Danforth Line 2 Scarborough Subway Extension

[denfromoakvillemilton]

Really, everywhere?

Doesn't side-of-road running create its own set of challenges in terms of interacting with road traffic?

And aside from that, the TTC's intransigence and lack of originality notwithstanding, there is also no reason that an LRT should be all central ROW or all side of the road.

The Croydon Tramlink in London was created using existing completely off-road trackage and adding central ROW and mixed traffic sections. Back in January I had the opportunity to ride the Utrecht light rail (envisioned as a sneltram or 'express streetcar') - it starts from its own platforms at the railway station and runs in a combination of a central ROW, on tracks beside the road and at one point in a heavy rail style corridor of its own.

LRT's are harder to turn around when they run on the side of the road.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

LRT's are harder to turn around when they run on the side of the road.

Turn around? Why would a train need to turn around? Wouldn't it just switch to the other track?

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

Turn around? Why would a train need to turn around? Wouldn't it just switch to the other track?

Way easier to do that in median ROW.

 

[Duck]

God this really grinds my gears. EVERYWHERE else in the world you see LRT's on the SIDE of the road, NOT in the middle. It makes no sense to have it in the middle if its in an isolated Right Of Way.

You unecessarily create a barrier for traffic, and the LRT has to obey all traffic signals including left turns for cars.

Zuh? How does it not have to obey all traffic signals if the LRT tracks are where sidewalks would be? The trains still have to stop if the light is red.

I've riden several LRT systems and I can't think of any that are split and run with traffic like what you're describing. Maybe completely separated and parallel to the road, sure.

 

[44 North]

University of Toronto Scarborough: Is the Scarborough rapid transit debate driving you around the bend?

These reports and articles make a helluva lot of sense. And going by all the facts, stats, and my own personal preference - the SLRT plan is way better than a short subway ext along McCowan (for development, for improved/greater service, higher speeds/acceleration, realistic future extensions etc). But I think U of T needs to commission a report from their Sociology and Psychology departments in order to really present the issue. There are 625,000 in Scarborough, and many of them want a one-seat ride on the exact same trains as what’s running under Yonge/Bloor, or soon SmartCentres Terminal – Vaughan Metropolitan Centre (*rolls eyes*). And they’re willing to reelect a tosser to get it for them (those last election results were too close for comfort). I have yet to see a technical report quantify and present this kind of data - which clearly is important/relevant.

***
I didn’t know where else to post this, and I wanted to share an animated example of my keenness for elevated rapid transit running through treed green spaces. I’m new to .gifs, and in order to make it run smoothly I had to increase the frame rate. So the trains appear to be moving at something like 150km/h (which is way too fast for this vehicle).

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Amazing work as usual

 

[TheTigerMaster]

These reports and articles make a helluva lot of sense. And going by all the facts, stats, and my own personal preference - the SLRT plan is way better than a short subway ext along McCowan (for development, for improved/greater service, higher speeds/acceleration, realistic future extensions etc). But I think U of T needs to commission a report from their Sociology and Psychology departments in order to really present the issue. There are 625,000 in Scarborough, and many of them want a one-seat ride on the exact same trains as what’s running under Yonge/Bloor, or soon SmartCentres Terminal – Vaughan Metropolitan Centre (*rolls eyes*). And they’re willing to reelect a tosser to get it for them (those last election results were too close for comfort). I have yet to see a technical report quantify and present this kind of data - which clearly is important/relevant.

These reports and articles make a helluva lot of sense. And going by all the facts, stats, and my own personal preference - the SLRT plan is way better than a short subway ext along McCowan (for development, for improved/greater service, higher speeds/acceleration, realistic future extensions etc). But I think U of T needs to commission a report from their Sociology and Psychology departments in order to really present the issue. There are 625,000 in Scarborough, and many of them want a one-seat ride on the exact same trains as what’s running under Yonge/Bloor, or soon SmartCentres Terminal – Vaughan Metropolitan Centre (*rolls eyes*). And they’re willing to reelect a tosser to get it for them (those last election results were too close for comfort). I have yet to see a technical report quantify and present this kind of data - which clearly is important/relevant.

Well the SmartTrack plan will provide them with that one seat ride downtown, so I don't see the problem.

Anyways, reading this report I was very surprised and dare I say a little bit scared for the future of Scarborough.

(1), because this report quantified like no other just how bad the subway plan is. Don't get me wrong, I was never a supporter of the plan, but even I didn't know that it was this bad compared to the alternatives.

(2), because this report has brilliantly quantified the transformative opportunity we're wasting away here. Think about it. We could have 25% of Scarborough residents, and likely the majority of Scarborough businesses within walking distance of rapid transit. Seriously think about that for a minute. Think about the opportunity we have here. This kind of rapid transit coverage is unheard of in suburban areas. This level of coverage is almost what I'd expect we'd have in Old Toronto. This is particularly important in Scarborough, as 50% of trips originating within Scarborough also terminate in Scarborough (only ~15% go downtown). This would be transformative for the borough, and I'm absolutely terrified that we're going to waste away this opportunity on a three stop subway that the vast majority of Scarborough trips won't use.

Finally, I'd like to add that this report for the first time has made me realize the sheer brilliance of the Transit City plan. Transit City is the only plan that recognizes that most people aren't heading downtown; they're travelling within the borough. As such, Transit City focused on improving travel and accessibility within the borough, brining 25% of Scarborough residents within walking distance of higher order transit, rather than faster travel speeds to downtown, to the detriment of accessibility. This is absolutely brilliant, and I'm now more convinced than ever that Toronto, and Scarborough in particular, needs Transit City.

 

[Forgotten]

View attachment 42693

I get a viaduct! You get a viaduct! Everybody gets a viaduct!

Perhaps it's just me but I fantasize about combining viaducts with the Spanish solution. It makes sense like combining bacon with poutine and the results would be just as good.

I'm not going to lie or oversell. It would bring about the end of Toronto's transit dark age and the start of the new dawn. Forget "Diversity Our Strength" make way for "Want For Nothing".

 

[Electrify]

TTC is run my people until Andy came alone since the 90's who march to their own beat, not at the beat of GM's.

At the same time, the Chair's of TTC have been useless as they don't hold the feet of staff to the fire to get things done as order or haven't a clue how to do thing right. The commissioners are in the same boat as the chair.

Staff keeps reinventing the wheel when there are proven items on the market at a cheaper price.

They refused to understand they are not the leader in the transit field and no one wants to follow them anymore.

Going elevate or having transit on one side of the road is a no no, and that not the way we do things. Getting transit on the side for Queens Quay and Cherry St as well the rest of the waterfront was like pulling teeth because of TTC, but it won in the end.

Andy is put on the spot as many decisions were made before he came here or as he was learning the role he is now. At time he can be his own worse enemy but not saying "this is wrong and not the right way" regardless what the mayor or council wants in the first place. He is wrong at times himself for failing to see the right path to take on various things.

Andy has a staff that long in the tooth and have put in 20-30 years who are only looking for that final pay check as they will be set for life once they get it and don't care what happen to TTC after they leave. Getting rid of those staff member can't happen overnight and will take years to do.

I saw the poor TTC culture within the first few months of 2004 to say that TTC needs a house clean from the top down. Even with the house cleaning Andy doing, I see various management that should been gone a decade ago still hanging on by a thread at TTC meeting.

Line 4 is a failure and a case how you shouldn't build a subway in the first place.

Even GO/Metrolinx has "We Can't" Attitude of TTC on various things today as well in the past.

Hell, even this attitude extends to those who watch transit! Before the TTC went ahead with articulated buses, whenever I suggested them I would see a mountain of replies condemning the idea since they can get stuck in the snow (because regular buses never have problems dealing with snow, right?). I don't want to get into it here, but even mentioning wider stop spacing on our street running LRT lines gets blasted, because seniors.

 

[Rainforest]

My critique of the paper by Sorensen and Hess, recently reviewed on Spacing:

This paper makes three major mistakes, and those mistakes largely invalidate its conclusions.

1) The authors propose a new version of the trunk LRT line in Scarborough (they call it “Malvern LRT”), that would run from the Ellesmere SmartTrack station to STC and then to Malvern. Thus, STC will no longer have a direct connection to Bloor-Danforth subway, and a lot of riders will be brought to SmartTrack instead.

However, the authors offer no proof that SmartTrack will be capable of handling so many passengers from STC, in addition to those coming from Markham and the north of Scarborough. Note that the frequency and train size for SmartTrack is not known at this point.

If SmartTrack cannot handle that load, then the majority of this paper’s conclusions do not hold.

2) The paper excludes 75% of Scarborough residents from its benefit analysis. The largest number of residents within the “accessible area” in any of their options is 143,500; while the total population of Scarborough is more than 600,000.

Many of residents not living in the “accessible area” will benefit more from SmartTrack and Scarborough Subway than from LRTs. Those people will have to take a bus in any case, but after that, they will prefer to transfer to a faster high-order transit.

Some weight in the modeling should be given to those residents and their interests. However, this factor is totally ignored in the paper.

3) The paper repeatedly compares the full LRT network to the options where the addition of subway results in 2 or all 3 LRT lines being excluded. It assumes that the subway, if built, will replace 2 or all 3 LRT lines.

Such assumption is plain wrong for Sheppard LRT (which is already funded, and its funding is independent on Scarborough Subway), and is debatable for “Eglinton-Morningside LRT”. The latter is not funded at present, and in theory the funding allocated for subway could be re-purposed to build that LRT. But in practice, the funds are more likely to be lost for transit altogether if the subway is cancelled.

As a result, the paper fails to make the most relevant comparison: (SmartTrack + 3 LRT lines; this is their Option 3) versus (SmartTrack + subway + 2 LRT lines; they do not consider this option at all).

 

[rbt]

However, the authors offer no proof that SmartTrack will be capable of handling so many passengers from STC, in addition to those coming from Markham and the north of Scarborough. Note that the frequency and train size for SmartTrack is not known at this point.

Frequency and train size are a function of funding. 12-car double-deck trains running every 5 minutes are possible (LakeShore West achieves this today during small periods of time) with sufficient funding (Union is a problem, but a $3B tunnel with several stations through downtown would fix that). This is massive capacity that would fit well within the combined SCC and DRL budgets. Question remains, would it work as well; I suspect not but I also don't think that'll stop Tory from proposing it as a cost savings measure, nor is it a bad idea.

It has to get down to a $4 fare though; the 2025 TTC standard fare will be approaching $4.

 

[P23]

Why not just branch off the smart track line around Ellesmere to STC and then connect to the Scarborough line at McCowan or whatever?

 

[rbt]

Why not just branch off the smart track line around Ellesmere to STC and then connect to the Scarborough line at McCowan or whatever?

Potentially cost. Capacity of the GO RER proposal (which has $15B set aside) is somewhat lower than what the SRT carries today.

That said, I'm pretty certain that upgrading the GO RER to 5 minute or better frequencies between Union and STC would be cheaper than the DRL + Scarborough Subway proposal. It really depends on whether it is similarly useful as a DRL replacement or not.

Wouldn't be surprised if this was the final solution and the DRL was left unfunded for a future 2030 investment package. A central tunnel for GO away from Union Station would be advantageous to the entire GTA and beyond.

 

[44 North]

Well the SmartTrack plan will provide them with that one seat ride downtown, so I don't see the problem.

Understandable. And there shouldn’t be a problem at all, in theory. Faster than a subway, broader service. But there still will be a problem. Because at the end of the day it’s not part of the subway system. Nor do we know how the fare structure will work. Will it be a flat fare TTC token to ride SmartTrack across the city as it is now with the subway? Probably not. Will it be as frequent? Seemingly not. And what about the rolling stock, or interior. Will it look and feel like a subway, or be set up like a commuter service with carpeting and padded seats? Just like with ICTS, or how Transit City LRT compares with St Clair or Spadina...many don’t know what they’re going to get, or if it’s going to be a major improvement. With subways people know exactly what they’re getting.

Re: your other points. I haven’t read the UofT report yet, so I can’t exactly agree or disagree. I wouldn’t mind seeing what they say about development. That’s one of the biggest drivers of decisions, and essentially renders facts and evidence null and void. There is ample land to develop in Scarborough. What happens if in the next few years a developer forwards a proposal for a mini metropolis on some highway scrubland like we saw with Markham’s Langstaff Gateway? Or what about a high-density precinct proposal in the Consumers Rd area? Will we see subway-level 15k peak projections for Sheppard like those promised thirty years ago? Will the Prov gladly support it like they have for 905 subways?

And the SELRT...is that even happening anymore? The Prov was quick to sign an MOU to divert funding to Eglinton. Will they do the same if Tory sits down with them to fund SmartTrack? And if the SELRT is still alive and kicking, then it should be promoted a helluva a lot more than it is. There’s seemingly no official site, or any official renders to show people how it will look. And even when it was promoted during the TC era, the renders weren’t very good. IIRC it was a white/grey LRV poorly stitched onto a low-quality photo of the existing street. For a project costing in excess of a billion dollarydoos, they can do better than that.

And thx for the compliment about my .gif!

 

[TOareaFan]

Potentially cost. Capacity of the GO RER proposal (which has $15B set aside) is somewhat lower than what the SRT carries today.

hate to get too picky....but here goes RER does not have $15B set aside. There is a goal/policy of the provincial government to spend $29B over 10 years on transit and infrastructure. $15B of that is in the GTHA.....one of the projects they are looking at is RER and have promised 15 minute frequencies on GO lines they own.....but they have not said that the cost of RER is $15B and, further, they have not actually identified where the $29B is coming from....so it is hardly "set aside".