[AlvinofDiaspar]

If that's the case then why are people acting like this funding for the SRT replacement subway is somehow taking funding away from a future DRL?

Actually, I think a better argument is that the SRT replacement subway without a complementary discussion of long-term funding sources just makes this a one-off, which isn't helpful to anything but electioneering. The city has to raise property taxes just for this one project while appearing to close the door on other revenue sources - just what does that look like to you?

AoD

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

If that's the case then why are people acting like this funding for the SRT replacement subway is somehow taking funding away from a future DRL?

Because, IMHO, the debate is not about whether Scarborough should have an LRT or a subway, since no one who is funding whatever gets built really cared to have even the level of discussion we're having here.

It's because this "process" exposed, for all to see, that the existence of Metrolinx as an apolitical transit planning agency is irrelevant. City council, the mayor, the province and the feds will all keep funding whatever projects are electorally expedient, and on a piecemeal basis.

Because the DRL is needed (and the same could be said for other regional projects in the Big Move) downtown, it is not crucial for Rob Ford or Stephen Harper who, if he wanted to, could have signalled his $660M contribution as the start of a new federal commitment to urban transportation infrastructure. But it wasn't that at all. It was about making Kathleen Wynne look bad and supporting Rob Ford and the small-c conservative suburbs. In short, while one could easily applaud the fact that everyone is coming together to build rapid transit in Scarborough, one must equally be aware how this process has been 100% political and not all about what is actually best for the city of Toronto, and certainly not the GTA at large.

The process, as I see it, is that the city reversed itself on multiple occasions, wasting years of construction and sunk costs as well. The province first allowed them to do this and then randomly allowed the Minister to announce his own, modified plan which, unlike the city's "final answer" is at least fully funded. And then the PM, loving the opportunity to stick it to the Liberals, announced that the Ford-city plan was now "a done deal" even though they funded only about 1/2 of the outstanding costs. So "done deal" still isn't really done, until someone finds another billion lying around.

None of that bodes as well a precedent for those who would like to think that a reasonable person, looking at the objective evidence, sees the need for a DRL and will come up with a reasonable plan to fund it in the near future.

That's my negative spin on it anyhow.

 

[Transportfan]

I think the Scarborough Subway could come very close to neutrality, even moderate profitability.

I'd think so, considering the RT is often overcrowded. I'm amazed so many ppl think this subway extension is a bad idea, especially since a subway extension was debated even decades ago when the RT was being planned

 

[innsertnamehere]

the Subway isn't such a bad idea that people wonder if you lack some certian mental abilities like if you think the sheppard subway should be built, the subway here really is something you can weigh fairly evenly with the LRT. in the end this subway is fairly competative (though slightly below it) with an LRT replacement. If we are getting the money for "free" like we are (be honest, we wouldn't have gotten that subway money if it wasn't this project) I am perfectly fine with it.

 

[scott pilgrim]

I have no heartaches over the sad realization [to some] that democracy works and you can't ram something down a community's throats or they might actually vote their representatives out. Imagine that. Voters actually pursuing self-interest. Politicians should absolutely be scared of voters. And they should absolutely respond to the concerns of voters. After all, these are the voters who live there, put up with these decisions and pay the taxes for these projects.

If transit planners and geeks want to win a fight, well, do your best to convince the voters, not lobby politicians. This is as it should be in any democracy.

If voters in the GTHA actually adopted such a mentality region wide, we wouldn't be in the mess we're in today.

Way back in the thread, but ughhh:

Your understanding of democracy is horrid and leads to politicians like Karen Stintz and her ilk. If this to you is the system succeeding, I'd hate to see what failure looks like.

Also, don't be so contemptuous of the planners, engineers and transit policy people who studied and worked years on this, and other projects. It is their job to give society their collective professional opinion and every solid plan/strategy has been thrown back in their faces by politicians without any understanding of the contents. This is not "Thank You for Smoking" type lobbying, thinking of it as such is a doing a disservice to competent and ethical professionals.

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

Way back in the thread, but ughhh:

Your understanding of democracy is horrid and leads to politicians like Karen Stintz and her ilk. If this to you is the system succeeding, I'd hate to see what failure looks like.

Also, don't be so contemptuous of the planners, engineers and transit policy people who studied and worked years on this, and other projects. It is their job to give society their collective professional opinion and every solid plan/strategy has been thrown back in their faces by politicians without any understanding of the contents. This is not "Thank You for Smoking" type lobbying, thinking of it as such is a doing a disservice to competent and ethical professionals.

^^^^
Yeah, what he said.

 

[M II A II R II K]

Federal cash brings no clarity to subway debate

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/federal-cash-brings-no-clarity-to-subway-debate-1.1866005

.....

With no consensus on even the broad-strokes of the plan despite countless studies, TTC CEO Andy Byford and Murray both appeared on CBC Radio’s Metro Morning on Tuesday.

Glen Murray

While he welcomes Ottawa’s contribution, he believes a $1.4 billion, provincially funded plan he put forward last month and running along the existing Scarborough RT right-of-way will serve more people.
Murray also touted his line as “fully funded” though it’s been criticized for stopping short of Sheppard Avenue East. A TTC report released Monday also claims the Murray plan doesn't account for all costs.
Murray admits he’s “fed up” with the transit debate and said he’s willing to look at changes to the alignment.

Andy Byford

TTC’s CEO is also happy to see the feds write a cheque but admits the Scarborough subway debate hasn’t exactly been a model for efficient transit planning, which he said is too often “driven by particular local agendas.”

This longer quote from Metro Morning spells out Byford's concerns about how transit planning is done in Toronto: "In order for us to successfully develop a network that will serve Toronto well ... you've got to have a system whereby people aren't calling for particular projects based upon their tenure as a politician. You've got to have visionaries in this city who are doing the right thing regardless of what the personal consequences might be. We've got to get to an apolitical, common-sense, consensus-based planning process."

Byford, whose resume includes the London Underground, said Toronto is “the most complex place that I've ever worked in terms of transit planning, the fact that you have three levels of government. Transit planning does seem to be driven by particular local agendas.”

Like Murray, Byford points out that expanding the subway system outward only worsens the already intense crowding during rush hours. “This expedites the need for the downtown relief line,” said Byford.

.....

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

Federal cash brings no clarity to subway debate

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/federal-cash-brings-no-clarity-to-subway-debate-1.1866005

Like Murray, Byford points out that expanding the subway system outward only worsens the already intense crowding during rush hours. “This expedites the need for the downtown relief line,” said Byford.

.....

This is pretty funny. Of course, it's true, simplistically. Obviously the system is so malnourished that any expansion anywhere but downtown worsens the crowding but that also doesn't mean transit isn't needed outside downtown. I sympathize with their conundrum - how to serve fast-growing, undeserved suburbs with an inadequate downtown system - but this piecemeal, pork barrel process isn't the answer. Since you basically can't do ANYTHING without the DRL, why did it only become a city priority like 2 years ago?

There's probably a way to build more than one thing at a time (so everything you build isn't expediting the need for some other project that, if built, would facilitate other much-needed projects) but then that would require actual planning and co-operating and I haven't seen much of either of those these past few months. If only there was some outside agency with the ability to devise a regional plan, set priorities and ensure that a few local councillors and point-scoring politicians aren't driving the transit agenda for the entire GTA. Dare to dream!

 

[rbt]

This is pretty funny. Of course, it's true, simplistically. Obviously the system is so malnourished that any expansion anywhere but downtown worsens the crowding but that also doesn't mean transit isn't needed outside downtown. I sympathize with their conundrum - how to serve fast-growing, undeserved suburbs with an inadequate downtown system - but this piecemeal, pork barrel process isn't the answer. Since you basically can't do ANYTHING without the DRL, why did it only become a city priority like 2 years ago?

The challenge is some of the people pushing suburban expansion are also actively working against raising funds to fix the overcrowding issue.

 

[Adjei]

This is pretty funny. Of course, it's true, simplistically. Obviously the system is so malnourished that any expansion anywhere but downtown worsens the crowding but that also doesn't mean transit isn't needed outside downtown. I sympathize with their conundrum - how to serve fast-growing, undeserved suburbs with an inadequate downtown system - but this piecemeal, pork barrel process isn't the answer. Since you basically can't do ANYTHING without the DRL, why did it only become a city priority like 2 years ago?

There's probably a way to build more than one thing at a time (so everything you build isn't expediting the need for some other project that, if built, would facilitate other much-needed projects) but then that would require actual planning and co-operating and I haven't seen much of either of those these past few months. If only there was some outside agency with the ability to devise a regional plan, set priorities and ensure that a few local councillors and point-scoring politicians aren't driving the transit agenda for the entire GTA. Dare to dream!

Until that outside agency find away to fund itself without any public money, politicians will always be involved in transit planning. As long as public money is building our transit, politicians will be involved.

 

[datamouse]

Oh man the TTC almost voted against reaffirming the McCowan alignment until it passed 6-4 on a 2nd vote.

 

[gweed123]

Interesting to note that if the vote on the tax increase to pay for the subway falls though, the $660 million that the Feds chipped in is about the right amount to elevate Eglinton East and connect with the SLRT. Even if the money is committed for Scarborough, the Province can easily transfer some of their $1.8 billion off the SLRT and onto the ECLRT.

Let's just hope that if the tax increase falls through that someone offers that up as an honest Plan B (or is it C or D by this point?). It's not every day that the Feds chip in that much money for transit, and it would be a shame to let that go to waste.

 

[BurlOak]

The Eglinton line up to Don Mills is already a "subway". We just need to get some extra funding to make it a full rapid transit (elevated or tunneled) line up to Kennedy. If this was done in the first place (as per Ford/McGuinty's plan), we wouldn't have this back and forth now.

Wonder if the extra cash needed to cover the BD extension would cover elevating the "tram/streetcar" portion of the Eglinton line.

In median is about $70M/km x 5.5 km = $400M.

Elevated is about $150M/km (this is $30M more than the Canada Line cost to account for our longer stations) x 5.5 km = $800M. I figure there is also a >$100M savings since only 1 Kennedy LRT station is needed - not 2, an uderground SRT loop is not needed and a 3rd track and extra platform is not needed at DM (maybe the plan has changed to put this at Laird now).

Tunneled would be $375 / km x 5.5 km = $2.2B.

So, elevated $300M to $350M extra. Tunnelled about $1.8B extra.

 

[innsertnamehere]

also important to remember that the canada line was finished in 2009, meaning that inflation must be accounted for as well as traditional escalating construction costs.

 

[BurlOak]

Federal cash brings no clarity to subway debate

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/federal-cash-brings-no-clarity-to-subway-debate-1.1866005

.....

Like Murray, Byford points out that expanding the subway system outward only worsens the already intense crowding during rush hours. “This expedites the need for the downtown relief line,†said Byford.

.....

I do not think this makes sense unless the subway is so wildly popular that it attracts huge numbers of extra riders - in which case the subway decision would have been obviously.

If the number of subway riders is similar to the number of LRT riders, or just a bit more, then both the subway and LRT plans will dump similar numbers onto the Yonge line through Y-B. There would be no difference on the need to increase the urgency of the DRL.

There is one thing that would change the urgency of the DRL - actually it would lower its urgency to a (very) small degree. That would be the combined SRT / ECLRT. This would split the transfers to the Yonge line between 2 stations (Y-B and Y-Eg). This would reduce the dwell time at the more critical station (Y-B) to transfer the passengers from Bloor to Yonge. This shoryer dwell time would increase the frequency of trains on Yonge and Bloor - albeit by a small amount.