Network 2011

[T-Bor]

A one time cost of $30M would enable you to move Oriole directly on-top of Leslie with an okay connection no worse than the SRT and potentially quite a bit better.

Another $40M and you can have a station at Lawrence near DVP with a very small bus terminal (for Lawrence route only).

$700M to triple track (double GO + freight), electrify, and potentially remove a few kinks like following the DVP instead winding west then back east. An electric GO train has the potential to deal with the greater slope. $700M is likely larger than necessary based on Georgetown grade separation but Don Valley is tricky to deal with.

Anyway, for $1B, about half of the cost of the estimated Subway replacement for the SRT, you can have near subway level service with TTC connections at Leslie Station, Lawrence, Union, and potentially Queen/King at new West Donlands neighbourhood by widening the bridge by 4 lanes for a very large centre tram platform and staircases.

Once you're at leslie station it's seriously a 40-minute commute still once you factor in waiting for trains just getting to union station. I'd totally pay an extra dollar to shave 20 minutes off a commute like that. A station in Don Mills would take congestion off the dvp as well if it followed the same route, since thats the way people drive anyway. How this would work from an engineering point of view is beyond me, but if there was somehow the ability to build a huge parking garage somewhere near the dvp so people could park and take the train downtown it'd do wonders for traffic.

I agree that something like a fare card is the way to go, maybe a metropass style thing with zones a la London or..you know...many other major world cities

 

[GenerationW]

The reason we don't have a politically palatable (across the board) plan is because Miller decided that ideology (must redevelop "priority neighbourhoods" with transit) took priority over planning continuity. He didn't just tweak the existing plan. He threw Network 2011 out the window. And then decided that the place to leave his ideological mark was by starting on Sheppard first. Heck, he even ignored the need for a DRL. That's how much he was biased towards LRT.

Again, Sheppard was first because after Miller's push for a Sheppard subway extension lost out in 05-06 to Spadina, Ottawa/Flaherty promised to fund 1/3 of Sheppard (and only Sheppard) at a later date. When that later date came and Flaherty made good on his promise, the plan for a subway extension had been replaced by LRT, but Miller & Giambrone weren't going to say no to guaranteed Federal money. It had to be Sheppard.

As for the DRL, call me when you find someone out there who is electable and who will seriously push for it. Our previous mayor barely mentioned it, and I can't see our current mayor exhibiting that kind of vision in whatever transportation plan he unveils early next year.

 

[kEiThZ]

Again, Sheppard was first because after Miller's push for a Sheppard subway extension lost out in 05-06 to Spadina, Ottawa/Flaherty promised to fund 1/3 of Sheppard (and only Sheppard) at a later date. When that later date came and Flaherty made good on his promise, the plan for a subway extension had been replaced by LRT, but Miller & Giambrone weren't going to say no to guaranteed Federal money. It had to be Sheppard.

The question then becomes what they chose to do with that money. They could have gone for an incremental expansion of an existing subway line. They chose to go LRT because they had to tie this line into their whole Transit City sales pitch. And now his legacy will suffer as a result of his absolute refusal to compromise.

As for the DRL, call me when you find someone out there who is electable and who will seriously push for it. Our previous mayor barely mentioned it, and I can't see our current mayor exhibiting that kind of vision in whatever transportation plan he unveils early next year.

I fail to see why Miller couldn't have pushed it. Are you suggesting that mayoral candidates who propose the DRL are unelectable?

I don't buy that argument.

 

[nfitz]

I fail to see why Miller couldn't have pushed it. Are you suggesting that mayoral candidates who propose the DRL are unelectable?

The DRL would have eaten all the transit expansion money for Toronto for a decade ... or two if it goes both ways out of Downtown.

Presumably they felt it was better to instead focus on transit in the suburbs ... wouldn't want to risk the suburbs feeling that everything was going to downtown.

 

[GenerationW]

And now his legacy will suffer as a result of his absolute refusal to compromise.

I'd go one step further and say it helped get Ford elected. Not exactly the legacy Miller envisioned I'm sure.

I fail to see why Miller couldn't have pushed it. Are you suggesting that mayoral candidates who propose the DRL are unelectable?

I don't buy that argument.

I'm sure a pro-DRL candidate can be electable, but I can't say I'm optimistic the leading anti-Ford candidate will be proposing a DRL in 2014.

As for Miller, one argument I heard claims he saw the merits of a DRL, but he bought into the idea (presumably Giambrone's) that Transit City would put so much pressure on the Yonge subway and make the DRL inevitable X number of years down the road.

 

[nfitz]

As for Miller, one argument I heard claims he saw the merits of a DRL, but he bought into the idea (presumably Giambrone's) that Transit City would put so much pressure on the Yonge subway and make the DRL inevitable X number of years down the road.

Presumably this is why Miller's council did vote to ask Metrolinx to have the DRL completed before the Yonge extension which Metrolinx has scheduled for completed by 2023. And Miller's council did start the studies leading to the environmental assessment for the DRL - it will be interesting to see if Ford kills that study.

 

[gweed123]

Presumably this is why Miller's council did vote to ask Metrolinx to have the DRL completed before the Yonge extension which Metrolinx has scheduled for completed by 2023. And Miller's council did start the studies leading to the environmental assessment for the DRL - it will be interesting to see if Ford kills that study.

I don't think he would. For one, all of the left-leaning councillors would use it to showcase his hypocracy. "He wants subways, yet he killed a study that was studying a new subway!" they would cry. It's in Ford's best interest to let the study finish, but then if he really is as anti-transit as we think he is, leave the study on the shelf. It's a lot easier politically to let something rot on the shelf than it is to cancel the study while it's in progress. I can see it now: the study would finish, he would look at it, say "we don't have the money for it right now", and then throw it on the shelf. But with a completed study, Metrolinx can hopefully then come along and say "ok, we'll take it from here". Either that, or the next mayoral candidate will take it and run with it. Either way, I don't really see the study being cut short.

 

[Dan416]

If Ford kills the DRL study (why isn't it in EA anyway?), then I'll happily label him anti-transit.

 

[gweed123]

If Ford kills the DRL study (why isn't it in EA anyway?), then I'll happily label him anti-transit.

Because you need to have an alignment picked before you can study the environmental effects that alignment would have. And yes, him cancelling the DRL study would prove beyond a doubt that he is not pro-subway, he's just anti-transit in general, and masquerading as pro-subway was a more pleasing way of getting his way.

 

[Dan416]

Aren't alignments part of the EA anyway? They were in the Spadina extension EA. Although at least there they had a starting point. And they knew they wanted to hit York U.

But hey, for the DRL we know we want to hit Union, and we want to hit the Danforth line around Pape or so.

So yeah, I still don't get it.

 

[rbt]

But hey, for the DRL we know we want to hit Union, and we want to hit the Danforth line around Pape or so.

Do we? I think we have very little evidence that a DRL at Union would minize the number of people transferring at Bloor-Yonge station.

I would expect a King alignment to be ideal. Broadview Station might be pretty good too. Just follow the 504 route.

Heck, a straight line along Queen of the same length (to Queen and Woodbine) may have a good impact on Bloor simply due to far fewer people going north to the Bloor line.

Turning a couple lanes of LakeShore into an express BRT and running all North-South routes to a loop at Bremner and Bay might work out well. $8B or whatever a DRL would cost can fund express bus operations for many many decades.

In short, I have absolutely no idea that a Union to Pape subway is a good way to relieve the Bloor-Yonge exchange point.

 

[Dan416]

Well I would just expect that we'd want to maximize the network connections, which would mean running the DRL through Union since Union is a transit hub for GO and VIA and the ARL.

 

[drum118]

Aren't alignments part of the EA anyway? They were in the Spadina extension EA. Although at least there they had a starting point. And they knew they wanted to hit York U.

But hey, for the DRL we know we want to hit Union, and we want to hit the Danforth line around Pape or so.

So yeah, I still don't get it.

Do you really know what you are talking about or asking???

I spent 2 years helping to write the Waterfront Transit EA and it no simple task. It took us a year to get a draft done for the Government approval.

You need to know what the the study will look at, how to rate them, using the right words for folks who have no clue what and EA is in the first place.

You need representative's from all City Departments, ward councillors, stakeholders, the mayor office, TTC, Metrolinx and other parties. Getting them on the same page is not an easy task.

Until you get the first part related to the Terms of Reference's done correctly, you cannot look at alignment options. There will be many options looked at where some will be rule out long before the public sees the various options.

Then you have to had a technology group determining what type of equipment that can be used as well type of service that can be provided by each group.

Why do you look at Union Station when we know now, it will never handle the GO Transit Ridership come 2031 as well the Front and Bay Intersection will be a nightmare just of pedestrians traffic, let along traffic?

 

[The Mad Navigator]

Do you really know what you are talking about or asking???

I spent 2 years helping to write the Waterfront Transit EA and it no simple task. It took us a year to get a draft done for the Government approval.

You need to know what the the study will look at, how to rate them, using the right words for folks who have no clue what and EA is in the first place.

You need representative's from all City Departments, ward councillors, stakeholders, the mayor office, TTC, Metrolinx and other parties. Getting them on the same page is not an easy task.

Until you get the first part related to the Terms of Reference's done correctly, you cannot look at alignment options. There will be many options looked at where some will be rule out long before the public sees the various options.

Then you have to had a technology group determining what type of equipment that can be used as well type of service that can be provided by each group.

Why do you look at Union Station when we know now, it will never handle the GO Transit Ridership come 2031 as well the Front and Bay Intersection will be a nightmare just of pedestrians traffic, let along traffic?

Don't bother wasting your time with CC since he has absolutely no clue.

 

[Earlscourt_Lad]

The EA procedure for transit lines, underground ones in particular, seems a little ridiculous. Could someone enlgihten me as to what the purpose is?