Toronto Spadina Subway Extension Emergency Exits | ?m | 1s | TTC | IBI Group

[Rainforest]

Considering what's envisioned for VCC and for the funding windfall it helped secure, this 2km is not unreasonable. The people that think this last 2km stretch is unreasonable tend to either see every dollar not spent on LRT and/or every dollar spent outside the 416 as a waste.

I don't know how you are locating such people. Yes that 2km stretch is unreasonable, and yet I can give you a few suggestions how to spend these money on subways (think DRL), or transit outside 416, or even a subway outside 416 (Yonge North).

You are possibly right that bundling the VCC extension into the package was the only way to get subway to York U. However, all it proves is that transit planning in GTA is very twisted, not that VCC subway is a genuinely good investment.

 

[rbt]

You forgot that everything has operating losses.

True but that is an additional $14M per year over todays buses so in the short run it will require about a dime increase in fares to cover. Of course, in 30 years it might turn out to have been a solid investment.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

I totally agree with this. There's a few things I'd like to nitpick though, if you don't mind

First of all, the entire Downsview area, I can see getting development. Lots of it. If you look at Sheppard and Allen right now, you might find that there's a lot of development going on currently. That said, I can never see Jane and Steeles-407 getting anything. Ever. There's just nothing going for it, even if there was a gold plated subway to downtown.

Which brings me to #2: VCC. As far as any belief that VCC (or VMC, whatever you,) will be an utter failure due to Vaughan's past growth strategy, I don't think so. It's not like people in Vaughan are going to be moving to VCC; it's supposed to be a high density downtown-like district, complete with condos and office towers. I think that definitely needs subway. But plans haven't been finalized yet, I'm not even sure if they have the developers up, and work definitely isn't going to start for 3 years. That means nothing's going to be finished for at least 5, and probably nothing notable for 10. I absolutely agree that the York U-VCC extension should be put on hold (Steeles West included) until we can get a definite timeframe on VCC. That still allows Viva Purple to have a solid route (currently it goes to York U, so it could go to York U and come back up Orange's route,) and it provides the needed service to York U.

3rd, I'm not so sure about (ever) reaching Canada's Wonderland, but the area definitely needs to mature before subway hits it. Maybe 50 years down the road, the current Jane suburban office park stretch will turn into a solid 10 story row of midrise offices, then a subway could make sense. I doubt it, and it's definitely not what I'd like for the region. And even if, the Jane LRT would probably be better for shuttling people to VCC and the Subway and Viva. Actually, by the time that warrants a subway, we'll already have a Jane-McCowan subway on Highway 7

+1

Much of Vaughans plans, however, seem predicated on having the subway there first; then building around it.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

You forgot the $14 million annual net operating loss for this extension when it opens. At least people in the region will be able to reach Vaughan's new city hall via this new subway.

No they won't. The city hall is being built at Major Mackenzie and Keele.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

I don't know how you are locating such people. Yes that 2km stretch is unreasonable, and yet I can give you a few suggestions how to spend these money on subways (think DRL), or transit outside 416, or even a subway outside 416 (Yonge North).

You are possibly right that bundling the VCC extension into the package was the only way to get subway to York U. However, all it proves is that transit planning in GTA is very twisted, not that VCC subway is a genuinely good investment.

I'll create a special category just for you: people who think every dollar spent somewhere is stolen from somewhere else, as if transit funding was transferable. It's not. If it was, there would have be a set amount budgeted each year that gets doled out to various projects. That's not how it works in real life.

Yes, the last 2km to Vaughan is what made the whole extension possible. Trains wouldn't go past Downsview without it. It's not a bad project just because some people think other projects are better and should have proceeded sooner.

True but that is an additional $14M per year over todays buses so in the short run it will require about a dime increase in fares to cover. Of course, in 30 years it might turn out to have been a solid investment.

In the short run, any large transit improvements will require increased fares, but if the losses were spread out over multiple routes, each serving fewer riders, there'd be nothing to really pick on and nothing to point fingers at. How much money does the Steeles East bus or the Queen streetcar lose every year? How much money would be lost if a single bus was added to every bus route during the pm rush? You can't build a good transit network by only expanding where losses would be minimized. Maybe a few select GO train service increases could be near profitability, but nothing else would be. Perhaps a Yonge extension just to Steeles that still somehow generated massive developments and ridership boosts in York Region.

Bus routes, for instance, can be managed based on minimizing losses, adding and cutting as necessary, but infrastructure is built for the future.

Much of Vaughans plans, however, seem predicated on having the subway there first; then building around it.

That's a good thing!

 

[Rainforest]

I'll create a special category just for you: people who think every dollar spent somewhere is stolen from somewhere else, as if transit funding was transferable.

Not a bad category. However, I'll replace term "stolen from somewhere else" with "not available for use elsewhere".

It's not. If it was, there would have be a set amount budgeted each year that gets doled out to various projects. That's not how it works in real life.

Yes, the last 2km to Vaughan is what made the whole extension possible. Trains wouldn't go past Downsview without it. It's not a bad project just because some people think other projects are better and should have proceeded sooner.

"Some" people? Quite a few UT members have expressed that view, including at least half of those who advocate subways in general.

 

[kEiThZ]

+1

Much of Vaughans plans, however, seem predicated on having the subway there first; then building around it.

That's kinda how transit-oriented-development should work. That we haven't done that for so long does not mean our way is better.

 

[Dan416]

Interesting how when it comes to Vaughan people leap to the defense of Transit-Oriented Development, as if suddenly that makes it okay. Yet the same people say there's no ridership in Mississauga and GO is suddenly good enough. Interesting.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

Interesting how when it comes to Vaughan people leap to the defense of Transit-Oriented Development, as if suddenly that makes it okay. Yet the same people say there's no ridership in Mississauga and GO is suddenly good enough. Interesting.

I was thinking the exact same thing. It's always the same straw man argument that YR is getting a subway because it asked and petitioned for the extension, while Mississauga hasn't. It just shows how politicized transit planning has become in the region.

I'd love for a subway to come right to my front door. That doesn't make it a sound transit planning decision, even if I do promise to develop my house into a mega story residential property.

 

[Dan416]

Unfortunately I don't see transit planning in the GTA being depoliticized anytime soon, even though that was one of the ideas behind Metrolinx, or so I thought.

 

[Darwinkgo]

^ Metrolinx is not going to impose a project over the wishes of a local council. If it were to, you may as well (and likely would have to) regionalize all planning power.

Politicians are there to represent the people - you have to trust them to make the right decisions. It is not a very good idea to 'depoliticize' any project. If you do, you better make sure you have a funding mechanism politicians don't control.

 

[Dan416]

Just because polticians represent the people doesn't mean they're qualified to plan transit. There's a reason we have terms like "white elephant" and "pork-barrelling" in our language.

 

[kEiThZ]

Interesting how when it comes to Vaughan people leap to the defense of Transit-Oriented Development, as if suddenly that makes it okay. Yet the same people say there's no ridership in Mississauga and GO is suddenly good enough. Interesting.

Hope you don't count me in that crowd. I think 'sauga could have its own network! Hurontario and Dundas subways!

 

[Tdot_one]

Interesting how when it comes to Vaughan people leap to the defense of Transit-Oriented Development, as if suddenly that makes it okay. Yet the same people say there's no ridership in Mississauga and GO is suddenly good enough. Interesting.

VCC isn't that far from the development that's going to arise in Downsview or NYCC, for that matter. It looks like it could turn into the northern-western part of "Downtown North".

Mississauga isn't close to such a large number of development. It'd make more sense to run an independent high-frequency, tunnel-based service, that serves the city. I think it makes sense if the service developed emerges from the GO line.

However expanding the TTC into Sauga could work if the immediate area within Etobicoke was intensified as well. Turning the city of Toronto into a first class, high density city, that ends in the city centers of the suburbs.

 

[marcus_a_j]

I would heartily concur there is reason to be skeptical about VMC and while it's true that plans haven't been finalized, the wheels are definitely in motion.

There's been a lot in the news about how Toromont is leaving Jane/7 for Bradford because of this. At least one major high-density project has been approved for the block between Jane and Creditstone. I forget the developer but it was six towers, mostly up in the 30s.

2 x 34 storeys and 3 x 35 storeys. Royal Empress Gardens was the applicant for this proposal. While there has been nothing proposed for the Toromont site, there are already applications submitted to the City for high-density developments including the NE corner of Jane/7, plus several other sites in the vicinity with big plans already prepared.

Since the subway won't be open for 5+ years, I don't see any problem with development being delayed. Au contraire, the idea is to have transit there on Day One so people don't buy cars when they move in. Once they have those cars in the driveway, the likelihood of them buying into the whole 'transit oriented development' thing drops.

Also, Solmar is also trying to squeeze out a few towers further north, by Vaughan Mills and if we know anything about Vaughan we should know more will follow soon. The developers are just waiting for the moment to strike. As it is, the city is obligated to intensify those lands under Places to Grow (and, by extension, their own official plan). It's a more likely scenario than Yonge/Finch would have been in 1974.

I wouldn't expect the Solmar proposal (south of Rutherford, east side of Jane) to go forward for residential development. The OP designates the land employment and because of new legislation, like Places to Grow, employment lands are being protected from conversion to other uses. The west side of Jane is not designated employment around the mall, and could see some high-density development around there.