scarberiankhatru
Senior Member
Growth will not switch to Kennedy & Eglinton, nor should it. STC has a mall and that trumps absolutely everything else.
|
|
|
officedweller
Senior Member
Rule number one about large scale international events in your City:
They are supposed to accelerate large [transit] infrastructure projects...
They are supposed to accelerate large [transit] infrastructure projects...
Fresh Start
Banned
To replicate the SRT alignment is too complicated (reconfigurating Kennedy's platform or outright building a new platform area) and wouldn't really provide relief to other parts of the city. A second station along Eglinton East around Brimley could at least alleviate Kennedy somewhat (routes 12, 21, 20 and presumably one of either the 86 or the 116 could terminate here instead). Lawrence-McCowan would also be 5 minutes away from the busy Ceberbrae neighbourhood where alot of trips along Lawrence originate. Plus there's the hospital as well. Such an alignment would also angle the Scarbrough Centre stop in a northwesternly position such that it could easily link up to a potential Sheppard Subway in the future for either through-service trips or a seamless cross-platform interchange.
Rainforest
Senior Member
Actually, $1.4 billion are supposed to cover both the upgrades or conversion of the existing guideway, and the extension to Malvern.Rainforest
Senior Member
Using this tool: http://map.toronto.ca, Kennedy / Eglinton to STC is 4.9 km on a straight line. However, the subway won't run exactly on a straight line. Going through the Lawrence & Brimley intersection (sum of two straight lines): 5.7 km.
scarberiankhatru
Senior Member
No, it's 5km. The subway sort of already exists at Kennedy and doesn't need to be destroyed and rebuilt just to get the total up to 6km.
edit - actually, if starting at Kennedy & Eglinton, 6km will take you all the way up to Corporate & Consilium...
Last edited:
nfitz
Superstar
The new TTC report on subway versus LRT for the SRT replacement is out, for next Monday's meeting.
http://www.ttc.ca/About_the_TTC/Com...upplementary_Reports/Response_to_Commissi.pdf
It finally provides a (sort of) apples-to-apples comparison of a subway extenstion to Sheppard/McCowan, compared the RT upgrade and extension to Sheppard/Markham. Ridership on the extended SRT is projected to be 8,000 at peak hour, compared to 9,500 at peak hour for the extended subway. Capacity on the grade-separated LRT line is as high as 16,000 compared to 30,000 for subway. Based on a cost of $2.3 billion for the SRT upgrade/expansion (9.9 km route with 7 stations) compared to $2.8 billion for the subway extension (7.6 km route with 3 stations), it does say that either option is technically acceptable.
It also notes that their own original recommendation was to simply upgrade the existing SRT with new-generation vehicles as it was cheaper than LRT, and that a subway extension would have to bypass any development or growth opportunities in the Kennedy-Midland corridor.
Perhaps most importantly is stresses, a few times, that the SRT has reached the end of it's service life, that they've been recommending that immediate action be taken for a decade, that the service is now operated at reduced speed and capacity, and another prolonged debate over the future of the SRT might jeopardize Metrolinx's commitment to rehab and extend the line as LRT.
http://www.ttc.ca/About_the_TTC/Com...upplementary_Reports/Response_to_Commissi.pdf
It finally provides a (sort of) apples-to-apples comparison of a subway extenstion to Sheppard/McCowan, compared the RT upgrade and extension to Sheppard/Markham. Ridership on the extended SRT is projected to be 8,000 at peak hour, compared to 9,500 at peak hour for the extended subway. Capacity on the grade-separated LRT line is as high as 16,000 compared to 30,000 for subway. Based on a cost of $2.3 billion for the SRT upgrade/expansion (9.9 km route with 7 stations) compared to $2.8 billion for the subway extension (7.6 km route with 3 stations), it does say that either option is technically acceptable.
It also notes that their own original recommendation was to simply upgrade the existing SRT with new-generation vehicles as it was cheaper than LRT, and that a subway extension would have to bypass any development or growth opportunities in the Kennedy-Midland corridor.
Perhaps most importantly is stresses, a few times, that the SRT has reached the end of it's service life, that they've been recommending that immediate action be taken for a decade, that the service is now operated at reduced speed and capacity, and another prolonged debate over the future of the SRT might jeopardize Metrolinx's commitment to rehab and extend the line as LRT.
What do you think the chances are of them being able to get a speedy EA done and start design before Spadina is completed in late 2015? My reason for asking this is if we can reuse the TBMs from Spadina, it may be useful to do so. I realize the subway option wouldn't be shovel-ready by 2015, but if the EA can be done and design on-going, the TBMs can wait for a year or so.
It's a much shorter extension than Spadina, which doesn't really help in terms of the EA (still just as much work to do), but it does help with the design.
The total timeline for the subway option may take an extra couple of years compared to the timeline for the LRT option, but I still think it's worth it to not have to run buses for 3-4 years while the SRT is shut down.
You can run the SRT into the ground while the subway is being built. And if it does happen to crap out while construction is still underway? Well, you're at the same spot you were if the LRT option was chosen anyway. The worst case scenario in terms of 'during construction transportation options' for the subway plan is the preferred option for the LRT plan.
sixrings
Senior Member
That makes sense to me... the RT plan was the worse of TC in my mind. I still hold out that when SELRT is complete the sheppard subway will be converted to LRT and it will be a crosstown to downsview. The RT to LRT never made any sense though if it wasnt a through line down Eglinton.
Last edited by a moderator:
nfitz
Superstar
Surely that's not the issue. Critical path is the carhouse and maintenance facility, which Inrastructure Ontario has already announced they are issuing the RFP imminently, and the contract for the SRT itself, which is to come later this winter. Surely Metrolinx isn't going to really consider a 2-year delay now, to re-examine everything. And presumably TTC isn't really prepared to put $2-billion of funding at risk for more navel gazing.
Given how loudly TTC keeps saying that the SRT is near failure, I wouldn't be surprised if they have to shut down the SRT soon anyway, whether they actually build a subway or not.
How do you extend the SRT life, for at least another 7 years ... probably longer.
No, the worst-case scenario is if Metrolinx and the new Premier says "FU, we've already fully funded 3 different plans, we're not doing it again. There are other communities that want $2-billion in transit funding, so if you want subway, you'll have to find nearly $3-billion.
44 North
Senior Member
I don't agree with making the line subway. Keep it elevated, and extend it as elevated. This suburban subway vs elevated debate was had 30+ years ago with the Go Urban idea; elevated won. And rightfully so. Elevated makes a helluva lot of sense for this part of T.O. It's especially true now that we see how attractive elevated can be (e.g with Vancouver's Canada Line).
The real debate: LRT or some other vehicle for the elevated. I'd go with LRT. High upfront costs, lower over the long-term due to the fact that we'd have numerous other vehicles in use. David Gunn would agree.
The real debate: LRT or some other vehicle for the elevated. I'd go with LRT. High upfront costs, lower over the long-term due to the fact that we'd have numerous other vehicles in use. David Gunn would agree.
Why would IO issue the RFP for the MSF when the contract hasn't been issued for either the Sheppard or the Scarborough LRTs (it's my understanding that the Sheppard contract was cancelled when TC was scrapped, and that it needs to be started again, correct me if I'm wrong)? Seems like that's putting the cart before the horse.
It seems like an undesirable outcome either way. Either we're stuck with buses for 3-4 years, guaranteed, or we roll the dice and see how long the SRT will hold out before we have to replace it with buses. Even if it has to be replaced with buses for part of the subway construction period, I still consider that a worthwhile gamble.
But a subway is what the right-wing faction of Scarborough has wanted all along. The Liberals would look at it objectively and likely determine that both plans have merits (and a similar price tag). Eglinton would remain unchanged, so they would still get something tangible to hold up. The PCs would look at it and say "it's a subway, go for it" (unless Hudak pulls a flip-flop and becomes Hudak circa 1995 again, in which case he'd probably cancel it either way).
nfitz
Superstar
The Scarborough LRT contract would follow closely behind. The LRTs are scheduled to arrive long before opening, and need to be stored somewhere. Not sure if the connecting track on Sheppard from Markham to Conlins is on the SRT or Carhouse contract ... but it can't be on the Sheppard East LRT contract, as that's much later in the timetable.
They had issued the RFQ, and then they had "suspended" it. They had never issued the RFP, let alone awarded the contract. They are simply moving forward with the RFP, finally.
It's not the bus replacement I'm worried about. It's where would you get the funding for the subway extension? The province has NEVER provided 100% funding for a subway extension before - it would get messy if they owned part of the subway line, and TTC owned another part. The province only paid 1/3 of the Spadina extension.
Gotcha. Yeah with the MSF being split between the two projects, it complicates things a heck of a lot more than if it was just part of 1 contract (like it is in Ottawa).
Well according to the report the conversion to LRT is $2.3 billion, while the subway is $2.8 billion (the LRT price seems to have gone up, weird). That $500 million you can get from Sheppard (which I showed how in the other thread, so I won't go over it again). Suffice to say that cost difference can be covered from within the funds already allocated for Transit City, so hopefully it wouldn't get as messy as you foresee. If the cost can't all be covered with Sheppard's funds for whatever reason, $500 million isn't a show-stopper for the City to swallow on its own.
nfitz
Superstar
But how could you transfer the $2.3 billion from the LRT project, as it's all PPP financing, that requires the province to retain ownership? I'd think to extend an existing subway, and maintain City ownership, you'd have to extend the payments out for a long period of time to get the same cash flow impact to the provincial treasury.