News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.2K     0 

I'm gonna laugh when whatever LRT contraption they build is at capacity on day one, which will then keep the thousands of lost riders away. I personally account for about 200 of the 6 million lost rides each year since I now go home exclusively via Finch station even though I take the RT downtown.
 
If a subway doesn't make sense between Kennedy and Scarborough Centre it can not possibly make sense along Sheppard and cannot possibly make sense to Vaughan where no current LRT/BRT ROW exists. I really think that if money is not available for a subway to Scarborough Centre then we should not be spending it on a Spadina line extension. If Kennedy to SCC doesn't warrant a subway then I am completely fine with that but I want the same criteria applied when looking at other routes rather than the hokey political game method of determining where subways go that seems to happen now.

Look at TTC's RTES document from 2002:
www.toronto.ca/ttc/pdf/rtes2002.pdf

Note page 12 of 49: Big light blue area indicating 100 to 250 (persons + jobs)/ha. Bigger land area in blue near SCC compared to York U indicates greater total population + jobs.

Note page 35 of 49: Scarbourough RT had boardings of 16,259 per km in 2000.

Note page 37 or 49: Steeles extension of Spadina line is expected to have approximately 13,500 boardings per km. Obviously less than the 16,259 the SRT already had in 2000.

Note page 38 of 49: Option A4 (CN/CP extension of Sheppard line) shows low density of 112 within 500m but option A5 (SCC extention of Sheppard line) shows density of 148. This shows that SCC must have very high density to have pushed up the numbers that significantly with the lengthening of the line between those points. SCC has pushed the density above the 137 on option E1 (Steeles extention of Spadina line). Obviously the subway to SCC from Kennedy wins this metric as well due to the high density of the SCC area.

Note page 39 of 49: The Steeles extension of the Spadina line fails this test... it is below the density threshold for 2km. The Sheppard Line extension to SCC beats it handily. Since CN/CP (A4) also passes this test easily it is hard to say whether the weight of SCC would push the Kennedy to SCC numbers above the threshold it is intuitive that if a line from SCC to North York is passing the test then the more popular route to downtown should also pass the test.

So obviously the TTCs own information shows the subway to Scarborough makes more sense than the Steeles extention of the Spadina line. Because the TTC doesn't have money for the SCC extention though you will hear a song and dance about how it makes no sense to extend the subway to SCC when an LRT would work perfectly. This despite the fact TTCs own numbers show it makes more sense than a Spadina line extension, despite the fact that the line would pass the success criteria used in the RTES study, and despite the fact that nobody is talking about how it makes more sense to put an LRT/BRT into York U.
 
Enviro: Your analysis makes perfect sense and I would have to agree with what you have said in terms of what routes do or do not warrant subway service.

However, one issue that I think plays a critical role in the LRT v. subway debate is the network itself. If LRT is going to be adopted as form of transit to be used to replace many plans for subway extensions than it really cannot be done in ad hoc manner. In many cases the extensions (such as SRT replacement or Vaughan) are on networks that feed directly into downtown and it would seem practical to just keep extending the subway line instead of opting for a new transportation form that requires a transfer and wait times.

But if money is an issue (which it is), and the new extensions don't make a lot of sense (which some don't), and no single option seems to stand out as one that clearly makes the most sense, then it is really time to partly go back to drawing board on transit planning.

SRT is good example of how no one plan right now is really all that great. Each has flaws that are large enough and important enough that it is hard to adopt any of them. I would suggest though that Scarborough is also a perfect opportunity (again) to think outside of normal transit planning and develop a plan that actually makes sense and serves its purpose. SRT was not a bad idea. But from I can see it had two majors flaws. The first is that it was a new technology and stood alone from the rest of the system. The second is that it simply went to Kennedy and required that obnoxious transfer. But in terms of size and capacity of the service it seems ideal for suburban purposes.

I cannot say exactly what I would suggest as an alternative to SRT. I think that if the TTC where able to work with GO than a newly revamped GO line running Talents (or some other trainset that could perhaps run all the way to Union) could help serve Scarboroughs needs. Perhaps an LRT system with comprehensive coverage and multiple points of transfer leading downtown would work well too. Whatever it is, I really hope that they don't simply opt for the status quo, ignore politics as much as possible and actually think these problems through.
 
National Post

Link to article


Expand RT in Scarborough, report suggests
Improving existing system cheaper than extending subway line


Katie Rook, National Post
Published: Friday, August 25, 2006

An independent consultant is recommending the Toronto Transit Commission enhance Scarborough's Rapid Transit system rather than expand a subway line to accommodate a growing ridership.

The proposed $360-million upgrade would service the most people and is the least expensive, the report states.

An expansion of the streetcar system and the extension of the Bloor-Danforth subway line are also explored as options.

The current system will reach its life expectancy in 2012 and is currently overburdened, carrying as many as 4,500 passengers an hour in the busiest direction, the report states.

Buses run parallel to the SRT line to accommodate the overflow.

City councillor Brian Ashton said he originally supported an extended subway but now believes investing in the existing technology is the best option.

Mr. Ashton would also like to see the enhancement coupled with an expansion of street car technology.

The report, written by Richard Soberman, a transportation expert, was presented to Scarborough city councillors on Wednesday in a briefing. It will go before the TTC next Wednesday, Mr. Ashton said.

Upgrading the line is expected to cost $190-million, while replacing the existing fleet of RT vehicles would cost about $170-million, the report states. Service would be disrupted for up to eight months.

City councillor and budget chief David Soknacki said he too originally supported a subway expansion but now believes the proposed enhancements would better serve riders from across Scarborough.

"The goal is to bring people back to transit," he said.

The proposed refurbishments would also improve accessibility and make Kennedy station more easy to navigate, he said.
 
LOL. Why not refurbish and move the SRT trains to the Vaughan extension and use that intead of a subway in the same way that it currently acts as an extension to the subway for Scarborough. Replace the existing SRT with whatever LRT option they're currently thinking of. Save $1B :) j/k
 
Actually, that's what systems are now doing for the suburbs - downgrade to a cheaper lower capacity system that feeds into the subway.

Paris is generally touted as an example, as is has two tramway lines connecting metro stations across the suburbs.
www.ratp.info/orienter/tramway.php#

Similarly, London has the Croydon Tramlink and is planning on expanding it. www.tfl.gov.uk/trams/init...ndex.shtml

It's just a question of determining where to end the subway and ending it in a city centre (i.e. Vaughan) or subcentre makes more sense than ending it in the middle of nowhere (Downsview / Kennedy).
 
Ending a subway in Vaughan makes more sense than ending it at Downsview or Kennedy? All I have to say to that is WTF? Just WTF.
 
I'm a bit confused. When they refer to LRT replacement, are they talking about London Docklands-style trains or traditional streetcars? If they're talking the second option, I'd say no right away.

Also, thinking about the traffic, am I right to assume that most people, like me when I lived in Scarborough, take it downtown, and not to other places in Scarborough? If so, having subway extensions from Kennedy (and Don Mills) makes more sense than a Scarborough network of LRTs. Scarborough isn't a standalone node to warrant that.

One of the negative criticisms towards the DLR here in London is that with so much expansion, it's making it less convenient to go from one end to the other, compared to an overland or underground.
 
It's not Docklands style transit that they're proposing. It's traditional streetcars in private rights of way.
 
Ending it at Downsview or Kennedy would just end it at a big parking lot - i.e. where should a big transit node be located? Ending a subway line at Vaughan or Scarborough Centre would end it at a destination or hub. That would result in fewer forced transfers.
 
Scarborough yes, but Vaughan Corporate Centre, um, no. What a subway requires is density, and VCC does NOT have that. Not even close.
 
VCC isn't built yet...in 20 or 30 years we might be kicking ourselves for stopping at Steeles, just like we're angry now that they stopped at Kennedy, Finch, and Kipling.
 
"It's traditional streetcars in private rights of way."

They're likely not to be traditional streetcars, but instead modern light-rail vehicles which can be a pretty big difference. But still not like the DLR, which is pretty similar to the current SRT.
 
scarberian why on earth would we build to vcc, which as you say is not even built yet, when we are still "kicking" ourselves for stopping at kipling and kennedy? subways aren't built to ANTICIPATE demand. They should be built where demand warrants them. Transit planning in Toronto is so ill-conceived it just drives me up the wall. It's political and parochial and just overall bad. It's not entirely Toronto's fault, but it was Toronto's idea to extend to York U, when the Scarborough line is falling apart and much more deserving of a subway. Or finish the Sheppard line! Finish what you start! Or restart Eglinton. Hell, the Yonge line needs to go to Steeles more than Spadina! Just none of it makes sense and its so frustrating. Of course transit fans are just as bad as the average joe at transit planning. subways everywhere! they cry. yes lets build a subway to vaughan, and the airport too! and the zoo, and the science centre, and along queen street, and the dvp, and to brampton!

why, oh why, are the europeans so much better at this than us?
yes, woe is me. lol.
 
"scarberian why on earth would we build to vcc, which as you say is not even built yet, when we are still "kicking" ourselves for stopping at kipling and kennedy?"

Because if we don't accept this subway now, we may not get another for a very long time - I'd rather have the least wanted subway than none at all. The feds and provs are not just going to give the money to the TTC for other projects instead. Toronto will save money by stretching the extension from York to VCC.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top