News   Nov 25, 2024
Highwire Act
 154     0 
News   Nov 22, 2024
National Housing Day: City of Toronto and Riverdale Co-op Open Affordable Homes
 821     1 
News   Nov 22, 2024
Bauhaus Condos Rising in Toronto's Old Town
 1.4K     6 

Debate on the merits of the Scarborough Subway Extension

OneCity will never be happy unless his transfer is eliminated. If this extension is built he will then travel out of his scarborough town center utopia only to find out that he must transfer at yonge and bloor to get downtown. He will then start a new campaign about the war on danforth riders. To be honest i am tempted to build that transit dream if it fulfilled my dream of getting OneCity to union station for his very time and to transfer to a nice one way amtrak train where he can reside with his own close minded people.
 
I never worry about transfers anymore. When I get off at Spadina I have TTC employees carry me to the streetcar. I guess it's not a true transfer free solution, but it's as close as we oppressed downtown residents can get.
 
sixrings said:
The one stop extension is vote buying. Which is why the SRT Murray alignment was never going to happen as well. That would have shut down the rt for years and scarborough would have gone nuts even if it was the cheaper option. Funny how despite people allegedly hating the SRT they knew people would dislike shuttle busses even more. Kind of makes me think that the people would have liked the lrt if it would have been built as well as we are underestimating how unimpressed the general public would be with brt.
Click to expand...

The Murray SRT alignment makes far more sense if the McCowan alignment doesn't permit intermediate stops at Brimley-Eglinton and McCowan-Lawrence. That way we could at least future proof an elevated subway towards Malvern and retain the investment of the existing Lawrence East (and Ellesmere?) stops.
 
OneCity said:
To me its the insistence on a transfer laden plan is what has been so unrealistic for years now. Not you but some people here are so politically polarized they get severley upset and personally attack whenever I point out the obvious that these LRT lines are never going to be built because they are poorly integrated to what exists and have been called out for this poor integration politically. Meaning to.a large extent residents actually got a bit of a voice on the topic which also happened to be a major campaign item two elections in a row.

The SSE in its current state may be contentious within Scarborough right now but the transfer LRT is not wanted by the greater majority. That's the side you'll never hear much of. Scarborough voices will continue to get talked over,issues not disscused properly and contradict the bias narratives in this City's extensive "Left" media. (Yep cue the Trump, Ford insults) Just my opinion formed from moving from Downtown to Scarborough.

We are now building a one stop extension in the most expensive fashion as no alternatives were even taken seriously by the Politcal opposition or they were just upset the apple cart got tuned over, and Tory took advantage. Same nonsense is going to happen on Sheppard as the lack of attention to connectivity in the Sheppard LRT is so blatantly obvious to most of those who live here and moreso those who would used it regularly. It's ripe for political gain should the stub stay "as is" Those that don't live near here could obviously care less about it. Again there will likely be another LRT promotion in the "Left" media with little voice given to the majority Scarborough residents concerns. Still disappoints me they never even attempt to move to a discussion regarding the transfer points after all this time, would have helped change the discussion. But thats thier politics which doesn't align with reality.

I agree your opinions are as valid as anyones, im happy to keep debating the details respectively whether we agree to disagree or not. Atleast you never have to worry about being attacked personally to say what you'd like to say on this topic.
Click to expand...

In your mind, how much is too much to spend on eliminating a transfer?

$5 billion?

$10 billion?

$20 billion?

Heck, why don't we hobble the capital budgets for transit building of the entire rest of the "One City" that you claim to be interested in unifying? Because that's the trajectory of the ballooning budget of the SSE boondoggle.

When will you be happy?

By the way, there are literally HUNDREDS of transfer points across the TTC and TENS OF THOUSANDS of riders execute them EVERY DAY and the only place we hear bitching and complaining about "oh my god, my fragile ego can't handle a single transfer, therefore the media and downtown and everyone HATES US" is in.... Scarborough.
 
Last edited:
sixrings said:
OneCity will never be happy unless his transfer is eliminated. If this extension is built he will then travel out of his scarborough town center utopia only to find out that he must transfer at yonge and bloor to get downtown. He will then start a new campaign about the war on danforth riders. To be honest i am tempted to build that transit dream if it fulfilled my dream of getting OneCity to union station for his very time and to transfer to a nice one way amtrak train where he can reside with his own close minded people.
Click to expand...

PERFECTLY SAID!
 
Hopkins123 said:
The Murray SRT alignment makes far more sense if the McCowan alignment doesn't permit intermediate stops at Brimley-Eglinton and McCowan-Lawrence. That way we could at least future proof an elevated subway towards Malvern and retain the investment of the existing Lawrence East (and Ellesmere?) stops.
Click to expand...

It was the best compromise at the time and should have been built that way. The McCowan corridor is slightly better for coverage into central Scarborough, but if we are not adding any intermediate stops due to the geological condition then it's useless and should have been moved back to the RT to allow for a better connection into Malvern (Markham-Milner area) and stops added in between.

Its likely all too late for any real financial benefit to be achieved by back tracking on the corridor. Re-design delays, inflation, longer construction period, RT will need to be shutdown and as long as Tory holds power Smarttrack will interfere and take priory in that rail space. Not my preference but I have no use in seeing transfers before SCC when implementing a substantial capital upgrade.

If the goal was to save money than an upgrade to the Skytrain and extension had far more merit. The subway on the RT corridor was always a significant improvement over the RT if were spending larger capital. For this line the LRT here was poor value with little improvement aside from ridership capacity and it was ripe to be called out. Miller screwed up, Ford took advantage of the support and called it out, Tory then took advantage of the support along with 99% of Scarborough elected officials when given the option and here we are. The old LRT plan was being held in a much higher regard by the Opposition then it should have been over the last decade. Likely too late now for any compromise and a couple of those may have been already rejected.
 
Last edited:
pretty sure onecity was against the srt because of the corridor being far away from people. Even argued that of course no one used the system because you cant even see lawrence station from lawrence. Now that his fantasy subway is getting no stops he wants to revert to the srt corridor. flip flop flip flop flip flop flip flop
 
sixrings said:
pretty sure onecity was against the srt because of the corridor being far away from people. Even argued that of course no one used the system because you cant even see lawrence station from lawrence. Now that his fantasy subway is getting no stops he wants to revert to the srt corridor. flip flop flip flop flip flop flip flop
Click to expand...

Sadly, you missed very basic logic here. Let's try one more time:

- The three-stop McCowan subway plan would have two stations, in addition to STC, in places where they would improve the connectivity: Lawrence East and Sheppard / McCowan. Therefore, that plan was better than the SRT corridor alignment.

- If the McCowan subway is reduced to one stop, than the said advantage is lost. The STC station would be present on any alignment. Therefore, the SRT corridor becomes either a better option (if cheaper), or equally ranked option (if same price), even though its stations locations aren't great.
 
Rainforest said:
- If the McCowan subway is reduced to one stop, than the said advantage is lost. The STC station would be present on any alignment. Therefore, the SRT corridor becomes either a better option (if cheaper), or equally ranked option (if same price), even though its stations locations aren't great.
Click to expand...

I’d say higher ranked if the same price, because we’d be getting more stations for the money.
 
Sadly you missed my very basic point. Let's try one more time: it was onecity/coffey1 who was against the murrey corridor up until recently Hence flip flop flip flop flip flop. Also one city always uses the we can't flip flop back to lrt argument because we have finally agreed on a subway and flip flopping just creates delays and added costs. I guess you are allowed to flip flop on some things like alignment if it fits your narrative.
Rainforest said:
Sadly, you missed very basic logic here. Let's try one more time:

- The three-stop McCowan subway plan would have two stations, in addition to STC, in places where they would improve the connectivity: Lawrence East and Sheppard / McCowan. Therefore, that plan was better than the SRT corridor alignment.

- If the McCowan subway is reduced to one stop, than the said advantage is lost. The STC station would be present on any alignment. Therefore, the SRT corridor becomes either a better option (if cheaper), or equally ranked option (if same price), even though its stations locations aren't great.
Click to expand...
 
sixrings said:
Sadly you missed my very basic point. Let's try one more time: it was onecity/coffey1 who was against the murrey corridor up until recently Hence flip flop flip flop flip flop. Also one city always uses the we can't flip flop back to lrt argument because we have finally agreed on a subway and flip flopping just creates delays and added costs. I guess you are allowed to flip flop on some things like alignment if it fits your narrative.
Click to expand...

You found a contradiction where none actually exists. Noone, including OneCity, is against subway being moved in the SRT (aka "Murray") corridor. Although such a change would cause some technical issues (the need to close SRT and replace with buses for a few years), and some of the politicians might complain, the majority of local public will likely accept it if a lot of money can be saved and they get their subway at the end.

However if the city moved back to the SLRT plan, then in addition to the above technical issue, there would be a lot of political infighting. So, there is a good reason to be against such a change.
 
Rainforest said:
You found a contradiction where none actually exists. Noone, including OneCity, is against subway being moved in the SRT (aka "Murray") corridor. Although such a change would cause some technical issues (the need to close SRT and replace with buses for a few years), and some of the politicians might complain, the majority of local public will likely accept it if a lot of money can be saved and they get their subway at the end.

However if the city moved back to the SLRT plan, then in addition to the above technical issue, there would be a lot of political infighting. So, there is a good reason to be against such a change.
Click to expand...
One city was originally against the SRT alignment and anything else is revisionist history
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top