AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Rapid transit planning in the Metro era is anything but apolitical - there are reasons why you don't have a Queen subway as originally proposed but have umpteen extension of existing lines outward.
AoD
|
|
|
Rapid transit planning in the Metro era is anything but apolitical - there are reasons why you don't have a Queen subway as originally proposed but have umpteen extension of existing lines outward.
AoD
M II A II R II K
Senior Member
So does the bedrock make it impractical to ever add a new Lawrence East station, and if so why not elevate it instead.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
M II A II R II K
Senior Member
Then it would get extra stops as Line 2 is eventually extended to Unionville.
Leo_Chan
Senior Member
Good luck with that. Probably in 100+ years and not Unionville, should be Markville. IMO, DRL should go to Unionville/Markham Centre.
Transit Fantasy Territory Reached!
steveintoronto
Superstar
A further point subsidiary to that: I was getting a lot of Google hits from usually reliable sources (Steve Munroe, Bow's TTC history, etc) who all went into detail of how the meshing of the two lines was highly problematic, and in Munroe's case, he added in some political views (not to disparage him in any way) but it missed the freakin massive elephant in the room that is rarely mentioned now-days: This was a *politically created f-up from the start*...of the highest order, literally, when it has to go before the SCC (IIRC, not the SCO). No wonder this city is *still* so vexed and tortured on transit policy, let alone the financing. I don't want to belabour that point, it's obviously being seen by some, and yes, the TTC is due a lot of flak too, but nowhere near that of the governing bodies. I state without reference at this point, will provide if challenged, but Crossrail being such a success in so many ways isn't by accident. *The political establishment learned from their mistakes*! And Crossrail has now become a textbook case (literally!) of a model to emulate for many jurisdictions, and the most profound aspect of it is to *keep the politicians out of it* other than by second person stockholders of a Limited Company.
dowlingm
Senior Member
Re: terminal turnback discussion a few posts back. Having all trains pull through and crossover would prevent a "same level/platform" Don Mills subway-LRT like transfer to another mode which I'm pretty sure was proposed on this thread a few days ago?
I do wonder what extending the subway will do for Kennedy numbers. When it was SRT-becomes-LRT, everyone had to change at Kennedy whether you came from STC or a bus direct to Kennedy. You could then choose between GO, Crosstown and Line 2. With L2 extended to STC, I wonder whether some people who might choose Crosstown-Eglinton-downtown will now just stay on to Bloor, and possible opportunistic rides on GO lost also. Not saying that as a bad thing, just wondering how it will work out.
I do wonder what extending the subway will do for Kennedy numbers. When it was SRT-becomes-LRT, everyone had to change at Kennedy whether you came from STC or a bus direct to Kennedy. You could then choose between GO, Crosstown and Line 2. With L2 extended to STC, I wonder whether some people who might choose Crosstown-Eglinton-downtown will now just stay on to Bloor, and possible opportunistic rides on GO lost also. Not saying that as a bad thing, just wondering how it will work out.
M II A II R II K
Senior Member
I don't see how they don't have space for a bigger station in a suburban mall parking lot. And side platforms shouldn't be considered since they're inconvenient, just look at the Yonge Line stations which also can't be Spanishized without shutting them down.
Midtown Urbanist
Superstar
We don't do elevated in this city.
Elevated is for pleb cities like Vancouver, Chicago and New York.
Miller's exact words is that the bedrock makes the Lawrence East station 'prohibitively expensive'. I take that to mean, never happening unless it happens in one phase.
OneCity
Senior Member
Miller is the LRT figurehead attempting to rally the troops. Timely interview and wishful thinking that Scarborough doesn't support a subway. Again if he is so big on surface transit build the subway on the surface or connect the LRT to Eglinton like Rob tried. End the debate. All other lines could be LRT or Sheppard subway & Eglinton LRT.
But to debate transfer surface LRT vs. underground subway is completely irresponsible. He should know what the issue is by now. Alteast make an effort at this stage to fix the main problem that is holding up this debate.
Last edited:
ssiguy2
Senior Member
and Paris, London, Tokyo, Shanghai, Sao Paulo, Moscow, Mexico City, Dubai, Osaka, Beijing, Honk Kong............all cities that can teach Toronto absolutely nothing about transit. None of those "non-world class" cities have anything on transit in Toronto and they all have wet dreams at the prospect of one day having a subway system as large and expansive as Toronto's.
OneCity
Senior Member
Smartrack is the problem here.
I firmly believe the only reason the SSE is not elevated is because Tory is too stubborn or invested to drop Smarttrack as it would become almost useless in Scarborough. There is no way the costs associated with constructing the elevated route for subway are the same as the deep tunnel
Just elevate the damn thing and move on
JGHali
Active Member
Well it's mostly a matter of finding room for elevated tracks. How about keeping the SRT or converting it to LRT using much of the existing structures to the extent possible?
Although I tend to think that the Canada Line in Richmond is fairly ugly, it certainly couldn't have put underground in the great sandbar of Richmond. Having said that, putting it at grade on the generally ugly No. 3 Rd made have made for a more transit- and pedestrian-oriented environment.
Although I tend to think that the Canada Line in Richmond is fairly ugly, it certainly couldn't have put underground in the great sandbar of Richmond. Having said that, putting it at grade on the generally ugly No. 3 Rd made have made for a more transit- and pedestrian-oriented environment.
OneCity
Senior Member
I have no respect for a design that puts a transfer before SCC to save costs. Its cheap, poor planning and its whats got us in this mess. There are other solutions that may cost slightly more but not cost near what the underground subway will.
We are debating the "expensive" easy way out 7 stop transfer LRT vs. the most expensive option possible with one stop subway. Both are pretty stupid at this juncture of the debate. If you want to go cheap, then dont use LRT, If they want to actually spend money to invest for the future of Scarborough Centre get rid of the transfer use LRT or subway. No reason only the LRT should be seen as the only above ground option.
Last edited:
OneCity
Senior Member
Sorry im not sure Im catching the point of the sarcasm? If you mean the shutdown? If we are shutting down the RT the elevated subway with stops would be viewed as much more palatable than the transfer LRT. And the majority of people here would be stoked with a compromise to move forward aside from the shutdown pain. Although some would argue the RT is just as painful today
Problem is Tory will not be the one to be able to do this as he's invested in Smarttrack. Doug Ford likely only supports underground although his brother did try to compromise earlier, and the other side is clearly transfer LRT come hell or high water.
Last edited: