Updated September 6, 2013 at 11:10 am: There is an excellent article by Stephen Wickens on his blog recounting the sorry history of Queen’s Park’s imposition of the ICTS technology on the Scarborough route.
It is worth noting that the ICTS cars cost over $2-million each 30 years ago, an outrageous sum. The price to Vancouver was much lower, well below $1m each, and the TTC order was used to funnel money from Queen’s Park to offset the development costs of the new technology. This is what passed for a “transit strategy” in the Davis government.
Updated September 5, 2013 at 11:00 am: My comments about Transportation Minister Glen Murray’s Scarborough subway announcement yesterday are now online at the Torontoist.
The original post follows below.
The prestige and success of the TTC, and of transit in general, depend on its being seen as constantly improving. A great deal of time has been wasted between 1969 when the TTC first proposed the SLRT [Scarborough LRT], through the failed premise of GO Urban (which should have been running in 1975) to the present. Only the rising cost of operating a car has driven up ridership during a period when the Commission’s common response to complaints was to cite its “service standards” and look the other way.
Despite the cost of fuel, there is a large demand for transportation in the Metro region which will not abate. Pressure for the completion of the expressway network continues at least partly because the TTC network does not address large segments of the travel demand.
If the Scarborough line fails, and with it the promise of comparatively cheap suburban rapid transit lines, the TTC will have set back its own future and the future of Metro with it.
Letter from me to Julian Porter, TTC Chair, June 12, 1981, in anticipation of a decision to change the mode of the proposed Scarborough LRT to the provincial “ICTS” technology.
In the intervening decades, we have been badly served by Queen’s Park, Metro/City Council and the TTC with scheme after scheme based on short-term political considerations, make-work projects and “who you know” transit planning.
Little more needs saying.
Steve Munro 
Mathieu wrote about the ECLRT:
On the contrary, for this corridor, LRT provides more expansion possibility than subway.
The common (mis)belief is that expansion possibility equates to capacity. What if the capacity needs of a line outgrow the capacity limit of LRT? This line of thinking ignores the fact that as one moves out of the core of the city, the growth potential ALONG THE LINE is just not there to provide the need for capacity growth. What happens in the suburbs is that the growth is spread wider, and this means two things: the line needs to be extended further out at its ends, and feeder routes bring passengers onto the line from a wider catchment area that most see as a need for more capacity on the line.
Here is how LRT addresses those two issues with expansion possibilities that are more likely to come to fruition due to lower constructions costs:
In the case of the extending the line, the flexibility of where LRT can be placed allows lower cost extensions, and even branches, that can even be placed in mixed traffic for lower costs. This translates into less drama at council to approve. Imagine a line, like the ECLRT, that is tunneled at its core and extends on a median right of way at its ends. More frequent service can operate on the tunneled section, providing the capacity where it is needed while providing a one-seat ride further out for those needing that. Further extension in a median is facilitated by its lower construction cost, but further out in the suburbs, an extension using two branches (where half the frequency is more than sufficient) can be made even easier if a mixed-traffic option is possible due to the lower frequency of service. The cost of subways means that we spend years, if not decades, debating it and nothing or a tiny extension is ever built.
As for the second issue of the original line needing further capacity due to new developement from a wider catchment area, I have been saying this for years, but I will quote Isaac Morland who said so eloquently:
The lower cost of LRT construction allows building one line now to meet the needs for today and for the immediate future, but then additional lines can be built as the need grows. Since this growth in suburban areas is across a wider area, it makes more sense to meet these needs with a technology that has a lower cost that allows us to build it just before we need it.
The outage-resilient feature of doing this is a bonus.
LikeLike
Steve, regarding technology choices; what do you think about electric trolley buses? I think that regular curb separated BRT followed by trolley bus conversion could be a stepping stone to eventually building streetcar style LRT. Modern trolley buses are very quiet (not the old ones still in use), environmentally friendly, energy efficient (cheap to operate), and reliable. Plus they can be articulated also to increase capacity further. Do you think that the GTA might start using trolley buses again?
Steve: I would not count on seeing TB’s again in Toronto. If electric buses are considered, there will almost certainly be a push to do off-wire operation. We will get into a big technology battle about stringing overhead, and vendors of charging systems will fight with each other for prominence. I would just like to get one decent LRT line operating here before we go off on another technology debate.
LikeLike
Why don’t you build LRTs downtown? Let the people of Scarborough decide what they want. And no, we should not build any Downtown Relief Lines until subway comes to Scarborough and Northern Etobicoke and Richmond Hill first. And not everyone works downtown like downtowners like to imagine. If need be, then let us have a referendum on whether or build LRT or subway in Scarborough (needless to say only the residents of Scarborough should get to vote). We should also have a referendum on Eglinton subway vs LRT and Sheppard subway vs LRT and only residents living within 5 km of the lines should get to vote. The original subway and Bloor Street Viaduct only got built after a referendum, so I don’t see why we cannot have more referendums. Referendums cost almost nothing if held at the time of elections. I am okay with LRT too (although I strongly prefer subways) but not an LRT imposed on us by downtowners.
Steve: When those referenda were held, they were for the entire City of Toronto as it then was (much smaller). There was never one to ask about the Bloor-Danforth subway as we know it, nor the Yonge extension into North York, nor the Spadina line. And if you want a referendum just for Scarborough, then maybe we should have a tax just for Scarborough too, especially when they use transit routes paid for by “downtowners”.
The Minister has a fine plan (as long as it is ever built). The only change that I would especially like to see is an addition of a stop at the location of the current Ellesmere stop (and it should be well connected to buses and streets and better connectivity to buses and streets should also be created at the Lawrence East station which should be located at the location of the present station). Preferably Kennedy station should be rebuilt too. I know that the present Ellesmere station is very poorly used and that is because it is not directly served by any buses and very poorly connected to Ellesmere (the street that it is named after). Midland and McCowan stations are too close to the STC station and are poorly used and so may be omitted.
Steve: It is physically impossible to build a station at Ellesmere on the alignment proposed by Minister Murray unless the platforms are well south of Ellesmere itself.
I think that Eglinton should be built as a subway (just make whatever you can afford now and more can be built in the future when more money becomes available) but have a referendum if we can’t see what the people clearly want. I am sorry but people just don’t want to see an LRT on Eglinton or Sheppard either and they want to replace the SRT with subway too. In a real democracy, people’s choices would be respected. Mayor Ford is not alone in his support for subways and the only problem with him is that he doesn’t want to raise taxes to pay for them. Why not also have a referendum on the different funding options proposed by Metrolinx? Referendums can and should be used for more than just deciding whether or not Quebec wants to dump Canada.
Steve: “People don’t want an LRT on Sheppard” because they have been fed a load of BS by the Mayor and others about how this will interfere with traffic. You want a referendum on alternate sources of revenue, but these would come from a variety of places well outside of Scarborough. Once we have new revenue in place (a sales tax, say), then there will be a region-wide debate on how to spend it. If Scarborough wants a gold-plated system that this revenue cannot fund, pouting about “downtowners” won’t get you very far if the 905 scoops the money to build subways and GO expansion.
The fight for Eglinton subway and Sheppard subway is not over. I would like to thank Minister Murray for his support for the subway but only if he actually gets it built within 5 years. China can make hundreds of kilometres of high quality subways in a few years so I don’t need see why we need at least 10 years to build 2 stops (they said it will take at least 10 years on the news today). China builds high speed electric Maglev (floats in the air) trains to it’s airport in Shanghai and did so years ago and we are still trying to build diesel trains to our airport and even that has been in construction for years and will take at least 2 more years before it’s built. China has by far the best infrastructure in the world with the vast majority of the world’s high speed trains being in China. Other countries like India, Indonesia, etc are also building high quality elevated and underground electric trains and electric monorails. You might say that the cost of labour is very high in developed countries so we can’t build as much but then look at London and New York City (both more expensive than Toronto) and look how many kilometres of high quality electric trains they have built and opened in the last few years. In New York City, people of one borough don’t try to impose LRT on other boroughs while building subways for themselves. In Mississauga, the mayor refused to grant permission to Brampton’s highly popular Züm buses saying that it will cause gridlock when gridlock is exactly what it will reduce. There is just way too much politics here in Canada with regards to pretty much everything. The Brampton mayor is not saying No to LRT but just that why not allow Züm buses to run south now until the LRT can be built which is still many years away as Brampton residents don’t have access to all day GO trains. The Brampton mayor also said that this will help build ridership for the upcoming LRT and will help make sure that the LRT when it is eventually built for at least 1.5 BILLION DOLLARS is not a waste as it will already have a ridership from the very first day.
[Links to thestar.com and to mississauga.com]
This is why we need to merge Burlington Transit, Milton Transit, Oakville Transit, MiWay (Mississauga Transit), and Brampton Transit to form Halton-Peel Regional Transit and doing so will also make trip times shorter for commuters thereby encouraging more people to use transit rather than running empty buses which often happens now and therefore it will also reduce gridlock and improve air quality as more people choose not to drive and better air quality will also improve everyone’s health and save us money on healthcare costs too. The merger of those 5 agencies will also dramatically reduce administrative costs and more money will be available to expand transit which will reduce the number of cars on the roads even further.
Steve: But first you should have a few referenda. We wouldn’t want some yahoo from Scarborough telling the good folks of Peel Region how to run their transit system.
Steve, do you think that we are likely to have the merger of those transit agencies anytime soon like happened in York Region and Durham region? Also Steve, do you know if Züm buses might be allowed to run to Port Credit GO station in Mississauga anytime soon? Are there any negotiations going on and do you think that the province (Transportation Minister or the Premier) can override the Mississauga mayor? The Mississauga mayor said NO based on her personal politics rather than what her people want as the people of Mississauga will also benefit from such a service. And isn’t this democracy so why does Brampton even need anybody’s permission to run buses on a public road? For example, Mississauga drivers don’t ask for Brampton’s permission when entering Brampton and nor should they need to. Also do you know when DRT’s new BRT service Pulse will come to Scarborough Town Centre?
Steve: You are happy to have the Minister override local municipalities for something you think is a good idea, but perish the thought that “downtown Toronto” might dictate what Scarborough gets. Are you aware that Glen Murray represents and lives in a riding in the heart of downtown and has very much a “downtown” outlook on how the city should develop? What will you say when he imposes high density development on Scarborough to justify the expense of building a subway line?
LikeLike
The Toronto Scarborough Subway vs. LRT debate for $1.2B.
LikeLike
I agree with Steve’s sense that suburban LRT is now not likely to happen at all – Murray’s ham-handed decision re: the Scarborough subway is the final straw – everything else will now be revised to follow his blueprint.
It’s a damned shame it has come to this, but considering the nature of politics in this region, LRT never stood a chance – Ford’s decision to scrap Transit City saw to that – and now the LRT game is basically over. Toronto’s future will be subways or nothing – possibly a busway if we’re lucky. We may as well move on to other topics at this point.
LikeLike
I can’t believe that no one in the media has made the point that Scarborough STILL won’t have any service (subway or RT) beyond McCowan! Where does the RT end? McCowan. Where does any future subway end? McCowan. The people of Scarborough are being played again. At least with the LRT, expansion to the Malvern town centre was possible. This does not improve the travel time for anyone east of McCowan. All it does as you said Steve, is save 5 minutes of travel by not having to change trains at Kennedy.
LikeLike
Steve:
Thanks to a prescient Torontoist commenter I have discovered that I have “drank the Kool Aid” and that you have captured my mind, bending it to your biased will. This apparently, is part of your special magic and not because I have been a lifelong transit supporter and find your overall positions aligned with my own. It’s great to have a life awareness moment. This is even better than Scientology. This contrasts of course with the belief in the deep analysis and well thought out evidence based call for “Subways, Subways, Subways”.
In any case, I don’t always agree with you. I think that using the ICTS fiasco as a picture of provincial participation in the 1980’s is a bit unfair. Mr Davis did participate in Capital Projects at 75% and operating deficits at 50%. That is better than the current rates at 0% and 0% respectively – and we (the Province) will decide which whimsical expenditure we will float out for votes. Even better, a project such as Transit City can be floated out for votes and then delayed – unfunded – for a heck of a long time. Mr. Davis may have over reached himself in thinking that UTDC could be a worldwide transit company, but his heart was in the right place. A better place than any current politicians from any party. Cities are for people, not cars.
Maybe what we need the most – here I am being mind controlled by you again – is an operating subsidy. On a cold morning in Scarborough, reliable bus service might be even better that a two stop subway ten years in the future.
Steve: Queen’s Park made its subsidy contingent on use of their chosen technology. We only got the CLRVs because the UTDC was desperate to have a credible product after the failure of the maglev system. Queen’s Park is also responsible for our loss of trolley buses, and for delaying Transit City long enough that most of it will likely never be built. Now we have an amateur planner in the Minister’s office.
As for mind control, I am only thankful that whatever brain waves are emanating from Etobicoke, I live far enough east to be immune. Either that, or they overshoot and hit Scarborough.
LikeLike
WOW, Mr. Murray just ruined transportation to 1/4 of the GTA. This subway eliminates all possibility for GO improvement on the Stouffville Line. They will be stuck with 6 train during AM Commuter Period, unless trains can now fly.
That land space is best used for GO now a subway coming aboveground ruining that land use ! ! !
LikeLike
At the same time, Mr. Ford has stated in the past that he could get the private sector to help with building subways. This is better for him – he gets his subway and he doesn’t have to pay for. And it’s not like he is the first Mayor to get himself a subway (i.e. Mr. Lastman’s ‘stubway’ in North York.)
LikeLike
Never a more depressing video has been posted to youtube when looked at from the perspective of recent events.
LikeLike
About the GO Train frequency… If the only way to improve train service is to segregate GO tracks from other services, then let be it. Now I understand that most part of Lakeshore line already is, so they must find a way somehow in this situation at least… I mean once is it electrified, running with EMU’s and the Union station capacity problem if fixed (maybe in 2050?)…
As for the remainings parts of the network, it will probably never need such high frequency (unless it get all electrified and that is less than probable).
I don’t know if any of you heard about the ”Train de l’Est” in Montreal. It is a commuter rail line that will use a very busy CN single track on a embankment for miles (very hard to expand). Anyway, the total cost of the project would be aroud 700 millions$, projected ridership 5000 a day… That’s what costed the 5 km metro extension to Laval 5 years ago wich carry 20 times more people!
Another thing i want to say that i think one big problem is about construction itself. The construction cost right now are absolutely a non sense. I guy i know who built a condo house downtown Montreal had to rebuilt the sidewalk in front after construction, you know. The contractor charged 8000$ for the job. He did it himself with is few employees and got it done for like 1600$. And the city engineer found it so well done, he said it was even better than the usual.
As for the city projects, contractors sometimes bids 75% lower than last couple years (corruption enquiries and all). Maybe we can get a little hope from this side.
LikeLike
I do not see how anybody in their right mind can think of spending another minute of their time or one more dollar on transit planning in Toronto – it is abundantly clear by now that NO PLAN, however well-conceived, can be carried out.
Even after Council agreed on how to proceed with building transit after overriding Ford’s objections in 2012, and Metrolinx and the TTC began working on the design for the LRT replacement of the Scarborough RT, once again ugly politics has intervened and cast this latest effort aside – compounding the endless delay and financial waste by once again forcing the engineers to toss out their work!.
We are trapped in a vast political whirlpool of idiocy and amateurishness when it comes to implementing the transit file. Murray’s stupid interference is only the latest proof of the futility of making and carrying out any serious plans. This destructive vortex is sucking us in and drowning us in its staggering waste and incompetence.
The Province of Ontario should cancel the entire transit expansion plan, pull the tunnel boring machines out of the Eglinton Crosstown line before one more cent is wasted (on a tunnel that will end up being filled in) and take back its 8 billion.
How can we serious-minded good-transit advocates maintain our sanity as long as this on-going infuriating political charade that passes for transit planning continues? I see no way out of this dreadful situation.
It is long past time we admit – once and for all – that NOTHING is going to actually get built under these conditions. We are trapped in a whirlpool of endless conflict and indecision because no one is in charge. No sooner are plans “agreed on” than they’re dashed to pieces on the basis of the latest whim centered on short-term political expediency. This situation is intolerable.
What passes for “transit planning” in Ontario is a total disgrace and a recipe for insanity.
LikeLike
Tom said:
Allow me translate this transit concept into an automobile concept:
We should not build any garages or parking spaces until everyone has a car of their own.
LikeLike
What a brilliant comparative analysis of Calvin Henry-Cotman – though there may be some good in having Murray take over (or try to), the “planning” and “action”, as hard as it may be to stomach it, and with the risks for further costly foul-ups, but what’s another subway into relative sprawl anyways?
The good news may come with allowing Murray to get going on some needed bike infrastructure projects, done with cheap paint would be fine. There would be a transit component to the highest priority item – getting a bit of Bloor/Danforth transit relief with a bikeway parallel to the 500,000 daily riders to allow choice, especially for the more short-haul ridership that pays more than long-haul.
The Fordkers scrapped a signed-contract EA two years ago to save $500,000, though to expand a subway for the price of paint is a relative bargain, not that fiscal issues figure into things it seems. Like the $85M of planning etc. that went into the LRT plan – it could have been used for painted bike lanes – 3200 in total, with the B/D stretching only 21kms.
Or half of it for painted bike lanes, and the rest to set up a Bixi-type bike system in Scarborough for assisting many to get hither and yon, including to the subway…
A special design should be de rigeur – swan-like shielding/streamlining…
LikeLike
Your idea is not bad but we still need to build a subway extension (perhaps a different alignment if GO Transit needs and decides to use that space).
Regarding possible Halton-Peel Transit Agency and Züm not being allowed to access South Mississauga; I am not shoving those suggestions down anybody’s throat – they are just suggestions and perhaps the good people of Halton and Peel might want to have a referendum on the former and the good people of Peel on the latter but ultimately it should be their choice and not mine as I currently don’t live there.
I am all for subways and electric GO trains even if it happens in a 905 area far from me but just as long as downtown does not get any more subways until Scarborough, Richmond Hill, Mississauga, and Markham are well connected by subway. It’s about fairness and Downtown, York, North York, Etobicoke already have more than their fair share of subway stations and underground LRTs (Eglinton for example) that we all helped to pay for. If other 905 areas want subways and electric GO trains, then they should get them too but just no Downtown Relief Lines until other people get their fair share of subway lines. Let us just build whatever subway we can in Scarborough (Eglinton, Sheppard, and SRT replacement) WITHOUT neglecting anyone else and whatever can’t be built now can be made for with frequent express buses until more money becomes available to build more subway.
If the TTC had built the Bloor Danforth extension in the first place instead of the third class LRT, we would not need to replace it already (the Yonge subway line from Eglinton to Union is more than twice as old as SRT but still good to go). If we just refurbish the SRT, we will need another expensive replacement in a few years with more service shut down for years upon years. And streetcars on Sheppard and Eglinton are going to be just as slow as the Spadina, Queens Quay, and St Clair West streetcars which too have their own rights of ways; so it is imperative that we fight against streetcars on Eglinton and Sheppard.
Steve: If the TTC had built true LRT, not the crap that Queen’s Park foisted on us with the SRT, we would have a technology where the 30-year upgrade would consist only of replacing the cars and tarting up the stations, much as we do today with the subway. It is worth noting that the YUS is on its third generation of subway cars, that the stations on the original line have had major overhauls, all of the track has been replaced a few times (with some major shutdowns pending for foundation renewal), and that the signal system must be replaced. It is not “good to go”.
The wealthy sections of Eglinton that pass through Forest Hill, etc are getting underground LRT whereas the people of Scarborough are once again being given a third class system with on street Eglinton LRTs (i.e. long fancy streetcars) and the wealthy sections of Sheppard got the subway and for the poor people of Scarborough they want to build another third class system with Sheppard LRTs (i.e. long fancy streetcars). I would prefer a subway on Hurontario connecting Mississauga with Brampton but if they want an LRT, then that’s their choice and I am cool with it but if they decide to want a subway, I would vocally support it as they too pay provincial and federal taxes. Why not build LRT where there is support? Peel Region, Halton, and Kitchener/Waterloo have been wanting them for years (they wouldn’t even consider anything else even it might be better) but Scarborough doesn’t even want any and they are being shoved down our throats. These so called on street LRTs will clog our streets like St. Clair west (there too they have their own right of way) and it will be bad for both drivers and transit users. My ideas about areas outside of Scarborough are just suggestions and I fully respect whatever decisions they make about their own areas but they should also respect the decisions that the people of Scarborough have made about more subways and no streetcars. I know that all of Ford haters assume that Ford will lose next year but when he wins, Eglinton and Sheppard will both become full blown subways just like the SRT replacement.
Steve: The “rich people” of Eglinton have an underground LRT because there is no room on the surface for it, especially at the density of service that will be required in the inner section. This is not the case on Sheppard East or Finch West. Meanwhile the SRT replacement is on a completely isolated right-of-way where interaction with other traffic is not an issue.
I like streetcars too but they are more suitable for main street style or dense areas where most trips are short instead of a place like Scarborough where most trips are long distance and hence slow streetcars don’t help. Steve, I know that you have an attachment to streetcars as you grew up riding them but this is about moving people fast and about what people need and want. I grew up riding full blown heavy rail electric trains and accordingly I have a love for those but their effectiveness is why I support them and not my attachment thereof. I hope that you understand and even though I agree with you regarding many things, I still respect your passion and your deep knowledge about transit. I found this great link which has your comments down below.
And I fully agree with the article that we should make full use of our existing rail lines (whenever possible) but I strongly prefer electrification of all corridors (better for the environment, less noise, cheaper to operate, countless other benefits). Nobody wants to pay for new subway in Scarborough, so I think that GO Transit should come to the rescue. If they can’t give us more subway in Scarborough, then just give us more GO train stations (electric trains only) with service from early in the morning to late at night and still no streetcars for Scarborough.
Steve: You are unlikely to see electrification on much of the GO network for decades. The first candidates will be Lake Shore and the Weston corridor, and there are challenges even to getting those done. If you make your desire/approval of more GO in Scarborough dependent on electrification, you will wait a very, very long time.
Enough of the novella length comments, please. They are tedious to edit, and you have made your point several times over.
LikeLike
@ Calvin Henry-Cotnam talk about LRT leaving the door open to branching.
I agree that this is one of the main advantages of LRT is that several in-median branches of lower frequency can join a grade-separated portion with higher frequency. One problem I see is that the Transit City plan outlined LRT that would probably take a generation to build and there was no plan or allowance for branching.
Steve: You have to get the main lines before you talk about branches. Saying there was “no allowance” for them ignores the fact that for surface routes, adding junctions in the future is not a major exercise.
For Eglinton, a way would have to be found to have branches converge at Laird – since this is where the grade-separated portion ends. Could one branch go down Laird to Pape or Donlands Station and the other be the continuation along Eglinton. This would kill the DRL (north of Danforth) and also bypass Thorncliffe and Flemingdon.
Steve: An Eglinton leg down to Pape Station is no replacement for the DRL which, in any event, should go to Don Mills and Eglinton, a much more natural future node than Laird. Going to Flemingdon and Thorncliffe is a benefit of the Don Mills alignment.
If the grade-separated portion was extended to Kennedy – and by extension Malvern, then there would be much better branching opportunities. You could have a branch come of at Kennedy Station and continue along Eglinton to Kingston Road and beyond. You could have a branch come off at Ellesmere and continue up to Agincourt. You could have a branch come off at Centennial College and go to UTSC.
Steve: Presuming, of course, that these branches would be built as elevated structures, not at grade (and lower expense), the very reason LRT was chosen in the first place.
In the West, branches could occur along Weston/Dixon and the Eglinton continuation.
By all means consider branching, but you need a grade-separated core to do it.
LikeLike
Citing Fordian logic, downtown already has 10 “LRT” routes. So why should the “downtown elites” have all the LRTs when the suburbs have to make due with dirty, unreliable buses and mere offers of token BRT upgrades?
It’s not physically impossible. However, it wouldn’t be cheap to leave a space for a Future Ellesmere station.
Steve: I didn’t say it would be impossible, but the curve at Ellesmere must start south of where it is today and this pushes the station south of Ellesmere itself.
Basically it would involve either splitting the grade up from the tunnel into two segments and leaving a flat segment long enough to build a station between the two, or moving the grade up from the tunnel south beyond where you would build the station.
The problem is, someone forgot to go back in time and inform those building the new housing subdivision on the east side of the rail corridor that someone in the future would want to build a trench for a future subway station along the RT corridor and thus the east trench wall would have to be built without temporarily shifting the rail line. As a result, it would be a very expensive placeholder.
LikeLike
It might be possible to build LRT that starts at Scarborough Centre and goes past McCowan, to Centennial College and Malvern Centre. Obviously, that will require more funding.
Steve: Ah yes, but then we will hear all about how people in Malvern, etc., are being forced to take inferior streetcars.
LikeLike
I too used to think that removing the RT from the Uxbridge Sub corridor is good for improving the GO frequency. But, apparently, the corridor gets tight north of Progress only. Between Kennedy and Progress, there is room both for the RT or subway and for at least 2 GO tracks.
Steve: A related issue is whether one tries to add stations to the GO line as am urban rail corridor rather than a commuter line. There certainly is no room for stations in the shared section.
LikeLike
@Tom (September 6):
It should be noted that “Downtown Relief Line”, despite its name, will be more useful for riders traveling from the suburbs to downtown jobs than for downtown residents. The former (including a fair number of Scarberians) are currently squeezed like sardines in the Yonge or Spadina trains during the peak hours; their commute will be faster and more comfortable with “Downtown Relief Line” in place. The downtowners will benefit less, as the stop spacing is likely to be rather wide.
I agree with a region-wide referendum on transit revenue sources.
Local referenda on subways vs LRT in each corridor would be totally useless if the whole city or region is supposed to pay for what the locals chose. The locals everywhere will approve the most expensive option, and the construction bills will mount up without any limit. Such referenda only make sense if people who participate are the same who pay for the choice they made.
LikeLike
There are people elsewhere in the city, downtown and otherwise that would kill for upgraded service to LRT standards and for your information (and others who might have thick skulls) the Downtown Relief Line is only needed because the Yonge and Danforth lines are too full of second-class, second-rate people riding downtown from North York, Richmond Hill, and Scarborough on their $3 flat fares. It’s main purpose is to provide more space for people like you. There’s already plenty of chatter to make the line express. Pull your head out of the sand.
Steve: The people in Scarborough etc. are not second-rate. Those who vote for Ford are merely unfortunately deluded, but not second-rate.
LikeLike
I forgot to mention in my last retort that no one works at STC either. Certainly not enough people that would cause subway levels of demand. We know this now.
Steve: I used to work at STC before retiring, and there were lots more who worked there too. Almost all of them drove to work in my office in part because they were coming from locations where it was almost impossible to get to STC as a commute because routes and service focused on Bay and Front.
LikeLike
(Post this one Steve. Thanks!)
L. Wall said, “I forgot to mention in my last retort that no one works at STC either.”
People from the richer areas of the city keep saying that there is not enough density in Scarborough but was there enough density at Bloor and Old Mill when that line was under construction in the 1960s? The density in Scarborough Town Centre area is still much more than at Bloor and Old Mill and in those days there were hardly any people at Bloor and Old Mill when construction first started in the 1960s for an eventual Old Mill station only the rich people in the Kingsway area decided that they wanted a subway too. And it would have take 60 years of plans, discussions, studies, committees, promises, and what not when the subway eventually opens ay York University in 2016. Why? Because York is in a poor neighbourhood even though the density there is very high owing to one of the largest universities in the world and when they decided to eventually build it, the low density rich neighbourhoods of Vaughan had to get it too and no one said that there is not enough density.
The rich areas of Eglinton (Forest Hill, etc) get underground transit (Eglinton line, Spadina line, Yonge line) whereas the poorer Scarborough parts get a streetcar (Eglinton streetcar, Sheppard streetcar, Scarborough RT / Scarborough LRT) “because the density is not high enough.” Similarly, the rich parts of Sheppard get a subway and the poorer Scarborough parts get a streetcar “because the density is not high enough” together with an unnecessary inconvenient transfer at Don Mills just like at Kennedy. To those who say unnecessary transfers are okay and convenient, why don’t you build half of the Downtown Relief Line (the farthest away from Downtown Core half) as a subway and then you can provide a “convenient” underground streetcar half for the section closest to the Downtown Core. Like from Don Mills and Eglinton to Pape station a subway and from Pape Station to the Downtown Core an LRT? If they decide to build something like that (i.e. an unnecessary transfer for Downtowners), then I am totally okay with any inconvenient transfers Scarborough has been and is being dealt (Kennedy station, Don Mills station, etc). Scarborough should get world class subway, electric GO lines, buses, or nothing – we don’t want LRTs (i.e. long fancy streetcars) at any cost.
Steve: This largely duplicates an earlier argument. The only reason there is a subway to the Kingsway is that it is passing through enroute to the then-planned centre of Islington. This is roughly like the situation at Lawrence East (wherever that station winds up) getting built because it’s on the way to STC. Beyond STC is quite another matter. The DRL will be full subway because it must be completely grade separated over its entire length and because the projected demand exceeds the capacity of LRT. This has nothing to do with convenience for downtowners.
There are LRT installations all over the world in many “world class” cities. Your unwavering bias against “LRT” is wearing rather thin. You have made your point.
LikeLike
That’s an open secret that everything is downtown focused (from GO Trains to the subways to any other amenity (public or private)). From your having worked in Scarborough for more than 8 years, I hope that you can relate to us as to why we feel left out. I was wondering Steve if you own a car. It’s none of my business but I am just trying to understand where your views on transit are coming from. As for me, I never owned a car.
Steve: I do not and never have owned a car. However, I do not feel disadvantaged as a public transit user, and base by advocacy on what I feel is best for the network overall. The “poor downtrodden Scarborough” bit, invented by politicians for their own benefit, not for Scarborough’s, pisses me off immensely because there are many other parts of the city that could make the same comment.
LikeLike
Perhaps I was not clear enough, or maybe I didn’t understand your humour. I will try to write it more clearly. Branches can be in THE MEDIAN and the “trunk” should be GRADE-SEPARATED. If we are spending about $4B on the tunnelled portion of the ECLRT, we need to have at least 2 routes share that portion of the line – essentially cutting its cost in half. If the trunk is from Mt. Dennis to Laird, then you must have 2 branches join in at each end – currently, there are no branches. In the west, it seems reasonable to have one branch go along THE MEDIAN of Eglinton and one branch along THE MEDIAN of Weston and Dixon. I think we both agree that there are no logical branching possibilities at Laird. Thus the grade-separated portion should be extended to where a branch would split. I would say the first opportunity would be Kennedy, where a branch could continue along THE MEDIAN of Eglinton and the other along the SRT corridor. Alternatively, a branch could go in THE MEDIAN of Kennedy towards Agincourt, Ellesmere towards UTSC, or another road and join up in the GRADE-SEPARATED SRT corridor.
LRT Should cost $60M to $80M /km, perhaps with a couple of hundred million more to duck under a major transfer intersection. Finch West is maybe the best example of this. If we are spending $4B ($350 /km), we better get more use out of it than just a single line. Perhaps the Transit City planners should have shown a few branches with dotted lines (i.e. future route) to demonstrate that this big benefit of the LRT option is realistically possible.
Steve: The Transit City planners were concerned with just getting the main principle of LRT established. One of its obvious advantages would be future branches, but drawing too much on a map makes the conversation trickier, and has a bad history of “freezing” such proposals into place.
LikeLike
I hope the flexibility of LRT proves itself between 2018 and 2022 when (if, really, but I have hopes) the Provincial Government decides to rush ahead with phase 2 of the Eglinton Crosstown LRT and takes it at least to the Renforth Gateway.
At this point, some people wise up and realize that if Eglinton were a “subway” in the traditional sense there is no way it could be extended that quickly.
Let’s hope that by this time the plan for replacing the Scarborough RT has been figured out.
Yes, I doubt that all of this will happen but you never know…
Cheers, Moaz
LikeLike
And this is part of the problem. The other is a lack of integrated fares between the TTC and the other transit line it connects to (i.e. GO, Mississauga Transit, York Regional Transit, etc.)
LikeLike
Walter makes comments about branching lines off from new separate right of way LRT lines, such as:
1 “THE MEDIAN of Eglinton and one branch along THE MEDIAN of Weston and Dixon.”
This is nice sounding but it forces those who want to go farther south on Weston Rd. to make a transfer.
2 “I think we both agree that there are no logical branching possibilities at Laird. Thus the grade-separated portion should be extended to where a branch would split. I would say the first opportunity would be Kennedy, where a branch could continue along THE MEDIAN of Eglinton and the other along the SRT corridor. Alternatively, a branch could go in THE MEDIAN of Kennedy towards Agincourt, Ellesmere towards UTSC, or another road and join up in the GRADE-SEPARATED SRT corridor.”
The basic problem with this is demand on the SRT corridor will be greater than on ECLRT. The other branches you mention would reduce the headways to a small fraction, 1/2, 1/3 or 1/4, of the main branch as well as making line management very difficult. If you run a 3 minute headway on the main line then your branches have to be every 6, 9 or 12 minutes, some multiple of the core headway. This does not always work well. The other problem is the grid goes to hell in a hurry and not everyone wants to get to the CBD.
Branches that make more sense are ones that occur at a natural barrier. A line east on Eglinton from Kennedy with one branch continuing out Kingston Rd. and another going north on Markham or Morningside does not screw up the grid. At least not any more than it is for riders along Kingston Rd. at the present.
The original plan would make Kennedy a natural node with 3 lines, ECLRT, SRT, and what ever runs farther east on Eglinton. This would be a logical and major transit hub. It might screw up any possibilities of major redevelopment at Scarborough Town Centre but it would encourage more around Kennedy Station.
LikeLike
I live in Markham, which for those of you who don’t know is even further away from a subway line than Scarborough. Yet I support building the Downtown Relief Line first, even before my town’s … sorry, I mean city’s … dreams of having the Yonge subway extended to Richmond Hill, or the electrification of the Stouffville Line. Why? Because it is the logical thing to do – it would have the highest ridership of any transit project in the GTA and have the biggest impact on reducing congestion on the other lines. There is no point in extending the subway network when the YUS line is already full!
I hope other people who live in the suburbs realise that the subway system is pretty much built for them. Hardly anybody I know who lives downtown uses the subway – they prefer to walk or take the streetcar when necessary. I don’t have the numbers in front of me, but I’m willing to be that the vast majority of people who use the downtown subway lines don’t actually live downtown. So why the hell do we suburb folk start complaining the moment the TTC suggests the DRL get built? It’s not really meant to serve the residents of downtown Toronto – they don’t need it because they already live there. It’s really designed to help our commute because we’re the ones who would be using it to go downtown! I do not understand why we suburb folk can’t wrap our heads around such a simple concept.
LikeLike
Steve has already adequately demolished this posting, but I can’t help but add my bit:
So LRT, underground, is sufficiently fabulous that we should be resentful of the wealthy Forest Hill neighborhood for having it, but LRT running identical vehicles on identical track on an above ground but 100%-grade-separated route that goes nowhere near traffic and includes fully covered stations, is sufficiently trashy that it gets to be called the dreaded S-word.
This is exactly the sort of thing people are talking about when they say argument should be based on facts and evidence, not random thoughts.
Would it help if we stretched a tent over the tracks in Scarborough? Or should we just paint out the windows to give the illusion of being in a tunnel?
Steve: There are actually intelligent folk living east of Victoria Park Avenue who have not yet drunk the Team Ford Koolaid.
LikeLike
I’ve often wondered just how much of an improvement could be made on the crowding issue at Bloor-Yonge if an arrangement between the TTC and GO transit could be made where TTC riders could also use GO transit’s rail network within Toronto for no more than the additional cost of one TTC cash fare per trip. Frankly, such an arrangement would probably be far more beneficial to the people of Scarborough than the subway idea currently being proposed by Murray.
Steve: A big problem (and a catch 22) with GO is that they add service on such a miserly basis that they have little room for inside-416 traffic. This produces a self-fulfilling prophecy that they don’t need to do fare integration because this would only overload a service that has no room for the traffic it would generate. Meanwhile, Metrolinx runs its Big Move demand model on the basis of far more frequent GO service and demand within the 416 than we are likely ever to see on our rail network.
LikeLike
Minister Murray himself was commenting on the need of ‘evidence-based’ transit planning a little while ago. Really? Just look at your own agency’s reports, Minister. Metrolinx’s benefit case analysis for the Scarborough RT clearly indicates the LRT option is superior to all other options.
This whole argument of ‘fairness’ in getting a subway for Scarborough, Etobicoke etc. just because there is no subway there yet, is complete baloney, verging on puerility.
Subway (or any other transit technology) should be chosen based on existing and prospective demand, not on political ambitions. It is precisely because of those nearsighted politicians and the exclusive focus on subways for decades that we have an inadequate and underdeveloped rapid transit system at present.
Inconvenient transfers for Scarborough commuters? For the one at Don Mills, you should blame Mel Lastman. If the Sheppard Subway did not exist now, I’m sure no one would even entertain the idea of building a subway along Sheppard to STC or wherever. Extending a line that is essentially a money pit for the TTC operating budget in the name of fairness and for saving a transfer that should not take more than a few minutes is not ‘visionary’. It is fiscally irresponsible, precisely the type of irresponsibility the current crowd at City Hall (with Rob Ford at the helm) is supposedly fighting against.
Calling the planned LRT’s on suburban arterials ‘streetcars’ (by analogy to the downtown system) shows either a strong bias for anything that runs on surface rails or simply a lack of knowledge of what LRT is.
Such are the joys when dealing with a largely uneducated public, who prefer to listen to political BS and snippets of (mis)information in the media instead of thoroughly researching and understanding the options that are on the table.
Electrification of GO Rail lines? That would be great, but this is North America, where electrified rail lines are notable exceptions rather than a common practice. I would astounded even if we get electrification of the Lakeshore corridor, let alone wide-scale electrification of the GO network or more generally, of Canadian railroads (which will never happen under private ownership of the railroads). Such are the joys of privately owned railway infrastructure, unlike ‘socialist’ Europe and Asia, where electrification is widespread and more generally, railway track construction and maintenance technology is decades ahead compared to North America.
LikeLike
In the early days, Royal York and Old Mill were like ghost stations. The stops were placed there to avoid running a parallel bus service along Bloor. Extending to Islington was just part of the basic trunk/grid concept.
Scarborough and Etobicoke were both supposed to get N-S LRT lines to feed Kipling and Kennedy. The problem with the Scarborough LRT was that the TTC was trying to build it as cheaply as possible … maybe too cheaply — no escalators, no platform-level loading, and they decided to run it through the middle of nowhere to save even more money.
LikeLike
I was being facetious with the second-rate comment given the tone of Tom’s comment. What does “imposed by downtowners” even mean? I’ll reiterate that many people even downtown (and elsewhere in the city, even the inner suburbs) would love to have an LRT line “imposed” on them.
I wouldn’t even start on the build the DRL as LRT rhetoric if I were you. LRT can’t handle the projected traffic on the DRL, a large chunk of which is actually traffic from the inner suburbs. This is in contrast to the SRT LRT which would have more capacity than total jobs available at STC.
LikeLike
Given that politics more than transit use seems to determine transit planning I’m interested in the multiple leaks attributed to anonymous Federal Conservatives about an offer of $500 – $600 million for a transit project to arrive before Christmas.
The Fed Cons & Prov Libs are not on very good terms as demonstrated recently by Murray’s reaction to getting stood up for 3 meetings in a row by Transport Minister Raitt to discuss subway funding.
Hypothetically now:
Rather than take Murray’s offer to prop up a meagre subway plan by adding an extra station or lengthening it, there’s more political points to be scored by providing the money solely if the Province agrees to switch it’s funding to the city’s $2.7 billion version, which of course puts TO on the hook to raise hundreds of millions in taxes, debt, charges and overruns.
Going with the Feds plan (with likely city council support) would be humiliating for Murray who has disparaged the costlier line. The Province would also not be pleased to have the (late) Feds take credit for a line that the Province is actually contributing double the cash for.
Should Murray decline the Feds/city offer, the Feds still win by saying that they (& city) were willing to fund a real subway line making a point to highlight the unnecessary shutdown of the SRT during the years that roads are filled with bus shuttles. This meddling costs the Feds nothing of course.
LikeLike
Which is rather sad considering that it probably wouldn’t take much to handle the increase in demand that would come with fare integration. It wouldn’t surprise me if on the Lakeshore line, a frequency of once every twenty minutes with every other train only running between Port Credit and Pickering would be able to handle the demand generated by basically charging a second token for TTC riders to use the GO train for part of their trip. Of course, it would help if some TTC route integration would also occur at GO stations if that were to happen.
LikeLike
The belief that certain areas “deserve” subways is to foster a grievance-based transit planning strategy, with those who have the biggest grudges jumping to the front of the queue. The actual needs of the system are left to go hang.
I notice with all these demands for transit service never come with a promise to pick up the tab for the bill if the projections somehow fail to align with reality. I wonder what the reaction in Vaughan would be if the TTC started sending a monthly invoice for running subways there, once the extension is completed. The “it’s all about fairness” argument seems to run only one way: yes to expensive goodies; heck no to shouldering a share of what it cost to build it.
Steve: The good burghers of Vaughan will get a TTC fare ride to downtown subsidized by Toronto taxpayers thanks to the agreement the city entered into for this project, hoping no doubt that Queen’s Park would pony up an extra transitional subsidy.
LikeLike
Regarding Steve’s forecast that an Eglinton subway may still happen, a nasty thought occurred to me: in such an eventuality, the province will hope to avoid any legal awkwardness with Bombardier by sole-sourcing them for the subway cars (to replace the now never-to-be-built LRT models). The likely fact that all this chicanery will end up costing more than, say, building an LRT from Pearson to Kennedy will be waved off as, “you can’t put a price on convenience”, or some such garbage.
LikeLike
This would benefit people at both ends of the Bloor-Danforth Line – Kennedy in the east, but Kipling in the west, plus a connection between Dundas West subway station and GO’s Bloor station. With an integrated fare, passengers could take the TTC to a GO station, jump onto a GO train, then jump onto the subway at Union (although during the rush hour the subway is crowded in both directions, not just people getting on the subway in the morning or off in the evening) and only have to pay the GO fare plus 65 cents for the TTC trip – and this could occur easily when the TTC fully implements PRESTO which allows the two TTC trips to count as one trip with a transfer.
Steve: It is already a single fare on the TTC if you use GO as a bridge between two TTC routes. This is not well-known.
LikeLike
I think that the people of Toronto should organize protests because we helped pay the bill for the building of GO, we help pay for it’s operation costs, it passes through our territory, and yet the trains do not even stop at most Toronto stations most of the time except for Union which means that they are just bringing people from outside of Toronto into the city and taking them back home and so realistically we can’t even use it. I think that we should block the GO tracks just like the natives block train tracks and roads and highways (they do so as it is a very effective technique). For decades, the people of Toronto have paid for this service that they can’t even use. Let us protest for fare integration and demand that all trains stop at all Toronto stops. There are times that I could use the GO trains to cut my commute time but the train just doesn’t stop at my stop most of the time so I can’t unless I ring the emergency alarm or something just to get off. Alternatively, this can be our protest technique (pressing the alarm much like a Stop Request button just before our station approaches). Sure, the 905ers may be delayed by this but we have been delayed for decades just because we could never use the GO trains even though they pollute our neighbourhoods and disturb our peace with their extremely noisy diesel locomotives and even though we paid to build them and we paid for the trains, etc to be bought and we pay for its operations.
Steve: I am not sure whether I should laugh or cry. The real protest should be to our MPPs, yes, the same ones who brought us the Scarborough subway through their pressure in the Liberal caucus. They have so much power, maybe you should talk to them.
LikeLike