saveoursubways (SOS)

[Dan416]

I think the easiest thing to sell is just build the Eglinton Crosstown LRT as subway down the central section, because that's cost-neutral (it costs the same to build a subway tunnel as an LRT tunnel). As for beyond the central section, I suppose we could cut the part east of the currently proposed tunnel, and for the west see how much of it can run above ground and/or trenched and/or in the ROW and cost that out and see how much that would cost. It can definitely run above the 401 to Pearson like the LRT is planned to.

As for the Bloor extension, I don't think we should separate out an extension to Sherway from an extension to MCC. MCC is a far bigger destination, and would be woeful to leave out of a westerly extension. We'd end up with an overbuilt terminal at Sherway when its only meant to be temporary.

And why do people keep saying a subway extension overlaps with GO? It doesn't. Never has. Never will.

 

[Rainforest]

Why are people concerned with reducing the cost of Phase I? All that does is increase the cost of Phase II. We should shift all of Phase I to Phase II, then skip Phase I entirely so we can start right away on Phase II.

The higher the sticker price, the less likely you are to sell the thing. Applies equally to a new fridge and to a transit plan.

Realistically, Phase I is a plan while Phase II is a list of good-intentioned promises.

 

[gweed123]

I think the easiest thing to sell is just build the Eglinton Crosstown LRT as subway down the central section, because that's cost-neutral (it costs the same to build a subway tunnel as an LRT tunnel). As for beyond the central section, I suppose we could cut the part east of the currently proposed tunnel, and for the west see how much of it can run above ground and/or trenched and/or in the ROW and cost that out and see how much that would cost. It can definitely run above the 401 to Pearson like the LRT is planned to.

I agree. And I agree that the leg from Jane to Pearson should be built shortly after the central section, however the distinction in phases still needs to be made. By showing the plan for extension, we can preserve the Richview corridor to make sure nothing is developed there between now and when the subway is built that will hinder the plan. It's a great opportunity to trench/cut-and-cover, we shouldn't waste it.

As for the Bloor extension, I don't think we should separate out an extension to Sherway from an extension to MCC. MCC is a far bigger destination, and would be woeful to leave out of a westerly extension. We'd end up with an overbuilt terminal at Sherway when its only meant to be temporary.

And why do people keep saying a subway extension overlaps with GO? It doesn't. Never has. Never will.

What makes you think it will be a massive terminal at Sherway? When the subway was extended from Islington to Kipling, MT continued to use Islington for their bus terminal. Yes, I do see some bus routes terminating at Sherway, but when you consider that the Mississauga BRT will likely be extended to terminate at Eglinton Flats (which should be completed at around the same time as the Sherway extension), the ridership from MT transfering onto the TTC will be more spread out, partially eliminating the need for the massive bus bay that exists today at Islington, and negating the need for one that big at Sherway.

 

[gweed123]

Note that of all the red areas on the map below almost all had LRT coverage in the Transit City Plan. Also note that the bulk of the population is west of Yonge but coverage is focused currently in the east, further covered in the east in phase 1, and doesn't really start serving the west until phase 2.

While I admire the point you're trying to make, I see a fundamental flaw in your logic. The map that I posted is a subway plan, not a transit system plan. If I were to take the TC map and do a similar thing (ie look at only the subway), it would look nearly exactly the same as if I were to do it on a subway map of today.

You have inadvertently raised a point that I have been trying to make, and that is that in order to compete with TC, we cannot design JUST a subway plan. Yes, a system plan is a lot more work, but it is the only way to accurately compare the levels of service projected by both plans. The vast majority of the "gaps" that are shown in that map actually have BRT lines running directly through them. If the BRT lines were included on the map showing the gaps in rapid transit coverage, there would be many fewer gaps.

 

[Dan416]

I agree. And I agree that the leg from Jane to Pearson should be built shortly after the central section, however the distinction in phases still needs to be made. By showing the plan for extension, we can preserve the Richview corridor to make sure nothing is developed there between now and when the subway is built that will hinder the plan. It's a great opportunity to trench/cut-and-cover, we shouldn't waste it.



What makes you think it will be a massive terminal at Sherway? When the subway was extended from Islington to Kipling, MT continued to use Islington for their bus terminal. Yes, I do see some bus routes terminating at Sherway, but when you consider that the Mississauga BRT will likely be extended to terminate at Eglinton Flats (which should be completed at around the same time as the Sherway extension), the ridership from MT transfering onto the TTC will be more spread out, partially eliminating the need for the massive bus bay that exists today at Islington, and negating the need for one that big at Sherway.

I think a short extension to Sherway is pointless for the very reason that it doesn't serve Mississauga at all. Maybe one MT route will go there. Other than that, it's much too far south. When the subway hits Dundas & Dixie, then you'll have something which will cute travel times for MT buses. And by then MT and TTC should work out their fare issues. But really, Subway needs to serve MCC and there's no two ways about it it must be done, with or without regional rail along the Milton corridor.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

Also, the bulk of people in Toronto live east of Yonge, not west of Yonge. The opposite is true for the GTA at large, but what does the population of Oakville or Ajax have to do with, say, the length of an Eglinton line?

 

[gweed123]

I think a short extension to Sherway is pointless for the very reason that it doesn't serve Mississauga at all. Maybe one MT route will go there. Other than that, it's much too far south. When the subway hits Dundas & Dixie, then you'll have something which will cute travel times for MT buses. And by then MT and TTC should work out their fare issues. But really, Subway needs to serve MCC and there's no two ways about it it must be done, with or without regional rail along the Milton corridor.

I agree that it may not be the most useful extension in the world, but remember, we are dealing with a political game, not just a fantasy one. With all the subway extension taking place in the east, and with comparatively little taking place in the west, some type of extension, particularly an inexpensive one such as to Sherway (most of which can be done at-grade) would be a political move more than a transit one. Look back to the 80s when Kennedy was added, they had to add Kipling too.

And Sherway isn't just about serving Mississauga, it's also about serving South Etobicoke. Also, Sherway is conveniently at the intersection of 2 major highways (3 if you count the QEW and Gardiner as separate highways, which they aren't), making it a convenient park n ride location, given the ample amount of parking at Sherway. This same concept was applied at Don Mills (trying to intercept people using the 404, and get them onto the subway instead of on the DVP), and has worked reasonably well.

 

[kEiThZ]

I wonder if Eglinton West can be included in Phase I by advocating for cut-and-cover (to contain costs) along Richview?

 

[scarberiankhatru]

I wonder if Eglinton West can be included in Phase I by advocating for cut-and-cover (to contain costs) along Richview?

Or contain costs further and just cut...

 

[kEiThZ]

Or contain costs further and just cut...

Personally, I agree with you. I don't think it's vital. And I think connecting to Blue 22 is a decent compromise. I don't buy the argument that there has to be a 'public option' for airport access. If that's the case, the TTC could simply offer rebates for Blue 22 to every person who turns in a TTC transfer at the Blue 22 station. It'd be cheaper than building a subway line.

However, I do worry about the optics of building that much in the east and not much in the west, in the first go. It's not our fault that the Sheppard subway exists....it's what unbalances the equation. But it's there and has to be dealt with. And that goes for the political reality of a plan focused on the east in the first phase.

That's why I suggested some BRTs in the west for Phase 1 as a way of providing some improvement while they wait for their subways.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

I meant cut as in cut'n'cover - but skip the 'n'cover...

 

[kEiThZ]

I meant cut as in cut'n'cover - but skip the 'n'cover...

ah. si.

I dunno how cost effective this would be...

But I have always wondered how much it would cost to cut and cover by moving over Eglinton...as in rebuild the road on the corridor and cut and cover on Eglinton that's there today. Then rebuild the road on top.

 

[kEiThZ]

And I hope you see now that I was not trying to run 15 LRTs to Malvern. We're not experts here. We're doing this as we go along. Fumbling in the dark to find our way, as it were.

The BRTs were developed simply to fill in gaps. When you get the chance, Scarberian (and everybody else), any feedback on the planned BRT network would be good. Specifically:

1) What to do with Finch? We've proposed a Finch cross-town on the street from one end to the other. We think it would be quite handy....actually for local travel or intra-region (inside Scarborough or just inside North York) travel. And it offers a way to quickly route buses to the various intersecting subway lines.

2) Do you agree with BRTs on Kingston and Ellesmere? They were largely put in because of the connections with Durham region and the need to connect UTSC with STC in Scarborough.

3) What corridors are good in the west? gweed's got Jane and Islington in for now. I am not super-familiar with the west end so I don't know if these are the best candidates. The goal is to have two North-South BRTs that help provide good coverage to Etobicoke. He's also got a short Lakeshore BRT to serve south Etobicoke. The goal was to funnel traffic up Jane to the subway.

4) How do you serve Malvern? This community has now lost an RT line and two proposed LRT lines to it. Regardless of what one feels are the merits of serving Malvern, it's clear that its been a long standing goal of the TTC and our political class to get some higher ordered transit to this area. We've proposed a BRT on Neilson that cuts through Malvern and will connect Finch and Ellesmere BRTs. It's not ideal. The other options would have been on Progress and the hydro corridor or using McLevin/Nugget. Both would involve fully new corridors. And the latter would have even necessitated a new corridor on McCowan, which though a good idea would have simply drawn more accusations of a Scarborough bias. But if someone has a better idea we're open to it.


These are flexible ideas. Our subways are front and centre. These BRT plans are there to answer our critics and help fill our coverage gaps. We are trying best to pick corridors that have decent ridership, provide good regional connections, and can be built at a reasonable cost. So any help improving this plan would help as well.

 

[kEiThZ]

I know it's mission creep here, but I wonder if Presto should be part of the SOS agenda as well.

 

[gweed123]

I know it's mission creep here, but I wonder if Presto should be part of the SOS agenda as well.

I think we should focus mainly on the hard infrastructure, as opposed to branching into policy planning, because that's a whole other can of worms... I do agree Presto should be made a policy priority though.