Danforth Line 2 Scarborough Subway Extension

[Rainforest]

A little misleading. The city's contribution to this subway is $1 billion. All cost overruns will be billed to the city. If the extra station turns out to be $200M, that's a 20% increase on our part of the budged that will be borne entirely by Toronto taxpayers (not Harper or Queens Park). Not exactly a minor expense if you look at it from our perspective.

Well, even if we ignore the federal and provincial contributions altogether, I would not say that a 20% increase of the city portion is a huge problem. After all, we are getting 33% more stations (4 vs 3) for that; and, most importantly, a station that will be well used and thus in line with the city's stated growth objectives.

Still, I think that it is more useful to compare the cost of that station with the total cost of the project, including the federal and provincial portions.

 

[Rainforest]

No, it means that we should be smart about how we spend our money; a concept that appears to be foreign to those of us who support this project.

If we are really smart, we should not discount the effect of the possible Scarborough subway cancellation on the future transit funding.

Basically, it would create a solid voting block against any dedicated transit taxes in any shape and form. That will have an adverse effect on our chances to build DRL or expand the LRT network.

 

[Rainforest]

Like I said, the RER proposal is for at least 15 minutes on every line. If you want to use 10 minutes or 7 minutes or 90 seconds in your calculation, be my guest. But let's not pretend that, as proposed, the upper limit is 15 minute frequencies. It will be more frequent than that.

I do not pretend that 15 min is a permanent limit.

However, I do state that it is a practical limit for the near future; and that fact must be taken into account when we debate the impact on other lines.

 

[Rainforest]

The majority of the city opposed this to subway. Let's get that straight right out of the gate. TheTigerMaster is in line with everyone in North York, Etobicoke, York, East York and the Old City.

How many councilors got elected on the platform of cancelling the Scarborough subway?

Either the rest of the city is content with that subway, or it is not important enough for them to make it an election issue.

Secondly, if we are going to do this crap, like Wisla said, let's do it right. That means the Danforth-Eglinton Station better be built.

Agreed on that point.

And as a result, this is now a 5 billion dollar boondoggle. For this money, we could build the phase 2 of the Crosstown, finish phase 2 of Finch and Sheppard, and build the Don Mills and Jane LRT's.

5 billion is a pure fantasy at this point. And anyway, that amount of money is not on the table and hence cannot be transferred to any other project.

 

[WislaHD]

I think people are forgetting that the current mayor was elected with the mandate to go forward with the Scarborough subway, same way as Ford was elected with the mandate of cancelling Transit City.

If Councillors didn't oppose Ford's cancellation of Transit City back then, what makes anyone think that Councillors would oppose the much more amicable Tory? Why would it be in the political interest of any Councillor? Only someone like Matlow who is stubborn enough to continue opposing the subway (and look where it got him, hardly any positions at City Hall this term) will continue to do so, and he is a small minority of council.

 

[BurlOak]

While we are on this topic, whats with the obsession of making Eglinton in Scarborough elevated? Elevation is ugly and expansive (sic) like tunneling, wouldn't making it trenched in the middle of Eglinton be a far superior alternative? Eglinton in Scarborough is definitely wide enough for it.

• The trench would have to be continuous, because if you try to duck under an intersection (including the utilities for the cross road), then you would have to start ducking even before making it to the surface from the previous "duck".
• What is better looking, an elevated track or a continuous trench along Eglinton - I guess that can be debated.
• From a passenger point of view, travelling in an elevated train is more appealing than underground or trenched.
• The trench would accumulate debris, possible pedestrians dropping things onto tracks, snow drifting, and salt splash from road.
• For the west part, trenching is not possible through West Don River and also not possible under the CPR tracks east of Leslie without loss of lanes.
• Similarly, trenching is not possible through the DVP without loss of lanes.
• Trenching is also not possible through the East Don River or Richmond Hill GO.
• So the only place where trenching is possible is from west of Vic Park to Kennedy - about 4km of the 8km total.
• Trenching would still require bridges for all the cross streets - whether for car or pedestrian crossings.
• Elevation based on Vancouver experience is $100M to $150M /km (both recent examples also included some underground portions so pure elevation may be a touch less. Trenching may even be more expensive.
• Trenching is much more disruptive during construction. Elevation requires excavation at footings, about every 50m or so, while trenching is continuous. Trenching would have to be about 7 or 8 metres deep to get under the cross road utilities - meaning large excavation stability needs. The elevated footing would be about 3m deep (plus piles).

 

[Rainforest]

I think people are forgetting that the current mayor was elected with the mandate to go forward with the Scarborough subway, same way as Ford was elected with the mandate of cancelling Transit City.

Although I support Scarborough subway, I can't say that Tory has been elected with any particular mandate regarding it.

Tory certainly has a mandate to build SmartTrack. It was a centerpiece of his campaign, and his poll counts surged once he started promoting this project.

As of Scarborough subway, as well as Finch and Sheppard LRT, neither of these projects were presented prominently in his campaign. Being a reasonably smart person, Tory just realized that is is better to let all these three project proceed, rather than get dragged into a confrontation around them, and thus get diverted from his main goals.

Ford certainly had no mandate to cancel Transit City. In fact, he did not have any clear transit-related mandate at all. His campaign was centered on cutting taxes and reducing the spending at the City Hall.

Transit issues were not nearly as prominent during the 2010 election campaign as they were in 2014.

 

[Rainforest]

I am not advocating for elevated LRT line on Eglinton; but for the sake of fairness, elevated does not necessarily mean ugly. We have local examples of ugly elevated structures and they make some of us believe that elevated is always ugly.

However, a number of cities on other continents have examples of elevated transit lines that are integrated in the streetscape very nicely.

 

[WislaHD]

• The trench would have to be continuous, because if you try to duck under an intersection (including the utilities for the cross road), then you would have to start ducking even before making it to the surface from the previous "duck".
• What is better looking, an elevated track or a continuous trench along Eglinton - I guess that can be debated.
• From a passenger point of view, travelling in an elevated train is more appealing than underground or trenched.
• The trench would accumulate debris, possible pedestrians dropping things onto tracks, snow drifting, and salt splash from road.
• For the west part, trenching is not possible through West Don River and also not possible under the CPR tracks east of Leslie without loss of lanes.
• Similarly, trenching is not possible through the DVP without loss of lanes.
• Trenching is also not possible through the East Don River or Richmond Hill GO.
• So the only place where trenching is possible is from west of Vic Park to Kennedy - about 4km of the 8km total.
• Trenching would still require bridges for all the cross streets - whether for car or pedestrian crossings.
• Elevation based on Vancouver experience is $100M to $150M /km (both recent examples also included some underground portions so pure elevation may be a touch less. Trenching may even be more expensive.
• Trenching is much more disruptive during construction. Elevation requires excavation at footings, about every 50m or so, while trenching is continuous. Trenching would have to be about 7 or 8 metres deep to get under the cross road utilities - meaning large excavation stability needs. The elevated footing would be about 3m deep (plus piles).

Well that's the trenched idea shut down.

I am not advocating for elevated LRT line on Eglinton; but for the sake of fairness, elevated does not necessarily mean ugly. We have local examples of ugly elevated structures and they make some of us believe that elevated is always ugly.

However, a number of cities on other continents have examples of elevated transit lines that are integrated in the streetscape very nicely.

Sure, but those cities have streetscapes and building forms that compliment elevated structures.

Eglinton in Scarborough is low density and big box stores. Elevated here would likely mean ugly.

 

[quicksilver]

Well that's the trenched idea shut down.


Sure, but those cities have streetscapes and building forms that compliment elevated structures.

Eglinton in Scarborough is low density and big box stores. Elevated here would likely mean ugly.

I completely agree.

I also think the local example of elevated on the YUS line north from Yorkdale to Wilson, across the 401, is ugly. Were an elevated option considered between STC and McCowan, I'm hoping we could do better perhaps by looking to Vancouver or elsewhere and having bigger dreams than chain link fencing.

 

[quicksilver]

By contrast this is not ugly, but then nor is it elevated.

Happy holidays to all my railfan friends at Urban Toronto!

 

[TheTigerMaster]

I do not pretend that 15 min is a permanent limit.

However, I do state that it is a practical limit for the near future; and that fact must be taken into account when we debate the impact on other lines.

Okay? In all likelihood, this practical limit will be eliminated long before the Line 2 extension is anywhere close to being operational.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

Heck, even the majority of Scarbough resiedents are opposed to this once they are made aware of the cost. It appears as if the support of this project is riding on the backs of people who know nothing about it, and on those who fetishize about underground electric railways.

I just love that figure. For at least 3 years (probably much more), the pro LRT people are saying that LRT is nothing like Streetcar, yet they are still listed together in a presentation from December 2014. Is there any wonder why it is so easy to say that LRT and Streetcars are (almost) the same thing.

I am not sure if they combined Streetcars with LRT so they could justify using LRT on routes that should have received buses, or if they wanted to portray LRT as a magical form of transit that can satisfy 1,000 to 14,000 pphpd, while the other modes are very limited. Any way you slice it, TTC gave (and continues to give) the impression that LRT and Streetcars are the same thing.

The same chart shows SRT from 8k to 14k. If this is the current operation, then it is actually only carrying about 5k. If it is the Vancouver style SkyTrain, then I think they have gotten closer to 20k.

The other thing I find strange is that a transit system that is to be around for 50 or 100 years, and we are designing to the demand in 2031 - which will be about 8 years after the line opens.

View attachment 39607

LRT's are very flexible, with minor adjustments it can run in a center ROW like a streetcar or in a grade separated route like a subway.

I consider the LRT they are building in front of my home on Eglinton to be a subway. I wouldn't call what they are building on Finch or Sheppard a subway. The Scarborough LRT being grade separated would have been an above-ground subway.



While we are on this topic, whats with the obsession of making Eglinton in Scarborough elevated? Elevation is ugly and expansive like tunneling, wouldn't making it trenched in the middle of Eglinton be a far superior alternative? Eglinton in Scarborough is definitely wide enough for it.

How many councilors got elected on the platform of cancelling the Scarborough subway?

Either the rest of the city is content with that subway, or it is not important enough for them to make it an election issue.



Agreed on that point.



5 billion is a pure fantasy at this point. And anyway, that amount of money is not on the table and hence cannot be transferred to any other project.

• The trench would have to be continuous, because if you try to duck under an intersection (including the utilities for the cross road), then you would have to start ducking even before making it to the surface from the previous "duck".
• What is better looking, an elevated track or a continuous trench along Eglinton - I guess that can be debated.
• From a passenger point of view, travelling in an elevated train is more appealing than underground or trenched.
• The trench would accumulate debris, possible pedestrians dropping things onto tracks, snow drifting, and salt splash from road.
• For the west part, trenching is not possible through West Don River and also not possible under the CPR tracks east of Leslie without loss of lanes.
• Similarly, trenching is not possible through the DVP without loss of lanes.
• Trenching is also not possible through the East Don River or Richmond Hill GO.
• So the only place where trenching is possible is from west of Vic Park to Kennedy - about 4km of the 8km total.
• Trenching would still require bridges for all the cross streets - whether for car or pedestrian crossings.
• Elevation based on Vancouver experience is $100M to $150M /km (both recent examples also included some underground portions so pure elevation may be a touch less. Trenching may even be more expensive.
• Trenching is much more disruptive during construction. Elevation requires excavation at footings, about every 50m or so, while trenching is continuous. Trenching would have to be about 7 or 8 metres deep to get under the cross road utilities - meaning large excavation stability needs. The elevated footing would be about 3m deep (plus piles).

Although I support Scarborough subway, I can't say that Tory has been elected with any particular mandate regarding it.

Tory certainly has a mandate to build SmartTrack. It was a centerpiece of his campaign, and his poll counts surged once he started promoting this project.

As of Scarborough subway, as well as Finch and Sheppard LRT, neither of these projects were presented prominently in his campaign. Being a reasonably smart person, Tory just realized that is is better to let all these three project proceed, rather than get dragged into a confrontation around them, and thus get diverted from his main goals.

Ford certainly had no mandate to cancel Transit City. In fact, he did not have any clear transit-related mandate at all. His campaign was centered on cutting taxes and reducing the spending at the City Hall.

Transit issues were not nearly as prominent during the 2010 election campaign as they were in 2014.

Well that's the trenched idea shut down.



Sure, but those cities have streetscapes and building forms that compliment elevated structures.

Eglinton in Scarborough is low density and big box stores. Elevated here would likely mean ugly.

Truthfully elevated in scarborough would save some money, and we can make it look nice if it comes to that. Plus building heated stations will be easier. A lot of this city does oppose the subway but it's not a hot button like it was before October 27. As for mandates? Tory was elected on SmartTrack just as Rainforest said. Not the subway. But there is a contingent at City Hall that wants the Sheppard East subway so watch out in 2015. Led by Norm Kelly, so it's legit.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

How many councilors got elected on the platform of cancelling the Scarborough subway?

Either the rest of the city is content with that subway, or it is not important enough for them to make it an election issue.

Conceded, only because for most people west of Victoria Park it's not a hair raiser.

Agreed on that point.

I said in 2012 that it would have to be built in order to work. The gap between Kennedy and Lawrence East is too large.

5 billion is a pure fantasy at this point. And anyway, that amount of money is not on the table and hence cannot be transferred to any other project.

It's already up at 4 billion. It can happen. I get the feeling it will.

 

[salsa]

Sure, but those cities have streetscapes and building forms that compliment elevated structures.

Eglinton in Scarborough is low density and big box stores. Elevated here would likely mean ugly.

Eglinton as we know it may not exist in the future when it gets redeveloped. That's what happened in parts of Vancouver, or even Scarborough Centre.