Danforth Line 2 Scarborough Subway Extension

[OneCity]

Next there'll be a one stop subway from Don Mills to SCC.

The "express" relief line will come first, then the empty Sheppard loop to SCC.

 

[BurlOak]

Just sent an email to Matlow's office thanking him for setting an example in the face of stupidity.

I sent him an e-mail as well.

The first thing I said was that returning to the transfer LRT would show insensitivity to the Scarborough desire for a transfer free ride, and shows inflexibility since he would be going back to the same failed plan. It would just make the anti-subway side look foolish.

Then I told him the keys to the motion should be as follows:

• Acknowledge that Metrolinx withheld a key report from Council in 2012, and that greatly influenced the debate - Council strongly condemns Metrolinx withholding key information from Council. [council would like to be able to shed the blame for the current situation to someone else, instead of admitting that they were wrong].
• Acknowledge the validity of above report finding a connected SRT with ECLRT is the best.
• Acknowledge that any transit solution must connect Scarborough (STC) to Yonge without transfer. [these 2 are key to show respect for Scarborough].
• Due to the information that was withheld, ask Council to explore if a more appropriate and effective means of Connecting Scarborough to Yonge without transfer was overlooked. [this shows that you are not just re-opening the same old debate].

 

[Hopkins123]

That's not even slightly true. I dare you to justify that assertion, and I won't even make you include the cost of capital from bringing forward the retrofit of Line 2 signals and buying new trains for Line 2 before the T1s reach economic end of life.

Okay, I'll preface what I am getting at through another angle.

Is a surface subway in the SRT corridor not far more affordable than going up the McCowan corridor?

The subway plan would have involved building a new platform on a diagonal at an estimated cost of $320 million

The LRT plan would have also involved renovating Kennedy Station to bring the LRT platforms underground.

Both the SRT corridor and the McCowan corridor comprise a 6.4 kilometre trek to SCC, but only the former could be 80% at- or above-grade. That's at least a $200 million per kilometre difference in costs. Is that not $1.3 billion saved? Yes Lawrence East and Ellesmere, if kept, would need to be rebuilt, but these are marginal costs as a lot of the existing infrastructure could be recycled. And speaking of recycling, no need to build that massive 34-bay bus terminal at SCC when we can reuse the existing terminus.
Another $300 million saved.

You'd have to buying rolling stock and build a yard for LRT (proposed Conlins Yard), so to act as if LRT doesn't come with its own set of baggage is disingenuous. A compromising position the LRT proponents could have made was have the Bloor-Danforth extended to SCC and then... have multiple branches of LRT radiate out from that point: One line up McCowan into Markham, another east along Ellesmere to UTSC and Durham, another west across Sheppard to Don Mills.

But this was seldomly, if ever, by my recollection debated.

The subway plan exists and is going forward because the LRT plan was simply inflexible and unworkable.

 

[jcam]

Looks like a colossal waste of money to me.

Agreed. Going forward, there will have to be value-for-money analysis done on network expansions, and none would support a subway extension from STC over LRT. Especially when you start aligning TTC surface as feeders to RER with integrated fares (you'd probably use LRT to feed into Subway and/or RER stations).

 

[BurlOak]

Okay, I'll preface what I am getting at through another angle.

Is a surface subway in the SRT corridor not far more affordable than going up the McCowan corridor?

The subway plan would have involved building a new platform on a diagonal at an estimated cost of $320 million

Would the Kennedy Station be shallow, and much fewer bus bays than STC. Likely, $300M is a very high estimate.

The subway plan exists and is going forward because the LRT plan was simply inflexible and unworkable.

The LRT could have been flexible. It was the people who were promoting it that were inflexible.

 

[dowlingm]

Okay, I'll preface what I am getting at through another angle..

Because your original post was crap, you're now changing your premise.

The LRT advocates never took into serious consideration the compromise of having the Bloor-Danforth extended as an at-grade/above-grade subway along the path of the SRT, which would have been costwise very similar as retrofitting the SRT to accommodate LRT.

"LRT advocates" wanted the province to pay for new LRT platforms for Crosstown and SLRT, refit of the track, power and platforms and extension to Sheppard/Conlins. "LRT advocates" didn't want McCowan subway or a bus terminal.

The cost of a completely new station north of Kennedy, and cutting into the track at Warden, and the extra train storage capacity for Line 2, and the likely impact of the Ellesmere Tunnel of accommodating each 23m long, 3.14m wide subway car rather than a 2.65m wide articulated vehicle, all paid for by the City as a change request is not "costwise very similar" to the LRT-SRT retrofit.

 

[OneCity]

Agreed. Going forward, there will have to be value-for-money analysis done on network expansions, and none would support a subway extension from STC over LRT. Especially when you start aligning TTC surface as feeders to RER with integrated fares (you'd probably use LRT to feed into Subway and/or RER stations).

I would like to see a value-for-money analysis done on Transfer LRT, vs Connected LRT, vs Connected subway on the RT corridor. I guarantee the difference in cost is minor compared to the benefits of not forcing a transfer at such a ridiculous location.

Same situation with the transfer location to the subway stub debacle on Sheppard. Get rid of these ridiculous transfer locations. Its not about the technology. Its about connecting to what has been built that has been sorely overlooked by the outside opposition.

 

[syn]

Kennedy Station is not a destination, there's no reason to arbitrarily end a line there if most of the commuters heading there are through riders en route to other places: to western 416 or Scarborough Town Centre in the reverse.

If the Bloor-Danforth was already a light rail, the decision to continue an extension of a one-seat ride through to SCC would be so widely acceptable it'd already in be operation by now. The rub is in forcing commuters en masse to transfer services.

A reasonable compromise would have been the LRT fans accepting that the S(L)RT is not worth the effort to fight, and put their efforts towards seeing a surface subway in the SRT corridor instead that could fulfill the 7-stop coverage that the light rail would have provided had they gone with that. The as-of-yet not-built section between SCC and Malvern could just as well be built as an elevated/partially tunneled subway as it could have been an elevated/partially tunneled light rail. Then they could fight easier, more winnable battles like ensuring the Eglinton East LRT gets built.

But no, the debate has primarily boiled down to technology rather than what the debate should have been about: customer convenience - what offers the best metrics for speed, carrying capacity, frequency, uninterrupted one-seat travel, and potential for future growth and development of surrounding areas.

STC isn't much of a destination either, hence the ridership projections (and current RT numbers) that don't come close to justifying this extension.

Is Spadina Station a 'destination'? I suppose so, but it seems like the vast majority of riders are getting on the streetcar. Why should they have to make a transfer? Why shouldn't the subway continue south, in the best interest of customer convenience?

The Spadina Streetcar is about the same length as the RT, with greater ridership.

Why are the residents and businesses of Spadina being neglected?!?

 

[OneCity]

STC isn't much of a destination either, hence the ridership projections (and current RT numbers) that don't come close to justifying this extension.

Is Spadina Station a 'destination'? I suppose so, but it seems like the vast majority of riders are getting on the streetcar. Why should they have to make a transfer? Why shouldn't the subway continue south, in the best interest of customer convenience?

The Spadina Streetcar is about the same length as the RT, with greater ridership.

Why are the residents and businesses of Spadina being neglected?!?

Will be far more of a destination than the majority of the current stops on the BDL line and far more Central as far as Scarborough is concerned. Its arguably the most important area in Scarborough and mainly outsiders are advocating to put a transfer before it? Complete nonsense. Without debating the current Tory plan as its also I bi product of stubbornness from the opposition to understand the importance of this and there are/were other options offered to correct this mistake.

 

[bobbob911]

STC isn't much of a destination either, hence the ridership projections (and current RT numbers) that don't come close to justifying this extension.

Exactly - STC as a "destination" is essentially the real estate available as a parking lot with proximity to the 401. Its a convenient place for someone to drive part of the way into the city and hop on the subway. From this POV it is incrementally more convenient then Kennedy.

Let's not delude ourselves into thinking STC or the surroundings will become a more popular destination, or a more pedestrian friendly hub.

 

[bobbob911]

Will be far more of a destination than the majority of the current stops on the BDL line and far more Central as far as Scarborough is concerned. Its arguably the most important area in Scarborough and mainly outsiders are advocating to put a transfer before it? Complete nonsense. Without debating the current Tory plan as its also I bi product of stubbornness from the opposition to understand the importance of this and there are/were other options offered to correct this mistake.

Important from what point of view? Its only relative importance is as a shopping mall for scarborough. From that point of view the subway may improve the ability for southwest scarborough to access STC. If you've been to STC you will know that a good percentage of the shopping there is big box stores external to the mall itself - impossible to access on foot from a subway.

I guarantee you the goal here is not for people to access STC more easily - its to enable STC as a new starting point for transit from Scarborough to the core.

 

[pman]

Will be far more of a destination than the majority of the current stops on the BDL line and far more Central as far as Scarborough is concerned. Its arguably the most important area in Scarborough and mainly outsiders are advocating to put a transfer before it? Complete nonsense. Without debating the current Tory plan as its also I bi product of stubbornness from the opposition to understand the importance of this and there are/were other options offered to correct this mistake.

Perhaps it's not entirely "complete nonsense" that "mainly outsiders" are advocating against SSE, since the same mainly outsiders are going to pay for the vast majority of the capital and operating costs. Folks in the rhetoric racket would classify your argument as ad hominem, which you can google. Of course, the old ad hominem trick works both ways. If SSE opponents based their opposition to SSE on their hatred of and disdain for the good folks of Scarborough, then their arguments would be as invalid as yours. But the vast majority of opposition to SSE seems grounded in data, analysis, and a recognition that with limited capital dollars we do need to ensure the few transit investments we make deliver some quantifiable, non-anecdotal value for money. So to put it in terms The Sun might favour, I don't live in Scarborough, but I'm being taxed to pay for this pig and I have a right to a voice on it.

 

[OneCity]

Perhaps it's not entirely "complete nonsense" that "mainly outsiders" are advocating against SSE, since the same mainly outsiders are going to pay for the vast majority of the capital and operating costs. Folks in the rhetoric racket would classify your argument as ad hominem, which you can google. Of course, the old ad hominem trick works both ways. If SSE opponents based their opposition to SSE on their hatred of and disdain for the good folks of Scarborough, then their arguments would be as invalid as yours. But the vast majority of opposition to SSE seems grounded in data, analysis, and a recognition that with limited capital dollars we do need to ensure the few transit investments we make deliver some quantifiable, non-anecdotal value for money. So to put it in terms The Sun might favour, I don't live in Scarborough, but I'm being taxed to pay for this pig and I have a right to a voice on it.

You are trying to spin this into into a deep polarizing POV. My suggestion has been pretty level and that to find the cheapest solution to remove the transfer I feel as though is completely unreasonable and unnecessary given the current network and what SCC is suppose to be in the future. As I said there are and were alternatives.

For the Opposition to come to the table every time with the "facts" and "data" the LRT is cheaper and the only other option and pretend the transfer isn't an issue after all that has gone on the last decade is useless rhetoric that wont help you, me or anyone.

Tory's subway plan is a complete head scratcher ill be the first to agree its a waste. But as an end user that doesn't make think the LRT with the "absurd" transfer locations is not a head scratcher of a design. Surely we can find the "facts" and "data" to better support a combination for both cost and integration. A much cheaper seamless LRT was offered and the "fact" is the opposition voted it down in order to tell Scarborough whats best.

If transfer LRT was the only option id kinda agree. But It's not and this is just Poltics rearing its ugly head on all sides.

 

[Hopkins123]

STC isn't much of a destination either, hence the ridership projections (and current RT numbers) that don't come close to justifying this extension.

Is Spadina Station a 'destination'? I suppose so, but it seems like the vast majority of riders are getting on the streetcar. Why should they have to make a transfer? Why shouldn't the subway continue south, in the best interest of customer convenience?

The Spadina Streetcar is about the same length as the RT, with greater ridership.

Why are the residents and businesses of Spadina being neglected?!?

What kind of backwards logic is this? Vaughan Centre and Richmond Hill Centre are little more than grassy knolls today but what they will become within the next 10-30 years is the rationale that's being used to propose extending the subway network out to these points.

Spadina Avenue is already surrounded by subway stops and the streetcar feeds directly into the subway at both ends. How is this comparable to Scarborough Centre which is an isolated 6.4 kilometres away from Kennedy Station? Are the people along Spadina any more special or important than Scarborough residents? This will conceptually be SCC in 10 years time, with or without the subway:

Mic drop!

It comes to a point that some people just have to accept things for how they are, and move on.

The SRT was opened in 1985. Do we want another 32 years to go by, obfuscating the process of upgrading it? I don't think so.

 

[narduch]

Exactly - STC as a "destination" is essentially the real estate available as a parking lot with proximity to the 401. Its a convenient place for someone to drive part of the way into the city and hop on the subway. From this POV it is incrementally more convenient then Kennedy.

Let's not delude ourselves into thinking STC or the surroundings will become a more popular destination, or a more pedestrian friendly hub.

STC doesn't even allow people to park their cars there unless they are going to the mall.