Dan416
Senior Member
^ People should listen to the Scarberian. He is wise.
Pretty much every pro-LRT argument people are coming up with on the forum is easily shot down, so unless y'all approach it from different angles, I'm not going to do this again.
Give the public a choice and they'll probably choose [to pay for] the subway extension. And the GTA will only be paying for part of it, anyway.
It's possible that a streetcar could handle short-term loads east of Don Mills (ridership won't go up as much without a subway extension, and without said extension, there'll be less development) but why would anyone want to build a line that could be overcrowded on day one, let alone in 20 years?
Add this, add that...wake me up when the numbers stop rising, ok?
If N/S rail lines are added or upgraded, there'll actually be fewer people per peak hour riding Sheppard east of Kennedy since they'll be transferring to the various N/S rail lines in large numbers (Morningside, SRT, Stouffville, Midtown, possibly McCowan/Markham) and not riding all the way along Sheppard.
Subtract the stretches of Sheppard where the streetcar will be underused and the stretches where a subway makes sense and you're left with the 3km between Midland and Markham...3km that are or will be very well-served by GO, the RT extension, or short bus rides to the RT.
The provincial government is not exactly awash with cash, either. Its surplus is thin, the business leaders are lobbying for tax cuts to counter the losses in manufacturing, and health care costs keep climbing as ever. The federal government has already used most of its surpluses to cut taxes, and at best will pay 1/3 of the costs.
I personally would agree to pay somewhat more taxes to afford subway construction. However, I don not bet on the majority of public sharing that view.
What's the evidence the LRT will be overcrowded on day one? It replaces the 85 Sheppard E bus and possibly the 190 STC Rocket (unless the latter is retained). The combined ridership of the two was 33,000 per day in 2005-2006, less than of such bus routes as Finch E, Finch W, Eglinton W, Lawrence W, Wilson. The addition of LRT will increase the ridership, but its capacity will be about 3 times that of a bus route (2-car trains and each car is larger than a bus) ... hardly any overcrowding.
Cost overruns are common plague of many transit projects. Neither LRT nor subways are immune. Who can guarantee that the Sheppard subway extention won't overrun, or overruns less than the LRT line?
Sure, the TTC has a penchant for unnecessarily costly construction, but let's compare oranges (LRT built by TTC) to other oranges (subway built by TTC). There is no point comparing LRT built by the real TTC, to subways built by a hypothetical organization that excels in avoiding all redundant costs.
SRT - yes.
Stouffville and /or Midtown GO will have the opposite effect, increasing the number of passengers riding Sheppard east of Kennedy, as they will want to get to the GO transit hub at Agincourt.
Morningside LRT won't have much effect at all, due to its very low ridership north of UTSC (and that's why it should not go north of UTSC in the first place). McCowan LRT is a much better idea than Morningside, but it is too hypothetical at this point.
So, you are saying that:
- Sheppard E between Don Mills and Kennedy has a very high development potential;
- Between Kennedy and Markham Rd, it has medium potential;
- East of Markham Rd, it has very limited, if any, development potential.
Any third-party opinion here? I am not very familiar with the area, having been there just a few times en route to the Zoo.
If so, then the "stingy" option is to proceed with the Sheppard LRT plan, but amend it so that the line's terminus is at McCowan or Markham Rd. That would save 200 - 250 million, which can be used for other transit projects. The remainder of Sheppard should be served by a bus route (10-15 min headways?) that runs to the subway terminus at Don Mills, perhaps running express where it duplicates the LRT.
The "greater funding" option is to extend the subway to Kennedy / Agincourt (and possibly STC, although that section would see the lightest ridership). That would be nice, but only if we can afford that alongside with other, more important, transit expansions. I think that first we need to secure funding for the DRL's eastern wing (full subway, minimum to Bloor and preferably to Eglinton) and the five most important LRT projects (Sheppard, Finch, Eglinton, Don Mills to DRL, Jane). Only if that is secured, we can seek extra funding to substitute some of them (Sheppard, Eglinton, Don Mills further north) with full-fledged subway lines.
Yes, we can afford it all. We can afford anything we want. If we only had enough money next year to start one project, Sheppard is not the priority, but that does absolutely nothing to change its viability in large transit schemes.
Transit City proposed a fantasy streetcar map with 8 or 9 billion dollars worth of projects...MoveOntario promised about $17 billion worth...Metrolinx is considering almost $100B worth of projects. Why on earth should we be stingy in our long term transit planning?
I guarantee that people would be more willing to pay for billions of dollars of subways than billions of dollars of suburban streetcars. Again, though, if there's no money for any subway extensions, there's no money for Transit City, or anything else.
There are no examples of LRT in Toronto that compare with Transit City...no billion dollar lines. The only subway projects we have to compare to are Sheppard (whose short length grossly magnified the cost/km) and Spadina (which is padded beyond belief).
The 85 + 190 ridership has increased to 36,500 and continues to rise, which if you're looking strictly at total ridership (an often flawed approach) is about the 7th busiest bus route in the city, slightly below Don Mills and Eglinton (both of which are split by subway stations), farther below Dufferin (heavily split by the subway), and slightly below Finch East/West and Jane, three long routes like Sheppard. Lawrence West and Wilson are far lower.
Ridership on the Sheppard subway zone could easily double in the near future, due to improved (extended) transit, redevelopment, gas prices, etc. The longer the subway is, the more people will switch from other routes, like Finch...no one will switch from the Finch bus to a streetcar/stubway combo, though.
Would you like to see a Sheppard LRT version of this just to be able to say LRT is appropriate for Sheppard?
Some 85 riders will go the other way to Rouge Hill, and some current 85 riders will stop transferring to the 85 because of all the other proposed improvements, including buses like Finch or Markham or Neilson, all of which could be markedly improved through different fare collection schemes, increased service, transit priority signals, etc. Lots of riders will get off at the RT (Markham), leaving only the 3km over to Midland/Stouffville to pick up enough riders to justify upgrading the bus to streetcar - that's not going to happen.
If GO service is added to the branch that runs just north of McLevin to Finch & Morningside, fewer people would take Sheppard over to Agincourt station, further reducing the potential loads east of Kennedy.
McCowan only remains hypothetical because it doesn't go to Malvern...anyone remotely familiar with the area knows that McCowan would make a fine and busy LRT line, one that replaces a bus that needs fixing, one that does not cripple traffic, one that can be operated as a real light rail line. This is just another reason why Transit City is a terrible plan.
I know it seems like I'm describing a corridor that's very busy west of Kennedy and then drops down to nothing very quickly, but that's closer to the truth than you realize.
Well, money is the biggest issue as always.
You are right that there is no accurate numbers for subway versus LRT construction in Toronto. However, it is a fundamental fact that digging a tunnel costs more than laying a surface rail line. The cost per km data are available for subway and LRT projects completed in other cities, and the subway values are 4-5 times higher than LRT values.
I do not have the latest data, but that 2005-2006 table contained:
- Sheppard E (# 85 + 190): 32,800 per day
- Lawrence W (# 52 + 58 + 59): 38,000 per day
- Wilson (# 96 + 165 + 120): 37,400 per day
Yeah, nice picture. But a lot sooner than it happens on Sheppard LRT, it will happen on Yonge subway at Bloor, if DRL subway is not built.
For those going towards North York and other destinations along northern Yonge subway, it's either Sheppard or Finch, and Finch E bus is at capacity already. The proposed N-S routes are of little relevance for them.
And if a frequent REX service runs through Agincourt, wouldn't it attract a fair amount of riders from east of Kennedy (not just Malvern!), using Sheppard E to get there? That will be their best, fastest way to get downtown for many, SRT + subway being no match.
But only those living near Malvern Town Centre will have convenient access to the GO station at McLevin. For many more GO users, Agincourt will be the connection point.
Just if two of Transit City LRT projects (Sheppard E and Morningside) have flaws, it does not mean that the whole plan is terribly bad. McCowan LRT may be added in Phase II.
Even though I support Transit City overall, I might have to agree with you partly on the Sheppard corridor. The LRT line to the eastern confines will cost 800 - 1000 million, or 600 - 800 million if limited to McCowan. Alternatively, the subway extension just to Kennedy / Agincourt will cost around 1200 million, not that much more. If the development potential along Sheppard is so uneven, then the subway option might actually be preferable. The matter of extending the subway further to STC, or building alternative transit routes east of Kennedy, can then be deferred till the next round of funding.
However, the following question arises: where will all those numerous riders of the extended Sheppard subway go? North York and STC won't attract that many employees, even if the line is 1/3 full. If many of those riders take Yonge subway downtown, they will swarm the Yonge line.
It looks like building the DRL subway all they way up to Sheppard, or a drastic enhancement of the Agincourt - Union GO service, has to be planned and funded, before the Sheppard subway extension can proceed.
Your "argument" that the Sheppard subway should not be extended because a few combined bus routes on Wilson have 1000 more total riders per day makes little sense. The only thing it suggests is that perhaps Wilson should be targeted for improved service, too.
... What are the redevelopment prospects? ... Is there already a partially finished subway line on the corridor?
Yes, here I'll have to agree with you, given the picture of development prospects you presented, and the desirability of minimizing transfers. Even though the subway extention is not the only viable option for this corridor, it might be the best option after all.
Just two? [flawed projects] Don Mills should also be a subway line, a NE wing of the DRL. Jane is a bit of a question mark for me...it could be worth it, but Rocket bus service to complement the Spadina extension and Finch and Eglinton lines could be very useful while costing next to nothing. Eglinton itself is a big unknown...it could work well, but it could be disastrous - if it's overcrowded and overbudget, we may have been better off just building a subway line. Of the six suburban lines, Finch West is the only clear winner.
If Phase II consists of routes like McCowan, Lawrence East/West, Wilson, Kipling, Warden, Kingston, Victoria Park, Bathurst, etc., etc., it should have been Phase I. Some of these arterials would benefit from even plain old streetcar service (Bathurst comes to mind), while others could handle a more real version of LRT (McCowan is a picture perfect candidate).
Transit City was the FIRST Light Rail Transit expansion into the suburban areas of Toronto. Being the first LRT, it lays the groundwork for future LRT expansion along other roadways, such as Steeles, Albion/Wilson/York Mills/Ellesmere, Lawrence, Victoria Park, Islington, and maybe others. If it creates demand for other routes, we will see.
If there isn't enough money for a subway extension, there isn't enough money for an LRT line. It's that simple.
Is that supposed to make me think twice about extending Sheppard, that it'll hold the DRL hostage?
We can build both.
1) Can LRT sustain passenger traffic on Sheppard east of Don Mills? - Yes, it can. Won't be overcrowded for long time, perhaps forever....2) Nevetherless, would it be more beneficial to build a shorter subway extention at the expense of that LRT? - Probably, yes.
Here, you grossly misstated my argument. (And then, of course, "easily shot it down".) Actually, my point is that Sheppard E east of Don Mills is quite a regular bus route, in line with others such as Wilson, Lawrence W etc. It does not matter if Wilson is 1000 riders above Sheppard E, and it would not matter if Sheppard E was slightly ahead of Wilson. The point is that LRT would have more than enough capacity to handle the demand on this route.
The Don Mills and Eglinton debate is LRT vs subway, but neither would be overbuilt as LRT.
And, what's wrong with Jane LRT? The street is wide enough north of St Clair, the ridership is high. If you support LRT on such streets as Kipling, Warden, McCowan, then why not Jane?
McCowan, Wilson, Kipling, Warden, Kingston are all good LRT candidates indeed, but bunching everything into Phase I will cause it to inevitably split into Subphases I, II, III etc. You have to start somewhere.
Btw, Kingston is partly included in the "Morningside-Malvern" project, that really should be Eglinton E - Kingston and do not venture too far north. Now the portion of Kingston south of Eglinton is being considered as well, although not a part of TC technically.
Lawrence E and W would be quite useful, although a fair bit of tunneling might be needed.
Bathurst definitely does not need mixed-traffic streetcars, that would be a disaster similar to Queen. I used to live in the area and know first-hand. The Bathurst bus carries decent loads but usually is not overcrowded. The flexibility of bus is more important for this route than the capacity of mixed-traffic streetcar.
It is good to provide one rapid transit route to Malvern and the north-east of Scarborough, but 3 at once is an overshoot. The funds can be better spent in the areas of higher density.
This is not correct. The cost of Transit City is now projected to $9B. If all those money are directed to subways, it will pay for a full Eglinton subway and a section of DRL from downtown to Bloor / Pape, but nothing else. Or, you can take DRL from downtown to Sheppard / Don Mills plus Sheppard subway to STC, but nothing else.......OK, Danforth subway could be extended to STC in lieu of the SRT upgrade/extension. And, the York U extension could be replaced with another piece of a similar cost.......But however you slice it, a comprehensive network does not come up.
Had not LRT been much cheaper than subway, why would other cities bother building LRT lines? But they do. Many cities in Europe, the land of advanced public transportation, build and use LRT (true, they build subways too, but not only subways).
I know that wouldn't concern you, as you believe in virtually unlimited transit funding. But in my books, this is a major concern. Same applies to Eglinton.......You have a right to stick to your belief, but I cannot see what substantiates it. The MoveOntario $18B announcement, per ce, is unprecedented in the Canadian history. But it remains, well, an announcement: half-committed by the province, no word from the feds so far.......Nevertheless, Metrolinx ups the ante, and asks for $80B, no, $100B!......Nice try, but how can we regard this as a funding guarantee?
(Stop spacing? Longer new cars?)
I'm also talking about Bathurst at least as far north as Centre.
(Regarding Jane LRT)The ridership loads aren't as high as other routes...with its higher turnover than other routes, I think it's possible that bus-based fixes could be sufficient, and that's something you should consider, especially given your concern with appropriate capacity and spending less money. They didn't approach it asking "what's best for Jane, how do we improve Jane?" they just drew an LRT line on the map and claimed ridership will more than double. With the Finch and Eglinton lines and the Spadina extension, few people will be riding Jane for long distances.
Currently, there's no money for anything, so how can there be $9B for LRT?
Again, you've *completely* missed the point: it'll take virtually unlimited funding to pay for all these LRT lines. It'll take the same dream/promised funding to pay for $9B of LRT as it would for $9B of subways, or $3B of subways, $3B of LRT, and $3B of buses, or $9B of any transit projects. If we can afford LRT, we can afford subways. If we can't afford subways, we can't afford LRT.
Removing Sheppard, Don Mills, etc., from Phase I would have freed up room for routes like McCowan and Wilson. Same number of routes, same cost, same number of people served. Transit City wasn't a plan to improve service, it was a plan to add some LRT lines.