Debate on the merits of the Scarborough Subway Extension

[OneCity]

Ok, but your "serious challenge" said to drive on Lawrence and see if a station is visible from an overpass. You said it's not, that it's "out of sight out of mind", and concluded that any station there wouldn't succeed. But in the same post you went on to say how a SmrtTrack station would be successful. Using your own metrics tho it wouldn't matter whether it's a station for Line 3, Line 2 on the same corridor, ST, or Stouff GO - all would be in the same location and thus all unsuccessful according to your challenge.

From what I can tell he doesn't even support a SSE station at Lawrence/McCowan because it stops progress or something. I'm lukewarm to the idea of abandoning Line 3 in favour of SSE, and even I support one. He says we'll add one at a later date (we won't since that's not the plan), and that SmrtTrack's Lawrence East station will be successful (but simultaneously won't be because it's apparently "out of sight out of mind").

Not what I was implying. I just meant it was a terrible design. Any good stop location design should be visible, pedestrian friendly, then bus/car friendly give n the area. The location is not optimal in that its hard to make pedestrian friendly. But it can atleast be improved with some better signage and as I mentioned a parking garage if it GO/RER because that's what would get people out of their cars.

The point was it's very lackluster and a very poor design and while you can accept some things that make you scratch your head, the RT has too many and in the overall landscape too few use and are proud of it. Even quite a few that do use it around SCC do support it or the LRT. I think its sad we are seeing a debate for the transfer LRT vs. a one stop subway. Im not excited about either. But like I said, ill vote and hope they improve Lawrence with the new Smarttrack station and provide a better connection to SCC. We could have don't better with both LRT or Subway technology than these two plans.

 

[Towered]

I love that there is a grassroots citizen movement to sink this pointless, wasteful extension that's gaining momentum, resulting in ever increasing media and political pressure.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

I love that there is a grassroots citizen movement to sink this pointless, wasteful extension that's gaining momentum, resulting in ever increasing media and political pressure.

What movement?

 

[sixrings]

What movement?

. The One City movement.

 

[syn]

What movement?

https://scarboroughtransitaction.ca/

 

[syn]

I'm sure we're all aware of NYC Station. But Lawrence East is a uniquely challenging station. It would lie adjacent to a creek and an active hospital, whose operations we cannot disrupt. Further, the SSE's two tracks are incased in a very deep single-bore tunnel, which I suspect would pose an obstacle compared to the traditional double-bore. With these challenges in mind, it might very well be "impossible" to add a station here at a later date, which is why I'd like some clarification on the TTC's comments regarding the feasibility of adding a station here at some point in the future.

http://urbantoronto.ca/news/2017/05/scarborough-residents-frustrated-subway-plans

"Logan and other staff told the audience that rocky terrain and the general topography of the area requires stations along the extended subway line to be much deeper than other TTC stations. That means more cost for longer escalators, elevators and stairways and more powerful ventilation systems, among other structural elements. The station at Lawrence would have to be particularly deep, so that the line could pass under the Highland Creek valley, just north of the station site. As it is, according to TTC engineer, Greg Thompson, the new Scarborough Centre Station would be "the deepest station we've ever built".

One resident wondered whether the TTC could "rough-in" a station box for a future station at Lawrence, similar to what it did on the Yonge line at North York Centre Station. Thompson explained that, because the TTC built that part of the Yonge line using the cut-and-cover method instead of tunneling, engineers could add the new station without disrupting service along the line. To add a station at Lawrence afterwards, he said, would require shutting down the line during the entire construction process, which might be as long as two years. Contractors would have to pierce the tunnel wall to build an extra station.


North York Councillor David Shiner, despite De Baermaker's contention that North Yorkers opposed the Scarborough subway, had made a motion at the March 28 City Council meeting to support a Lawrence station. During that meeting, when councillors considered the Scarborough subway plan, he moved that Council approve adding a "roughed-in" station at Lawrence. Council rejected Shiner's motion when it learned that the cost of just studying the shell station would be more than $1 million.


Members of advocacy groups like TTC Riders and Scarborough Transit Action and individuals, too, also asked why the City was proceeding with a subway, when, according to them, a network of light rail transit lines would serve more riders at less cost. One woman wondered why staff did not compare the cost of building a subway with the cost of an LRT along the current Line 3 Scarborough route. Logan again pointed out that staff can only follow Council's directives."

 

[Rainforest]

Gee, I think something's wrong with your assumption that population = appropriateness for rapid transit. Ever heard of population density? That's what really matters.

See the attached image.

Notice the dearth of orange and red in Scarborough? That's the real reason why subways aren't warranted there.

And if you actually looked at the map attached to your sarcastic post, you would find that density around the Sheppard West (former Downsview) station on the Spadina line is lower than in most parts of Scarborough.

Overall, North York isn't much more dense than Scarborough. There is a very dense area around the north end of Yonge subway; nobody questions the vitality of Yonge subway, but it can't be used to justify the second line ito North York if we try to follow your logic.

Density pattern around the west end of BD line is pretty much similar to Scarborough, too.

 

[Rainforest]

Even if you wanted to make that assumption, Scarborough voters were partial to a plan that would either a) replace the RT with a subway for free (2010) or 32km of subway for $9 billion (2015). No one 'voted' for the current plan.

A poll last December (2016) had more Scarborough residents supporting an LRT:

https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/20...nts-back-lrt-but-only-slightly-poll-says.html

A public consultation in May did not go well for the city:

https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/20...subway-plan-gives-them-just-one-new-stop.html

I also find it odd that we're supposed to ignore the rest of the city in favour of whatever Scarborough supposedly wants.

The entitlement is astounding.

There is no entitlement in Scarborough. They are located further than other inner suburbs from the city core, and their transit situation is worse than in other areas.

What you are trying to paint as "entitlement", is a natural and justifiable desire to reduce (not even eliminate) that gap.

 

[Rainforest]

I love that there is a grassroots citizen movement to sink this pointless, wasteful extension that's gaining momentum, resulting in ever increasing media and political pressure.

The real grassroot opponents to SSE do exist, but their numbers are very small. There is no evidence they are gaining any momentum; that's entirely your wishful thinking.

That said, they are more than welcome to field their candidates in the 2018 municipal elections. Let's see how many votes they will collect.

 

[sixrings]

FYI Downsview has a airport and height restrictions

And if you actually looked at the map attached to your sarcastic post, you would find that density around the Sheppard West (former Downsview) station on the Spadina line is lower than in most parts of Scarborough.

Overall, North York isn't much more dense than Scarborough. There is a very dense area around the north end of Yonge subway; nobody questions the vitality of Yonge subway, but it can't be used to justify the second line ito North York if we try to follow your logic.

Density pattern around the west end of BD line is pretty much similar to Scarborough, too.

 

[sixrings]

FYI the second line (spadina subway) was built to relieve yonge. It wasn't built because the area was dense enough to support it. Are you going to argue that this scarborough extension is going to relieve yonge better than a "relief line."

And if you actually looked at the map attached to your sarcastic post, you would find that density around the Sheppard West (former Downsview) station on the Spadina line is lower than in most parts of Scarborough.

Overall, North York isn't much more dense than Scarborough. There is a very dense area around the north end of Yonge subway; nobody questions the vitality of Yonge subway, but it can't be used to justify the second line ito North York if we try to follow your logic.

Density pattern around the west end of BD line is pretty much similar to Scarborough, too.

 

[sixrings]

There is no entitlement in Scarborough. They are located further than other inner suburbs from the city core, and their transit situation is worse than in other areas.

What you are trying to paint as "entitlement", is a natural and justifiable desire to reduce (not even eliminate) that gap.

Justifiable expansion at the expense of other areas which have transit needs and the density to support it. No entitlement in monopolizing the few dollars we have at all.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

And if you actually looked at the map attached to your sarcastic post, you would find that density around the Sheppard West (former Downsview) station on the Spadina line is lower than in most parts of Scarborough.

Overall, North York isn't much more dense than Scarborough. There is a very dense area around the north end of Yonge subway; nobody questions the vitality of Yonge subway, but it can't be used to justify the second line ito North York if we try to follow your logic.

Density pattern around the west end of BD line is pretty much similar to Scarborough, too.

Arguments over density are completely misguided, when virtually all of suburban subway demand comes from bus transfers.

The Relief Line will be busier than Line 2, and nearly as busy as Line 1, despite it travelling through some of the least dense parts of the city!

 

[Leo_Chan]

Arguments over density are completely misguided, when virtually all of suburban subway demand comes from bus transfers.

The Relief Line will be busier than Line 2, and nearly as busy as Line 1, despite it travelling through some of the least dense parts of the city!

Not doubting, but do you mean Relief Line South or Relief Line North + South?

 

[pstogios]

And if you actually looked at the map attached to your sarcastic post, you would find that density around the Sheppard West (former Downsview) station on the Spadina line is lower than in most parts of Scarborough.

Overall, North York isn't much more dense than Scarborough. There is a very dense area around the north end of Yonge subway; nobody questions the vitality of Yonge subway, but it can't be used to justify the second line ito North York if we try to follow your logic.

You've beautifully explained why the TYSSE is another waste of limited transit dollars. So let's keep wasting money on lines to areas without the density to warrant them. Right. /sarcasm

Guess why the TYSSE was built? Politics. MPP Greg Sorbara wanted a subway line to his riding.

Guess why the SSE will be built? Politics. This time to feed Tory's mayoral ambitions.