News   Jun 26, 2024
News Roundup for June 26, 2024
 14     0 
News   Jun 26, 2024
Hop, Skip, and a Jump
 252     0 
News   Jun 25, 2024
10 Storeys Proposed to Float Over Annex Heritage Building
 1.8K     1 

Danforth Line 2 Scarborough Subway Extension

One of the issues that's never talked about is orphan technology. The reason Scarborough wants a subway so badly, is in no small measure because many feel Scarborough got shafted with the short RT line. Now if the RT line was longer or there were 2-3 RT lines, nobody would be saying that. But the SRT is Scarborough's equivalent of the Sheppard Stubway.

Confidence in LRT will go up when Eglinton opens. And when there's firm commitment to build more than one line. Build Eglinton East and the Scarborough LRT at the same time and people will come around eventually. But if you build one, you'll piss off just enough people to get another 30-year pro-subway backlash.
 
kEiThZ said:
One of the issues that's never talked about is orphan technology. The reason Scarborough wants a subway so badly, is in no small measure because many feel Scarborough got shafted with the short RT line. Now if the RT line was longer or there were 2-3 RT lines, nobody would be saying that. But the SRT is Scarborough's equivalent of the Sheppard Stubway.
Click to expand...

True, it's orphan and short. Should've always gone to Malvern as originally proposed. Not to mention that we should've seen more lines like it in TO. With newer rolling stock designed to look very similar to the T1 or TR it'd be pretty decent, even if a short stub. Though I think even in its current shabby state it still gives a more 'rapid transit' impression than if it was built as originally proposed (low platform CLRVs). I guess it's hard to say since Crosstown isn't open and we never rebuilt Line 3 for LRVs, but something about the SRT's attributes makes it feel above streetcars/LRT. Probably mostly due to the high platform style, or the way the vehicles look/operate compared to street-running LRVs.
 
There is no doubt that if the Etobicoke RT was built, Scarborough RT extended in the 1990s, and the inevitable RT was built along Sheppard or Finch, people's opinions would be very different.
 
OneCity said:
But would the evidence be non political? Its would be evidence used to support a political case for the areas which are exploding because they we blessed with transit from another era. We don't need that in this City.

We need to build and fund a network for all differing needs. And if the evidence was collected appropriately to support the need for City wide growth as a priority it would make sense. But thats not what this "evidence" motion was going to do if passed. It was a divisive motion to fund one need as a priority. And this is exactly the Politics we need to get away from so we can finally move forward.
Click to expand...

Coffey is that you?
 
44 North said:
Should've always gone to Malvern as originally proposed.
Click to expand...

I doubt that would've helped much. It would still effectively be a slow shuttle to the "real" subway. If the DRL had been built with the same technology (as was the original plan - the Bill Davis provincial government refused to fund transit projects unless they used technology from UTDC, which is now Bombardier Transportation) then people wouldn't care too much aside from the awkwardness of having two completely separate transit systems. But as long as there's a faster, more modern and more useful transit system in the wealthy parts of the city, people in the rest of the city will complain -- rightfully so -- that they're getting shafted with unnecessary transfers, slow service for the sake of having more stops even though nobody actually uses those stops, and city councillors from the wealthier (and whiter) parts of Toronto who advocate those cheaper solutions for the poorer suburbs. I'm sure that'll get a lot of groans, but we have the last two mayoral elections as pretty clear evidence for it.
 
amnesiajune said:
I doubt that would've helped much. It would still effectively be a slow shuttle to the "real" subway. If the DRL had been built with the same technology (as was the original plan - the Bill Davis provincial government refused to fund transit projects unless they used technology from UTDC, which is now Bombardier Transportation) then people wouldn't care too much aside from the awkwardness of having two completely separate transit systems. But as long as there's a faster, more modern and more useful transit system in the wealthy parts of the city, people in the rest of the city will complain -- rightfully so -- that they're getting shafted with unnecessary transfers, slow service for the sake of having more stops even though nobody actually uses those stops, and city councillors from the wealthier (and whiter) parts of Toronto who advocate those cheaper solutions for the poorer suburbs. I'm sure that'll get a lot of groans, but we have the last two mayoral elections as pretty clear evidence for it.
Click to expand...

Not sure what you're rambling on about this time.
 
Reecemartin said:
I think that in the long run subway extensions will always come to be appreciated. Despite not seeing the areas as well and costing more, riding the subway further with no transfers is much faster, especially if a bus passenger can transfer direct to subway rather than to LRT then to subway.
Click to expand...
In a perfect world we'd have a subway on every major road. But its not a perfect world, its not feasible and we're cash strapped, needing to make tough decisions.

Of course a subway will always be appreciated. But... its nice to want things.
44 North said:
Not sure what you're rambling on about this time.
Click to expand...
He's trying to make it a race/class issue, for some reason.
 
The subway should have gone to Scarborough Centre to begin. Metro council rejected it in to attempt to save coin back in the day. Here we are 30-40 years later debating and wasted money on previous failed plans from both the City and then Province refused to extend the BDL to Scarborough Centre. Streetcars, LRT, BRT whatever to the City Centre would always be a white elephant to residents of this massive Toronto suburb. Subway will be a white elephant to outsiders until its built and accepted like the rest of the network. Its the start that should have been done years ago.

We are not "cash strapped" per se. We are strapped from the fact we never had a funding plan. We are beyond due to build for needs in both the poorest areas of the City left behind and for the accelerated growth occurring in the wealthier transit rich areas. Any argument to not build well connected, extensive transit at once is simply divisive. And the "facts" proposed requested to be heavily weighted in the rejected motion are not looking at the entire picture whatsoever. The City clearly needs some bridges to move forward. From here we need to not only fund the rest of the network but plan ahead for future growth so we dont have the same divisive debates and corner cutting arguments in the future as the City continues to grow.

Now seriously whats wrong with this City?
http://www.insidetoronto.com/news-s...ronto-councillors-over-comments-at-city-hall//.
 
Last edited:
OneCity said:
The subway should have gone to Scarborough Centre to begin. Metro council rejected it in to attempt to save coin back in the day. Here we are 30-40 years later debating and wasted money on previous failed plans from both the City and then Province refused to extend the BDL to Scarborough Centre. Streetcars, LRT, BRT whatever to the City Centre would always be a white elephant to residents of this massive Toronto suburb. Subway will be a white elephant to outsiders until its built and accepted like the rest of the network. Its the start that should have been done years ago.

We are not "cash strapped" per se. We are strapped from the fact we never had a funding plan. We are beyond due to build for needs in both the poorest areas of the City left behind and for the accelerated growth occurring in the wealthier transit rich areas. Any argument to not build well connected, extensive transit at once is simply divisive. And the "facts" proposed requested to be heavily weighted in the rejected motion are not looking at the entire picture whatsoever. The City clearly needs some bridges to move forward. From here we need to not only fund the rest of the network but plan ahead for future growth so we dont have the same divisive debates and corner cutting arguments in the future as the City continues to grow.

Now seriously whats wrong with this City?
http://www.insidetoronto.com/news-s...ronto-councillors-over-comments-at-city-hall//.
Click to expand...

A massive suburb is best served by one subway stop?
 
Lets say we built it as LRT. Is LRT going to handle the current and future ridership? The current SRT is overcrowded. Subway to STC makes sense. If they build it with infill stations being planned and abe to be built in the future, it may be the better option.
 
micheal_can said:
Lets say we built it as LRT. Is LRT going to handle the current and future ridership? The current SRT is overcrowded. Subway to STC makes sense. If they build it with infill stations being planned and abe to be built in the future, it may be the better option.
Click to expand...

The LRT would have had more than enough capacity, 4x that of the current SRT,
 
Voltz said:
A massive suburb is best served by one subway stop?
Click to expand...

Yeah.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spoke–hub_distribution_paradigm

Imagine if other parts of the city had their public transit truncated like Scarborough does. At Eglinton West, Eglinton and Dundas West you have to get off one subway line that ends and transfer to another for the sake of saving some money in capital expenditures. And because more stops automatically means better service, those suburban subways get a bunch of stops that serve practically no-one. That would be ridiculous, right? So why does it make sense in Scarborough?
 
W. K. Lis said:
With a LRT, it would be less expensive, have more stops, and better coverage.
Click to expand...

This can't be said often enough, but "more stops and better coverage" doesn't automatically mean better service. In the case of Scarborough it actually means worse service. Four of the stops are in low-density industrial areas - three of them are deserted and the fourth mainly serves as a connection to the 54E bus, which can easily connect to the Lawrence RER station and/or the Kennedy subway/LRT station.

In effect, "more stops and better coverage" just means slower trips for the vast majority of people using that transit line so that the city can save a few hundred dollars per resident.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top