Debate on the merits of the Scarborough Subway Extension

[sixrings]

Elections are not just based on transit maps. There are many issues people are thinking about. I hate to admit but in the last mayoral election I voted for tory even though I liked another candidate simply because I thought that tory had a better chance to beat ford. Similarly if I was American I would have voted for hillary even though I liked Bernie because I don't like splitting votes. The other thing people here areare assuming is that people voted for ford solely because of his subways subways subways I sort of remember ford's campaign being more about cut the gravy. He convinced people there was so much waste because of years of miller that he could find efficiencies. Even if one liked his subways subways subways he presented it as a possibility with little to no additional funds. Now we know he coulding find efficiencies nor could he build a subway for nothing. This issue is dead so I don't know how you expect someone to find a more recent poll. But my experience from those wanting proof is that when they see contradictory polls then what they like they attack the source for bias, the amount of people in the poll, or in this case the year. Doesn't mean it isn't proof.

That's your proof? A push poll taken from three years ago? Remember folks, this predates a lot of things. Like the Trudeau inauguration and his promise of untold billions of dollars earmarked for Toronto transit. Also predates the wild factor that is Patrick Brown's probable government-in-waiting and how he may re-prioritize things more in the suburbs', Scarborough's in particular, favour. And even in spite of this poll, Scarborough still wind up overwhelmingly voting for the pro-subway candidate in the municipal election that year:

 

[sixrings]

I guess based on your map and logic that the people of rexdale voted for tory strictly because they really believed in smarttrack.

 

[44 North]

The chances of this happening are zero now. Council isn't going to backtrack on the subway decision.

True. But because this is the debate-on-merits thread I'll vent and pretend that zero is 1-2% chance. Don't want posters to accuse me of beating a dead horse, cuz I'm not. But with SSE something always seemed fishy. The oddly high pricetag being a big one, ditto for SmartTrack/Stouffville RER sprouting up round the same time. Kinda feel like SSE was always planned to be cancelled eventually. And that with ST+RER being a supposed "surface subway", pols and the Prov can get away with saying 'but you still got a subway' type of thing. Feel this with RL too. In this instance I don't see it as ultra-underhanded because many haven't seemed to consider the ramifications and sordidness of abandoning 6.5km of subway line that is Line 3.

Whatever, I digress. but in this what-if scenario it'd be prior to SSE's public cancellation that plans for Line 3 and Line 4 would be concocted behind closed doors at both the local and Prov level. Schabas is probably still on Mlinx's payroll so he'd be incl too. This is where we'd maybe get some variation of the Scarboro Wye to transition to. And I think in light of the stationless SSE ppl would be more than willing to accept.

When reading archived articles what's an interesting dynamic to observe relative to current debates is that Line 3 and it's transfer was not often or ever discussed as some horrid thing. Yes the line was questioned at times, but ultimately it always remained unfinished with the hope that it'd be extended and become more worthwhile. The big issue for Scarb pols (particularly in how it related to developing SC) was getting a Sheppard Subway. This was the big priority for them from the 80s and well into the 00s.

Forward +30yrs and Sheppard is basically a taboo subject (tho still desired by many, as well as on political level). Yet we're led to believe that ridding ourselves of the transfer between Line 2 and 3 is the real hurdle, and why abandoning a valuable piece of infrastructure and spending x Billion to result in a net zero increase in our subway coverage is the 'healthy' decision. A lot of this is media spin and vocal minority spin. If there's a way to make Line 3 more integrated and get Sheppard extended, a Line 3+4 wye would be worth reopening the contention issue. This wye would connect Eg/Kennedy, SC, UTSC, Agincourt, Consumers/Fairview, NYC, and maybe Malvern. Compared with SSE gives us two subway extensions vs 1, more stations, more coverage, kills two birds with one stone, and naturally would have a lower per km cost.

 

[BurlOak]

Possible you and I are thinking something similar here. I don't want to say the fellow's name or report, but the end result would be a pretty good option for a "fully grade-separated, connected rapid transit line". Two lines to be exact. Obviously not the thread for fantasy stuff, but I think it's apt to bring up what with your mention of value engineering. Also that it had some degree of engineering maths to give an idea of the benefit.

Naturally been discussed ad nauseum before, but here's a link to the video as a rehash. Now keep in mind I don't exactly support its creator, and question ideas like using Innovia or the 401 corridor instead of standard 4-car subway and keeping on Sheppard. But still the end result of this Scarboro Wye would arguably be more palatable to the area than both the MOU compromise and SSE. And it finally deals with Sheppard.

That did cross my mind, and like you I don't think the 401 route was anything close to ideal.
But I also thought of just improving the SSE by adding an Old Mill style Lawrence stop, maybe building more of it by cut-and-cover (who cares about a small woodlot near Ellesmere) and maybe extending to Sheppard or Finch (if the CPR Railyard is noeeded).

True. But because this is the debate-on-merits thread I'll vent and pretend that zero is 1-2% chance. Don't want posters to accuse me of beating a dead horse, cuz I'm not. But with SSE something always seemed fishy. The oddly high pricetag being a big one, ditto for SmartTrack/Stouffville RER sprouting up round the same time. Kinda feel like SSE was always planned to be cancelled eventually. And that with ST+RER being a supposed "surface subway", pols and the Prov can get away with saying 'but you still got a subway' type of thing. Feel this with RL too. In this instance I don't see it as ultra-underhanded because many haven't seemed to consider the ramifications and sordidness of abandoning 6.5km of subway line that is Line 3.

Whatever, I digress. but in this what-if scenario it'd be prior to SSE's public cancellation that plans for Line 3 and Line 4 would be concocted behind closed doors at both the local and Prov level. Schabas is probably still on Mlinx's payroll so he'd be incl too. This is where we'd maybe get some variation of the Scarboro Wye to transition to. And I think in light of the stationless SSE ppl would be more than willing to accept.

When reading archived articles what's an interesting dynamic to observe relative to current debates is that Line 3 and it's transfer was not often or ever discussed as some horrid thing. Yes the line was questioned at times, but ultimately it always remained unfinished with the hope that it'd be extended and become more worthwhile. The big issue for Scarb pols (particularly in how it related to developing SC) was getting a Sheppard Subway. This was the big priority for them from the 80s and well into the 00s.

Forward +30yrs and Sheppard is basically a taboo subject (tho still desired by many, as well as on political level). Yet we're led to believe that ridding ourselves of the transfer between Line 2 and 3 is the real hurdle, and why abandoning a valuable piece of infrastructure and spending x Billion to result in a net zero increase in our subway coverage is the 'healthy' decision. A lot of this is media spin and vocal minority spin. If there's a way to make Line 3 more integrated and get Sheppard extended, a Line 3+4 wye would be worth reopening the contention issue. This wye would connect Eg/Kennedy, SC, UTSC, Agincourt, Consumers/Fairview, NYC, and maybe Malvern. Compared with SSE gives us two subway extensions vs 1, more stations, more coverage, kills two birds with one stone, and naturally would have a lower per km cost.

The SSE does indeed appear fishy, but it appears we are heading there like zombies without thinking. Many people know its wrong but are afraid to suggest a change for fear it will be cancelled. The pro transfer LRT crowd is still beating the drum for the Transit City option, and that maintains the fear to retain the 1 stop SSE.

 

[Rainforest]

It should be noted that even if the deep Lawrence East station is added, it won't cost "billions". It could cost $200 or $300 M, based on other recent projects, and that's not a huge amount compared to the total cost of SSE. If the station can be built at the surface level, all the better.

Furthermore, the federal govt is willing to contribute up to 40% to new transit projects, if other levels of governments are willing to pay 60%. Apparently, both the Queens Park and the city are struggling to come up with the matching funds.

I'm not sure if any enhancements to SSE are eligible since this project commenced before the federal announcement. But if it can be made eligible, then both the Lawrence East and the Sheppard / McCowan stations can be restored without increasing the City's contributions.

 

[Sakraycore]

Honestly at this point I think the best thing to do would be to just add back the Lawrence east station back to the SSE. I also hope that Shepperd subway would become a reality sooner than later. However given the current order of events, it seems 99% sure that SSE would happen first.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

It should be noted that even if the deep Lawrence East station is added, it won't cost "billions". It could cost $200 or $300 M, based on other recent projects, and that's not a huge amount compared to the total cost of SSE. If the station can be built at the surface level, all the better.

The costs of the SSE have escalted to a cost well beyond what has been typical of past Toronto subway projects. I'd advise against using prior
station construction costs as a benchmark for what Lawrence East could cost.

Furthermore, Lawrence East is an exceptionally challenging station. It would be a very deep station, lying below to a creek, and it's beside a hospital whose operations we would not be able to disrupt.

I'm not sure if any enhancements to SSE are eligible since this project commenced before the federal announcement. But if it can be made eligible, then both the Lawrence East and the Sheppard / McCowan stations can be restored without increasing the City's contributions.

How would that work?

 

[kEiThZ]

I guess based on your map and logic that the people of rexdale voted for tory strictly because they really believed in smarttrack.

You may slam his logic, but that's what drives politicians: votes.

Are you going to seriously suggest that a politician could perform better in Scarborough by offering to cancel the subway and go back to LRT? They might perform better in the rest of the city. I'm not sure they would perform better in Scarborough.

And Tory has seen that same map. It's probably why he didn't bother cancelling the subway after the cost reports started rolling in.

 

[Rainforest]

How would that work?

Potentially, the city would apply to get more funding from the federal level in order to enhance the project already on the books.

Whether that's allowed, I don't know.

 

[BurlOak]

Potentially, the city would apply to get more funding from the federal level in order to enhance the project already on the books.

Whether that's allowed, I don't know.

There are no rules - it just depends on whether the feds want to give the money.
And that depends on who is asking

 

[44 North]

That did cross my mind, and like you I don't think the 401 route was anything close to ideal.
But I also thought of just improving the SSE by adding an Old Mill style Lawrence stop, maybe building more of it by cut-and-cover (who cares about a small woodlot near Ellesmere) and maybe extending to Sheppard or Finch (if the CPR Railyard is noeeded).


The SSE does indeed appear fishy, but it appears we are heading there like zombies without thinking. Many people know its wrong but are afraid to suggest a change for fear it will be cancelled. The pro transfer LRT crowd is still beating the drum for the Transit City option, and that maintains the fear to retain the 1 stop SSE.

True. We should be buying a couple dozen homes along McCowan to make it happen. There's a slowly closing window to make an Old Mill-type station (above grade) or York Mills-type station (partially submarine) a reality.

And ultimately Line 3's E-W portion north of Ellesmere can always be cannibalized for something like a Sheppard extension. So even with SSE, Line 3 may not be abandoned entirely. Somewhat related, but I wonder what the monetary value of the line is (property, ROW, infrastructure). Or if the Prov will be paying the City when we cede the N-S corridor for GO expansion.

 

[OneCity]

I don't know about these groups 'making matters worse'. They're opening a dialogue, which may very well result in things like lower per km costs, addition of a Lawrence station, and maybe even bringing the line to Sheppard. Who knows. But I'd rather hear a variety of voices than one drum-banger speaking on behalf of 3/4 million, or a few bureaucrats and politicians calling the shots. It's silence that arguably gave us the oddball SSE we have now (i.e unrealistic and fishy sky-high cost, line cut short, no inline stations)..

Driving by the Lawrence RT stop today I was reminded that the majority of Scarborough residents likely don't even know were this stop exists. There is minimal (if any) signage off Lawrence and the stop is completely buried out of sight. A similar problem ive always had with most of Scarborough transit stops, but this one is right out of sight and out of mind. Who would build transit like this in any era and expect it to succeed?

Just to shed light how insignificant the TTC Riders poll and PR campaign was:

630,000 residents in Scarborough
7,500 riders on the Lawrence RT stop

That is 1.2% of the population of Scarborough.

And I think they polled 200 of that 7,500(many of whom clearly don't read the newspaper or watch local news). Im not saying these few people that use the station(s) don't have reason to be upset. First as far as Lawrence goes they are still getting a solid form of transit, second the 7 stop debate has been had, certainly it has been given multiple chances already, and what i'm saying is this is so irrelevant in how Scarborough will vote as a whole. There is the narrative these "advocates" and opposition are hoping to create is that Scarborough people are "waking up". But this is so very far from reality IMO and pushing this transfer plan with zero changes to what has been rejected is truly a complete waste of time for them and everyone else. Ellesmere and Midland are even more insignificant in the greater scheme and residents outside these areas care more about SCC's future and moving forward. When I say this is a vocal minority its an understatement as for as Scarborough goes and our democratically elected officials more accurately reflect this.

Serious Challenge: If you have a friend or family member than doesn't read UT or care too deeply about public transit. Ask them to go for a drive on Lawrence Ave E and see if they notice there is a "rapid transit" stop on Lawrence. Ill be very impressed.


The majority of residents have already heard their spiel over and over and over. Anyone who reads Metrolands Scarborough Mirror has had their fill on transfer LRT promotion for 15 years. Not trying to be rude to this cause at all, but its already had its day. Im just trying to shed light on how far fetched the idea that this transfer LRT plan has any credence or realistic support. This type of misrepresented reporting can make it seem like the old plan has realistic support and a chance of coming back to outsiders looking in, but its this type of reporting which talks over what most are people prefer that's a big part of what's fuelling the likes of the Ford vote. They also like to tap into the apathy and their is obviously enough voters to support this ilk of Politician right now. Not a great Political strategy to do the same thing over and over in this climate. It's just so that from reality. Whether people in Scarborough agree with the current subway plan or not the debate is not being allowed to move forward from the old transfer LRT plan by the opposition. At this stage atleast come up with a better LRT plan than what was rejected multiple times before if you want overall residents to support the cause.

Whether we agree to disagree on the support or politics is completely OK. Feel free to debate but we'll soon get the answer again anyway. I still request for fun you to take the challenge Lawrence RT challenge. Even do it yourself as it truly gets me every time I drive by and think "hey I just passed a transit stop, and probably im the only one on the road at the time that even knew". A true head scratcher in transit design and yet one of many reasons the RT was an epic fail in Scarborough

 

[coopEng]

Driving by the Lawrence RT stop today I was reminded that the majority of Scarborough residents likely don't even know were this stop exists. There is minimal (if any) signage off Lawrence and the stop is completely buried out of sight. A similar problem ive always had with most of Scarborough transit stops, but this one is right out of sight and out of mind. Who would build transit like this in any era and expect it to succeed?

Just to shed light how insignificant the TTC Riders poll and PR campaign was:

630,000 residents in Scarborough
7,500 riders on the Lawrence RT stop

That is 1.2% of the population of Scarborough.

And I think they polled 200 of that 7,500(many of whom clearly don't read the newspaper or watch local news). Im not saying these few people that use the station(s) don't have reason to be upset. First as far as Lawrence goes they are still getting a solid form of transit, second the 7 stop debate has been had, certainly it has been given multiple chances already, and what i'm saying is this is so irrelevant in how Scarborough will vote as a whole. There is the narrative these "advocates" and opposition are hoping to create is that Scarborough people are "waking up". But this is so very far from reality IMO and pushing this transfer plan with zero changes to what has been rejected is truly a complete waste of time for them and everyone else. Ellesmere and Midland are even more insignificant in the greater scheme and residents outside these areas care more about SCC's future and moving forward. When I say this is a vocal minority its an understatement as for as Scarborough goes and our democratically elected officials more accurately reflect this.

Serious Challenge: If you have a friend or family member than doesn't read UT or care too deeply about public transit. Ask them to go for a drive on Lawrence Ave E and see if they notice there is a "rapid transit" stop on Lawrence. Ill be very impressed.


The majority of residents have already heard their spiel over and over and over. Anyone who reads Metrolands Scarborough Mirror has had their fill on transfer LRT promotion for 15 years. Not trying to be rude to this cause at all, but its already had its day. Im just trying to shed light on how far fetched the idea that this transfer LRT plan has any credence or realistic support. This type of misrepresented reporting can make it seem like the old plan has realistic support and a chance of coming back to outsiders looking in, but its this type of reporting which talks over what most are people prefer that's a big part of what's fuelling the likes of the Ford vote. They also like to tap into the apathy and their is obviously enough voters to support this ilk of Politician right now. Not a great Political strategy to do the same thing over and over in this climate. It's just so that from reality. Whether people in Scarborough agree with the current subway plan or not the debate is not being allowed to move forward from the old transfer LRT plan by the opposition. At this stage atleast come up with a better LRT plan than what was rejected multiple times before if you want overall residents to support the cause.

Whether we agree to disagree on the support or politics is completely OK. Feel free to debate but we'll soon get the answer again anyway. I still request for fun you to take the challenge Lawrence RT challenge. Even do it yourself as it truly gets me every time I drive by and think "hey I just passed a transit stop, and probably im the only one on the road at the time that even knew". A true head scratcher in transit design and yet one of many reasons the RT was an epic fail in Scarborough

Why not consider that for the majority of the system - really any of the underground subway stops would be the same thing. If you drive along Bloor or Danforth you will not see a stop. Not knowing a if stop is there is more a symptom of lack of demand than it being a bad stop. It's ironic that you refer to the Lawrence East stop as being buried for all the talk about elevated RT in Scarborough. I'm not saying this to support LRT over subway - but the idea that people don't know there is a stop isn't a real persuasive argument to me.

 

[OneCity]

Why not consider that for8 the majority of the system - really any of the underground subway stops would be the same thing. If you drive along Bloor or Danforth you will not see a stop. Not knowing a if stop is there is more a symptom of lack of demand than it being a bad stop. It's ironic that you refer to the Lawrence East stop as being buried for all the talk about elevated RT in Scarborough. I'm not saying this to support LRT over subway - but the idea that people don't know there is a stop isn't a real persuasive argument to me.

While visibilty may be poor on Danforth stops they are all accessible from the street, this RT stop is just pathetic on both fronts and should be a lesson in how not to build transit

Its not a main argument of what to build but its to shed light on how poorly planned transit was built in the past and how Insignificant the support for the transfer LRT at this stop is in the bigger picture as i doesn't reflects even 1% of Scarborough but continues to get a ton of publicity. Again they are not providing anything new and these Lawrence residents will have some form of good transit.

 

[syn]

While visibilty may be poor on Danforth stops they are all accessible from the street, this RT stop is just pathetic on both fronts and should be a lesson in how not to build transit

Its not a main argument of what to build but its to shed light on how poorly planned transit was built in the past and how Insignificant the support for the transfer LRT at this stop is in the bigger picture as i doesn't reflects even 1% of Scarborough but continues to get a ton of publicity. Again they are not providing anything new and these Lawrence residents will have some form of good transit.

It doesn't?

Based on what, exactly?

What is the 'good transit' these residents will be getting?

Serious Challenge: If you have a friend or family member than doesn't read UT or care too deeply about public transit. Ask them to go for a drive on Lawrence Ave E and see if they notice there is a "rapid transit" stop on Lawrence. Ill be very impressed.

Lawrence station is responsible for about 21% of the ridership on the RT - kind of silly to suggest only those who care about transit are aware of it.