News   Sep 18, 2020
 1.1K     2 
News   Sep 18, 2020
 892     0 
News   Sep 18, 2020
 10K     6 

TTC: Scarborough Subway Extension (formerly LRT replacement) (City of Toronto, Design Phase)

syn

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 26, 2007
Messages
4,497
Reaction score
2,131
How about the idea that NIMBYS exist and accept that reality. However places like Humber Bay Shores are begging for a subway and we are not giving it to them because some people want to label them downtown elites.
I don't think it's just NIMBYs. There are also historical considerations, neighbourhood character, market demand, etc. This is why subways used to be built where density already existed, rather than building it wherever politics dictated and hoping for the best.
 

syn

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 26, 2007
Messages
4,497
Reaction score
2,131
throwing out the entire relief line plan and starting from scratch doesn't seem like building transit "with some form of urgency" to me. Nor does throwing out the scarborough subway plan and starting that from scratch (although I do prefer the 3-stop plan).


Are you saying we will never have a fight over priority of transit projects again? That seems a little optimistic.
You're right.

It's not realistic to think that once Scarborough gets this line all will be well - especially when plenty of people in Scarborough realize their trips aren't that much shorter.
 

blacksquirrels

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 31, 2020
Messages
42
Reaction score
30
I don't think it's just NIMBYs. There are also historical considerations, neighbourhood character, market demand, etc. This is why subways used to be built where density already existed, rather than building it wherever politics dictated and hoping for the best.
It's NIMBYs + inept governments with no balls. NIMBYs complain about everything, including increased traffic on an already existing live transit corridor. People will always complain if you give them a platform to do so. Just build it. If it doesn't involve expropriation then it's none of their concern in my opinion. Can't move next to a transit corridor then complain when trains are supposed to used on it.
 

Northern Light

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 20, 2007
Messages
7,385
Reaction score
8,488
Location
Toronto/EY
I don't think it's just NIMBYs. There are also historical considerations, neighbourhood character, market demand, etc. This is why subways used to be built where density already existed, rather than building it wherever politics dictated and hoping for the best.
I'm not sure that's entirely accurate.

Yonge wasn't all that dense north of Bloor when the subway went in.

Many/Most of the massive rental blocks associated with St. Clair, Davisville and Eglinton followed the subway.

Much of the Line 2 route was low density and indeed still appears to be so.

If you follow Danforth east the only obviously high density pocket is at Main Street Station/Victoria Park Station, both of which were build concurrent to the subway.

Though, in the case of Line 2, a fairly high density pocket along Cosburn from Broadview to Donlands began to emerge pre-subway and was finished concurrently with same.

On the western side, the largest density appears at Dundas West, and then High Park; with both of those hi-rise sections built concurrently with or just after the subway opened.

All of which is to say, certainly some level of density is desirable; a subway to a corn field is not!

However, a reasonable assurance of density built with or immediately after a subway is not inherently poor planning.

*****

Of note, notwithstanding the relatively low density on much of Bloor West and Danforth; Line 2 is not all that far off capacity at peak times.

This is because feeder routes bring people from fairly large distances into the subway; and that too must be considered when planning.

None of which is to re-litigate any issues in this thread; merely to offer that things aren't as easily determined as one or even two simple metrics.
 
Last edited:

TorPronto

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 25, 2017
Messages
148
Reaction score
117
I'm not sure that's entirely accurate.

Yonge wasn't all that dense north of Bloor when the subway went in.

Many/Most of the massive rental blocks associated with St. Clair, Davisville and Eglinton followed the subway.

Much of the Line 2 route was low density and indeed still appears to be so.

If you follow Danforth east the only obviously high density pocket is at Main Street Station/Victoria Park Station, both of which were build concurrent to the subway.

Though, in the case of Line 2, a fairly high density pocket along Cosburn from Broadview to Donlands began to emerge pre-subway and was finished concurrently with same.

On the western side, the largest density appears at Dundas West, and then High Park; with both of those hi-rise sections built concurrently with or just after the subway opened.

All of which is to say, certainly some level of density is desirable; a subway to a corn field is not!

However, a reasonable assurance of density built with or immediately after a subway is not inherently poor planning.

*****

Of note, notwithstanding the relatively low density on much of Bloor West and Danforth; Line 2 is not all that far off capacity at peak times.

This is because feeder routes bring people from fairly large distances into the subway; and that too must be considered when planning.

None of which is to re-litigate any issues in this thread; merely to offer that things aren't as easily determined as one or even two simple metrics.
Further to this, it seems the PC government is keen on TOD so it wouldn't surprise if they force an upzoning wherever there are new subway stops
 

OneCity

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 28, 2016
Messages
1,821
Reaction score
716
OneCity, you seem to be a strong supporter of building subway lines in suburban Scarborough, where the densities don't really necessitate it, and where lower-capacity transit solutions like LRT and BRT would provide speedy transit without the unneeded capacity and at a SIGNIFICANTLY lower cost. (I understand your insistence on connecting Scarborough Town Center to the subway to serve as a hub, and that seems logical to me, I'm mostly talking about Sheppard East here). Do you also believe we should be doing so in places with similar build forms, Etobicoke, Mississauga, Markham, Pickering, North York etc? If not, why?
First off Scarborough is part of Toronto and should have it's Centre connected to the main transit arteries it pays into with no issues. Unfortunately issues came but im glad we moved on to build a solid legacy for Central Scarbororough.

As for the 905:

I'm a strong supporter of Misssauga Centre being connected to the Line 2 after Yonge

Vaughan already connected

Richmond Hill built 15-20 years out

Sheppard built 20-25 years out

20 - 30 plus years out I would expect:
Markham will be planning stages for an SSE extension Pickering may even be planning stages a Sheppard extension

In addition to any required Core relief line and extensions this is how I see the subway network progressing as the GTA grows its urban-suburban Growth nodes moving forward
 

Steve X

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 16, 2016
Messages
1,871
Reaction score
1,186
First off Scarborough is part of Toronto and should have it's Centre connected to the main transit arteries it pays into with no issues. Unfortunately issues came but im glad we moved on to build a solid legacy for Central Scarbororough.

As for the 905:

I'm a strong supporter of Misssauga Centre being connected to the Line 2 after Yonge

Vaughan already connected

Richmond Hill built 15-20 years out

Sheppard built 20-25 years out

20 - 30 plus years out I would expect:
Markham will be planning stages for an SSE extension Pickering may even be planning stages a Sheppard extension

In addition to any required Core relief line and extensions this is how I see the subway network progressing as the GTA grows its urban-suburban Growth nodes moving forward
I feel like the best we'll see is Line 2 extension to Dundas/Hurontario
 

CaskoChan

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jun 25, 2020
Messages
42
Reaction score
57
Location
Caledon East
I feel like the best we'll see is Line 2 extension to Dundas/Hurontario
Now that would be epic. By extending Line 2 to mississauga, it would then be a connection to the Hurontario LRT, so people from Brampton could take it to the line 2 transfer, then take it to downtown Toronto.

let me know what you think.
 

Northern Light

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 20, 2007
Messages
7,385
Reaction score
8,488
Location
Toronto/EY
Hmmm.

I tend to think Line 1 and 2 are reaching their outer logical lengths.

But I decided to see how long other Metro lines get.

A-Train is the longest route in NYC best I can tell, at about 49km

While London's Central Line is 54.9km

****

Line 1: 46.2km after the YNSE is complete to #7

Further extending this to Major Mack would add 3.8km for a total of 50.0km

Line 2: will be 33.8km after the SSE completes

Extending to Sherway Gardens is about 3.7km (based on previous plans)
From there to Hurontario/Dundas is 6km (measure by Google Map)

So that would bring Line 2 to 42.5km

Extending the SSE up to Markham (McCowan and #7) adds 9km bringing the grand total of this 150-year fantasy project to 51.5km.
 

W. K. Lis

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
17,505
Reaction score
6,198
Location
Toronto, ON, CAN, Terra, Sol, Milky Way
Hmmm.

I tend to think Line 1 and 2 are reaching their outer logical lengths.

But I decided to see how long other Metro lines get.

A-Train is the longest route in NYC best I can tell, at about 49km

While London's Central Line is 54.9km

****

Line 1: 46.2km after the YNSE is complete to #7

Further extending this to Major Mack would add 3.8km for a total of 50.0km

Line 2: will be 33.8km after the SSE completes

Extending to Sherway Gardens is about 3.7km (based on previous plans)
From there to Hurontario/Dundas is 6km (measure by Google Map)

So that would bring Line 2 to 42.5km

Extending the SSE up to Markham (McCowan and #7) adds 9km bringing the grand total of this 150-year fantasy project to 51.5km.
A two-hour ride for one fare (allegedly). Compare with a taxi or Uber fare, or the fuel used by your motor vehicle.
 

ARG1

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 28, 2020
Messages
169
Reaction score
331
it makes no sense extending subways that far into the suburbs. if you're going downtown, it's called GO Transit ffs.
There are some locations where GO Transit isn't feasible. The Richmond Hill Line will NEVER be anything more than just rush hour commuter rail because A) its in a flood plain, and B) due to its routing, it will be nearly impossible for them to build connections to any TTC line other than Leslie on Line 4 and Union. As Metrolinx has stated themselves, that line has no future in regional rail. Milton line is another case where because the track is owned by CP, it would probably cost as much to pay off CP to finally be able to build a proper regional rail service on the line, as it would to extend Line 2 far into Mississauga. Its also important to add however that most of where the subway is today used to be in suburbs. When projects like the Yonge Line extension to North York was built, the idea of a "North York Centre" was just that, an idea. North York Centre was built purely because of the subway corridor. When paired with proper city planning, subways turn suburbs into High-Rise corridors. There is a reason why if you view any aerial view of Toronto, you will find most density around where subway corridors are located, namely Yonge. Finally, GO Transit is incredibly good at being like an express route for longer distance commutes, especially travelling between the different cities in the GTA. You know what its not good for? More locally oriented transit. GO Transit should not exist and could not exist "on its own", it needs to be supplemented by a more local mode of rapid transportation to fill in the gaps, which includes either LRT, or Subways, or even Busways.
 

kali

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jun 21, 2020
Messages
303
Reaction score
296
^yes I know all that. The point is that many of these extensions make no sense when there are much more pressing needs in the system. I say that as someone who supports a 3 stop elevated SSE and YNSE, but those are the only suburban extensions needed at this point. The entitlement with which some members (well maybe only one) post here about how Scarborough is owed a line 4 extension boils my blood. Who died and gave you carte blance with the chequebook?

If Scarborough needs to get downtown quickly, they'll have GO RER/Expansion on the Stouffville and LSE lines. Missisauga has LSW. Milton is the odd one out, but that doesn't justify extending line 2.
 
Last edited:

syn

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 26, 2007
Messages
4,497
Reaction score
2,131
I'm not sure that's entirely accurate.

Yonge wasn't all that dense north of Bloor when the subway went in.

Many/Most of the massive rental blocks associated with St. Clair, Davisville and Eglinton followed the subway.


Much of the Line 2 route was low density and indeed still appears to be so.

If you follow Danforth east the only obviously high density pocket is at Main Street Station/Victoria Park Station, both of which were build concurrent to the subway.

Though, in the case of Line 2, a fairly high density pocket along Cosburn from Broadview to Donlands began to emerge pre-subway and was finished concurrently with same.

On the western side, the largest density appears at Dundas West, and then High Park; with both of those hi-rise sections built concurrently with or just after the subway opened.

All of which is to say, certainly some level of density is desirable; a subway to a corn field is not!

However, a reasonable assurance of density built with or immediately after a subway is not inherently poor planning.

*****

Of note, notwithstanding the relatively low density on much of Bloor West and Danforth; Line 2 is not all that far off capacity at peak times.

This is because feeder routes bring people from fairly large distances into the subway; and that too must be considered when planning.

None of which is to re-litigate any issues in this thread; merely to offer that things aren't as easily determined as one or even two simple metrics.
You're right about density. However, when the Yonge Subway was built, streetcar service was essentially at capacity. A subway was the next logical step.

Yonge may not have been as dense north of Bloor, but it's a major commercial thoroughfare with a direct link downtown.

The same can't be said for subway expansion locations over the past 50 years.

Feeder routes are needed in suburban areas because they don't have the density to justify higher order transit. I'm all for investing in these areas, but in a manner that makes sense.

If we stuck to the strategy that saw the Yonge Line built, the DRL would've been up and running decades ago and we wouldn't be in our current predicament.
 
Last edited:

Top