[Platform 27]

Assuming a subway from Kennedy to STC costs 2 billion (which just barely comes under the term "billions"), the billions are from extending the subway to STC, not from eliminating the transfer at Kennedy per se.

Yes you could argue it's just semantics. But my point is 2 billion dollars isn't just to eliminate the transfer, it's to bring the subway system to Lawrence East and Scarborough Centre, especially in light of the SRT coming to the end of its life which provides a perfect opportunity to run the SRT into the ground while the Danforth extension is built underneath. I'm glad we have a visionary mayor who will make this happen. We should all feel so blessed in this new year.

OK, let's go through this step by step.

Right now, there's a fully-grade separated rapid transit corridor running from Kipling in the west to McCowan in the east, with a transfer at Kennedy.

Existing committed provincial dollars will extend that corridor deeper into the northeast of the city, from McCowan to Burrows Hall (Sheppard & Progress) via Centennial College. Still fully grade-separated, still one transfer at Kennedy.

Proposed further funding would extend that corridor from Burrows Hall to Malvern. Still fully grade-separated, still one transfer at Kennedy.

If you, or your visionary mayor, want to move (not eliminate) that corridor's one mid-trip transfer point, presumably with the (laudable) overall aim of reducing the total number of folks who have to transfer, you should account for the cost of relocating it as $(x - y) dollars, where $x is the cost of building new subway from Kennedy to STC, and $y is the cost of freshening the SRT from Kennedy to STC. I don't think anyone here knows exactly what that number is. Presumably folks at the TTC and Metrolinx are trying to crunch it at this very moment. Suffice it to say it is not a small number--well south of $2 billion, yes, but it's not like that means it's small.

We still haven't heard what you or your visionary mayor have in mind for the part of the corridor from STC to McCowan, or McCowan to Centennial College, or Centennial College to Burrows Hall, or Burrows Hall to Malvern. Assuming you want to junk the SRT guideway between STC and McCowan and not build any kind of higher-order transit past STC, it means a whole bunch of buses converging on STC, where people who began their journeys at places like, say, Centennial College and Malvern, will--that word again--transfer. They will get on a subway line that will be at something like one-quarter of ridership capacity by 2031 and save a grand total of 2 minutes travel time, which will help offset the gained travel time they had to deal with on the bus leg of their trip.

We haven't even began mentioning the folks in condos at Brimley and Bellamy who could look forward to TOD infill stations on the existing line but who are SOL if the SRT gets tossed. Same with proposed development around McCowan.

You also keep talking about the benefits of a new subway station at Lawrence East, either at the low-density intersection of Lawrence and Brimley that was in the plans the last go round, or perhaps serving the slightly more ridership-friendly intersection at Lawrence and McCowan (where there's at least a smallish hospital), and yes, there'd be some benefits from bringing higher order transit there. But you fail to mention the reasonably-busy SRT station surrounded by high-density at Lawrence East that vanishes.

So let's look at that $(x - y) cost and see what it's bought us: we've moved a transfer point. We've eliminated a transfer for a fairly modest number of riders (not all by a long shot, unless untold thousands of folks are sleeping in the stores at Scarborough Town Centre at night). We've increased the bus component of the trip for a fairly large portion of the ridership that actually starts their journey every day to the northeast of STC. And, most importantly, I think, we've solved the great vehicle girth-envy dilemma that so plagues the good folks of Scarborough: no longer will they sit in narrowish second-class trains. They will have nice, wide trains, just like all those spoiled brats west of Victoria Park... all the better to stretch out their legs into space not actually needed to accomodate passengers.

 

[nfitz]

I'm glad we have a visionary mayor who will make this happen.

I thought you lived in Mississauga ... so I ponder what you mean by "we".

You made a sarcastic comment about how could it cost billions to eliminate the transfer. I still don't understand why you'd make such a comment when it was perfectly correct.

 

[reaperexpress]

The subway system already goes to STC. The RT *is* a grade-separated rapid transit "subway" that simply uses a different technology. You're better off taking that $2-$3 billion earmarked for BD and using it to extend the RT deeper into Scarborough instead. OK, so you have that transfer at Kennedy, but as I said, it's nowhere near as inconvenient as the transfers at Bloor-Yonge and St. George. When I worked for the TTC, we had origin-destination studies (from 1978 I think) which showed that where people had a choice between using an E-W surface route to YUS vs. a N-S surface route to BD and a subsequent transfer at St. George or B-Y, the YUS non-transfer option always won out, even if it meant a longer trip. This also shows up today in the ridership difference between BD and YUS. Unless you reconfigure BD via the old Y so that Scarborough gets a one-seat ride downtown, eliminating that extra transfer at Kennedy to the RT doesn't really buy you very much, because there's always the deterrent of the transfer at St. George or B-Y. If you add in a DRL, the number of transfers becomes even worse.

The money (I'm pretty sure it's less than $2 billion) is already earmarked for the SRT, not BD. I agree that technology is irrelevant, even the Transit City LRT design was fully grade separated.

I cannot think of a single way that the transfer at Kennedy is better then that at St. George. What part of transferring at St. George is so inconvenient? You exit your train, walk up the stairs, and you get on a different train.

The fact is that as a rapid transit network grows, the number of transfers inherently goes up. Look at any dense rapid transit system and you'll find huge numbers of transfer stations because it is impossible to have a direct train from everywhere to everywhere else. It doesn't mean the system is inconvenient, it just means there are more ways of getting where you're going. Adding a DRL will bring rapid transit to underserved areas while providing an alternative to the crowded Yonge and Bloor lines. No one will force people to take the DRL.

 

[Asterix]

a perfect opportunity to run the SRT into the ground while the Danforth extension is built underneath.

Please refresh your knowledge of the physical ability to run Danforth subway trains around the curves of the SRT right-of-way (hint: they won't make it).

If you are going to extend the subway, you need a different alignment. Proposing something that is not physically possible doesn't help support the rest of your argument.

 

[LowerBay]

What part of transferring at St. George is so inconvenient? You exit your train, walk up the stairs, and you get on a different train.

The part where I lose my seat. The part where I have to let 1-2 trains pass before I can board. That doesn't happen at Kennedy -- BD trains are empty, so passengers always get a seat. They get a seat the other way (on the RT) too. And, the crowds are nothing compared to B-Y or St. George.

 

[GraphicMatt]

To be fair, I think you have to consider things through the populist lens, which says that Scarborough residents have been unfairly treated with a second-class transit line and a really annoying transfer for decades now.

It's similar to those who argue against building in-median LRT because the TTC has done such a shitty job at managing service with their existing surface LRT routes.

In both cases, opponents advocate that we should spend billions of dollars avoiding these problems instead of just tackling them head on. Restructuring Kennedy to create a more convenient transfer and implementing a strategy to improve in-median and on-street LRT & Streetcar service across the board are both cheaper solutions that will pay-off in the long-term.

 

[nfitz]

a perfect opportunity to run the SRT into the ground while the Danforth extension is built underneath.

Please refresh your knowledge of the physical ability to run Danforth subway trains around the curves of the SRT right-of-way (hint: they won't make it).

If you are going to extend the subway, you need a different alignment. Proposing something that is not physically possible doesn't help support the rest of your argument.

I don't think there is anything in what Cori wrote that said the subway would take the same alignment, but underground. I read it as that you can run the existing SRT while the subway is extended, because they don't interfere with each other.

 

[LowerBay]

Please refresh your knowledge of the physical ability to run Danforth subway trains around the curves of the SRT right-of-way (hint: they won't make it).

If you are going to extend the subway, you need a different alignment. Proposing something that is not physically possible doesn't help support the rest of your argument.

I think he meant extending it "underneath" on a different alignment.

 

[Asterix]

I don't think there is anything in what Cori wrote that said the subway would take the same alignment,

I just figured when he said "while the Danforth extension is built underneath" that he meant 'while the Danforth extension is built underneath the SRT' (since he used "underneath" and not 'underground').

 

[nfitz]

I just figured when he said "while the Danforth extension is built underneath" that he meant 'while the Danforth extension is built underneath the SRT' (since he used "underneath" and not 'underground').

Presumably at some point it would pass underneath the SRT, no matter what alignment it takes.

 

[Dan416]

I used underneath because it implies that they can be done concurrently. And in places it will be underneath, such as at STC and Kennedy. That's the great advantage to extending Danforth, you can do while the SRT is still in operation rather than take the SRT out of service to spend millions to fix it. Especially when it's so hated by Scarberians everywhere.

I don't know where scarberiankhatru and keithz are to pipe up about how hated the SRT is.

 

[GraphicMatt]

The SRT is hated because the transfer is really badly laid out and the vehicles are unreliable, particularly in the winter. Both of these would be addressed with the LRT plan.

 

[Platform 27]

To be fair, I think you have to consider things through the populist lens, which says that Scarborough residents have been unfairly treated with a second-class transit line and a really annoying transfer for decades now.

It's similar to those who argue against building in-median LRT because the TTC has done such a shitty job at managing service with their existing surface LRT routes.

In both cases, opponents advocate that we should spend billions of dollars avoiding these problems instead of just tackling them head on. Restructuring Kennedy to create a more convenient transfer and implementing a strategy to improve in-median and on-street LRT & Streetcar service across the board are both cheaper solutions that will pay-off in the long-term.

You're dead on.

The great Scarborough subway debates have nothing to do with substantially improving access to high-quality transit and everything to do with (a) envy related to how wide the trains are on their side of Victoria Park versus how wide they are in Etobicoke and North York, and (b) impatience with those bloody escalators at Kennedy station.

Unfortunately, nobody in the history of humanity ever got elected on a platform calling for better-managed service on the city's in-median surface RoWs.

 

[LowerBay]

I don't know where scarberiankhatru and keithz are to pipe up about how hated the SRT is.

I don't hate it. Again, I'm showing my age, but in 1981 there was a naming contest in the papers for the RT, and as a joke, I submitted the name "the holly trolley".

 

[LowerBay]

To be fair, I think you have to consider things through the populist lens, which says that Scarborough residents have been unfairly treated with a second-class transit line and a really annoying transfer for decades now.

It's similar to those who argue against building in-median LRT because the TTC has done such a shitty job at managing service with their existing surface LRT routes.

In both cases, opponents advocate that we should spend billions of dollars avoiding these problems instead of just tackling them head on. Restructuring Kennedy to create a more convenient transfer and implementing a strategy to improve in-median and on-street LRT & Streetcar service across the board are both cheaper solutions that will pay-off in the long-term.

Scarborough wasn't shortchanged with a 2nd class system. When the RT was proposed, it was conceived as a futuristic and state-of-the-art elevated system -- an automated mini-subway. There was even going to be an Etobicoke RT. Scarborough was the envy of the other boroughs. That I remember.