Wheel-Trans requires you book your trip a minimum of 4 hours in advance. This might work if you know you're going to need to be somewhere at a certain time, but completely eliminates the possibility of any spontaneous trips. And anyway, if Wheel-Trans were our go to solution for everything, then why are we bothering with low floor vehicles? They have less capacity than high floors and offer an inferior ride quality. If we thought Wheel-Trans to be a sufficient replacement, then we could be riding around in next gen CLRVs instead of being thrown around every time a Flexity rounds a curve, but that's not the direction we have chosen to go in.
If you want a local service, that's what parallel bus services are for. There is absolutely nothing wrong with putting bus routes on top of subway routes. In fact in Seoul, they have full fledged BRTs running on top of subway lines.
Do you have any actual statistics to suggest that the Crosstown is going to be worse than its precedessor, a bus line with no bus only lanes? Provided some absurd SOP to slow the trains way down like on the TTC streetcar network isn't introduced, the fact of having its own lanes alone is going to make the trip faster than that of a bus, as evidenced all over Europe.
The Spadina Streetcar was worse than its predecessor, St. Clair today runs slower than when it was in Mixed traffic, and the Finch West LRT is barely going to be faster than the bus service outside of Rush Hours. Remember, LRTs aren't fast modes, all that separating them from traffic really does is allow them to avoid Rush Hour traffic, which while it's an important travel time, doesn't represent the only time people will travel.
Will it? The planned GO expansion is going introduce a measly five stations within the city of Toronto. Despite our marketing of it as a "RER", it is really going to be in no way comparable to the Paris RER, or the Berlin S-Bahn, or JR commuter rail. With the amount of new stations introduced it's more like it's more like a semi-frequent regional train like the RB/RE lines in Germany.
Then you have no idea what's going on. GO Expansion isn't just 5 new stations, it's the electrification and service expansion of 5 GO lines. Recently Metrolinx has announced (clearly due to a push from DB) that all lines will operate ON AVERAGE every 5 MINUTES
during rush hours, with it likely decreasing to every 7.5 minutes
off peak. This is a far cry from what you said which is "The bulk of the Barrie line service runs during rush hours, and off-peak the trains run every hour."
At last tally (2018, as per the CPTDB wiki), the Eglinton West bus currently has a similar ridership to the 510 Spadina line (38.5k), the Eglinton East bus a mere 23k. I don't see on what basis you say I will not be able to breathe on the Crosstown, especially if we don't expect ridership to double immediately.
And we in Toronto, as well as Canada broadly routinely underestimate how much ridership new infrastructure gives us. It's basically like clockwerk, we introduce a new service, and all of a sudden we can't handle the service levels.
Again with the assertion that the service will not be fast and reliable. Have you ever actually ridden one of these Euro style tram lines without transit priority? I have, it's annoying to have to wait at traffic lights but it's not the end of the world and it's much faster than making the same trip by bus, especially during rush hour.
Or for an extra 0.5 to 1B, we could've fully grade separated the line and built a metro with more capacity, and without risk of being tboned by some crazy driver.
I think calling this kind of thing acting 'Toronto' is a misrepresentation. 20 years after its opening, the Sheppard line barely cracks 50k daily ridership and we're building a subway extension to replace line 3, which also has similar ridership to the 510 Spadina streetcar. "Acting Toronto" would be more like overbuilding our transit and not getting maximum value out of it for generations so that the population doesn't have to feel like second class citizens for riding a "fancy streetcar" instead of a subway.
Ye of course, because the Sheppard Subway is a tiny stub that doesn't go anywhere. You have to put every single line into context. When you consider how tiny the Sheppard Subway is, it's actually amazing it gets the ridership that it does. It has more riders per km than most lines in say Washington DC.
And before you reply to this accusing me of a strawman, if you actually look at the discussions around the Scarborough subway, at comments made by both councillors and regular citizens, not wanting to feel like second class citizens while downtown gets their subways is exactly the reason we are building the SSE in the first place. LRT would've been more than adequate for the job.
We can agree that the SSE overbuilt, but for various reasons the Scarborough LRT is frankly even more ridiculous. What should've been done is Eglinton gets built as a Canada Line style Light Metro, and the SRT is replaced by regular Metro rolling stock and acts as an extension of the Eglinton Line. That would've been great.
And, curiously, the BD line enjoys a daily ridership of almost 530,000. Maybe the station spacing isn't as big of a problem as I've been lead to believe.
Who exactly was claiming that BD was somehow a failure? I was calling it unfortunate that it had such tight stop spacing and that it should be larger, that's not the same thing as saying that the short stop spacing is a massive failure that dooms the usability of the line?
This is what you're fundamentally misunderstanding. NOBODY is claiming that Line 5 will be a "failure", a billion dollar boondoggle that nobody will use. What we are saying is that a lot of design decisions are mind numbingly idiotic for no good reason. In fact, you have yet to prove your point, why is it a good thing that Eglinton is an LRT? What are the benefits of the mode? It only saves a small amount of money in exchange for worse vehicles that aren't suitable for the usage of a subway, that are more expensive to maintain, that decrease the reliability of the entire line due to being in direct contact with pedestrians and motor vehicles.
P.S, I'll add on to this:
Is that a necessity at this point in time? This isn't the Yonge line here, the Crosstown is not expected to reach capacity any time soon and this feels like a benefit that it wouldn't be able to make use of for decades to come.
Automation and higher frequencies does 2 things, 1 it means that you don't need a driver or employee present on board. This massively reduced how much money you're spending operating the trains. 2, this allows us to run smaller trains. A 150m train running every 3 minutes, has the same capacity as a 75m train running every 90s. If we look at Eglinton for instance, if built that as a metro, instead of building the full 90m long platforms, you could've built it with 50-60m long platforms, which would significantly saved on the construction costs. As you might well know, by far the most expensive part of any subway is the stations, having more stations absolutely baloons the cost of the subway project, and being able to halve or at the very least significantly cut how much station you need to build goes a long way in reducing the overall cost of the project, cost that can go to something else such as, elevating the eastern portion. Now I'm not going to have an argument on whether or not additional funds would be needed to do it this way, but I will argue that a 60m Eglinton Line Metro would not cost more than .5 to 1B dollar extra, which is only a 10-20% increase over the base price. This is why I said that "5km of elevation won't add much to the cost" and frankly it would very likely be worth it considering the far more pleasant trains and all the saving in operations that we would see.