News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 8.9K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5.1K     0 

I almost hope sheer wins so you can have a pc in all three levels of government and after four years still not have a shovel in the ground. However I live on Eglinton and I'm not exactly willing to have my tunnel filled in with dirt just to prove my point.
 
Canada line was privately planned. I doubt it will be heralded as such a success in 20 years (platforms not designed to be easily expanded to length on Metro line, no station possible at W57th, and shutdown issues on the skybridge because the motors can't cope with slippery rails as well as LIM).
By the same team as the REM, and I still don't see the Canada Line as being underbuilt. The STM yellow and blue lines were overbuilt. It's an OCD thing on this forum to build things for the next 200 years because transit planning is so inefficient.
 
I almost hope sheer wins so you can have a pc in all three levels of government and after four years still not have a shovel in the ground. However I live on Eglinton and I'm not exactly willing to have my tunnel filled in with dirt just to prove my point.

Stop reminding us how you lucked out to happenstance live near a future "subway" stop. Lol! :p
 
Only because the CDPQi is doing it. The official governing authority (ARTM) is so slow to plan things that the government gave three new projects to the CDPQi directly, bypassing the authority.

Much like the Ontario line, transit must be privately planned to get the most efficient system.

So in other words, big government was the problem, same as here, with political agendas mucking up the works. An independent or at least semi-autonomous body in tandem with the private sector could probably get us all these big ticket items built in no time. To wit, REM Montreal was just a fantasy a couple years ago and look at it now. Vancouver's Canada Line also just took 5 short years to build. Maybe more of that work ethic and less of the decade long time periods it takes just to build TYSSE and the Crosstown is what's needed here.
 
We have to remember that scarborough isn't that far from downtown, and regardless, the mode share downtown consists of mainly transit and walking. If you're going to build a subway connection in Scarborough, the best place to go is Downtown.

It's also worth noting that 23% in Scarborough is like 150K trips per day. Those are current transit trips. If you add a line that goes downtown, obviously more people are going to go downtown. People don't take transit from scarborough to other areas because it's too inconvenient and not worth it (parking costs, traffic, etc).

This reasoning doesn't make sense to me.

If you add a line that goes downtown, more people will go downtown? That may be true, but it also won't change the fact that 77% of trips aren't going downtown. Nearly 50% of trips begin and end in Scarborough. That percentage isn't going to drastically change because of the SSE.

What's clear is that there's what you could call a 'quiet majority' in Scarborough who'd like enhanced inter-Scarborough travel. The current SSE plan makes inter-Scarborough travel worse, not better.

The SSE is also not a subway downtown. You still have to transfer. Expecting a transfer free trip on the subway when you live near Markham just isn't realistic.

Scarborough may not be far from downtown in some areas, but it's fairly large and poorly planned. STC is roughly 25km from Union Station, which is nearly the same distance from Union to Square One.

The most reasonable option for any subway would be to extend Sheppard to STC, with a DRL that goes to Don Mills. An LRT from Kennedy would then be the most sensible option, along with an Eglinton LRT East to Malvern.
 
So in other words, big government was the problem, same as here, with political agendas mucking up the works. An independent or at least semi-autonomous body in tandem with the private sector could probably get us all these big ticket items built in no time. To wit, REM Montreal was just a fantasy a couple years ago and look at it now. Vancouver's Canada Line also just took 5 short years to build. Maybe more of that work ethic and less of the decade long time periods it takes just to build TYSSE and the Crosstown is what's needed here.
The REM (albeit just a section) will open the same year as the Crosstown, which started construction 7 years prior, crazy.
 
If the government just promised to build 2km of subway every year in Toronto. That would mean that it would take about 10 years to complete the DRL LONG. Then the debate would be where next to build which I'm sure DRL west would win. Another 10 years to complete. Then we would be looking at extending this line to STC 20 years later. That might sound far away and not efficient but realistically when are these shovels getting in the ground. And at least building 3km of subway each year brings some optimism to the city and an idea that eventually they will get to my area no matter how far off the beaten path it is.
 
If the government just promised to build 2km of subway every year in Toronto. That would mean that it would take about 10 years to complete the DRL LONG. Then the debate would be where next to build which I'm sure DRL west would win. Another 10 years to complete. Then we would be looking at extending this line to STC 20 years later. That might sound far away and not efficient but realistically when are these shovels getting in the ground. And at least building 3km of subway each year brings some optimism to the city and an idea that eventually they will get to my area no matter how far off the beaten path it is.

We had that option with Jane Pitfield's candidacy in 2006 and y'all went with David Miller instead.
 
This reasoning doesn't make sense to me.

If you add a line that goes downtown, more people will go downtown? That may be true, but it also won't change the fact that 77% of trips aren't going downtown. Nearly 50% of trips begin and end in Scarborough. That percentage isn't going to drastically change because of the SSE.

What's clear is that there's what you could call a 'quiet majority' in Scarborough who'd like enhanced inter-Scarborough travel. The current SSE plan makes inter-Scarborough travel worse, not better.
The trips within Scarborough are best serve with buses.
I assume residents know that taking the bust 2 stops to buy groceries, or kids going a few stops to school, can never be improved by an LRT with stop spacing 4 times farther apart. You save a few seconds of travel time, but increase walk time by minutes.
The only time the benefits of rail transit can be ahcieved are if the rider is on the transit long enough to see the benefit of the faster speed. By definition, the local trips are short enough that they don't see benefit. (Unless you have some statistic to show that a majority of those 77% of trips are actually over 15 or 20km in length).

The SSE is also not a subway downtown. You still have to transfer.
Before I put any thought into it, I too was in favour of extending the B-D line to STC. That extra transfer at the busiest station in the entire network was proof of how bad it was. It was also proof of how bad the Transit City plan was - as it forced riders to follow that exact same travel pattern, but with 1 extra transfer. So Transit City either had the exact same problem as SSE, or it relied on the fact that enough potential riders would be upset with the extra transfer that they would drive. I don't think that relying on people to drive should be the goal of a transit line.
The most reasonable option for any subway would be to extend Sheppard to STC, with a DRL that goes to Don Mills. An LRT from Kennedy would then be the most sensible option, along with an Eglinton LRT East to Malvern.
What is needed is subway or rapid transit for the distant travel, and buses for local - and no LRT.
The grade-separated Eglinton-Scarborough Crosstown was the best idea that has been floated in the past 30 years. Anyone with enough foresight to imagine a DRL Long should have been in favour of the combined option. A bit of extension to Malvern - which would have easily happened as more money became available - would have been perfect.
 
Meanwhile...

Editorial: Want a Subway? Then Single-Family Zoning Has to Go

From link.

For most of its run from West Portal to Balboa Park, the M Ocean View Muni line runs past neat rows of low-density, single-family houses. Supervisor Norman Yee, who represents the district it runs through, has consistently objected to legislation that would bring more density along the line.

That position is totally inconsistent with his successful push to authorize spending nearly $1 million to accelerate a study on undergrounding the M Ocean View line. The ultimate price tag to put that line in a subway is around $3 billion.

Perhaps he hasn’t heard, but subways are notoriously expensive and complicated. The costs are justified only where the terrain demands it (such as with the West Portal tunnel, cut through a hill) or because it’s the only way to serve an area with no available right of way, narrow streets, and/or enormous densities (think Market Street, Chinatown, downtown Oakland, or midtown Manhattan).

“We have to tether precious transit investment dollars to density. The M should be undergrounded only if we rezone the neighborhoods it serves to be more dense, with a minimum sixty-foot height limit,” said Todd David of the San Francisco Housing Action Coalition.

Streetsblog has a call in to Yee to find out how he reconciles his two positions. So far we have not been able to connect with him, but we’ll update this post when he calls back.

Meanwhile, since the M Ocean View is basically the only Muni line that already has substantial portions running on its own right of way (down the center of 19th Avenue, for example, as pictured in the lead image), on flat, level ground, it is the last place to spend money on a subway. How about a subway or other right of way upgrades for the N Judah, L Taraval, T Third, or K Ingleside on Ocean Avenue, or someplace that doesn’t have any rail service at all, such as Geary and the Richmond District?

M_line.0208.jpg

This diagram illustrates the lengths the city will go to preserve car lanes. Image: SFMTA

As Streetsblog has pointed out previously, if the city really wants to speed up the M Ocean View and make it more reliable, they know how to do it: add crossing gates and give the line pre-emption over car traffic. This is standard in other cities with rail. Take the San Diego trolley, seen below, which is far more reliable than Muni, thanks to crossing gates on the vast majority of its track.

There is, of course, one part of the M Ocean View line with sufficient density to start to justify a subway–and that’s Park Merced, which was always the driver for this project. But Park Merced is also close to BART, which is much faster and has higher capacity than the M Ocean View could ever have, even in a subway tunnel. If the point is to serve Park Merced, why not consider a spur that branches off from BART’s line between Balboa and Daly City at Alemany Boulevard and then use the trench of Brotherhood Way to reach Park Merced? Since it’s already below grade, no subway tunnels would be required, and only a few short sections of aerial track are needed to connect to the existing BART right of way.

With a BART connection, Park Merced residents would get a much faster and more reliable, higher-capacity train to downtown San Francisco (and beyond) for a fraction of the cost of putting the M Ocean View underground. David, meanwhile, just wants to see efficient transit moving lots of people to and from denser housing. “I’m agnostic on how we accomplish that. The subway doesn’t have to be dug. If we can use other methods, cool – let’s go for that”

If Yee is still determined to improve the M Ocean View, forget subways: let’s start with something simple, such as removing the turning pockets at the Stonestown Galleria, which forces trains full of hundreds of people to sit behind left-turning cars waiting to enter a shopping mall. That would cost less than the subway study did, and would actually improve the commutes of thousands of Yee’s constituents
 
^ M Ocean View line runs straight through downtown San Fransisco. The debate there is whether to place some sections underground.

The problem over there is distinct from the one in Scarborough, where the main goal of SSE is to reduce the number of transfers.
 
By the same team as the REM, and I still don't see the Canada Line as being underbuilt. The STM yellow and blue lines were overbuilt. It's an OCD thing on this forum to build things for the next 200 years because transit planning is so inefficient.
How exactly is the blue line overbuilt if there has been a business case to extend it since the 80's?
 

Back
Top