Common sense. Diverting the Sheppard line through industrial wasteland helps no one, and only saves 5 mins from the time it'd take to loop down Markham Rd. You'd essentially be cutting off every Sheppard customer east of Kennedy by not doing this and also denying a proper linkage to the periphery of Malvern, the 95 bus and Centennial College/Milner Business Park. Once mass transit expands in Scarborough the dependency commuters have on monster terminals like Kennedy and STC will plummet.
Malvern doesn't deserve and cannot support multiple transit lines...the ridership isn't and
never will be there. Sheppard East's ridership plummets by the time you get out to Malvern. No subways should be built beyond STC, not in our lifetime, anyway.
Then your simply talking about a very limited amount of subway, that fails to serve most of the territory covered by Transit City. Sure, great for a few people, but no benefit to most.
Quite clearly I typoed, and I meant $200 million a kilometre for subway - that was quite apparent from the context of what I was saying, and all the past discussion about $200 million for subway. I don't see why you'd be pretending to not understand that it was a typo ... and I can only assume that your more interested in having an argument than have a constructive conversation.
Unimaginative2 has *never* said we should cancel Transfer City and build nothing but subways...doady merely said that for the same price as half a dozen suburban streetcar lines, we could build a few useful subway lines. I despise Transfer City overall but even I'd like to see parts of it built. This argument is turning into a red herring fishfarm.
So it was also a typo when you said 40km of subway would cost $60 billion? You've consistently exaggerated the cost of subways, and for no apparent purpose, since the people you're arguing with support a mix of contextually and corridor appropriate modes. Sheppard, Eglinton, DRL, or extending existing lines; these are all
legitimate subway projects that are either underway, proposed, or were proposed at some point...no one's suggesting we build subways for the sake of subways in ridiculous places. $60 billion would build well over 200km of subways, and probably 250-300km, given massive economies of scale; this is more subways than anyone here (except for drum118 and socialwoe) has ever hinted at and more than this city would ever need. Why take your argument down such an extreme path when all we did was dare to criticize the wisdom of spending billions of dollars on suburban streetcars?
I'm sorry? That's kind of rude isn't it? $200 to $250 million per kilometre of Toronto subway in 2008 dollars seems to be the going estimate of late ... do you have any better numbers? Pure fiction seems an unfair assessment.
I'd have thought that it does nothing for downtown is because it's clear that adding more streetcars downtown won't help. There has to be another plan for downtown. The Don Mills EA clearly notes that downtown is in the study area ... wait and see what comes from that.
Saying that Transit City - which is a streecar plan, doesn't do anything for downtown, which clearly needs something else, makes as much sense, as complaining that Transit City doesn't fix the washroom problems at Finch station.
More then once, you've claimed subways cost over $1 billion per km. If they've been typos or miscommunications, fine, we can move on.
Yes, Transfer City is a plan for streetcars that pretends to be a well-rounded plan for rapid transit for the whole city. It's good to hear more people acknowledge this.
