No, of course not. My position is simply that your not going to get subway tunnel for less than $200 million per kilometre. The Spadina extension is $232 million per kilometre in 2006 dollars
The Spadina extension is unnecessarily 100% tunneled and includes, for example, a station at a cemetery. That per/km figure can be slashed by trimming waste and through massive economies of scale that would result from multiple or consecutive projects. There's long outdoor sections on the existing lines and there would be long outdoor sections on any new lines such as Don Mills or Eglinton.
But compared to any other city I'm familiar with, I find TTC mezzanines miniscule, and under-sized. Most shocking is that you have multiple entrances to a station that lead to multiple entry points, resulting in patrons constantly arriving at a station and not being able to get through unmanned entrances. I've not really seen this in other systems, with larger mezzanines.
Undersized? If Sheppard's mezzanines were any bigger, there'd be one long mezzanine from Yonge to Fairview. Wilson station looks like a near-end-game Doom level. Many stations feature healthy walks to the bus bays. You're honestly suggesting that mezzanines should be big enough that any and all entrances feed into one huge underground piazza just so the occasional tourist doesn't get caught at an automatic entrance with cash? Wouldn't it be easier and
a million times cheaper to get some kind of smart card?
Where does the subway transition to LRT? I don't know ... Pape? Eglinton? O'Connor?
Where? For one thing, you do not transition to a new technology at an arbitrary point where vehicles are still completely full! If it goes north of Pape, it must go to Sheppard...anything else is, frankly, stupid.
If so, I'll shut up - I thought I'd seen suggestions to that effect. The unnecessary "Transfer City" comments by some suggest otherwise.
Let's follow Johnny on his trip from Malvern to York U. He used to take the Finch bus but he's going to try these new Transfer City lines: Morningside LRT, transfer to Sheppard East LRT, transfer to Sheppard subway, transfer to Yonge line, transfer to Finch West LRT, transfer to Spadina line. The next day, he decides to take the Sheppard West bus or the 196 instead, reducing his transfers from 5 to 4. The next day, he realizes he might as well take the Finch East bus to the Steeles West bus, thereby not using any of Transfer City's lines.
Now, let's follow Johnny's mom on her way to work: Morningside LRT, transfer to Sheppard East LRT, transfer to the RT, transfer to the Danforth subway, transfer to the Yonge subway, wait for the next Yonge subway, wait for the next Yonge subway, wait for the next Yonge subway, get off at Union. The next day, she realizes she can take the Finch East bus to Markham Road and take the GO train downtown in 1/3 the time (Malvern to Summerhill in 15 minutes?), also not using any of Transfer City's lines.
I'll stay out of Morningside - I'm the first to admit I don't know the area well enough. But building a subway to STC doesn't replace an RT extension. It replaces the RT - you still need something else to replace the extension. If your going to bother to build the subway all the way to STC, isn't one more stop to get away from your node a good thing?
The subway to STC is not going to be marginally more expensive than upgrading the SRT from Kennedy to McCowan. The
estimate (in 2006$) for upgrading the SRT ranged from $353 million to $527 million depending if you if you went for 4 or 6-car trains; and how Kennedy got reconstructed. The subway option was $1,220 million - 2.3 to 3.5 times more expensive. This isn't marginally more expensive. And you call my estimates into question?
Yes, your estimates are wrong. As has been said many, many times, the reno + extension is the same cost as the subway extension to STC. The thing is, the subway extension serves an area with a population of 300,000-400,000, while the RT extension serves an area with 100,000 people and the Rouge Park. About 20,000 people per day travel between Malvern and STC, many of whom continue on downtown and so would switch to GO were it improved...the Midtown GO line runs right to Markham & Finch, remember. So the RT is being renovated and extended for only 20,000 rides a day, a figure that doesn't deserve rapid transit of any form beyond express buses. Were the subway to be extended for the same price, another 20,000 rides along McCowan and another 30,000+ along Lawrence and Ellesmere would benefit, not to mention only the subway would trigger full development of STC. But I understand that you don't appreciate this, given your admitted lack of on the ground knowledge of Scarborough. For the same reason, I don't comment on Etobicoke or Peel as often as others, deferring to local expertise.
A DRL would have to be subway or RER-like equipment.
Yes, it would, so to answer your question, RT technology wouldn't be better.
Perhaps for right now - but I'm sure in 50, or 100 years, it will still be there, and will be a major interchange between 2 lines. At that time, it will be quite reasonable. Shame they hadn't overbuilt Yonge, or Union, or St. George (though it's criminal they didn't overbuild St. George ... they knew that was going to be a major station).
No, it's overbuilt, featuring too many bus bays and a delightfully long walk to the buses, plus a huge mezzanine.
A subway is an underground tunnel. (as in a pedestrian subway). We use subways for metro lines that are primarily underground. But when you start building the entire thing above ground, it's not a subway - it's an El, or a Skytrain - not a subway.
I'm *obviously* referring to subway technology.
