Danforth Line 2 Scarborough Subway Extension

[BurlOak]

Once again, you completely misunderstand. The tax is no "promise". It's already started being collected by the City for a specific purpose. Absent that purpose, there's a very valid legal question as to who that tax levy belongs to. There will be more on this issue in the months to come.

The specific purpose is to build the subway. The subway would be built. Thus, the tax could continue to be collected to give to the Province.
I get what you mean now that the same tax cannot be used for another purpose - unless City Council has a vote for the tax to be used in another way. I imagine that would be a pretty easy vote to pass through Council (province is paying full $4B for subway, so let's switch the tax to another transit project).

 

[Streety McCarface]

The low ridership stations in New York City look like this:

The low ridership stations in Toronto look like this:

I'd be fine with building more subways in suburban Toronto if they were built cheaply like the old MTA stations.

I'm not disagreeing, I believe building the TYSSE underground between pioneer village and VMC was a mistake, and in Scarborough, I wouldn't mind an elevated option to be considered. To me, that makes a lot more sense than underground, but the point is that the SSE corridor is worthy of higher order transit. The current plan sucks, I've said this dozens of times, I'm advocating for a subway. How it's built, I don't know what is the best option.

I don't get it - when relevant density numbers are posted the response is typically 'density isn't everything'...except when it is, apparently.

The population of the SCC is just over 16,400. Not only is the density still significantly lower than Old Toronto, but the total population you're referring to is relatively small.

What about the surrounding neighborhoods?

Bendale - 3,409/km2

Morningside - 4,112/km2

Woburn - 3,636/km2

Agincourt - 3,580/km2

Dorset Park - 3,331/km2

Not only is the SCC's Scarborough-high density level not enough to justify a subway, it's surrounded by much lower density neighborhoods that are right in line with the low Scarborough average.

What about commercial/employment density? Again, very low.



If you understand the ingredients necessary to justify subway then you'd understand exactly why it disqualifies Scarborough:

Population Density - No
Commercial/Employment Density - No
Built Form - No, almost entirely mid-20th century suburban
Local Transit Culture - Suburban

I can't believe we have to explain why subways work in Brooklyn but don't make sense for Scarborough lol.

]

I've been over this before, suburban local transit culture generates more ridership per station than that of old Toronto. the section of subway between Victoria Park and Kennedy (3 stations) sees more ridership than all of the old Toronto section of the Danforth Subway. If that is not proof enough that Scarborough should have better transit integration, then I don't know what is.

The point of the statistic is that the Scarborough Centre station section of the subway has the density to support a subway stop, even without surface connections.

Every proposed station is in a neighborhood with either significant density or significant population centers.

Eglinton East -- Eglinton-Brimley (Pop: 22,387, Den: 6,931)
Bendale -- Lawrence East (Pop: 28,954 Den: 3,409) + the Lawrence Bus
Scarborough Centre -- STC (Pop: 16,403 Den: 6,358) + buses from all over Scarborough
Agincourt -- Sheppard East (Pop: 44,577 Den: 3,580) + buses from malvern

The subway serves a direct population of around 110K people based on the nearest neighborhoods if built to the fullest extent, and this is what is around the stations (within about a kilometer or 2, enough to walk or bike). Beyond that, you have an impressive bus network that feeds right into the subway system, serving at least 60-70% of Scarborough (360,000+). Assuming a 33% modal share, you can see at least 100K people use the line within 2-3 years, more as the area becomes attractive. It doesn't need dense areas like King or Bloor-Yonge because these stations (like Kennedy, Warden, Finch, Don Mills, Kipling, Islington, Sheppard West, Wilson, Eglinton West, Victoria Park, etc) serve major bus terminals in areas with almost no density whatsoever. And these stations are successful. Toronto will never be as dense as New York City or London, but it has a grid system, which gives the ability to funnel transit users from smaller bus lines, to stations. It may not work like this downtown, but it works like that at almost every other station in the system with slightly significant ridership. Even old Toronto stations with the most ridership like Pape, Broadview, and Main Street have more ridership because of this phenomenon, and this is in dense areas. What this all proves is that rapid transit in suburbs work, and they work very well in this city. They just don't need a lot of stations to generate significant ridership, just ones with ample amenities.

There were options that would have been cheaper and more effective than the subway.


I didn't state any statistics for Scarborough, I think you're confusing me with someone else. Still, the fact that Scarborough has only "small pockets of density" is kind of the point. Small pockets of density generally don't justify underground subways. An above ground line might be cheap enough to justify the cost. Maybe running on an elevated guideway of some sort. If only something like that existed...


My point exactly. LIRR uses regular rail lines that have been upgraded to have frequent, all day service. It's only partially grade separated and electrified by the way. It's not a new subway line that runs parallel to an existing elevated rapid transit line and an existing commuter rail line. If something like LIRR were planned for Scarborough (for example, RER trains that would use the Stouffville line with a branch to STC), it would be cheaper and get Scarborough residents downtown a lot faster than the subway. With no transfer.

What would you like me to explain about the Relief line? RL North is key to relief of Line 1. It accomplishes that goal in a way that RER on existing rail lines can't, and so effectively that its route through relatively low density neighbourhoods is justified. RL West goes through a highly dense, fast growing urban environment that is mostly poorly served by existing rail lines.

They do, New York and Chicago have them everywhere.

I would consider a line with barriers to be "grade separated" enough for rapid transit. They're not running within the street like an LRT, which is prone to accidents on the street and red lights, emergency vehicles, etc.

I agree that RER needs to be expanded within Scarborough. However, RER is not viable unless you are going south of king street. Everywhere else in the city, it is far faster to take the subway to reach your destination. This is because of fairly limited RER frequencies, lack of flexibility (fewer stations), higher dwell times, longer transfers (especially at Union), and crowding, especially at rush hour. Currently, many lines fill 12 car double decker trains running at frequencies of every 15 minutes (or better, in the case of the Lakeshore lines, 5 minutes) during rush hour. Imagine what will happen when 4 car single level EMUs replace these 12 car trains and are only running at 15, or even 5 minute frequencies.

With regards to the relief line, a lot of the segments run along mainline rail. Relief line west follows the Kitchener line, and Relief line north follows the Richmond Hill line. It was claimed earlier that subways are not needed along corridors paralleled by mainline rail. In the case of the Relief line, both are covered by mainline rail.

 

[Streety McCarface]

It boggles the mind, let alone logic, why Scarberians claiming to want a "connection directly downtown from STC" would prefer it by subway. But I suspect a poll taken of Scarbro' would show that it's a highly vocal minority. Not only would RER connect them downtown in a much shorter time, it would connect them north and east as well. Surely that makes more sense for a 'borough' to claim it's a real 'downtown'. But perhaps not...MNR actually makes a better analog than LIRR, as HV overhead AC catenary is used on the outer extremities of MetroNorth, sharing track and current with the North East Corridor in parts as technically GO is planned to do, save that GO is to use 25kV catenary, the international standard.

Downtown is not just Union Station unfortunately. While I currently don't live in Scarborough, every time I have to travel to U of T from GO transit, I add at least 15 minutes to my journey, plus the waiting for a train at my home station, more expensive fares, slower service along the Union Station Corridor, etc. The GO-TTC transfer at Union station is not an efficient one by any means. It's 2-4 minutes waiting for your train to disembark, 2 minutes through the concourse, 3 minutes down the hallway (more if crowds are bad), 1 minute in the TTC subway station, plus 2 minutes waiting for the train. In total, this is between 10-12 minutes on a bad day. This will obviously improve when the Bay concourse opens, but not enough to convince people that taking GO is the better way from somewhere as close as Scarborough.

 

[steveintoronto]

Downtown is not just Union Station unfortunately.

Ummm...it certainly is downtown. But lets accept your abstract concepts for once on this claim. It's a hell of a lot closer to the central core than STC is to Scarborough's multiple density nodes. And until relief is offered for Lines 1 and 2, it means you still have to change at Yonge/Bloor, which means the rebuild of same, a ridiculous need when the solution is to build other means to circumvent that overcrowding. I don't see you clamouring for the Relief Line. You just want to pile onto the dangerous crush already there.

The GO-TTC transfer at Union station is not an efficient one by any means. It's 2-4 minutes waiting for your train to disembark, 2 minutes through the concourse, 3 minutes down the hallway (more if crowds are bad), 1 minute in the TTC subway station, plus 2 minutes waiting for the train. In total, this is between 10-12 minutes on a bad day. This will obviously improve when the Bay concourse opens, but not enough to convince people that taking GO is the better way from somewhere as close as Scarborough.

Your inability to embrace 'the near now' is sadly missing. What is it that you don't understand about "RER"?

SSE is decades away, if at all. RER, unless your man Ford fffs everything (a distinct possibility) is a heck of a lot closer, and will tie in a lot more cross core routes to stations on the *existing Lakeshore line*. And as mentioned prior by myself and others, if DRL is RER, it will run under the core of TO and connect out the other side, allowing not just passenger interchange at junctions, but actual route alternatives for interconnecting lines from the east and west Lakeshore legs to have service either to Union or to Mid-Core, and if and when the MidTown becomes available, yet another through-running RER connection to tie the regions into midtown Toronto.

It must be very difficult for people who can only think "Subways, subways, subways" to regard how the rest of the developed world is excelling at transit compared to backward Toronto.

 

[steveintoronto]

Thus, the tax could continue to be collected to give to the Province.

Don't you think you should consult that actual legal document to make a claim like that? That's bizarre, to say the least. The Province is quite able to allocate taxes of its own.

I get what you mean now that the same tax cannot be used for another purpose - unless City Council has a vote for the tax to be used in another way.

It's far more complex than "reassigning" what is tantamount to being a legal contract.

I imagine that would be a pretty easy vote to pass through Council (province is paying full $4B for subway, so let's switch the tax to another transit project).

I'm searching for the City's legal documents on this, but meantime:

City forced to refund portion of Scarborough subway development charges
By JENNIFER PAGLIAROCity Hall reporter
Wed., Aug. 10, 2016

After a powerful developer’s group challenged key numbers in the city’s transit planning process for the Scarborough subway, a settlement approved Wednesday means the city will now collect millions of dollars less to pay for the project.

The deal comes eight months after the Building Industry and Land Development Association, BILD, launched an appeal at the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB), over the amount of money being charged to developers so the city can pay to connect the Bloor-Danforth subway line to the Scarborough Town Centre, replacing the aging Scarborough RT.

That appeal has also left questions about the reliability and precision of ridership numbers and their role in influencing political decisions worth billions of dollars.

The agreement, approved by the OMB, means the city must now refund a portion of the charges to all developers who were issued building permits on or after Aug. 1, 2015 to reflect a 10 per cent reduction in the rate. Any future charges will be calculated at the new rate.

A city spokesperson said they have yet to tally the total amount to be refunded. But a report from staff to council, the contents of which were earlier shared with the Star, estimated the refund at $2 million with interest and total revenue loss estimated between $4 and 6 million, when taking future charges into consideration.

In 2013, city council scrapped plans for a seven-stop LRT from Kennedy Station to Eglinton Ave. East that would have been paid for by the province in full. A controversial vote saw council — spurred on by then mayor Rob Ford and Scarborough councillors — agree instead to build a three-stop subway that would cost $2 billion more.

That decision came after a last-minute update to ridership estimates presented by city staff, which jumped from 9,500 to 14,000 people in the busiest direction at the busiest time — a figure that just barely justified the need for a higher-capacity subway.

In order to build the more expensive connection, city staff originally estimated an additional $910 million would need to be raised for the city’s contribution alone, $165 million of which would hopefully come from development charges.

So, council imposed a city-wide development charge, which came into effect in 2015, specifically to fund the subway. The money is collected when building permits are approved, charged on a per-unit basis for residential buildings and a per-square-metre basis for commercial buildings.

The rates for the subway charge were determined by a calculation based on the city’s controversial 14,000 ridership projection.

Since the appeal was launched, top city officials have defended the figure but made contradictory statements about the planning process that produced it.

The city’s chief planner Jennifer Keesmaat claimed the process was “problematic” and “rushed.” Later, Mayor John Tory — who backed both the three-stop subway and a new revised plan — said the original proposal was not based in any planning rationale but rather “on a sketch on a piece of paper.”

In appealing to the OMB — the provincial body that handles land and other planning disputes — BILD argued that the city’s ridership projections were too high and the developers should not be on the hook for a subway when light rail would more than suffice.

Before the ridership numbers could be tested in an OMB hearing, the city and BILD agreed to the settlement and rate reduction which benefits developers.

In agreeing to the settlement Wednesday, the city did not admit to any fault in how they calculated the charges.

When explaining how the new rate was calculated, an expert witness for the city told the board Wednesday that they simply adjusted one of the ridership numbers related to the 14,000 figure to reflect a 10 per cent reduction.

OMB chair Bruce Krushelnicki questioned whether a new ridership number that was modified to fit an agreed-upon reduction could still be an accurate ridership projection.

“I’m a little concerned with the nature of that language,” Krushelnicki said at the board Wednesday.

Craig Binning, a partner at consulting firm Hemson which developed the study for the development charge, said he felt “comfortable” the number was still within the “acceptable range” and that the original calculation was based on “the best available information we had at the time from city staff and the TTC.”

Krushelnicki accepted that explanation, saying: “I’m happy with that.”

Council earlier approved a settlement at the board during a closed-door discussion in June.

The report from staff to council warned councillors that not accepting the settlement could see the city losing even more development money if their ridership numbers and calculations faced further scrutiny.

Following mediation, staff said the city was forced to concede the figures would have to be adjusted to represent at least a 10 per cent reduction.

With the bylaw that governs the development charge set for renewal in 2018, new legislation governing development charges and council moving ahead with plans for a revised one-stop subway extension, those calculations are due to change again.

It’s unclear just how much the city will be able to raise from development for the current subway plan. Future ridership for the one-stop subway has been estimated by city staff at just 7,300 in the busiest direction at the busiest hour.

https://www.thestar.com/news/city_h...f-scarborough-subway-development-charges.html

Brace yourself for more of this! Achampong is just getting warmed up...

Ontario court to hear application on suspending Toronto city council ...
Globalnews.ca-Aug. 14, 2018

Court agrees to hear challenge of government's plan to trim Toronto ...
Toronto Sun-Aug. 14, 2018

Toronto lawyer files action against Ford for cutting number of city ...
Canadian Lawyer Magazine-Aug. 1, 2018

Court date set in fight against Premier Doug Ford's slashing of Toronto ...
Toronto Star-Aug. 14, 2018

 

[Streety McCarface]

Ummm...it certainly is downtown. But lets accept your abstract concepts for once on this claim. It's a hell of a lot closer to the central core than STC is to Scarborough's multiple density nodes. And until relief is offered for Lines 1 and 2, it means you still have to change at Yonge/Bloor, which means the rebuild of same, a ridiculous need when the solution is to build other means to circumvent that overcrowding. I don't see you clamouring for the Relief Line. You just want to pile onto the dangerous crush already there.

Your inability to embrace 'the near now' is sadly missing. What is it that you don't understand about "RER"?

SSE is decades away, if at all. RER, unless your man Ford fffs everything (a distinct possibility) is a heck of a lot closer, and will tie in a lot more cross core routes to stations on the *existing Lakeshore line*. And as mentioned prior by myself and others, if DRL is RER, it will run under the core of TO and connect out the other side, allowing not just passenger interchange at junctions, but actual route alternatives for interconnecting lines from the east and west Lakeshore legs to have service either to Union or to Mid-Core, and if and when the MidTown becomes available, yet another through-running RER connection to tie the regions into midtown Toronto.

It must be very difficult for people who can only think "Subways, subways, subways" to regard how the rest of the developed world is excelling at transit compared to backward Toronto.

Midtown is nowhere in sight and I said specifically: "Downtown is not just Union Station unfortunately." That is a fair and correct statement that needs no refutation. Downtown goes all the way up to Bloor and Bathurst. To say one or 2 downtown RER stations is enough for it to be a viable alternative is illogical.

the SSE is not decades away, it will open a few years after RER opens (if it sticks to schedule). A decade? maybe, but RER is under the same time pressure. They have a lot of work to do.

I understand all there is to know about RER. I know that it is a rapid transit service that is meant to serve other regions of the greater Toronto area. Under the Liberal agenda, the vast majority of the system was supposed to be electrified. We will see how that turns out under the Ford regime. Frequencies on most lines are in the 15 minute to 30 minute range during the off peak hours (with the exception of some areas which will be hourly). RER will have faster average speeds than the subway lines due to greater stop spacing, however, in areas where places are congested, speeds may not be increased. Even other RER systems have core sections where slowdowns to 15 mph is necessary. The Union corridor will likely be no exception.

However, I, like you, and everyone else on Urban Toronto honestly have no clue how RER is going to end up when it arrives. How high will frequencies actually be, will they be able to increase to every 5 minutes or better? How will new stations add to dwell times? Rolling Stock? Will it actually be electrified? Will transfers be improved? Will stations be integrated with the bus network? Which future lines may get the treatment? High Floor or Low Floor (platforms)? Will it actually be complete by 2025 or was that all total BS? How will they fix the Union Station problems? What will fare integration actually look like? Will ford cancel some lines? Will some stations be cut? Will we see other stations?

While we understand the general concept of RER, it is a fact that we honestly have no idea how our system is going to end up because Metrolinx has no f***ing clue what they're doing.

By the way, I have clamored a lot for Relief line, relief line north, RER, and the finch west LRT. We've had arguments on how the Relief Line should be built. I don't need to argue it's merits because they're self explanatory. I have always been in support for a full relief line from Don Mills subway station (or Victoria park North subway station) to Osgoode station via Pape and Queen Station. I have never been against that. If anything, I've tried to advocate for making it even more expensive than it already will be by suggesting the add on of underground streetcar stops for the 506, 504 and 501. I've even suggested turning the 501 into a streetcar subway following the relief line (sort of like the SEPTA Market-Frankford line system) so that Queen could be opened up and have wider boulevards. I've always advocated for the streetcar system. If you haven't noticed, this is a Scarborough Subway thread, where we discuss just that, not the Relief Line, not RLN, not the Streetcar network, etc. I also don't support ford. I've never voted for him. I've always seen him as a buffoon, bordering on Trump levels of populism. Just because I support a subway extension for specific reasons does not mean that you have to be arrogant enough to assume where my support lays.

The dangerous crush at BY can be mitigated with platform edge doors in the meantime while DRL is built. It will take a decade to build that thing, so complaining about it is not going to change anything, regardless if the Scarborough subway is built or not -- ridership is growing everywhere. Quite honestly, the crushes I've experienced at Bloor Yonge are nowhere near as bad as St George. That is one scary station. Why not advocate for improving that station?

 

[syn]

I've been over this before, suburban local transit culture generates more ridership per station than that of old Toronto. the section of subway between Victoria Park and Kennedy (3 stations) sees more ridership than all of the old Toronto section of the Danforth Subway. If that is not proof enough that Scarborough should have better transit integration, then I don't know what is.

Yes, and it's been demonstrated more than once before that this is absolute nonsense.

Broadview - Main (21 connections total): 135,050 riders

Victoria Park - Kennedy (26 connections total): 129,900

Aside from the fact that it doesn't make much sense to ignore everything leading up to Victoria Park as it's still on the urban grid, the distances we're discussing are almost the same.

Victoria Park, Warden and Kennedy are served by 26 connections between them, an average of nearly 9 per station. Chester may seem to have very low ridership, but it isn't directly served by any connecting buses.

You continually ignore station spacing, built form and surrounding density. For whatever reason, you don't think context matters. It does.

Given the size and connections of the three stations you're referring to, the ridership isn't really that impressive. Dufferin Station, serviced by one bus (even if it's a long route), has higher ridership than Warden. That's with Ossington less than 800m to the east, and Landsdowne just 500m to the west.

That's 80% of the length of the proposed SSE station - some people will have to nearly walk the distance between two stations in the city just to get on the train lol.

 

[Leo_Chan]

Midtown is nowhere in sight and I said specifically: "Downtown is not just Union Station unfortunately." That is a fair and correct statement that needs no refutation. Downtown goes all the way up to Bloor and Bathurst. To say one or 2 downtown RER stations is enough for it to be a viable alternative is illogical.

the SSE is not decades away, it will open a few years after RER opens (if it sticks to schedule). A decade? maybe, but RER is under the same time pressure. They have a lot of work to do.

I understand all there is to know about RER. I know that it is a rapid transit service that is meant to serve other regions of the greater Toronto area. Under the Liberal agenda, the vast majority of the system was supposed to be electrified. We will see how that turns out under the Ford regime. Frequencies on most lines are in the 15 minute to 30 minute range during the off peak hours (with the exception of some areas which will be hourly). RER will have faster average speeds than the subway lines due to greater stop spacing, however, in areas where places are congested, speeds may not be increased. Even other RER systems have core sections where slowdowns to 15 mph is necessary. The Union corridor will likely be no exception.

However, I, like you, and everyone else on Urban Toronto honestly have no clue how RER is going to end up when it arrives. How high will frequencies actually be, will they be able to increase to every 5 minutes or better? How will new stations add to dwell times? Rolling Stock? Will it actually be electrified? Will transfers be improved? Will stations be integrated with the bus network? Which future lines may get the treatment? High Floor or Low Floor (platforms)? Will it actually be complete by 2025 or was that all total BS? How will they fix the Union Station problems? What will fare integration actually look like? Will ford cancel some lines? Will some stations be cut? Will we see other stations?

While we understand the general concept of RER, it is a fact that we honestly have no idea how our system is going to end up because Metrolinx has no f***ing clue what they're doing.

By the way, I have clamored a lot for Relief line, relief line north, RER, and the finch west LRT. We've had arguments on how the Relief Line should be built. I don't need to argue it's merits because they're self explanatory. I have always been in support for a full relief line from Don Mills subway station (or Victoria park North subway station) to Osgoode station via Pape and Queen Station. I have never been against that. If anything, I've tried to advocate for making it even more expensive than it already will be by suggesting the add on of underground streetcar stops for the 506, 504 and 501. I've even suggested turning the 501 into a streetcar subway following the relief line (sort of like the SEPTA Market-Frankford line system) so that Queen could be opened up and have wider boulevards. I've always advocated for the streetcar system. If you haven't noticed, this is a Scarborough Subway thread, where we discuss just that, not the Relief Line, not RLN, not the Streetcar network, etc. I also don't support ford. I've never voted for him. I've always seen him as a buffoon, bordering on Trump levels of populism. Just because I support a subway extension for specific reasons does not mean that you have to be arrogant enough to assume where my support lays.

The dangerous crush at BY can be mitigated with platform edge doors in the meantime while DRL is built. It will take a decade to build that thing, so complaining about it is not going to change anything, regardless if the Scarborough subway is built or not -- ridership is growing everywhere. Quite honestly, the crushes I've experienced at Bloor Yonge are nowhere near as bad as St George. That is one scary station. Why not advocate for improving that station?

I think you bring up very good points in this post. RER has a lot of uncertainties that can make or break the service as a replacement for taking the TTC is the main leg of the trip. This then compared to the SSE makes the SSE seem quite attractive. However the SSE does have it's own uncertainties like service patterns (will trains short turn at Kennedy), bus transfer times (off centre extra long bus terminal), extra ride times (bus to STC instead of Lawrence or Midland), rolling stock (T1's, TR's. or TR2's), signalling (ATC with traditional signals or only ATC), and many more.

At the end of the day, if GO RER can fulfill the promises that the people on this forum and Metrolinx appears to promote, then it is definitely the better option for those in Scarborough to get downtown, including the transfer to the subway or streetcar. However, if the cost of the SSE can go down or stations can be added cheaply and the terrible bus terminal gets fixed, then it would be a good option. The LRT option is definitely hard to go back to and shouldn't be pushed for unless some interdimensional curve ball comes out of nowhere and it gets a majority with politicians. However, all of these things don't seem to be likely, so we're in a dangerous situation where thing can only get worse before they get better.

 

[steveintoronto]

I understand all there is to know about RER.

Von Munchausen would be suitably impressed.

 

[MisterF]

Frequent RER service with a branch to STC would be an interesting solution, and potentially more effective than the subway extension. However, it is clear that the city is not upgrading the Union Rail Corridor to capacity suitable for such service, therefore a RER branch to STC remains a pipe dream. While the subway option is doable and affordable.

It's not affordable. It's astoundingly expensive for what we're getting, especially since it's replacing an existing line. With 3 RER branches plus UPE coming into Union from the west, a third RER branch from the east shouldn't be an insurmountable problem. It couldn't possibly be more expensive than the SSE.

.
They do, New York and Chicago have them everywhere.

To clarify, is this in response to my point that small pockets of density generally don't justify underground subways? New York and Chicago don't tend to have underground subways in that type of built form at all. Most of Chicago's system is at the surface or elevated, especially in the outer parts. The NYC subway simply doesn't serve Scarborough-type density at all; it's entirely in higher density, less car-oriented areas. And even then much of the system is above ground.

I agree that RER needs to be expanded within Scarborough. However, RER is not viable unless you are going south of king street. Everywhere else in the city, it is far faster to take the subway to reach your destination.

Nope. Even today, going from Kennedy Station to King station is faster by GO with a subway transfer at Union than taking Line 2 to Line 1. You have to go as far north as Dundas before it evens out (33-34 minutes for each option). The highest demand is from Dundas south, so RER would take more people close to their destination than the SSE.

With regards to the relief line, a lot of the segments run along mainline rail. Relief line west follows the Kitchener line, and Relief line north follows the Richmond Hill line. It was claimed earlier that subways are not needed along corridors paralleled by mainline rail. In the case of the Relief line, both are covered by mainline rail.

The DRL is absolutely not covered by mainline rail. RER on existing lines can't accomplish the core goals of the DRL. It can't relieve Bloor-Yonge. It will be less effective at relieving the streetcars and serving the downtown east and west areas. It can't serve neighbourhoods like Pape Village or Don Mills. Transfers with the Danforth and Eglinton lines would be very difficult. For RER to do all these things the Richmond Hill line would have to be rerouted through a tunnel. And while that idea has merit, it's basically a subway at that point. I'm not sure where you're going with this line of debate, but the reasons that the SSE gets so much flack simply don't apply to the DRL.

 

[Streety McCarface]

Yes, and it's been demonstrated more than once before that this is absolute nonsense.

Broadview - Main (21 connections total): 135,050 riders

Victoria Park - Kennedy (26 connections total): 129,900

Aside from the fact that it doesn't make much sense to ignore everything leading up to Victoria Park as it's still on the urban grid, the distances we're discussing are almost the same.

Victoria Park, Warden and Kennedy are served by 26 connections between them, an average of nearly 9 per station. Chester may seem to have very low ridership, but it isn't directly served by any connecting buses.

You continually ignore station spacing, built form and surrounding density. For whatever reason, you don't think context matters. It does.

Given the size and connections of the three stations you're referring to, the ridership isn't really that impressive. Dufferin Station, serviced by one bus (even if it's a long route), has higher ridership than Warden. That's with Ossington less than 800m to the east, and Landsdowne just 500m to the west.

That's 80% of the length of the proposed SSE station - some people will have to nearly walk the distance between two stations in the city just to get on the train lol.

To be entirely fair to the first statement, The Broadview to Main section of the subway is 5.25km while the Victoria Park to Kennedy section of the subway is 4.8km. In terms of a ridership per kilometer rate, the Broadview to main section sees 25,725 riders/km while the Victoria Park to Kennedy section sees 27,063 passengers per kilometer, a difference of over 1000 passengers per kilometer. On top of that, the section has no streetcar connections (but does have the SRT, and many transfer at Kennedy to the GO line downtown, while more people get off go at Main Street).

Also, the Vic Park -- Kennedy section has 24 connections, not 26, and one is a community route that sees almost no ridership (175,12,24,67,404,17,9,102,16,69,135,68,70,20,113,86,198,116,12,57,34,43,21,131)

The Broadview -- main section sees 27 sections (8,62,87,100,25,72,81,185,56,83,31,22,70,91,92,9323,64,135,20,113,87,62), including 3 streetcar routes (504,505,506), and one community route (404)

In total, the Vic Park -- Kennedy section sees 2722 vehicles
The Broadview -- Main section sees 3024 surface vehicles without considering the extra capacity of the streetcars. If this is taken into consideration, that number increases to 4,310 bus equivalents. In essence, the Old Toronto section of the subway sees more buses, has more stations, runs entirely underground, has greater density, and has relatively the same ridership as the Scarborough section of the subway. In fact, its rate of ridership per kilometer is less than that of Scarborough's.

Who cares if one bus route has more ridership than one subway station? I can pull Eglinton West out of my ass and say that has a greater ridership while realizing that EW is being replaced by a subway, not one stop. Same with Finch West (with an LRT).

 

[Rainforest]

It's not affordable. It's astoundingly expensive for what we're getting, especially since it's replacing an existing line.

SSE is affordable and will be built. You are free to call it "unaffordable" even after it is actually built, but the riders will still use it.

With 3 RER branches plus UPE coming into Union from the west, a third RER branch from the east shouldn't be an insurmountable problem. It couldn't possibly be more expensive than the SSE.

This line of thinking certainly has merits, but meets some practical hurdles. I'll write more on that in my next post.

 

[Rainforest]

The City has nothing to do with operating the USRC. Ironically, they have a legal title on owning the land and the air-rights as detailed in the Esplanade Tripartite Agreement, and ruled on a number of times by the SCC, but the rail companies as named in the Agreement (one of which is now Metrolinx operating as GO Transit) have the right of use in perpetuity if done so as per the Agreement.

Technically you are right; Metrolinx should be the main actor, with the City just providing its input. But, my point still stands: the Corridor is not quite ready.

And there is certainly a plan to widen it into both the east and western throats of Union Station. This is necessary and planned for the Stoufville Line, which is planned to be RER up to Onionville (sic). A spur to STC makes perfect sense, albeit the present curve of the RoW where it meets the Uxbridge Line must be softened.

http://www.metrolinx.com/en/regionalplanning/rer/rer_stouffville.aspx

At peak, they want to run 4 RER trains per hour each way, plus 3 diesel trains per hour in the peak direction only. Adjusting that setup for the STC connection isn't easy.

Simply splitting the RER service between STC and Unionville obviously won't cut it:
- Two trains per hour, with say 2,000 riders per train, gives only 4,000 pphpd capacity serving STC. The lowest estimate of the peak demand from STC towards Kennedy is 7,000.
- Scarberians are "spoiled" by the TTC's frequent bus service, with major bus routes running at every 5 min or better. A lot of riders will use buses to reach a subway, instead of waiting 20 or 25 min for the RER train.

I can think of a service configuration that might work, such as:
- The total Uxbridge sub frequency up to 8 trains per hour (every 7.5 min) both ways, split evenly between STC and the northern branch.
- No separate RER and diesel service to Unionville. Either all trains going there are electric and go to the end of line at Linkolnville, or all of them are diesel and go to the end of line.
- In addition to 4 Union-bound trains per hour, STC gets 8 shorter Kennedy-bound trains per hour. The combined service would run every 5 min between STC and Kennedy.

The latter configuration would meet the expectations on both capacity and frequency. But, that requires quite a bit of tweaking on the part of Metrolinx and the City, and I am not sure they are willing to take this route.

In the absence of credible path to a proper RER solution, I'd rather support the subway that is certainly doable, than let the subway project get abandoned and fall back to the LRT option with transfer. Even though I don't disagree that the RER solution is better conceptually.

 

[innsertnamehere]

STC demand is way above a 15 minute frequency. The LRT projected 8,000 people an hour heading south, it's more like 10,000 with the subway. four 1,200 people GO trains is not going to accommodate that.

a commuter rail solution is not a real possibility for STC, demand levels are too high.

 

[nfitz]

STC demand is way above a 15 minute frequency. The LRT projected 8,000 people an hour heading south, it's more like 10,000 with the subway. four 1,200 people GO trains is not going to accommodate that.

Are there sources for those numbers?

An eight-stop LRT with eight different catchments, may well have more ridership than a single $4 billion subway stations.

Also number check ... the peak planning capacity for a 140-metre long 6-car TR train is 1,100; crush loading is higher. A 12-car double-decker GO train (not including engine) is 310-metres long; surely it doesn't have the same capacity and a single deck 6-car train only 45% the length!