeds into the subway terminus.

 

[Rainforest]

I think the Sheppard Line still runs at a deficit, 15 years after it opened. The massive development boom everyone expected hasn't really occurred.

It shouldn't have been built.

I'd say, it should have been built in a different way. Maybe, underground LRT in the central section (like on Eglinton), with surface sections and perhaps branches outside the centre.

 

[OneCity]

There are areas much better connected to downtown than Scaborough Centre. I'd choose NYCC, Vaughan MC and condos around Downsview/Wilson over Scarborough Centre since these locations would get me downtown quicker. I'd also choose anywhere along the new Eglinton LRT over Scarborough Centre since living somewhere like Don Mills & Eglinton will get me downtown much faster than living at Scarborough Centre as well.

There are already tons of areas with easy access to downtown that don't have high densities. What makes you think Scarborough Centre will be different?

Not everyone is so negatively biased towards Scarborough and many people already choose to live around the Centre with inferior transit and connection compared to the areas you mention. Hard to believe over 600,000 people live in Scarborough when they could choose to live in the areas you mention.

 

[Rainforest]

Since "Scarborough deserves a subway" and deserve a "transfer-free" solution, would a SLRT that goes along the "approved corridor" but continues down Kennedy to Kingston and goes towards downtown and connects to the Waterfront LRT work? Of course, this line would be grade separated (elevated) along these corridors. This is just a scenario I would like opinion on. This allows a "transfer-free" ride downtown and has the speed of a subway. I'm not proposing this to replace the SSE or EELRT in any way in the current "approved plan", just a "what if" it was proposed earlier.

I think such a line would be very well received.

Unfortunately, it would cost several times more than one-stop SSE. Tunneling in downtown is going to be extremely expensive.

 

[LNahid2000]

Not everyone is so negatively biased towards Scarborough and many people already choose to live there with inferior transit and connection compared to the areas you mention. Hard to believe over 600,000 people live in Scarborough when they could choose to live in the areas you mention

We were talking about density at Scarborough Centre, not the population of Scarborough. No need to change the topic now.

 

[OneCity]

We were talking about density at Scarborough Centre, not the population of Scarborough. No need to change the topic now.

I already responded to this and yes it is the same topic as people buy the same type of housing in all these areas including Scarborough and you are trying to state otherwise. The density will be what the City determines it. A transfer one stop before Scarborough core that doesn't exist elsewhere is a dumb design that does impact attractiveness.

 

[Rainforest]

At $5 billion for one subway stop, you could build all of the Sheppard East, Scarborough-Malvern (aka Crosstown East), and convert the SRT to LRT and extend to Malvern. About 56 stops.

The cost of one-stop SSE may be enough to pay for 2 LRT lines, but certainly not 3.

If you take the current SSE estimate, about $3.4 billion in 2017 dollars, you could allocate about $2.0 billion for SLRT to Sheppard / Progress, and $1.4 billion for Eglinton East. I am not sure that it will even be enough for those 2 lines. No money to extend SLRT to Malvern, and certainly nothing for a 3-rd line.

If you go by the $5 billion guesstimate floating around here (2024 dollars ?), then the same escalation factor should be applied to LRT lines. There is no reason to believe that the escalation factor is smaller for LRT.

 

[LNahid2000]

I already responded to this and yes it is the same topic as people buy the same type of housing in all these areas including Scarborough and you are trying to state otherwise. The density will be what the City determines it. A transfer one stop before Scarborough core that doesn't exist elsewhere is a dumb design that does impact attractiveness.

Where did I state otherwise? I stated that people looking for easy access to downtown would choose other areas over Scarborough Centre. I never said no one would live in Scarborough period. Lots of people live and work in Scarborough.

Anyway, my original post was regarding Scarborough having downtown like densities which will never happen, so I'm done.

 

[syn]

I think this shows that there are many better solutions to the SSE or transfer LRT.
Unfortunately, those in favour of the transfer LRT refused to consider anything else.
Those in favour of a continuous connection looked at numerous options, but started with the more conventional ideas and finally got acceptance on the SSE.

Do you have any legitimate projections in terms of ridership that justify a subway extension?

A subway was considered for a long time, but rejected because the density and ridership projections simply do not justify the expense.

Now it's being forced through because Tory needs Scarborough votes in the next election...and he's not even delivering what he promised in the election (a 3 stop extension).

Making a transfer is a commonplace practice on transit systems. Have you used the TTC before??

 

[syn]

The cost of one-stop SSE may be enough to pay for 2 LRT lines, but certainly not 3.

If you take the current SSE estimate, about $3.4 billion in 2017 dollars, you could allocate about $2.0 billion for SLRT to Sheppard / Progress, and $1.4 billion for Eglinton East. I am not sure that it will even be enough for those 2 lines. No money to extend SLRT to Malvern, and certainly nothing for a 3-rd line.

If you go by the $5 billion guesstimate floating around here (2024 dollars ?), then the same escalation factor should be applied to LRT lines. There is no reason to believe that the escalation factor is smaller for LRT.

2 lines with multiple stops vs a 6km one stop extension.

The LRT solution seems like a far better use of tax dollars, and more beneficial for Scarborough.

 

[Rainforest]

2 lines with multiple stops vs a 6km one stop extension.

The LRT solution seems like a far better use of tax dollars, and more beneficial for Scarborough.

2 lines are materially different from 3 lines. If 2 lines is the correct cost equivalent of one-stop extension, then a statement about 3 lines should not be made.

Now, it is debatable what is more beneficial for Scarborough, SSE or 2 light rail lines. I can see both sides of that argument.

But strategically, for the city as a whole, SSE is the right answer. Then you get happier voters in Scarborough, who will be less likely to obstruct the Relief Line and other transit initiatives, which invariably require new taxes.

If you somehow manage to kill SSE and spend the same amount of money on light rail in Scaborough, then:

- You still spend the same amount of money in Scarbogouh, thus no leftovers for the Relief line;

- You produce a large body of angry voters;

- Those angry voters will push their councillors and MPPs to oppose the Relief Line, Waterfront East LRT, or anything that requires transit taxes.

 

[BurlOak]

Do you have any legitimate projections in terms of ridership that justify a subway extension?

A subway was considered for a long time, but rejected because the density and ridership projections simply do not justify the expense.

Now it's being forced through because Tory needs Scarborough votes in the next election...and he's not even delivering what he promised in the election (a 3 stop extension).

Making a transfer is a commonplace practice on transit systems. Have you used the TTC before??

The Ford SRT/ECLRT had ridership of 12,000 - exceeding on-street LRT. And this was with the line ending at STC - if it were extended to Malvern, it likely would have been higher. When (and before) the Ford plan was killed, the solution was to force a transfer to put everyone onto the B-D. The ridership projections exceeded expectations but TTC found a solution that wasn't acceptable.
I am not so much for the SSE, as I am against the transfer LRT - but I understand why those who support transit in Scarborough would look to another solution when they have multi-government support for SSE.

 

[nfitz]

The cost of one-stop SSE may be enough to pay for 2 LRT lines, but certainly not 3.

That is correct.

As pointed out before, the $5 billion number came from a previous poster (Sakraycore) who favours the subway. Not sure why he is saying $5 billion, but given that last years estimate for the original 3-stop plan was $4.7 billion, that adding the proposed 4th station at Brimley/Eglinton is about $300 million, and that the 1-stop plan has increased another $300 million since then - it's not difficult to get a $5 billion number - or even a $5.3 billion number - for the original 3-stop plan that council approved to replace the 9-station 10-km LRT from Kennedy to Sheppard.

If you go by the $5 billion guesstimate floating around here (2024 dollars ?), then the same escalation factor should be applied to LRT lines. There is no reason to believe that the escalation factor is smaller for LRT.

That would be true if it was 2024$. But if it's based on the original 3-stop plan, then it would get you 3 LRT lines.

 

[Rainforest]

As pointed out before, the $5 billion number came from a previous poster (Sakraycore) who favours the subway. Not sure why he is saying $5 billion, but given that last years estimate for the original 3-stop plan was $4.7 billion, that adding the proposed 4th station at Brimley/Eglinton is about $300 million, and that the 1-stop plan has increased another $300 million since then - it's not difficult to get a $5 billion number - or even a $5.3 billion number - for the original 3-stop plan that council approved to replace the 9-station 10-km LRT from Kennedy to Sheppard.

Fair enough. I am a bit uneasy with the idea that adding 1.7 km from STC to Sheppard, and a station at Lawrence East, hikes the project cost from $3.4 B (or even less) to $4.7 B. I wouldn't think it should be that expensive.

However, yes if the 3-stop plan was still on the table, and if the above cost estimates for the 3-stop version are reasonable, then the total could be close to the cost of 3 light rail lines.

 

[Rainforest]

The Ford SRT/ECLRT had ridership of 12,000 - exceeding on-street LRT. And this was with the line ending at STC - if it were extended to Malvern, it likely would have been higher. When (and before) the Ford plan was killed, the solution was to force a transfer to put everyone onto the B-D. The ridership projections exceeded expectations but TTC found a solution that wasn't acceptable.

All of that is correct, but we shouldn't forget that the Ford SRT/ECLRT solution would cause its own problems / bottlenecks on the Yonge line and on the eastbound Eglinton.