Couldn't it run at surface or worst case, a deckable trench through the Langstaff Gateway lands? Use cut and cover under Yonge and put the portal just east of Yonge when it curves east.
The initial idea for the Langstaff lands was, yes, to ramp up the development and deck over the rail corridor, so even though the subway is now at grade it would effectively be in a tunnel. Not clear if that's still the plan.

As for this stuff about the curves and the alignment, and cut and cover, the egg heads at Metrolinx have spoken. They're fair questions to ask but I assume they have answers, satisfactory or otherwise.
 
The era of subway expansion may very well be coming to an end, given the rising prices
The era of subway expansion pretty much ended in 1980 when Metro Toronto declared the Line 2 extensions to Kennedy and Kipling as the last subway expansions "for sometime". Instead Metro was to shift to other technologies such as LRT and eventually Light Metro (although we didn't have a choice in that matter). Cost was the main factor back then as well.
 
Why is Metrolinx not even proposing cut-and-cover under Yonge? It should be an option they list, so that politicians can look at their choices, no? If Ford and YR want to spend more to get less they can (see EWCE) but it should be visible.

I guess I shouldn’t expect anything from Metrolinx: they didn’t cost out an elevated or separated at-grade ROW for the EWCE either.
Sure, its cheaper - but the disruption it causes - shutting down the street for years at a time, construction noise and dust, the cost of moving or rebuilding utilities etc means it's politically unpalatable. Localised cut-and-cover construction for station boxes is still required - although mining station caverns can reduce the amount of cut-and-cover even further (with a higher cost, of course)

As an example, only last year did Translink in Vancouver finally end legal battles over compensation for cut-and-cover Canada Line construction - a line that opened in 2010!
 
I don't think it is an exaggeration to describe the unaffordability of transit construction in Toronto as a crisis. We need to figure this out, urgently.
Yeah, its absurd and not sustainable. We're talking about a subway extension through the suburbs along a (for the most part) wide arterial road. There must be a way to bring the cost down beyond dropping stations.

Likely the biggest issue is station depth. Can they be brought closer to the surface? If that needs cut and cover tunnel construction, do it.

Stations should be as simple as possible. No washrooms. Integrate into developments if possible, but if not, just put stairs and an elevator at street level and don't bother with a building (like the ones on Eglinton and Bloor).

Simplify. Shorter trains, narrower trains, more at grade and elevated.
 
The heart of the GTHA!? He cannot be serious. I'd sooner call Square One the heart of the GTHA - at least that area actually is fairly centrally located and has 10+ storey buildings.

Sigh. I'm pretty used to Moore's tired Downtown-is-the-Centre-of-the-Universe spin on things, which is what drives most people in Canada crazy about Toronto and how Fords get elected by tapping into the resentment.

The Deputy Mayor of RH is ... who he is. But, come on, it's some marketing BS. Is Newmarket the heart of York Region? No - but it's the geographical centre, and that's where the Regional HQ is built.
Was North York REALLY the City With Heart?
Was Vaughan REALLY asserting it's ABOVE Toronto in any sense other than geography?
Does Toronto being a "City of Neighbourhoods," somehow make it different from other cities?

Like, take a pill, Oliver. No one's gonna take your hard-earned 416 landline.
I saw people on Twitter pointing out some mistakes in Steve Munro's analysis the other day, and he knows his tech stuff but they're the kind of mistakes you make if you live downtown and only know about Richmond Hill because you read about it in newspapers sometimes (because people like Oliver would never stoop to covering it in any other context). IMHO, a transit reporter in Toronto should actually offer some context to readers instead of going for the cheap dig but what do I know?

(Same goes for people who think they understand what constitutes a neigbhourhood's history because they went on Streetview for 5 minutes. But I digress!)

When they were doing the planning for this area, about 10 years ago, it was pointed out that when you add up YRT/Viva + subway + GO + the Transitway, there's a unique confluence of transit and therefore a big opportunity to intensify. They said something like, "It will be Union Station North!" Is that literally accurate? No, it's not. But you get the point. So, it's completely accurate that there is a place "where all forms of transportation come together," and if it's not actually and literally the heart of the GTHA, who cares?

All Moore is saying is, "Duh, there's only one Union Station and it's in Downtown Fricking Toronto! Can you believe this suburban joker doesn't know Downtown Toronto is the beating heart of the GTHA, and perhaps the universe?! How could he, he lives TWENTY TWO kilometres away!" and that's equally worthy of an eyeroll emoji, IMHO. (Random trivia: TO is about 40km across so plenty of Torontonians live 15-20 km from downtown and the High Tech stop is less than 5km from the Toronto border so... yeah, not that far from The Centre of the Universe.)

So I'll give Deputy Mayor DiPaola 🥺
And Oliver Moore 🥺🥺

but again, the one thing we all agree on is that the costs of this stuff makes less sense every day.
 
Last edited:
Sigh. I'm pretty used to Moore's tired Downtown-is-the-Centre-of-the-Universe spin on things, which is what drives most people in Canada crazy about Toronto.

The Deputy Mayor of RH is ... who he is. But, come on, it's some marketing BS. Is Newmarket the heart of York Region? No - but it's the geographical centre, and that's where the Regional HQ is built.
Was North York REALLY the City With Heart?
Was Vaughan REALLY asserting it's ABOVE Toronto in any sense other than geography?
Does Toronto being a "City of Neighbourhoods," somehow make it different from other cities?

Like, take a pill, Oliver. No one's gonna take your hard-earned 416 landline.
I saw people on Twitter pointing out some mistakes in Steve Munro's analysis the other day, and he knows his tech stuff but they're the kind of mistakes you make if you live downtown and only know about Richmond Hill because you read about it in newspapers sometimes (because people like Oliver would never stoop to covering it in any other context). IMHO, a transit reporter in Toronto should actually offer some context to readers instead of going for the cheap dig but what do I know?

When they were doing the planning for this area, about 10 years ago, it was pointed out that when you add up YRT/Viva + subway + GO + the Transitway, there's a unique confluence of transit and therefore a big opportunity to intensify. They said something like, "It will be Union Station North!" Is that literally accurate? No, it's not. But you get the point. So, it's completely accurate that there is a place "where all forms of transportation come together," and if it's not actually and literally the heart of the GTHA, who cares?

All Moore is saying is, "Duh, there's only one Union Station and it's in Downtown Fricking Toronto! Can you believe this suburban joker doesn't know Downtown Toronto is the beating heart of the GTHA, and perhaps the universe?! How could he, he lives TWENTY TWO kilometres away!" and that's equally worthy of an eyeroll emoji, IMHO. (Random trivia: TO is about 40km across so plenty of Torontonians live 15-20 km from downtown and the High Tech stop is less than 5km from the Toronto border so... yeah, not that far from The Centre of the Universe.)

So I'll give Deputy Mayor DiPaola 🥺
And Oliver Moore 🥺🥺

but again, the one thing we all agree on is that the costs of this stuff makes less sense every day.
We need to be distancing ourselves from the concept of "the economic beating heart" anyways. I was more pointing out that it's ridiculous to use the present tense here, as if the hottest place to be in the GTHA right now is The Home Depot.

On the other hand, I agree with you that the idea that downtown Toronto deserves more because it's worth more is tiring, I'm just equally tired of boisterous marketing slogans.

Anyways cut and cover would be very well suited for at least the stretch from Arnold/Elgin in Thornhill south to Finch Station, while it still is mostly strip malls and car dealerships. I'd also like to see some evidence that High Tech would be more than just a neighbourhood station in terms of ridership.
 
Yeah, its absurd and not sustainable. We're talking about a subway extension through the suburbs along a (for the most part) wide arterial road. There must be a way to bring the cost down beyond dropping stations.

Likely the biggest issue is station depth. Can they be brought closer to the surface? If that needs cut and cover tunnel construction, do it.

Stations should be as simple as possible. No washrooms. Integrate into developments if possible, but if not, just put stairs and an elevator at street level and don't bother with a building (like the ones on Eglinton and Bloor).

Simplify. Shorter trains, narrower trains, more at grade and elevated.
Washrooms don't cost $100M. I don't think we need to strip out amenities like that, I suspect we just have broken thinking on depth of stations, and probably complete lack of control on what contractors are charging. People are getting rich off these projects...

Maybe a full value for money audit is needed? They should be able to explain where 80-90% of the project spending is going and why it needs to cost what it does. Also should have to justify what is unique about Toronto that causes transit projects to be more expensive.
 
Washrooms don't cost $100M. I don't think we need to strip out amenities like that, I suspect we just have broken thinking on depth of stations, and probably complete lack of control on what contractors are charging. People are getting rich off these projects...

Maybe a full value for money audit is needed? They should be able to explain where 80-90% of the project spending is going and why it needs to cost what it does. Also should have to justify what is unique about Toronto that causes transit projects to be more expensive.
The deeper the washrooms, the more powerful the pumps need to be to bring the waste to the near surface where the sewers are located. They just need to place the washrooms above the sewer to save money!
 
Would cut and cover really be more disruptive than tunnel boring? Anybody been on Eglinton in the last decade?

Sigh. I'm pretty used to Moore's tired Downtown-is-the-Centre-of-the-Universe spin on things, which is what drives most people in Canada crazy about Toronto and how Fords get elected by tapping into the resentment.

The Deputy Mayor of RH is ... who he is. But, come on, it's some marketing BS. Is Newmarket the heart of York Region? No - but it's the geographical centre, and that's where the Regional HQ is built.
Was North York REALLY the City With Heart?
Was Vaughan REALLY asserting it's ABOVE Toronto in any sense other than geography?
Does Toronto being a "City of Neighbourhoods," somehow make it different from other cities?

Like, take a pill, Oliver. No one's gonna take your hard-earned 416 landline.
I saw people on Twitter pointing out some mistakes in Steve Munro's analysis the other day, and he knows his tech stuff but they're the kind of mistakes you make if you live downtown and only know about Richmond Hill because you read about it in newspapers sometimes (because people like Oliver would never stoop to covering it in any other context). IMHO, a transit reporter in Toronto should actually offer some context to readers instead of going for the cheap dig but what do I know?

(Same goes for people who think they understand what constitutes a neigbhourhood's history because they went on Streetview for 5 minutes. But I digress!)

When they were doing the planning for this area, about 10 years ago, it was pointed out that when you add up YRT/Viva + subway + GO + the Transitway, there's a unique confluence of transit and therefore a big opportunity to intensify. They said something like, "It will be Union Station North!" Is that literally accurate? No, it's not. But you get the point. So, it's completely accurate that there is a place "where all forms of transportation come together," and if it's not actually and literally the heart of the GTHA, who cares?

All Moore is saying is, "Duh, there's only one Union Station and it's in Downtown Fricking Toronto! Can you believe this suburban joker doesn't know Downtown Toronto is the beating heart of the GTHA, and perhaps the universe?! How could he, he lives TWENTY TWO kilometres away!" and that's equally worthy of an eyeroll emoji, IMHO. (Random trivia: TO is about 40km across so plenty of Torontonians live 15-20 km from downtown and the High Tech stop is less than 5km from the Toronto border so... yeah, not that far from The Centre of the Universe.)

So I'll give Deputy Mayor DiPaola 🥺
And Oliver Moore 🥺🥺

but again, the one thing we all agree on is that the costs of this stuff makes less sense every day.
Funny how you criticize Oliver Moore for using the same inflammatory rhetoric that you use in your post. Downtown is the centre of the GTA whether Ford Nation likes it or not. I really don't see why acknowledging that triggers people. The whole reason that downtown cores exist is to play that role. Yet there hasn't been a single new subway station built downtown in 55 years. There's nowhere in the GTA that's been more starved of transportation investment than downtown (Humber Bay Shores might come close). People who have grievances because of special treatment for downtown aren't seeing reality.

In any case, despite your focus on Moore's wording, his point that subways have become terribly expensive is spot on. The refusal to accept elevated or cut and cover is part of the problem.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top