[Rainforest]

so we MUST build this because we FEAR that the public will turn on DRL final price tag and nothing will get built?

That's a very loose interpretation of what I actually said. IMO, everyone can have an opinion on whether SSE should or should not be built.

However, it is unacceptable and stupid to celebrate a possible killing of a major transit project, or gloat about it.

That is some great fear mongering

Hopefully, you understand the difference between taking reasonable precautions and "fear mongering". Otherwise, your everyday life would be full of accidents.

Who defines what rapid transit is? The fact that the LRT will have half the stops of the local bus routes and never be in mixed traffic to me feels pretty rapid transit like.

Indeed, there is no universally accepted definition. In my opinion, the clue is in the average speed, and the duration of a typical trip. If the projected speed of Toronto-style street-median LRT is 23 kph, and the average speed of a bus route it replaces is 18 kph, then LRT is not rapid transit. LRT is still useful in many cases, but should be described as an improved local service.

Otherwise, you would have to count mixed-traffic express buses as rapid transit as well. Many of the TTC express bus routes have wider stop spacing than the planned light rail lines.

Even if you do think LRTs are local transit with Smarttrack coming shouldnt you be focusing on getting your riders from their doorstops to the Smarttrack stops. If that is true then Scarborough needs all the LRT it can get.

As already mentioned, those LRTs would help. However, you will not see Scarberians pushing hard for their construction, or buying into the idea of trading their subway extension for them.

If the city builds those LRTs eventually, they will be received well, I hope.

 

[Rainforest]

It is rapid transit. There's little difference between the planned Eglinton Line in Scarborough, and the other LRT in Scarborough. Heck, the Line 3 rebuild would have had zero at-grade crossings of road - that's BETTER than Eglinton.

Line 3, aka SLRT, would certainly be rapid transit. That line would serve only 7 stops out of 46 LRT stops.

Thus, with all due respect, your statement about "46 rapid transit stops" was incorrect.

Furthermore, 3 light rail lines (30 km at grade and 10 km grade-separated) would cost more than one 6.5 km long subway extension. You could possibly build 2 light rail lines for that amount, but certainly not 3 lines.

Honestly, if Line 2 were to be extended, I'm not sure I'd even take it to Scarberia Town Centre ... it's only a major node now, because it's the terminus. It should go past the 401.

I agree with that, it would be much preferred to go past 401, with a terminus at Sheppard.

However, if the city decided it can't afford to extend the subway to Sheppard, that's not a reason to cancel the subway altogether.

 

[JSF-1]

^ Transit investments do not end with the next 4-year government term.

Its nice you still believe that, but don't think for a second that politicians don't put there own re-election on a pedestal. Time and time again we see politicians who couldn't possibly give fewer shits about "long term" planning; All they care about is the here and now and what will make them look good in 4 years. If they actually cared about long term investments than we would be seeing a push for things such as higher operating subsidies but nobody (except the NDP apparently) care to think about it; and lets not look past Toronto's and Ontario's storied history of screwing up transit projects because nobody cared to think about how things would turn out in 20 or 30 years.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Its nice you still believe that, but don't think for a second that politicians don't put there own re-election on a pedestal. Time and time again we see politicians who couldn't possibly give fewer shits about "long term" planning; All they care about is the here and now and what will make them look good in 4 years. If they actually cared about long term investments than we would be seeing a push for things such as higher operating subsidies but nobody (except the NDP apparently) care to think about it.

And NDP is talking about it at least partially because of organized labour.

AoD

 

[JSF-1]

^Well regardless of the reason for bringing it up, its atleast nice that one party gives a damn about more than just pretty expansions and vanity projects. Its a shame though that both the Libs and the Cons won't entertain the idea of restoring the provincial operating subsidy. Transit has been the shits in Toronto since the 90's and its not just because we don't have a large subway system.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

^Well regardless of the reason for bringing it up, its atleast nice that one party gives a damn about more than just pretty expansions and vanity projects. Its a shame though that both the Libs and the Cons won't entertain the idea of restoring the provincial operating subsidy. Transit has been the shits in Toronto since the 90's and its not just because we don't have a large subway system.

Though TBH, the city itself was unwilling to increase the subsidy significantly - opting to keep property taxes at inflation. There aren't all that many parties with much skin in this game.

AoD

 

[Rainforest]

Its nice you still believe that, but don't think for a second that politicians don't put there own re-election on a pedestal. Time and time again we see politicians who couldn't possibly give fewer shits about "long term" planning; All they care about is the here and now and what will make them look good in 4 years.

That's true, and yet governments of all stripes do invest in transit. Long-term transit planning isn't our strong suite, but not investing anything doesn't look good for them.

So, I didn't say the next next government (4+ years from now) will necessarily be better than the one we are going to elect this year. I'm just saying that even if the coming government is unwilling to fund a particular project, it still has a chance with the next regime.

If they actually cared about long term investments than we would be seeing a push for things such as higher operating subsidies but nobody (except the NDP apparently) care to think about it; and lets not look past Toronto's and Ontario's storied history of screwing up transit projects because nobody cared to think about how things would turn out in 20 or 30 years.

Honestly, I would be reluctant to raise the operating subsidies when the system is already overcrowded at peak, and any additional lines, even if funded, will take many years to build.

If the governments are willing to invest in transit at all, I'd rather get them invest in the system expansion, and let the riders pay most of the operating expenses.

 

[JSF-1]

That is true to, the City does have a role to play in all of this as well. I really wish that Toronto (both residence and Politicians) could have the same paradigm shift in regards to public transit like L.A. had in the 90's, but we still seem to be stuck in the mindset that the status quo is fine, and don't attempt to rock the boat. I think everyone on this forum can agree Toronto can be better, we just choose not to be.

 

[nfitz]

Debate on the merits of the Scarborough Subway Extension!!!!!!!!!!

Merits ... there are none. Don't see the need for a pro-white elephant.

As for it going north of the 401 I actually agree. It should be run up McCowan to Sheppard or Finch as those two major intersections have alot of transfers taking place.

As a three-station extension to Sheppard, I was moderately in favour of it, despite the cost. I fact, I favoured adding a fourth stop at Eglinton/Brimely/Danforth - which still is an average spacing of 1.9 km - which is huge. That would be real transit. And I'd be a lot more favourable about it if they went back to that.

It's just absurd to run underneath a busy transit corridor like Lawrence East—under a hospital FFS—without stopping! And then to end the line, just south of a major barrier like the 401? That's as dumb as stopping the Sheppard Line just before the 404 instead of at Victoria Park just.

Some complaints about the Spadina extension are justified, but by extending it just past the 407, it helps deal with transit issues with the horrid traffic on all the arteries between Steeles and 7.

For that matter, I don't think you need every train to run to the end of the line. I'd also be in favour of building a branch after Kennedy to the Eglinton GO station. Google maps says it's only 1030 metres from the end of the GO platforms to where the subway tunnel will go at Eglinton/Danforth.

Line 3, aka SLRT, would certainly be rapid transit. That line would serve only 7 stops out of 46 LRT stops.

Thus, with all due respect, your statement about "46 rapid transit stops" was incorrect.

Speeds on surburban LRT lines are comparable to those on downtown subway lines. Speed is primarily a function of stop spacing. I'm in favour of widening the stops - it might even be faster than some spots downtown then!

 

[sixrings]

Who said you couldn't have an opinion even if it doesn't make sense?

I am pretty sure you celebrated the lrt being cancelled. So it's ok to celebrate LRTs which would have been paid for being cancelled but not subways where we have no idea how to pay for them theoretically being cancelled?

Well you maybe getting super duper rapid transit. The one stop express. No city will even attempt to beat that. Congrats.

That's a very loose interpretation of what I actually said. IMO, everyone can have an opinion on whether SSE should or should not be built.

However, it is unacceptable and stupid to celebrate a possible killing of a major transit project, or gloat about it.



Hopefully, you understand the difference between taking reasonable precautions and "fear mongering". Otherwise, your everyday life would be full of accidents.



Indeed, there is no universally accepted definition. In my opinion, the clue is in the average speed, and the duration of a typical trip. If the projected speed of Toronto-style street-median LRT is 23 kph, and the average speed of a bus route it replaces is 18 kph, then LRT is not rapid transit. LRT is still useful in many cases, but should be described as an improved local service.

Otherwise, you would have to count mixed-traffic express buses as rapid transit as well. Many of the TTC express bus routes have wider stop spacing than the planned light rail lines.



As already mentioned, those LRTs would help. However, you will not see Scarberians pushing hard for their construction, or buying into the idea of trading their subway extension for them.

If the city builds those LRTs eventually, they will be received well, I hope.

 

[syn]

Question: is there any alignment that could result in this being entirely above ground? If not, why?

 

[Leo_Chan]

Question: is there any alignment that could result in this being entirely above ground? If not, why?

Yes, bulldoze everything.

 

[syn]

^It was a serious question - I guess the answer is no?

 

[TheTigerMaster]

^It was a serious question - I guess the answer is no?

Serious answer: If we bulldozed this whole city, this subway extension wouldn't be necessary in the first place

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Serious answer: If we bulldozed this whole city, this subway extension wouldn't be necessary in the first place

Does City Council have the authority to demolish Toronto?