Eglinton-Crosstown Corridor Debate

[scarberiankhatru]

You are correct, the central portion will have to be underground. My argument is that it should be at grade, in the six-lane suburban arterial sections. Sorry I didn't make this clear perhaps we are actually in agreement?

Not really. If they do build a streetcar line on Eglinton, it should not be in tunnels in the east/west stretches...that would be a colossal waste of money. It's the tunneled/median ROW combination that's the problem...most of the expense of a subway but service quality at the mercy of the surface sections. An LRT line could work well if they build it as a real rapid transit line, but a $3+ billion, partially tunneled, 30km long Spadina streetcar would be an unmitigated disaster when a full-blown subway could be had for not that much more. I'd rather they build nothing now than hurry along and build the wrong thing just for the sake of getting something built.

 

[Dan416]

People say (and I'm not talking about anyone specific here) there isn't money for a subway along Eglinton. Yet there is money for a subway to Nowhere (VCC). Not to mention the (needed) Yonge extension north. If you believe in something enough, and it has a good business case, it can be built. Of course, if you have a bad plan with a non-existent business case (most of Transfer City) then that can get money too. The point is, the money IS there. Canada is one of the wealthiest nations on the PLANET. Don't tell me we don't have money for NEEDED subways. Have you taken a look at our roads and highways recently?

 

[waterloowarrior]

once the LRT goes underground, does it no longer encourage a medium-density, pedestrian friendly streetscape until it surfaces?

 

[RedRocket191]

People say (and I'm not talking about anyone specific here) there isn't money for a subway along Eglinton. Yet there is money for a subway to Nowhere (VCC). Not to mention the (needed) Yonge extension north. If you believe in something enough, and it has a good business case, it can be built. Of course, if you have a bad plan with a non-existent business case (most of Transfer City) then that can get money too. The point is, the money IS there. Canada is one of the wealthiest nations on the PLANET. Don't tell me we don't have money for NEEDED subways. Have you taken a look at our roads and highways recently?

I don't think your first point stands up very well. There might be money for 15km of extensions, but that doesn't mean there's money for that plus 30 km of new line. That's like saying "since I can afford 1 house I'll be able to afford 5."

On your second point, yes, something with a good business plan should get funding - if there is funding to be had. The simple fact is that the more subways we build, the less money we'll have for other projects which are equally important. This is true of all projects, but you have to admit that subways drain the treasury much faster than LRT does.

Corridors which need subways and where the need can be justified using cold hard numbers and solid planning principles should obviously get them. But this has to be balanced with the needs of others who have to eat from the pot.

 

[Dan416]

I don't think it's so much an issue of whether we can afford it as whether we can afford NOT to make these investments. If we don't, Toronto will get ever more congested and unattractive. And once that happens, imagine how expensive it'll be to build a subway!

On your example of a house, well, very, very few people pay for a home with one payment. Most take a mortgage. Since subways are for our future, they can be paid for in a similar fashion if we can't afford them all right now.

 

[kettal]

People say (and I'm not talking about anyone specific here) there isn't money for a subway along Eglinton. Yet there is money for a subway to Nowhere (VCC). Not to mention the (needed) Yonge extension north. If you believe in something enough, and it has a good business case, it can be built. Of course, if you have a bad plan with a non-existent business case (most of Transfer City) then that can get money too. The point is, the money IS there. Canada is one of the wealthiest nations on the PLANET. Don't tell me we don't have money for NEEDED subways. Have you taken a look at our roads and highways recently?

Well lets start off with VCC, there's certainly no business case there, any businessman who is involved in that mess should be bloody embarrassed.

Secondly, being a wealthy country is a irrelevant. The cost of construction is directly correlated to the nation's wealth, to the point that a poorer nation can build the same infrastructure at the same cost relative to GDP, if you get my drift. I'm talking about wages, taxes, construction disruptions, expropriation costs, etc.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

The business case for going as far as Vaughan was that it was all or nothing...and "all" includes almost every other transit project we're talking about here. Without York Region and Sorbara catapulting the Spadina extension to the top of the priority list, none of these projects would be happening. 2km of subway that will be used but never reach that silly goal everyone's aiming for - capacity - are a small price to pay for the proposed transit funding boosts, which otherwise would not have happened now (but could have happened eventually some day).

 

[Whoaccio]

once the LRT goes underground, does it no longer encourage a medium-density, pedestrian friendly streetscape until it surfaces?

Logic puzzle!

 

[RedRocket191]

On your example of a house, well, very, very few people pay for a home with one payment. Most take a mortgage. Since subways are for our future, they can be paid for in a similar fashion if we can't afford them all right now.

But like a mortgage, you have to make payments over 25 years. The more money you spend, the higher the mortgage payments are. The city or the province might be able to afford $1 billion a year in financing, but $2 billion a year? $3 billion?

The other option is the extend the payment period, but the private sector we need to build the thing will not be happy about a 100 year repayment plan.

 

[digitalcabana]

Public Transit: Metrolinx Plan

Eglinton subway strategy gets more traction than streetcar, councillors say

JOHN LORINC
Globe and Mail
July 25, 2008

They represent very different stretches of Eglinton Avenue, but two Toronto councillors think it's time to bury the idea of building a streetcar or light-rail line across Eglinton and instead go with a full-fledged subway.

"A subway along Eglinton makes more sense," said Karen Stintz (Ward 16, Eglinton-Lawrence), citing its potential to revitalize employment zones such as the Thorncliffe Park area, east of the Don Valley. "Now is the time to start talking about it."

Gloria Lindsay Luby, whose Ward 4 (Etobicoke Centre) is bisected by a stretch of Eglinton once set aside for the aborted Richview Expressway, agreed, noting that a subway will trigger high-density development west of Jane. "I would think more people would support a subway over here but there has been no consultation whatsoever."

Their comments come in response to yesterday's report in The Globe and Mail that Metrolinx, the agency assigned to develop a regional transit strategy, is pushing for a subway beneath Eglinton rather than a partly buried light-rail transit line, as proposed in Mayor David Miller's Transit City strategy.

The debate has also resurfaced in a week when in Britain royal assent was given for a £16-billion ($32-billion) plan to finance a crosstown subway line in London linking Heathrow Airport, in the west, to Canary Wharf and the new commercial suburbs, in the east.

Many transit activists strongly back a network of dedicated light-rail routes over subways because streetcar lines are cheaper, faster to build and stretch money further. In the wake of the fight over the St. Clair West streetcar right-of-way, the province has streamlined the approval process for such projects and the city is pressing ahead with several other light-rail lines included in the Transit City plan.

Yet for Ms. Stintz and other critics, the lingering question mark about the proposed $2.24-billion Eglinton LRT - which will extend 31 kilometres from Pearson International to Kennedy Station - has to do with the fact that it will have to operate through a 10-kilometre-long tunnel between Laird Drive and Keele Street because the road allowance is simply too narrow for a surface route. "We know we're going to have to put it underground anyway," Ms. Stintz said.

What's more, even the tunnelled sections may prove to be an inconvenience, says Steven Petroff, chair of the Upper Village Business Improvement Area and co-owner of the Petroff Gallery on Eglinton. In briefing sessions with the city, he's been told that the TTC is not planning to operate city buses along those stretches of Eglinton where the LRT will run below grade. "In this area, there are a number of homes for the elderly. It's going to be a big adjustment."

The price tag, however, remains the decisive factor, unless the provincial and federal government underwrite a subway line, as has happened with the Spadina Extension. TTC chair Adam Giambrone has said an Eglinton subway would cost about three times as much as an LRT.

York South-Weston Councillor Frances Nunziata, who was mayor of the former City of York when Queen's Park spent $150-million to cancel an Eglinton subway line, says she would rather have an LRT built within the foreseeable future rather than wait a generation or more for a subway. "I don't want to stall the project."

But both Ms. Stintz and Ms. Lindsay Luby feel that a subway is more likely to attract development, investment and therefore transit riders to the corridor.

Eglinton West is seeing some signs of intensification, with high-rise projects either under construction or approved at Royal York Road and Martin Grove Road.

But there remains a great deal of empty or underutilized land in the areas west of Jane Street where Eglinton remains a broad, car-dominated arterial with little pedestrian or commercial activity.

In the east end, Ms. Stintz points out that a subway line will do more to spur the revitalization of business parks and employment districts, which council has moved to protect as a means of attracting manufacturing jobs and businesses back to the city. "Yes, it's expensive," she says, "but we have a manufacturing sector in decline and people are looking for work. If we made this an investment strategy, we could rejuvenate areas that have not been well served by transit."

 

[khris]

Go Karen Stintz!

 

[Dichotomy]

Can you imagine the cost if the Yonge subway was built from Union Station to Eglinton today? Thankfully, the city started to think ahead in the '40s and plan for the future - something sadly lacking today.
It makes no sense to build a LRT along Eglinton - other than it is 'cheaper.' There is no space for a right of way from about Mount Pleasant to the Allen - so (as has been discussed) most of that would have to be buried anyway. Why not build it in sections, like the Yonge line was? Laird to Keele would be a very good start. As areas to the east and west of those stations grew, the subway could be extended. Surely the density exists along that corridor now!
Queen's Park and Ottawa have to sit down with Silly Hall and hammer out a long term funding plan. The city cannot be expected to bare the capital costs itself. Toronto gets saddled with enough costs that are a result of Queens Park and Ottawa's bungling! And Silly Hall has to stop spending this 'capital' money on other projects, which only makes Queen's Park and Ottawa angry.
If something isn't done now, things will get very ugly. Toronto is already circling the bowl. Long term residents who are fed up with the decline are either dying or moving out. What will this city be like in another 20 years when the only people left in the city are from other countries where 'good enough' looks like paradise?
The comments about Canada being one of the richest countries in the world are false. We spend like we are rich. We carry on like we are rich, but the added costs of running such a large, diverse, sparsely populated country are weighing us down.
For the amount of money we spend STUDYING a new subway, many 'third world countries' would have built the damn thing.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

TTC chair Adam Giambrone has said an Eglinton subway would cost about three times as much as an LRT.

That's just false. Why would the subway need to be tunneled through the Richview corridor or east of Leslie where the ROW is so wide? Using Spadina's gold-plated cost figures, an Eglinton line with vehicles and all other relevant costs that's 100% tunneled and gold-plated would cost roughly $7.5B. Anyone who thinks the Eglinton LRT will be built for $2B or so is delusional, anyway. $3+ billion for LRT compared to, at most, $5 billion for a subway is not "three times as much."

 

[Rainforest]

Rainforest

7.5B for subway versus 3.5B for LRT is not a 3 times difference, but it is still quite a bit.

Building the Eglinton subway in phases only makes sense if the funding for the whole thing is guaranteed from the onset. Otherwise, we will end up with one more stubway. How many transfers will it take to get, for example, from STC to Eglinton / Kipling, if the subway stretches from Jane to Don Mills only?

 

[officedweller]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080724.wmetrolinx24/BNStory/National/

Competing plans for Toronto transit cause delays
Province's Metrolinx agency is clashing with the TTC over a plan that would rewrite the mayor's vision for a light-rail network
JEFF GRAY AND MATTHEW CAMPBELL

From Thursday's Globe and Mail

July 24, 2008 at 3:50 AM EDT

As it contemplates road tolls and up to $80-billion in new public transit construction across the Toronto area, the province's Metrolinx agency is clashing with the TTC over a scheme that would radically rewrite Mayor David Miller's Transit City plan for a light-rail network.

At issue is Metrolinx planners' desire to scrap the TTC's proposal for a $2.2-billion partly tunnelled light-rail line on Eglinton Avenue and instead build something the TTC warns would be two to three times as expensive, such as a subway or a tunnelled subway-like system with vehicles similar to the Scarborough RT or Vancouver's SkyTrain.

The dispute is partly to blame, insiders say, for the delayed release of a draft of Metrolinx's long-range regional transportation plan.

It was supposed to come out this week, but is now due Sept. 27.

Sources say the delay is also meant to allow Queen's Park time to mull Metrolinx's other controversial ideas, such as an extra $6-billion to $9-billion a year for public transit paid for by road tolls or parking taxes.

Metrolinx chairman Rob MacIsaac, the former mayor of Burlington, denies there is a "fight."

But he says something faster and with more carrying capacity than light-rail is needed on Eglinton - where subway construction was halted by premier Mike Harris in 1995 - especially if riders are to take it from Scarborough to Mississauga.

"If you're going to travel from one end of that line to the other, we think you'd probably better pack a picnic lunch," Mr. MacIsaac said.

"We would like to find a way to speed it up for people who are travelling longer distances."

And why, he asked, build something that could end up overcrowded?

"There's little point in spending a lot of money on an LRT line that will end up with passengers whose faces are pressed up against the windows."

Adam Giambrone, the Toronto city councillor who chairs the TTC and is one the city's four representatives on Metrolinx's 11-member board, argues that building either a subway or a Scarborough RT-style line on Eglinton would mean delays and a price tag of $6-billion to $8-billion, compared with the existing plan's $2.2-billion, potentially sucking money away from other projects.

"The TTC has said it doesn't make sense," Mr. Giambrone said.

He said the route's projected 9,000 riders in the peak hour of the morning rush in 2021 don't justify a subway. By comparison, the Bloor-Danforth line carries 27,000, while 35,000 now jam into the Yonge line in just one hour in the morning.

If the province wanted to build the light-rail tunnel wide enough to allow for future conversion to a subway, it would cost an extra $1-billion, he added.

The TTC has built several subways, with provincial funding provided, that have not reached ridership capacity, including Sheppard, and the original Spadina extension in the 1970s, and the transit agency has now clearly banked its future on light rail.

"Sometimes I would say there is a propensity to see that a solid commitment to public transit is a subway, and that that's a real sign of love," said TTC vice-chairman Joe Mihevc, a big booster of light-rail who spearheaded the controversial streetcar lanes on St. Clair Avenue.

"Of course we want subways. Everyone would. But the question is, what's the lost opportunity?"

Trying to rewrite the Transit City plan would put Metrolinx - and the province, if it approved the move - on a collision course with the mayor, who included the Transit City lines in his 2006 election platform. It would also appear to contradict the endorsement Premier Dalton McGuinty gave the scheme when he announced his $11.5-billion MoveOntario 2020 public-transit plan.

A senior TTC source suggested the province will veto any radical changes to the city's plans: "They're not prepared for a collision. They're not prepared to have a whole plan to go down in flames over a fight."

Transit activist Steve Munro, who fought to save the TTC's current streetcar system in the 1970s, says Metrolinx's "interfering" on Eglinton could slow down or scupper the rest of the TTC's plans, and that he believes the route is suited to streetcars.

But respected long-time transportation consultant Richard Soberman - an adviser to Metrolinx who has lately been critical of the TTC - said Eglinton needs more than light-rail and that extending the Scarborough RT along the busy route is under consideration.

This isn't the first time the city has been at odds with Metrolinx, which was created in the fall of 2006.

Some have called for the regional agency - which has yet to assume its responsibility for GO Transit - to take over part of all of the TTC, something Mr. Miller has vehemently opposed.

The left-leaning mayor has also raised concerns about Metrolinx's enthusiasm for new partnerships with the private sector.

Toronto has been down this track before.

In the 1970s, the TTC planned what is now the Scarborough RT as a high-speed streetcar, but was convinced by Queen's Park to change course and build the line as a demonstrator for a new transit vehicle developed by the then-government-owned Urban Transportation Development Corp., which was later bought by Bombardier.

Montreal-based Bombardier, which is already building Toronto's subway cars at its Thunder Bay plant, manufactures the next generation of Scarborough RT-style vehicles. It is also keen to move into public-private partnerships in which it maintains or even operates public-transit lines: It already has a contract with GO Transit to operate the bulk of its commuter rail lines, starting this year.

***

The competing visions

TTC

The Transit City plan calls for light-rail vehicles in dedicated lanes, with a tunnelled section through the most congested stretch, possibly from Laird to Keele.

Light rail

Increasingly common across the U.S. and Europe, are light-rail vehicles, such as the Flexity streetcar. The TTC rejected its builder's bid last week.

METROLINX

A fully tunnelled subway across Eglinton, or a subway-like rail system using heavier vehicles such as Bombardier's Advanced Rapid Transit system.

Rapid transit

Similar to the Scarborough RT and Vancouver's SkyTrain, vehicles such as Bombardier's Advanced Rapid Transit Mark II can be automated and carry more people than conventional light-rail lines, but fewer than traditional subway trains.

SOURCE: TRORONTO TRANSIT COMMISSION