Debate on the merits of the Scarborough Subway Extension

[TheTigerMaster]

So what if the bus commute is slightly longer? In most cases it'll be shorter.

What gives you the impression that in most cases the bus trip will be shorter?

 

[Hopkins123]

What gives you the impression that in most cases the bus trip will be shorter?

Because, think about it, most routes already terminate at either Kennedy or Scarborough Town Centre. Diverting more routes like the planned Sheppard and Ellesmere branches into SCC, for instance, means commuters from the east end of Scarborough are getting access to the subway far sooner than continuing across to the SRT corridor (or farther afield the Don Mills or Yonge corridors).

McCowan is more beneficial a transit spine to most of Scarborough (it's the Yonge Street of Scarborough!) than the SRT/Kennedy corridor. If only planners had the sense to situate a Lawrence East station south of Lawrence as not to have to build the station super-deep to cross Highland Creek, then the last major flaw in the current plan would be resolved.

 

[syn]

I never said these affected groups can't use an elevator. The subway option will also involve elevators obviously. What I'm saying though is what you are promoting will involve longer walking times to transfer between the respective modes of transit. How is that helping people, when for marginally higher cost we can invest in eliminating those transfers? And most transit trips don't end in Scarborough, less than half do:

Seems like a sizable chunk are in fact going to the areas surrounding the YUS Line.

Again, is this sarcasm?

So what if people have to walk?!

Taking transfers and walking are part of the transit experience.

Nearly half of all transit trips beginning in Scarborough end in Scarborough.

"Elderly women with canes and mothers with strollers and the physically disabled you're forcing to withstand all these transfers just to save a billion bucks!"

How many of those elderly women with canes and physically disabled are going downtown or to North York every single day??!

I'd suggest those residents would be much better served with a solution that makes traveling around Scarborough easier. Accessible Rapid Transit for everyone, that's actually better value and can be expanded in the future.

In case you haven't looked at that map carefully, the heaviest concentration of trips are around the current RT corridor. Anyone trying to make trips in that area once the RT is gone will have reduced accessibility.

I'm sure the elderly ladies of Scarborough and physically disabled won't like that at all.

Neither will the rest of Toronto, who will have to subsidize this insanity for years to come.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Because, think about it, most routes already terminate at either Kennedy or Scarborough Town Centre. Diverting more routes like the planned Sheppard and Ellesmere branches into SCC, for instance, means commuters from the east end of Scarborough are getting access to the subway far sooner than continuing across to the SRT corridor (or farther afield the Don Mills or Yonge corridors).

Ryerson University analyzed this and disagreed. Bus trips to access the SSE will increase by an average of 4 minutes, versus the existing SRT

They determined the average travel time by bus to the closest transit stop would be 20.5 minutes with the seven-stop LRT, 23.7 minutes with the existing SRT, and 27.3 minutes with the one-stop subway — meaning the average time spent on the bus with the subway option would be 6.8 minutes longer than with the LRT.
​

McCowan is more beneficial a transit spine to most of Scarborough (it's the Yonge Street of Scarborough!)

Seriously? How? McCowan is lined with single family dwellings its entire length. If there's any "Yonge Street of Scarborough", its Eglinton.

 

[syn]

Do you understand math and statistics, in particular the difference between a systematic sampling error, and the margin of error that is normally caused by the limited sample size?

Assume you have a town with 100,000 people, 32% of them like basketball and 44% like baseball. When you poll 500 people, you might find that 34% of those polled like basketball, and 41% like baseball. You will have a margin of error equal to 2 or 3 or 4 points. You could get a smaller error by polling more people, but for many purposes, your results are already good enough.

Now if you conduct your poll on a day of a major baseball game, you might get only 15% responses in favor of baseball. That's because many baseball fans will be out watching the game, or glued to the screens and not taking phone calls. That would be a systematic sampling error. The error wouldn't get any smaller if you polled more people on the same day, and it wouldn't be reflected in the margin of error.

Anyway, I said that the poll results have to be taken with a grain of salt; never said that they all should be ignored.

Yes, do you?

If you understand this then you'll understand how silly it is to suggest election results indicate support for one mode of transit over another.

Cherry picking is selecting one group of data that suites you most, and ignoring the rest. That's exactly what you are doing when you refer to the polls only and ignore results of multiple election campaigns.

Just because you call the polls far more reliable, they don't actually become far more reliable.

But they are.

And no data is being cherry picked.

What data is there that actually indicates this is a good idea?

All the ridership data, density and population projections indicate that this is a waste of money.

The majority of Torontoians are fine with the subway plan.

Nope.

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

"In the rest of Toronto only 28 per cent approved of the single stop underground project, while 60 per cent disapproved."

In your imagination.


During the 2010 election campaign, I heard / read a lot of noises about taxes from the Ford's side, and much less about transit. Therefore I decided to make it a bit easier for you, and not insist on including the 2010 election results in the body of evidence that the electorate tends to support pro-subway candidates.

But if you want them included, no problem. They fit into the trend.


No it's not fair to say what you said.

First of all, homophobia and bigotry were RoFo's personal failings, not elements of his election platform. Secondly, the residents who voted for him, could not possibly expect to benefit from the said features of the mayor. Unlike the subway, that they definitely hoped to benefit from (you are free to believe or not whether they will actually benefit).

It is fair to say that they chose to overlook RoFo's personal failings, in the hope that he will deliver them benefits of another nature. Whether that was a smart choice, is a matter of another debate that isn't relevant for a transit thread.

You are completely contradicting yourself - the 2010 election apparently wasn't about transit because you don't want it to be, but 2015 was even though Doug Ford dominated Scarborough simply by rehashing his brother's 2010 plan.

And yes, the same 'logic' you're applying to make blanket statements about transit support can certainly be applied to make blanket statements about Scarborough's support for bigotry, homophobia, etc.

His stance on such issues were known well before the election, and his disdain for the LGBTQ community throughout his time in office was fairly well supported among his base.

 

[syn]

Why won't they run full speed?

I may have confused speed with frequency. I believe frequency will be lower from SSE to Kennedy until there's enough ridership to support it (which could be many, many years), with some trains heading back west at Kennedy station.

That itself will result in longer travel times.

The RT is fantastic as it is - one must be quite out of touch to think Kennedy to STC in 10 minutes with stops in between is 'bad'.

 

[Rainforest]

Yes, do you?

If you understand this then you'll understand how silly it is to suggest election results indicate support for one mode of transit over another.

Yeah, it is very silly to disregard the election results.

But they are.

And no data is being cherry picked.

What data is there that actually indicates this is a good idea?

All the ridership data, density and population projections indicate that this is a waste of money.

Read this thread again, and you will learn why this is a good idea.

Elected representatives of the voters agreed that it is a good idea, and decided to build. If you don't like it, tough luck.

Nope.

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

"In the rest of Toronto only 28 per cent approved of the single stop underground project, while 60 per cent disapproved."

Nope.

They are content enough not to elect opponents of SSE.

You are completely contradicting yourself - the 2010 election apparently wasn't about transit because you don't want it to be, but 2015 was even though Doug Ford dominated Scarborough simply by rehashing his brother's 2010 plan.

You are completely contradicting yourself - you want to dismiss all election results when they don't suit you, and yet now you complain that 2010 results should be about transit.

And either way, your case completely falls apart.

And yes, the same 'logic' you're applying to make blanket statements about transit support can certainly be applied to make blanket statements about Scarborough's support for bigotry, homophobia, etc.

His stance on such issues were known well before the election, and his disdain for the LGBTQ community throughout his time in office was fairly well supported among his base.

Your logic doesn't add up at all.

 

[Rainforest]

We should have a custom-ordered LRT vehicle. If Bombardier doesn't want to build it to our specifications, then I am sure Siemens or some other company would be more than happy too. No absolute need to keep the same rolling stock for every LRT line, especially since it is unlikely Sheppard will connect to any, minus possibly with Crosstown East.

The vehicle order shouldn't be a problem at all. I believe all major manufacturers still have off-the-shelf high-floor models.

The need to have a line-specific rolling stock is a bit of a disadvantage, but it can be mitigated in a number of ways.

Eventually there may be light rail lines on Vic Park, McCowan (north, into Markham), a line in the STC - Progress campus - Sheppard - Malvern corridor, and Eglinton East as you said. Most likely all of them will be low-floor, as those are cheaper to build when the accessibility requirements are taken into account.

If the high-floor and low-floor vehicles use same track gauge and same voltage, then they should be able to use each other's tracks for non-revenue trips, for example to access the yard.

If they come from the same manufacturer, then they might have some common parts and share same workshops.

Dual-height stops can be built as well (example: common section of tram lines #5 and #51 in Amsterdam). However, such stops will be more expensive and will take more space, therefore they should be limited to short common sections if/when necessary.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

I may have confused speed with frequency. I believe frequency will be lower from SSE to Kennedy until there's enough ridership to support it (which could be many, many years), with some trains heading back west at Kennedy station.

That itself will result in longer travel times.

The RT is fantastic as it is - one must be quite out of touch to think Kennedy to STC in 10 minutes with stops in between is 'bad'.

Years ago, back when the SSE was three stops with anticipated demand of 14,000 pphpd, TTC said only 50% of Line 2 trains would service Scarborough Town Centre. Now with only one stop on the extension, and demand of only 7,000 pphpd, they've claimed they'll be sending all trains to Scarborough Centre. The reasons for this change are not entirely clear to me (why run more trains when you anticipate demand to be lower?)

In any case, the TTC's service plans for individual routes change every few months. They're in no way bound to provide a certain level of service, and we probably won't know for sure what service on the extension will look like until a few months before it opens.

 

[Rainforest]

Years ago, back when the SSE was three stops with anticipated demand of 14,000 pphpd, TTC said only 50% of Line 2 trains would service Scarborough Town Centre. Now with only one stop on the extension, and demand of only 7,000 pphpd, they've claimed they'll be sending all trains to Scarborough Centre. The reasons for this change are not entirely clear to me (why run more trains when you anticipate demand to be lower?)

Maybe they think that the trains will turn around much faster with a one-stop extension, than they would with a 3-stop extension and a longer route. Therefore, no point to go for a more complicated scheduling.

But anyway, I see nothing wrong in turning back every 2-nd train at Kennedy, or even at Warden, during the rush hours. That would balance the load more evenly along the line. Off-peak, the trains are less frequent, and would run the whole length.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Maybe they think that the trains will turn around much faster with a one-stop extension, than they would with a 3-stop extension and a longer route. Therefore, no point to go for a more complicated scheduling.

That makes sense. The 3-stop plan required a significant number additional of trains to operate, so turning back 50% reduces capital costs.

 

[syn]

Years ago, back when the SSE was three stops with anticipated demand of 14,000 pphpd, TTC said only 50% of Line 2 trains would service Scarborough Town Centre. Now with only one stop on the extension, and demand of only 7,000 pphpd, they've claimed they'll be sending all trains to Scarborough Centre. The reasons for this change are not entirely clear to me (why run more trains when you anticipate demand to be lower?)

In any case, the TTC's service plans for individual routes change every few months. They're in no way bound to provide a certain level of service, and we probably won't know for sure what service on the extension will look like until a few months before it opens.

Agreed.

It wouldn't surprise me in the least to see reduced service.

I'd hope they manage the line as efficiently as possible - the cost to subsidize it's operation will drive the taxpayer cost well past $5 billion in the grand scheme of things.

 

[OneCity]

Seriously? How? McCowan is lined with single family dwellings its entire length. If there's any "Yonge Street of Scarborough", its Eglinton.

Eglinton is closer in the aspect that its zoned commercial most of the way thru and cuts fairly central. As for a North/South line McCowan or (Danforth/McCowan) is the most central and has some key developable intersections that made sense if we were adding stops and Eglinton/Danforth and the already (east/west) dense surroundings and hospital at Lawrence, and obviously the City Centre. From top to bottom Markham rd is the most developable N-S road with high/low rise residential and commercial mix from Kingston Rd to Finch.

 

[syn]

Ryerson University analyzed this and disagreed. Bus trips to access the SSE will increase by an average of 4 minutes, versus the existing SRT

They determined the average travel time by bus to the closest transit stop would be 20.5 minutes with the seven-stop LRT, 23.7 minutes with the existing SRT, and 27.3 minutes with the one-stop subway — meaning the average time spent on the bus with the subway option would be 6.8 minutes longer than with the LRT.​

​

That's the average time too. It could be a lot longer for some riders.

Seriously? How? McCowan is lined with single family dwellings its entire length. If there's any "Yonge Street of Scarborough", its Eglinton.

Yikes. McCowan as the Yonge Street of Scarborough?! People do realize Yonge had a streetcar for many decades before the subway was built...don't they?

We've learned some fascinating things from Scarborough Subway supporters in this thread:

- Rapid Transit that gets you from Kennedy to STC (over 6km) in less than 10 minutes is bad because it involves a staircase
- Election results are only about SUBWAYS SUBWAYS SUBWAYS, but polls based on scientific principles aren't reliable
- Scarborough is paying for downtown transit expansion
- McCowan is the Yonge Street of Scarborough
- There may be elderly ladies with canes going downtown, therefore we must spend billions of dollars to ensure they don't have to use an LRT, even if it means a much longer bus ride
- Density doesn't matter
- Cost doesn't matter

am I missing anything?

 

[Rainforest]

We've learned some fascinating things from Scarborough Subway supporters in this thread:

- Rapid Transit that gets you from Kennedy to STC (over 6km) in less than 10 minutes is bad because it involves a staircase
- Election results are only about SUBWAYS SUBWAYS SUBWAYS, but polls based on scientific principles aren't reliable
- Scarborough is paying for downtown transit expansion
- McCowan is the Yonge Street of Scarborough
- There may be elderly ladies with canes going downtown, therefore we must spend billions of dollars to ensure they don't have to use an LRT, even if it means a much longer bus ride
- Density doesn't matter
- Cost doesn't matter

am I missing anything?

Scarborough Subway supporters didn't post anything like that.

You either twisted the wording of our posts, or just generated all that stuff inside your head.