Sheppard East LRT - Cancel or Continue?

[GraphicMatt]

The problem with this kind of poll and the SRT issue we seem to be discussing now is that it's akin to asking someone if they'd a) lock criminals in prison or b) eliminate all crime. Everyone's going to choose the latter, but the former is the reality we're all forced to live with.

I think the SRT is the perfect example of pragmatic, politically-motivated transit building. It was the wrong technology at the right time, but after a certain point - once the funding was there and the plans complete - it made sense to just let it go rather than try to stop it.

Transit planning is never perfect. I think Yonge should have express tracks. I think University is way too close to Yonge, and should have been built at Spadina. I think running the Spadina extension shouldn't run in the middle of the Allen. And the DRL should have been built at least a decade before we even thought about higher order transit on Sheppard. And using an orphan technology on the SRT was, of course, a huge mistake.

But we move on. We build what we can and adapt as we go.

 

[kEiThZ]

I don't want to sidetrack too much but the reason ART Mk IIs are being proposed for the SRT is because they need more capacity than LRT for the current corridor. But they want to avoid a transfer so they are extending ART mk ii service to Malvern. This a waste of resources...deploying heavy rail to Malvern. Instead they should deploy heavy rail (subwat) where it's needed (current SRT corridor) and send light rail to Malvern. It would be marginally more expensive overall but offer significantly better service to all of Scarborough. It's want Scarborough councilors were fighting for until they got tricked into supporting TC.

 

[kettal]

I don't want to sidetrack too much but the reason ART Mk IIs are being proposed for the SRT is because they need more capacity than LRT for the current corridor. But they want to avoid a transfer so they are extending ART mk ii service to Malvern. This a waste of resources...deploying heavy rail to Malvern. Instead they should deploy heavy rail (subwat) where it's needed (current SRT corridor) and send light rail to Malvern. It would be marginally more expensive overall but offer significantly better service to all of Scarborough. It's want Scarborough councilors were fighting for until they got tricked into supporting TC.

Pure rubbish. The corridor will be in a separate ROW in any case. The capacity limits of road-median LRT don't apply here.

 

[kEiThZ]

Pure rubbish. The corridor will be in a separate ROW in any case. The capacity limits of road-median LRT don't apply here.

Read my post again. I suggested that grade separation was a waste of money from McCowan till Malvern. At-grade TC style LRT is fine. But for the current SRT corridor they need more than TC style LRT (hence the grade separation) and ART MK I's (hence the Mk II proposal). Why not just use a subway and a LRT for their hi/lo mix instead of ART Mk II's the whole way or worry about short-turning LRTs.

 

[Second_in_pie]

^^ And a stupid and arbitrary transfer where it makes absolutely no sense.

 

[nfitz]

Perhaps if you read the post I was responding to, you might have realized that I was talking about the SRT instead of Sheppard Subway.

Perhaps if you would actually quote whatever you are referring to, then that would be clearer. Still it's equally wrong. It certainly not unanimous - or else a whole bunch of people with a lot more qualifications than us wouldn't have selected something else! You can say a lot of thing, but I don't see how you can say it's unanimous.

EDIT: And if it can't be unanimous if there's two out of a thousand people that disagree, I'll change my wording: I think there's a near unanimous belief that subway is the obvious choice for the corridor.

How can it be near-unanimous? They selected a different technology ... surely that alone is evidence it's not unanimous. How can you say such completely absurd things, and expect to be taken seriously?

 

[kettal]

Read my post again. I suggested that grade separation was a waste of money from McCowan till Malvern. At-grade TC style LRT is fine. But for the current SRT corridor they need more than TC style LRT (hence the grade separation) and ART MK I's (hence the Mk II proposal). Why not just use a subway and a LRT for their hi/lo mix instead of ART Mk II's the whole way or worry about short-turning LRTs.

Why exactly is short-turning LRT's something to worry about? Obviously there's not the demand to send all of them through to Malvern.

I have doubts that the ART option will even be on the table anymore by next month.

Your quote: "they need more capacity than LRT for the current corridor" is clearly bullshit, as LRT in the corridor would have no lower a capacity constraint than ART.

 

[kettal]

^^ And a stupid and arbitrary transfer where it makes absolutely no sense.

Yet transferring onto the GO train at Kennedy will make a lot of sense. Like, "save 40 minutes in travel time every day" sense.

 

[Rainforest]

Why exactly is short-turning LRT's something to worry about? Obviously there's not the demand to send all of them through to Malvern.

I have doubts that the ART option will even be on the table anymore by next month.

Your quote: "they need more capacity than LRT for the current corridor" is clearly bullshit, as LRT in the corridor would have no lower a capacity constraint than ART.

Short-turning LRT's is not a problem. In fact, this is how they are going to operate the extended SLRT.

The problem is this: we save money by not extending the subway to Scarborough Centre (and yes, SLRT on the guideway has enough capacity to handle the demand, and decent speed). But then, it turns out that we have to spend almost all of the saved money to build a fully grade-separate line to Malvern Centre. And the only rationale for building a fully grade-separate line to Malvern is that we want to avoid another transfer.

Had the subway been extended to STC, the subway would cost substantially more than SLRT, but that extra cost would be offset by a cheaper line from STC to Malvern.

Note that the difference between LRT and ART is not that big in that case (fully grade-separate line). Conversion to LRT will bring advantage of fleet commonality and joint maintenance facilities with other lines. But the projected construction cost of S(L)RT is about same whether LRT or ART is used. LRT would be substantially cheaper (STC to Malvern) if it was in street median, but this is not planned.

 

[Rainforest]

^ Despite the above considerations, the Kennedy - STC subway extension stands no chance of happening. In a a couple of years, TTC will be in panic mode regarding this route, because of the 2015 end-of-life of the currently used Mk-I vehicles. Therefore, they will be very averse to any change in plans that delays the restoration of rail service to STC.

 

[kettal]

The problem is this: we save money by not extending the subway to Scarborough Centre (and yes, SLRT on the guideway has enough capacity to handle the demand, and decent speed). But then, it turns out that we have to spend almost all of the saved money to build a fully grade-separate line to Malvern Centre. And the only rationale for building a fully grade-separate line to Malvern is that we want to avoid another transfer.

Would you care to explain why the section leading to Malvern has to be fully grade separated?

 

[Ryan]

It seems like the main problem with getting the B-D up to STC is the east-west alignment at Kennedy. Because if it were aligned north, it could just follow the RT ROW at least to Ellesmere, which would save a lot of money since they are already going to have to lay new tracks if they are converting it to LRT. Is there any way that the alignment at kennedy could be rebuilt?

 

[kEiThZ]

Why exactly is short-turning LRT's something to worry about? Obviously there's not the demand to send all of them through to Malvern.

I have doubts that the ART option will even be on the table anymore by next month.

Your quote: "they need more capacity than LRT for the current corridor" is clearly bullshit, as LRT in the corridor would have no lower a capacity constraint than ART.

1. Your attitude and language is entirely uncalled for.
2. I was clearly to referring to deploying Transit City style at-grade LRT. I made it specific in my second post. I apologize if you were confused by my first post.
3. As of right now the ART option is the one on the table. Until it's official that there's a change to LRT that's what we have to work with.
4. Nobody expects every LRT to head to Malvern. It's not something I have complained about or advocated for. I am concerned that short-turning creates extra operational hassles which may in the end impact service west of McCowan. These are hassles which could be entirely eliminated by a subway/LRT hi/lo mix for current corridor and the extension.

 

[kEiThZ]

Would you care to explain why the section leading to Malvern has to be fully grade separated?

Ask the TTC that. Malvernites don't want it. There are concerns about aesthetics and privacy issues. They would be fine with at-grade LRT. It's the TTC that insists on putting in grade separation all the way to Malvern. It's a must if they use ART Mk IIs. But why they are insisting on it if they switch to LRT is beyond me. Grade separation leaves out Markham and Milner, two very large trip generators along the route.

The proposal we are working drops the line to at-grade LRT along Progress and the hydro corridor from STC to Malvern with a transfer to the Bloor-Danforth line at STC.

 

[kEiThZ]

It seems like the main problem with getting the B-D up to STC is the east-west alignment at Kennedy. Because if it were aligned north, it could just follow the RT ROW at least to Ellesmere, which would save a lot of money since they are already going to have to lay new tracks if they are converting it to LRT. Is there any way that the alignment at kennedy could be rebuilt?

That should be seen as an opportunity not an obstacle. Using the Eglinton-Danforth-McCowan alignment, facilitated by the E-W orientation of the BD subway at Kennedy for a subway extension, allows the RT to stay in operation right through the construction period. This alignment would not interfere with the SRT except at the teminii (and barely at that).