[urbandreamer]

Why stop the tunnel at the Gardiner? Buffalo is a better termination point....

Then tunnel the Gardiner with a subway beside it. Tunnel under Humber Bay to cut the distance.

Only a middle-aged guy from mid-town could dream this up....

 

[Translude15]

C'mannn guys, bury the railway tracks, rebuild the Gardiner on top of it and put the DRL in the median. Doesn't that plan get any recognition? C'mannnnnn!!!

 

[doady]

Why stop the tunnel at the Gardiner? Buffalo is a better termination point....

Then tunnel the Gardiner with a subway beside it. Tunnel under Humber Bay to cut the distance.

It would make more sense to connect directly to the Red Hill Creek Expressway. Two dumbass ideas become one.

 

[gweed123]

All of the candidates could've just won over the transit vote by simply saying; "Toronto has come a long way to get the current funding and plans in place that is desparately needed now, and therefore, not disrupting the current pace of projects, I propose to augment the current plan by wroking with metrolinx & gov by getting one of the missing pieces in place that will link up the current set of projects: the DRL, currently under study by the TTC"

That would get everyone on this forum (minus the Scarb fans possibly) creaming their pants, and I would think/hope sit well with most of Toronto, too.

Add the DRL, and replace the SRT with a subway to STC, and I'd be very happy. Your approach is logical, coherent, and practical. As a result, it will never happen in a municipal election. It makes too much sense to be considered.

 

[Calrissian]

Any candidate who thinks Transit City alone is going to win them votes is pretty delusional.

Maybe, maybe not, but not acknowledging its existence and origins, or worse, reversing/stopping it, is plain moronic and destructive, not just to the city, but to their campaign. Identifying it as a good start and talking about enhancing it with the DRL, would win over transit starved citizens. Trading it in for anything else at this point, is out of stubborness and would only achieve stalling any potential progress.

 

[GraphicMatt]

If I was mayor I'd propose a number of small changes to Transit City lines with a promise to accelerate the DRL. Small things like proposing further grade separation on the outer ends of the Eglinton LRT would be popular without veering into fantasy land.

 

[W. K. Lis]

If I was mayor I'd propose a number of small changes to Transit City lines with a promise to accelerate the DRL. Small things like proposing further grade separation on the outer ends of the Eglinton LRT would be popular without veering into fantasy land.

Small changes, such as putting the Eglinton Crosstown under Weston Road as a light rail subway as opposed to ending the light rail subway at Keele Street, are preferable than wholesale canceling of projects, just to start all over again with totally different projects. Easier to implement as well, since the work could still continue in other sections.

 

[gweed123]

If I was mayor I'd propose a number of small changes to Transit City lines with a promise to accelerate the DRL. Small things like proposing further grade separation on the outer ends of the Eglinton LRT would be popular without veering into fantasy land.

Finally, something we can agree on!

Only I think the SRT refurbishment and replacement with LRT is a complete waste of money, and would be nearly cost-netural with a B-D subway extension. Other than that though, I'd be happy with more grade separation on Eglinton, and pushing up the DRL.

 

[nfitz]

Only I think the SRT refurbishment and replacement with LRT is a complete waste of money, and would be nearly cost-netural with a B-D subway extension. Other than that though, I'd be happy with more grade separation on Eglinton, and pushing up the DRL.

I agree with that except the SRT.

I don't know how you can claim that subway versus replacement is cost-neutral. The subway is being measured in billions - even the lowball estimates by some candidates is $1-billion; with 6 km of new subway, it's likely closer to $2-billion in current dollars. Metrolinx has cost the 1.8 km SRT extension from Sheppard to Malvern at $386 million (in current dollars). With the rehab and 3.4 km extension to Sheppard budgeted at $1.4 billion (current dollars ... $2.4 billion in escalated); with SRT coming in at about $214 million per kilometre that means the extension costs about $700 million and the rehab costs about $700 million. A portion of the rehab cost will be for the new underground station at Kennedy.

Replacing the existing subway from Kennedy to Scarborough Centre will cost almost 3 times more than replacing it with LRT. This isn't cost-neutral.

Just at a glance it's simple to see that the cost of tunelling subway and building new underground stations is more than rehabbing the current alignment, much of which only requires new track and overhead.

I'm not arguing whether it should be subway or LRT ... just that it's not the same cost for subway as LRT.

 

[gweed123]

I agree with that except the SRT.

I don't know how you can claim that subway versus replacement is cost-neutral. The subway is being measured in billions - even the lowball estimates by some candidates is $1-billion; with 6 km of new subway, it's likely closer to $2-billion in current dollars. Metrolinx has cost the 1.8 km SRT extension from Sheppard to Malvern at $386 million (in current dollars). With the rehab and 3.4 km extension to Sheppard budgeted at $1.4 billion (current dollars ... $2.4 billion in escalated); with SRT coming in at about $214 million per kilometre that means the extension costs about $700 million and the rehab costs about $700 million. A portion of the rehab cost will be for the new underground station at Kennedy.

Replacing the existing subway from Kennedy to Scarborough Centre will cost almost 3 times more than replacing it with LRT. This isn't cost-neutral.

Just at a glance it's simple to see that the cost of tunelling subway and building new underground stations is more than rehabbing the current alignment, much of which only requires new track and overhead.

I'm not arguing whether it should be subway or LRT ... just that it's not the same cost for subway as LRT.

I would much rather have a subway running to STC and BRT beyond STC than an LRT from Kennedy to Sheppard. I would price the subway extension to STC somewhere in the neighbourhood of $1.8 billion. Given that the refurb and extension is likely to be $1.4 billion or higher, I would be much more inclined to spend $1.9 billion and have subway to STC, and then either dedicated ROW BRT or curbside BRT (or both) from STC to Malvern, obviously passing through Sheppard. While a swing of $500 million may be quite a bit, it's certainly not a showstopper. It would deliver a much more efficient service, and more importantly, would extend rapid transit further into Scarborough than the current proposal.

The current proposal is underkill from Kennedy to STC, and overkill from STC to Sheppard. Why not have the technology choice scaled to what the actual demand will be? I don't think even you can deny that there is subway-level demand at STC. And it's not like you're adding in an extra transfer for people, you're just moving the transfer point further back. In fact, in many ways you may be reducing a transfer for people, as people from Malvern would need to take a bus to the SLRT terminus at Sheppard, hop on the SLRT to Kennedy, and then transfer again to the subway. In essence, the current proposal creates a second Kennedy situation at the terminus at Sheppard. I thought that type of scenario was something we were looking to avoid, not to create another one!

 

[nfitz]

I would much rather have a subway running to STC and BRT beyond STC than an LRT from Kennedy to Sheppard. I would price the subway extension to STC somewhere in the neighbourhood of $1.8 billion. Given that the refurb and extension is likely to be $1.4 billion or higher, I would be much more inclined to spend $1.9 billion and have subway to STC, and then either dedicated ROW BRT or curbside BRT (or both) from STC to Malvern, obviously passing through Sheppard. While a swing of $500 million may be quite a bit, it's certainly not a showstopper. It would deliver a much more efficient service, and more importantly, would extend rapid transit further into Scarborough than the current proposal.

That's like saying that buying your going to buy a $20,000 swimming pool instead of a $20,000 car and drive your swimming pool to work every day.

Upgrading the SRT to LRT costs $700 million. A subway would cost $1.8 billion (it's a reasonable estimate). That's the only fair comparison. You might well think taking $1.1 billion dollars from another project to build the subway is a good thing ... but that's a lot of money to provide very little benefit in travel times, capacity (which is excess), or delivering rapid transit to anyone who doesn't already have it (it even takes it away from those working near Lawrence West).

Advocate for subway ... go ahead, even I think there's a case to be made. But queitely stealing the money from a project to Sheppard or Malvern ... or from the Don Mills LRT (which wouldn't cost much more than $1.1 billion), or from the York VIVA project (which seems to be in vogue) and revenue-neutral is intellectually dishonest and no better than the partisan politics that come out of the mouths of the various candidates.

 

[gweed123]

Upgrading the SRT to LRT costs $700 million. A subway would cost $1.8 billion (it's a reasonable estimate). That's the only fair comparison. You might well think taking $1.1 billion dollars from another project to build the subway is a good thing ... but that's a lot of money to provide very little benefit in travel times, capacity (which is excess), or delivering rapid transit to anyone who doesn't already have it (it even takes it away from those working near Lawrence West).

But the extension is also $700 million. Why spend $700 million on a portion of a line where the demand could easily be handled by BRT? If you could do it for under $100 million, and have a line twice as long (and a line that actually REACHES Malvern, instead of stopping on it's doorstep), AND creates a funnel for more efficient bus travel to STC, why not do it? Why not take that $600 million and put it towards an extra 2km of the subway extension? It's not as if the route beyond STC NEEDS to be LRT, BRT is quite able to handle that job.

And using a different alignment (Danforth-McCowan) would likely see an increase of 15-20% in terms of ridership between Kennedy and STC (not including the people from the rest of Scarborough who may start using the TTC more often because it's actually convenient now), just because the subway would actually be where the people are. The current SRT alignment is a path of least resistance shuttle service from STC to Kennedy, nothing more. It's of almost no use to anyone other than those at STC. Putting it on an alignment that actually passes by people would generate a lot more ridership than I think you give it credit for. It also passes through a high-density, lower income neighbourhood, something that social planners love.

Advocate for subway ... go ahead, even I think there's a case to be made. But queitely stealing the money from a project to Sheppard or Malvern ... or from the Don Mills LRT (which wouldn't cost much more than $1.1 billion), or from the York VIVA project (which seems to be in vogue) and revenue-neutral is intellectually dishonest and no better than the partisan politics that come out of the mouths of the various candidates.

If the difference is only $400 or $500 million, I'm sure the City could squeeze some more money out of the province. If it's a last-ditch effort, take out a loan for it. It's only marginally more than what the city coughed up for the SELRT. I'm not saying the funding lines up perfectly, but the cost of the upgrade + extension is not magnitudes more than the cost of the subway extension. It's actually under a 25% difference, which is well within the cost increase range that is to be expected with large projects like this (Transit City as a whole increased by nearly 50%). If the cost was double, I'd say you have a point, but under 25%, I'd say that's a reasonable margin of difference that it can be evaluated as a reasonable alternative.

 

[nfitz]

If the difference is only $400 or $500 million, I'm sure the City could squeeze some more money out of the province. If it's a last-ditch effort, take out a loan for it. It's only marginally more than what the city coughed up for the SELRT.

The city didn't cough up anything for Sheppard East.

It's not marginally more .. it's an extra $1.1 billion.

If you feel that service past McCowan could be BRT, then advocate that, and drop the project cost to $800 million. Even better isn't it, that saves $600 million which could complete both Sheppard East to Meadowvale and either Eglinton to Renforth or Finch East to Yonge.

Though I don't see any point leaving a hole in the network betwen Scarborough Centre and Sheppard East ... we want a network.

 

[gweed123]

The city didn't cough up anything for Sheppard East.

Sheppard East was a 1/3 cost sharing agreement between the City, the Province, and the Feds, was it not?

It's not marginally more .. it's an extra $1.1 billion.

Umm, no. $700 million for refurb + $700 million for extension = $1.4 billion. Subway extension + BRT = $1.9 billion. Difference of $500 million. You seem to always want to neglect the extension cost in your pricing.

If you feel that service past McCowan could be BRT, then advocate that, and drop the project cost to $800 million. Even better isn't it, that saves $600 million which could complete both Sheppard East to Meadowvale and either Eglinton to Renforth or Finch East to Yonge.

BRT past McCowan only makes sense though if the subway terminates at McCowan. Imposing 2 transfers just to get to past Kennedy is rediculous. Take the hub qualities of Kennedy and move them northeast to STC, that's all I'm saying.

Though I don't see any point leaving a hole in the network betwen Scarborough Centre and Sheppard East ... we want a network.

Then why does the SELRT not go to STC? Or at least branch to STC? Connectivity between Sheppard and STC is the job of a Sheppard rapid transit line, not the SRT.

 

[nfitz]

Sheppard East was a 1/3 cost sharing agreement between the City, the Province, and the Feds, was it not?

No, 0% city funding. 2/3 province. City would never have let Metrolinx take over a project they were funding.

Umm, no. $700 million for refurb + $700 million for extension = $1.4 billion. Subway extension + BRT = $1.9 billion. Difference of $500 million. You seem to always want to neglect the extension cost in your pricing.

An interesting approach. And fortunately we have $500 million growing on trees.

Then why does the SELRT not go to STC? Or at least branch to STC? Connectivity between Sheppard and STC is the job of a Sheppard rapid transit line, not the SRT.

A good question ... it was supposed to be a study the TTC were to do after the original EA was finished, along with the option to the zoo. A branch down Brimely I'd think ... it would be interesting to know what came of those planned studies ... though if you've noticed the trend is to cut the projects to save money - not make them bigger!