Toronto's Transit Network Plan

[WislaHD]

I think the mayor and planners owe us an explanation as to the degree on influence that SmartTrack has had on the relief line.

I seriously question the ridership projections of Relief Line too.

"The SmartTrack cases used a modified land use plan that assumed SmartTrack itself would cause growth that would not otherwise occur. This causes increases for the Relief Line’s projected demand when it is matched with a the lower level of SmartTrack service (4 trains/hour) because the latter does not attract as much riding as the Relief Line."
http://stevemunro.ca/2016/02/22/demand-projections-for-relief-lines/

SmartTrack ridership case models use a set of variables that assume more growth than with the Relief Line. In cases of low SmartTrack service, the Relief Line has higher ridership not to make up for poor SmartTrack service but because SmartTrack-included models assume greater growth along the corridor.

Here are City Planning's numbers for the Relief Line:

* 125,500: Daily riders projected for 2031 for a relief line built along the city’s preferred Pape-and-Queen St. route without SmartTrack.
* 133,100: Daily 2031 relief line riders when 15-minute SmartTrack service is added to the network.
* 98,800: Daily relief line riders with 5-minute SmartTrack service.

I think these results call into question the whole ridership projection models because their assumptions are I believe quite biased towards SmartTrack.

I think this also means that Relief Line ridership numbers are significantly low-balled by City Planning as a result.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

I seriously question the ridership projections of Relief Line too.

"The SmartTrack cases used a modified land use plan that assumed SmartTrack itself would cause growth that would not otherwise occur. This causes increases for the Relief Line’s projected demand when it is matched with a the lower level of SmartTrack service (4 trains/hour) because the latter does not attract as much riding as the Relief Line."
http://stevemunro.ca/2016/02/22/demand-projections-for-relief-lines/

SmartTrack ridership case models use a set of variables that assume more growth than with the Relief Line. In cases of low SmartTrack service, the Relief Line has higher ridership not to make up for poor SmartTrack service but because SmartTrack-included models assume greater growth along the corridor.

Here are City Planning's numbers for the Relief Line:

* 125,500: Daily riders projected for 2031 for a relief line built along the city’s preferred Pape-and-Queen St. route without SmartTrack.
* 133,100: Daily 2031 relief line riders when 15-minute SmartTrack service is added to the network.
* 98,800: Daily relief line riders with 5-minute SmartTrack service.

I think these results call into question the whole ridership projection models because their assumptions are I believe quite biased towards SmartTrack.

I think this also means that Relief Line ridership numbers are significantly low-balled by City Planning as a result.

Honestly the whole thing look like a face-saving exercise for JT who needed a climbdown from the lofty and undeliverable ST promises.

AoD

 

[WislaHD]

Honestly the whole thing look like a face-saving exercise for JT who needed a climbdown from the lofty and undeliverable ST promises.

AoD

I think that is exactly what it is. I think City Planning tried to make the most out of a bad situation and thus delivered the transit map that led to the creation of this thread. So long as we push forward with all these goals, I will not complain. Especially considering how political transit planning was just prior to Tory's election.

But we really must push forward with these goals. Embrace GO-RER with SmartTrack branding, and get the damn Relief Line built. I just hope that everything revolving SmartTrack passes through council as fast as possible, so that the "Big J" Relief Line to Sheppard studies are allowed to proceed without the fear of making SmartTrack look absolutely redundant in the face of the Big J relief line's ability to provide Yonge-line relief.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

I think that is exactly what it is. I think City Planning tried to make the most out of a bad situation and thus delivered the transit map that led to the creation of this thread. So long as we push forward with all these goals, I will not complain. Especially considering how political transit planning was just prior to Tory's election.

But we really must push forward with these goals. Embrace GO-RER with SmartTrack branding, and get the damn Relief Line built. I just hope that everything revolving SmartTrack passes through council as fast as possible, so that the "Big J" Relief Line to Sheppard studies are allowed to proceed without the fear of making SmartTrack look absolutely redundant in the face of the Big J relief line's ability to provide Yonge-line relief.

If that's what bait and switch looks like, it should happen more often (sad that we needed it to get to this point, but hey, means to an end). RER is needed, and gawd we know RL can't come soon enough.

I think that Big J is an inevitable outcome once there is a commitment to build Small J - the latter doesn't make a lot of sense on its' own.

AoD

 

[44 North]

P.S. You can lay off the ad hominem vs. Tory, it doesn't help explain his or City Planning's motivations.

I think Tory is a great mayor, and I would vote for him again. But @Forgotten 's ad hominem toward him and point about 'Neptis shill' stuff is justified IMO, particularly when looking at the big picture. City Planning is doing a great job, and few question their direction or numbers. But it's pretty clear that both Tory and the Prov are the ones throwing wrenches into plans, forcing the City to work around Tory and Wynne's unified and virtually-identical newfound "priorities".

The majority of SmartTrack is Stouffville RER. Yes, a great concept and a laudable project. But the reality is that it came out of the blue, and was never part of the Big Move/RTP. Stouffville was always supposed to be AD2W using diesels. But in the last couple years Stouffville RER became an urgent need/priority for both the Prov and Tory. This alone raises some questions about what's going on behind closed doors. But more to the point, the project oddly seemed to coincide with a) the Prov/Metrolinx finally acknowledging that a Relief Line should be a 15-yr priority, b) Scarb Subway, c) the delaying of GO Richmond Hill improvements (both AD2W and Express Rail) to indefinite status quo status.

Tory is playing for both teams (the City and the Prov). And yeah he's a great mayor. But Stouffville RER / SmartTrack (same thing, really) is the project that's causing the gears to grind. And that's no fault of the City's.

 

[M II A II R II K]

The DRL could go west to Bathurst on Queen, and then diverge south to King since there really isn't much on Queen west of there, especially no connecting bus routes. The next stop west of Bathurst could be Liberty Village, especially since SmartTrack isn't viable. And then north back to Queen at Dufferin, and have a station on Lansdowne between College and Dundas, and connect with Line 2 at Dundas West.

 

[WislaHD]

I think Tory is a great mayor, and I would vote for him again. But @Forgotten 's ad hominem toward him and point about 'Neptis shill' stuff is justified IMO, particularly when looking at the big picture. City Planning is doing a great job, and few question their direction or numbers. But it's pretty clear that both Tory and the Prov are the ones throwing wrenches into plans, forcing the City to work around Tory and Wynne's unified and virtually-identical newfound "priorities".

The majority of SmartTrack is Stouffville RER. Yes, a great concept and a laudable project. But the reality is that it came out of the blue, and was never part of the Big Move/RTP. Stouffville was always supposed to be AD2W using diesels. But in the last couple years Stouffville RER became an urgent need/priority for both the Prov and Tory. This alone raises some questions about what's going on behind closed doors. But more to the point, the project oddly seemed to coincide with a) the Prov/Metrolinx finally acknowledging that a Relief Line should be a 15-yr priority, b) Scarb Subway, c) the delaying of GO Richmond Hill improvements (both AD2W and Express Rail) to indefinite status quo status.

Tory is playing for both teams (the City and the Prov). And yeah he's a great mayor. But Stouffville RER / SmartTrack (same thing, really) is the project that's causing the gears to grind. And that's no fault of the City's.

And Neptis's involvement is where?

The Neptis Report on Metrolinx's Big Move by Michael Schabas criticized many Metrolinx items. The report thought the Crosstown should only function for Scarborough commuters to reach Etobicoke and vice versa and saw no need for the Relief Line.

Meanwhile, John Tory has identified the Relief Line as a priority, even saying it was a prerequisite before any Yonge North extension in recent days, and is now advocating for Crosstown East and West extensions with local stops.

 

[44 North]

And Neptis's involvement is where?

The Neptis Report on Metrolinx's Big Move by Michael Schabas criticized many Metrolinx items. The report thought the Crosstown should only function for Scarborough commuters to reach Etobicoke and vice versa and saw no need for the Relief Line.

Meanwhile, John Tory has identified the Relief Line as a priority, even saying it was a prerequisite before any Yonge North extension in recent days, and is now advocating for Crosstown East and West extensions with local stops.

I guess I used loose quotes there, so I didn't directly mean Neptis was involved. I was more drawing parallels between Schabas' shabby Neptis report (the one that said all of downtown and Line 1's capacity issues can be solved by simple GO upgrade), and the new plans for the Stouffville corridor that we're seeing now. Stouffville RER was never part of the RTP and Big Move (it was to be AD2W using diesel), so it seems a bit strange/coincidental that both Tory and the Prov individually decided that this line absolutely must be electrified with RER service in the near term.

This is odd for several reasons: 1) It came out of the blue; 2) it had low ridership when modeled for AD2W and performed poorly when studied for electrified service; 3) it interferes with preexisting plans (particularly the DRL and SSE, since they share similar catchments). It's also odd that York Region pols argued years ago that electrified Stouffville could be a "relief line" to extend Yonge north, and that Tory also used the word "relief" when pitching the plan.

Whether it was a genuine coincidence that Tory and the Prov both individually forwarded an unplanned project (one which reduces the ridership and potential of two planned subway projects, and also happens to provide some degree of Line 1 relief) I guess will remain a mystery. But it seems like something's going on there. And even though I think Tory is great for the city, and a good politician. I still don't fully believe he wants the DRL built to the same degree our Planning Department does. Yes he says Yonge needs a relief line. But he def seems a bit vague in his wording, or when showing direct support for the quintessential Relief Line we've come to know.

***

Even though it seems we're making great progress on getting the Relief Line finally started, my gut tells me that things are going to get a lot more convoluted and drawn-out. If we thought the recent deluge of reports concerning plans of ST, RER, RL, SSE were a lot to take in - then what about when the next phase of Metrolinx's YRNS drops later this year? More ideas, over a larger area, with input from York Region and QP... it'll be crazy. In the last few weeks we were greeted with reports showing all combinations of routing/ridership/fares/frequencies/development/etc. But I think that was just the tip of the iceberg.

 

[Forgotten]

Meanwhile, John Tory has identified the Relief Line as a priority, even saying it was a prerequisite before any Yonge North extension in recent days, and is now advocating for Crosstown East and West extensions with local stops.

That's just proof Tory will say anything depending on which way the wind is blowing. He's for it. He's against it. Now he's for it again?

On a related note, is anyone else relishing for the day they build a subway station to shelters for the destitute (instead of one at a major school campus and shopping/tourist site) because yay hypothetical development potential followed by the cries of foul when the "sketchy" folks with no place to go get scrubbed off the map? Now how do you figure B1 gets higher marks for social justice?

 

[GenerationW]

That's just proof Tory will say anything depending on which way the wind is blowing. He's for it. He's against it. Now he's for it again?

He has never been against it; just keeps changing how much he's for it.

 

[WislaHD]

On the note of the Relief Line, here is the schedule City Planning is offering now:

So with funding, we are looking for 2026/27 opening?

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

On the note of the Relief Line, here is the schedule City Planning is offering now:
So with funding, we are looking for 2026/27 opening?

Give them 5 years from approval to completion and let them sort the process out - we've let project schedule being dictated by the org for way, way too long - and even then, the end result was inability to deliver. Time to change that.

AoD

 

[TheTigerMaster]

On the note of the Relief Line, here is the schedule City Planning is offering now:

View attachment 69384

So with funding, we are looking for 2026/27 opening?

Hmm. That schedule is more rapid than even I was anticipating

 

[Northern Light]

Hmm. That schedule is more rapid than even I was anticipating

That's the most optimistic scenario. As at the current moment there is no funding for any configuration of the relief line.

The province does not appear to have any near-term room to fund a share.

That leaves the City which is already approaching its debt-ceiling and The Feds.

The latter, while likely generous w/the City in the near-term, I suspect will be funding mostly projects that can turned-over faster.

Cross-town West; the Waterfront East LRT come to mind for transit.

Though the City is also looking for significant funds for the Portlands/Don River project; for the Gardiner Hybrid and general re-hab; and for a long list of State-of-Good-Repair projects.

I'm very much of the belief the Relief line would be among the very best investments. But I don't expect it open before the 2030s, if we're lucky.

 

[DSC]

Hmm. That schedule is more rapid than even I was anticipating

As we have seen with many such schedules the ones people produce at the 'concept' stage of projects have VERY little to do with what actually happens.