News   May 01, 2024
Four-Tower Complex North of Finch Station Grows in Resubmission
 1.3K     1 
News   May 01, 2024
TMU Urban and Regional Planning Alumni Celebrate 25th Annual Spring Reception at Little Canada
 361     0 
News   May 01, 2024
Ballin' Out for Charity: Toronto's Real Estate Basketball Event Scores Big for Youth Empowerment
 366     0 

Danforth Line 2 Scarborough Subway Extension

Tulse said:
So there's no possibility that "the left" might actually be...correct? That is, that subways are a fiscal excess given the demand on the corridors they have been proposed, that there are other more pressing funding priorities, and that it better to spend money on bringing a lot of medium-volume transit solutions to a lot of people rather than focus on one or two extremely expensive high-volume projects for areas that don't necessarily warrant the capacity?
Click to expand...
We had a comprehensive long-range transit plan which claimed to be the result of evidence-based planning. This plan came to the conclusion that a DRL was completely unnecessary. I'd love to hear how anyone can justify that as being "correct", especially when many of the people who pushed Transit City are now crying that this "wasteful" B-D extension will delay the one thing we absolutely need far more than anything else........(wait for it)........a DRL.

rbt said:
Miller should have put the Spadina extension, which he budgeted for (roughly ~$750M in 2013 dollars) onto the Transit City map.
Click to expand...
TC was a complete break from subways, which meant promoting a brand-new network of LRTs and nothing else. No way Miller was going to put a subway on a TC map.

And Miller was not exactly the most enthusiastic backer of Spadina. He had no choice other than to accept it once Queen's Park and Ottawa signed on, but Karen Stintz was actually far more active lobbying for Spadina through her unofficial capacity advising York Region.
 
I'm glad they come to a conclusion on Scarborough Subway.

At the same time, I hope they will continue with LRT projects on Eglinton / Sheppard / Finch.
 
Voltz said:
Adding a station in after where the tunnel was TBM'd requires that the tunnel structure be dismantled, so it can't be added in later without shutting down the line for a significant amount of time. The station structure would at least have to be built, which is the bulk of the cost.
Click to expand...
Was there a station structure built for North York Centre when the Yonge line was originally extended to Finch?
 
GenerationW said:
We had a comprehensive long-range transit plan which claimed to be the result of evidence-based planning. This plan came to the conclusion that a DRL was completely unnecessary. I'd love to hear how anyone can justify that as being "correct", especially when many of the people who pushed Transit City are now crying that this "wasteful" B-D extension will delay the one thing we absolutely need far more than anything else........(wait for it)........a DRL.
Click to expand...

When Transit City was released, many people argued that its main failing was no DRL. But it is inarguable that Transit City would have brought rapid transit to a far greater portion of the city, and far more quickly, than the current process.
 
GenerationW said:
And Miller was not exactly the most enthusiastic backer of Spadina. He had no choice other than to accept it once Queen's Park and Ottawa signed on, but Karen Stintz was actually far more active lobbying for Spadina through her unofficial capacity advising York Region.
Click to expand...

Your right. Miller lobbied for Sheppard money for a few years first. They gave him Spadina money instead, and a provincial minister's family made a killing building townhomes.
 
Last edited:
BurlOak said:
I still think they had 3 choices to make.

  1. Vote a close YES to Subways, in which case Subway planning will begin - only to be cancelled or changed at or before the next Provincial or Municipal election.
  2. Vote a close NO to Subways, in which case LRT construction will begin - only to be cancelled or changed at or before the next Provincial or Municipal election.
  3. Find a compromise that could get a stronger majority support - and actually go on to built some transit.

The voting was 24 to 20 to 0. They chose option 1.
Click to expand...


that's why the gynormous bureaucracy that is Metrolinx was initially created - but it's pretty obvious their not doing their job - maybe dismantle it to pay for those subways.
 
I really hope when they build these stations they don't surround them with massive surface parking lots or bus loops. Looking at the Yellow line (line 1) extension to York region, I think 407 station was the only one with a massive amount of parking (reasonably because its right near two major highways). Most of the other stations have plans for the surrounding area to increase the density. Although I think LRT was the better plan (the fact that people complain about the transfer at Kennedy is crazy, its one of the easiest transfers I ever seen in a transit system) I hope through station design and planning the areas around the stations can be improved to support the subway better.

As far as the DRL (let's really call it something else) goes, I support it, but I don't think it is as urgent as people claim. I ride the subway at all hours and while it is busy (busy transit lines are good)during the rush hour (2 hours a day, 1 in the morning and one in the evening) there have only been a few occasions where I have seen it packed (like zero personal space).

Typically, there is the clear crowding in the cars that are close to the transfer at Yonge-bloor, but at the other end of the trains usually the doors are crowded and in the middle sections there's lots of room. Also, the times in which it has been really packed are usually the result of a delay not because there are too many people for the line to carry. I really think the signaling and track improvements, along with screen doors would keep the trains running better, closer together and solve the crowding (not over crowding) in the rush hours.

So while the DRL is a priority and I would love to see it built asap, I don't think the situation is as dire as people make it out to be.
 
In4matt said:
As far as the DRL (let's really call it something else) goes, I support it, but I don't think it is as urgent as people claim. I ride the subway at all hours and while it is busy (busy transit lines are good)during the rush hour (2 hours a day, 1 in the morning and one in the evening) there have only been a few occasions where I have seen it packed (like zero personal space).

Typically, there is the clear crowding in the cars that are close to the transfer at Yonge-bloor, but at the other end of the trains usually the doors are crowded and in the middle sections there's lots of room. Also, the times in which it has been really packed are usually the result of a delay not because there are too many people for the line to carry. I really think the signaling and track improvements, along with screen doors would keep the trains running better, closer together and solve the crowding (not over crowding) in the rush hours.

So while the DRL is a priority and I would love to see it built asap, I don't think the situation is as dire as people make it out to be.
Click to expand...

I don't know what stops you're getting on at, but the subway going north between Queen and Bloor is routinely packed between 4:30pm and 6pm on weekdays. At least a couple days every week I see crowds of people being left on the platform as multiple trains go by. Thankfully in the mornings I get on at Finch, but when I used to get on at Davisville, it was a regular occurrence that train after train would go by without space for more than a small handful of people to squeeze in. From my experience, the Yonge line has already hit capacity.
 
In4matt said:
I really hope when they build these stations they don't surround them with massive surface parking lots or bus loops. Looking at the Yellow line (line 1) extension to York region, I think 407 station was the only one with a massive amount of parking (reasonably because its right near two major highways). Most of the other stations have plans for the surrounding area to increase the density. Although I think LRT was the better plan (the fact that people complain about the transfer at Kennedy is crazy, its one of the easiest transfers I ever seen in a transit system) I hope through station design and planning the areas around the stations can be improved to support the subway better.

As far as the DRL (let's really call it something else) goes, I support it, but I don't think it is as urgent as people claim. I ride the subway at all hours and while it is busy (busy transit lines are good)during the rush hour (2 hours a day, 1 in the morning and one in the evening) there have only been a few occasions where I have seen it packed (like zero personal space).

Typically, there is the clear crowding in the cars that are close to the transfer at Yonge-bloor, but at the other end of the trains usually the doors are crowded and in the middle sections there's lots of room. Also, the times in which it has been really packed are usually the result of a delay not because there are too many people for the line to carry. I really think the signaling and track improvements, along with screen doors would keep the trains running better, closer together and solve the crowding (not over crowding) in the rush hours.

So while the DRL is a priority and I would love to see it built asap, I don't think the situation is as dire as people make it out to be.
Click to expand...
The is urgent because it needs to be built because or system is tiny and needs to be expanded. That's the number one reason it needs to be built.
 
js97 said:
that's why the gynormous bureaucracy that is Metrolinx was initially created - but it's pretty obvious their not doing their job - maybe dismantle it to pay for those subways.
Click to expand...

How many subways can we build by dismantling Metrolinx? Anyone have a figure on that?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top