With the emergence of two candidates for Mayor of Toronto who support the Scarborough LRT scheme, we are bound to hear much talk about how long construction would take, how long SRT riders would be forced to ride shuttle buses, and when the line might open. In this context, it’s worth looking back at Metrolinx plans before various politicians decided to buy votes in Scarborough with a subway line.
The TTC’s original plans were to rebuild the SRT before the Pan Am Games. That schedule went out the window when then-Premier McGuinty pushed out the delivery plans for the Transit City projects so that most of the spending would occur after the provincial deficit was under control if not eliminated.
Also lost in the shuffle was the idea that the Sheppard LRT would be in operation before the SRT shutdown as an alternate route for people from northern Scarborough to reach the subway system.
Metrolinx revised timelines were based on three overlapping stages of the project:
- Build the new maintenance shops at Conlins Road including pre-building a portion of the Sheppard LRT for use as a test track. (This portion would be part of the link to the future Scarborough line and would be needed even if the Sheppard line were not yet operating.)
- Build the north end of the Scarborough LRT line from Sheppard to a point just east of McCowan Yard.
- Rebuild the existing SRT as an LRT line. Only this part of the project would require a shutdown of SRT service.
As momentum grew for the subway proposal, it suited proponents to treat the entire project timeline as the shutdown period for the SRT, and thus we began to hear of a four-year long period when riders would be taking bus shuttles. The situation was not helped by the fact that Queen’s Park and Metrolinx talked of the Scarborough LRT opening “by 2020” even though it could be finished far earlier.
In July 2012, I wrote about the “One City” debate at Council, and in that article asked:
Metrolinx needs to explain why the shutdown period for the SRT has grown to four years. Is this a question of project complexity, or of Queen’s Park’s desire to stretch out cash flows?
This prompted a response from Metrolinx Vice President of Rapid Transit Implementation, Jack Collins:
Your recent blog posting implies that Metrolinx or the Province has increased the duration of the SRT shutdown period from 3 years to 3 to 4 years.
This is not the case. The first time we heard 3 to 4 years was during the City Council debate on Wednesday concerning the One City Plan.
This duration did not come from a Metrolinx representative and in all our discussions with the TTC staff the shutdown has been three years, and hopefully less if we put our minds to it.
I wanted to assure you and your readers that even with an AFP type contract, the current Metrolinx plan is:
- SRT will stay in service until after the 2015 Pan Am/ Para Pan games
- The AFP contract will have a condition that will limit the shutdown period to no more than 3 years
- As part of the AFP contractor selection process, contractors will be encouraged to come up with plans to reduce the shutdown period to less than 3 years
[Email July 13, 2012]
A year later, as a result of some subtle changes in wording of government announcements, I pursued the question again. Jack Collins replied:
In the “5 in 10 Plan” presentation to the Metrolinx Board in May 2010, we deferred the light rail delivery dates for all projects and Eglinton LRT and Scarborough LRT were shown as completing in November 2020.
Since May 2010 there have been additional changes to LRT schedules that were a result of an MOU and the Sheppard East subway debate and those changes have impacted Sheppard East and Finch LRT in-service dates, but we have held to the original November 2020 dates for Eglinton and Scarborough LRT. The wording “in-service date of 2020” is perhaps more precise, although it does not give a month in 2020 and I am not sure “by 2020” is any more or less definitive.
To be clearer, the project team is working towards a goal of being in-revenue service during the month of November 2020 for both the Eglinton Crosstown LRT and Scarborough LRT. That said, there is still a chance that Scarborough LRT can be opened earlier. As I have previously indicated to you, Metrolinx will limit the SRT shut-down period to no more than 3 years. Assuming a contract award for the combined Crosstown and Scarborough LRT Design, Build, Finance, Maintain contract in early 2015, the successful proponent will need to complete enough design during the balance of 2015 to allow construction to start in 2016. We anticipate that construction could start between McCowan Station and Sheppard and on the new loop for SLRT into the new Kennedy LRT station. We will be asking the proponents to identify a construction staging plan that minimizes the SRT “shut-down”. The plan is to open Scarborough LRT as soon as feasible, but until we have a contractor on-board with an approved contract schedule and staging plan, it is bit difficult to pin down the exact dates on when the SRT will be shut-down and the new line opened.
On the Scarborough/Sheppard Maintenance and Storage Facility Design, Build, Finance and Maintain contract we hope to award the contract in October 2013. Early construction works for drainage and site leveling was completed last year and design should start in 2014 with construction going about 2.5 years from late 2014 through early 2017. This date is tied to Light Rail Vehicle delivery and having LRV’s available for final building and systems acceptance testing.
[Email July 8, 2013]
This was further clarified:
Plan is to start work in late 2015 but in areas that do not require a shut-down of SRT. Metrolinx will also review proponents plans to limit the shut-down to 3 years or less. That may delay the shut-down until late 2016, but still makes an earlier opening than November 2020 possible for Scarborough LRT.
We do not want to start a shut-down until all the other elements like TTC final design approvals, supply of traction power substations and signaling systems etc. are advanced enough to limit the shut-down duration.
[Email July 8, 2013]
In private conversations with Collins, it was clear that Metrolinx was hoping for a 2.5 year shutdown, but could not commit to that until bids for the work were in hand complete with project staging proposals. Thanks to the subway campaign, we don’t actually know what might have been possible.
Even if a new Council embraces the LRT scheme again (and assuming that the Scarborough Liberal Caucus doesn’t throw a monkey-wrench into the works at Queen’s Park), we would be lucky to see any construction start before 2016, but that would be on the portion of the project that does not require a shutdown. The question then would be whether the whole project could be compressed by a desire to get it completed quickly.
We will hear a lot of hot air during the election campaign with claims and counter-claims about the LRT and subway options. Metrolinx, the TTC and City staff owe the public clear, unbiased information about these options and how they would fit into the larger planning exercise for regional transportation now underway.
Steve Munro 
Steve,
With all due respect, there has been more than a little development. In fact, I wonder if so many people commenting on Sheppard actually ride it. Because if they did, they would find that it is Standing Room Only on the morning and afternoon rush. Although I suppose when there is an agenda to pursue, the truth can often become a casualty.
If the Scarborough Subway is back on the table, then so should the Sheppard LRT. I mean who builds one-third of something and calls it an absolute success or failure? If it was built as intended, it would be a massive success. A true northern crosstown route that will not require swinging through Yonge-Bloor station. And it still can be.
The compromise position makes the most sense. Cancel the Scarborough Subway, put Eglinton LRT along the existing SRT route. But first extend Sheppard subway East to STC to give them access to the Yonge line and not ride shuttle buses for 2-3 years. Then extend Sheppard west to Spadina giving them multiple options to get downtown and bypass Yonge. Then extend the Eglinton LRT over to Centennial College and up into Malvern in the East and extend Eglinton LRT West to the Airport.
No more of those dreaded transfers and one single technology for each line. Allow co-fares for Go Trains to get people out of the U south of Bloor where they will have 3 options to re-connect with the subway network along a fully completed Sheppard Subway line at either Downsview, Oriole or Agincourt stations which would be fully integrated with the TTC.
This is a financially do-able plan.
LikeLike
I appreciate your response, and it was the one I expected. At 110 seconds would not the growth experienced in the last 8 years consume the vast majority of this additional capacity if it were projected into future assuming that there was no line extension, just continued organic growth in the system (20 percent vs 27).
Steve: Yes, growth is eating up a lot of the supposed future surplus in capacity.
So in essence, in this context I believe what this implies, that downtown bound Scarborough riders really do need the DRL in order to maintain access to the Downtown core at peak, even assuming that there is no additional growth in load from the Crosstown LRT, their own or a Yonge line extension.
So a downtown bound Scarborough rider who holds the DRL hostage to their own subway is cutting off their nose to spite their face.
I have supported the DMRL, in order to provide access for Scarborough and East York, using the Scarborough LRT, the Crosstown, as well as enabling a Don Mills LRT to provide local service, help relieve the Yonge line and provide shorter bus rides for those travelling from the east, as well as the service a DMRL would provide the areas in ran through (although that part is relatively minor compared and not a major issue to downtown).
LikeLike
Considering that the subway extension is being built to reinforce the downtown centric traffic pattern, you may want to reconsider your views on the subway extension. The only way that you might get the subway extension to be a stimulant for a new “downtown core” at STC is to link it to the Lakeshore GO line and a future GO line along the CP line north of STC. However, not a single subway extension supporter wants to take on that much of a cost increase to the project.
Of course, if Scarborough had actually wanted a transit oriented downtown core, Scarborough City Centre would have been centred around the Sheppard-Kennedy-Ellesmere-Midland box.
LikeLike
So the question becomes, can we at this point build a DRL before all capacity increases reasonably planned for Yonge are consumed, assuming that funding was secured in the next budget round, and the detailed route planning for an EA starts tomorrow?
If not what will the impact be on access to downtown from the east and north? On how short a headway can GO practically operate on downtown bound trains? Can they dedicate one pair of tracks (one east one west or one north one south) and would that make a notable difference? Is there a practical point on a GO line that actually intersects enough of the load to make a large enough difference?
Steve: How many trains is partly a question of service design (do you run them mainly inbound with little or no conflicting outbound service), track layout on the various corridors, track time at Union Station, and finally actual availability of equipment. I would be very surprised to see better than 6 trains/hour (10 minute headway) on the Stouffville and Richmond Hill corridors, and if both were used this would mean a 5 minute headway through Union Station for the two services combined. This would add 3-4 trains/hour above the current service on each route, and so if we presume 6 new peak trips in total, that’s on the order of 12k more passenger spaces presuming you can fill all of the seats.
All that presumes we can physically add that much service, and frankly if we cannot, then all the claims in The Big Move about diverting trips from road to rail is just so much hot air.
LikeLike
Steve, to get back on topic. Would not the LRT originally proposed also provide more people effective service to the STC along with service downtown? Do a better job at making STC a local hub? Would the 3 billion proposed for subway not cover virtually all the costs of the Scarborough portion of the Sheppard LRT, extension of the Crosstown, and Malvern service and UTSC service? Basically provide subway comfort, frequency, speed and reliability to basically all of Scarborough? Would this not include basically indoor shelter areas for LRT riders?
Steve: First off, it’s $3.6b, not $3b. Yes, the extra $1.7b would build the SLRT Malvern extension plus the Sheppard line including the “Morningside Hook” to UTSC. Subway frequency is a question of how much service the TTC or Metrolinx chooses to operate. Indoor shelters? Not so sure about that for stops in the median of streets especially at busy stops where you would need a really big shelter.
LikeLike
I would accept an LRT as a replacement for the SRT only if at least as much money is spent on the LRT as would have been the subway. If, however, the reason behind why people in and around Downtown are so desperate to build LRT in Scarborough is that they wish to save money and use the saved money on an extremely expensive Downtown Relief Line (DRL) in subway rich Downtown, then forget it. Either give us the already approved subway to McCowan and Sheppard or give us an LRT that would cost at least as much (which would be enough to take it completely grade separated to Markham and Steeles). Don’t save money in Scarborough to spend it in Downtown is all I am asking. Per Capita spending on transit has been way lower in Scarborough than the rest of Toronto and this is simply unacceptable. Otherwise, I think that Scarborough should divorce Toronto and either join York Region or Durham Region or go it alone. If Scarborough separates from Toronto, then I have no problem with constructing extremely expensive and unnecessary Downtown Relief Lines in Downtown which is already a very subway rich area.
Steve: Begone. Enjoy your partnership with Durham who cannot afford to even run decent bus service let alone build a subway.
Please see the previous comment and my note that we could build the SLRT to Malvern plus the Sheppard line to UTSC with the money earmarked for the Scarborough Subway. We would probably have change left over.
LikeLike
Funny, I take that line everyday at rush hour, and I see lots of seats. And then there are the evening rush hour trains pulling into Sheppard that have less people on them then 1 bus worth.
There has been growth in usage along Sheppard, but not enough to justify its existence. Nor is there enough probable demand along Sheppard east of Don Mills to justify a subway (there is for LRT).
As for agendas, some of us are not hung up on technology and prefer what makes fiscal sense. Call it not wanting to waste money on billion dollar boondoggles to corners where the largest destination is a Canadian Tire.
LikeLike
The issue I would have with this approach is that it would seem to me you have not really looked to see the primary users and benefactors of a DRL would be, residents of Scarborough using the TTC going to work in the morning rush. It makes sense because all those expensive to staff bus lines running in Scarborough have loaded up the subway to the breaking point.
LikeLike
Steve, how do you think the added trips (announced today, beginning April) to the Stouffville line (including weekend trips) may factor into the Scarborough transit discussion?
It is obviously not a replacement for ‘rapid transit’ but it brings another option to that “Scarborough-to-downtown” discussion…well at least it will if they can figure out a reasonable fare accommodation.
Cheers, Moaz
Steve: I don’t think they will make any difference at all. None of the new service is peak period, peak direction.
LikeLike
If memory serves, you could also do a good chunk of the Scarborough-Malvern line as well. Mind you, you probably would have to give up the Malvern extension to ensure that it would reach Guildwood station.
LikeLike
I don’t think you’ve thought this through. If for example the heavy spending on the “downtown” subway lines along Yonge and Bloor ceased, the people who live in the old city will be the least affected because most of them either use the streetcar lines to get to work in the core now or could easily switch to an alternative path that doesn’t involve the subway.
The people who would really be hurting are the ones coming in from York Region, North York and Scarborough.
LikeLike
Technically, you are right. However, let’s not forget that only a minority of Scarborough residents / voters use subway for downtown trips on a regular basis. Others drive a car, take a bus, or stay home / walk; all those groups have no interest in a new downtown subway. In contrast, a subway extension deeper into Scarborough is viewed as an asset that benefits the whole area, and appeals even to people who will rarely use it.
Such aberrations occur sometimes in a democratic system; voters might back a plan that does not appear to be most rational. I am sure that cancelling the Scarborough subway now, after the issue has gained so much prominence, will reduce the chances of DRL subway getting funded.
LikeLike
You are likely correct, and that is the rub. When I look at what is good for the city as a whole, and for Scarborough in particular, the LRT proposal for Scarborough strikes me as a superior choice, and one that would be more easily added to. The roadway if required at key intersections should be widened to allow for fully indoor shelters and everywhere the shelter should have an area for people collecting on the platform off peak can be completely out of the weather. I think that even the LRT as proposed is not complete enough, but adopting it would facilitate further extensions. I have no interest in moving Scarborough money to another project, but see spending the entire $3.6b in Scarborough on an entire network, in fact I would support spending an additional $.4-.6b now on something north south in the Markham or McCowan area to provide for further tie in with the areas north, and speed access to the overall system, and support a superior business location in Scarborough, whatever the local focus of the network in Scarborough was (likely the STC), rather than putting it on the end of a line to somewhere else. This single subway line with does little to nothing to support working and living within Scarborough at all, whereas an LRT network properly done would be transformative.
People downtown uses the streetcar and subway to get around because it is close to their door. We are making it a chore for Scarborough residents and workers to access transit. They will, as I would, drive, and this supports sprawl, and showing an empty subway makes building more transit harder.
We are only making it easier to travel to the core so business in doubt will locate there. The empty and expensive subway will also make it harder to sell building a subway to support even those downtown bound trips (a DRL), as it will undermine support for subway in all applications. The Vaughan and Richmond Hill extensions are also mistake for similar reasons. They are projects built beyond the scope of current or reasonably projected demand. While they feel good, they make better transit within the areas in question harder. An extension of high quality transit (true BRT at a minimum) beyond the STC in several directions (making it a local focus) would have made it a more attractive location for business, and helped to possibly create a more viable downtown Scarborough. As it is the only real way there is a terribly overloaded 401, where it is undifferentiated.
If building a full LRT network in Scarborough meant that the DRL would be, for political reasons, an underground LRT (no space on most of length to build it on road), I would be ok with that (sorry Steve), as it would be a mistake that would not come home to roost until likely 2050-2060. However, we better be ready with a 4 car, 3 platform system (load from outside unload in middle at the same time) at least at the primary stations (Danforth and Yonge intercepts), so that we can hit that 90 second headway mark, and thus achieve at least the 24K capacity mark, as we will likely need at least 15K capacity right out of the gate, and it will grow from there, especially as it will also support a Don Mills LRT as well as potentially other routes, as an eastern network is built out.
However you are correct, “subway, subway, subway” has a feel good ease that people will buy into.
LikeLike
Have you ridden the DRT Pulse service? It’s fast, effective, on time and you don’t have 15 buses or streetcars show up in Durham Region at the same time (unlike the TTC where this happens everyday). I have never even seen two buses show up at the same time in Durham Region. Steve, you need to stop insulting Durham Region just because Scarborough does not want to have it’s transit funding put in to a Downtown Relief Line / DRL which the Downtowners claim will help Scarborough riders. Your argument that Scarborough should use it’s transit money to help build a DRL because Downtowners say that such a DRL will help Scarborough citizens does not make sense given that the people of Scarborough clearly don’t want a DRL period. As long as no Scarborough money is used towards building even more local subway lines in Downtown Toronto, then I don’t see any objections to the DRL.
Steve: My reference to Durham came from their unwillingness to schedule more buses to meet the improved GO service on Lakeshore because they claimed they could not afford it.
I like the idea of “pulse” services for areas with relatively wide headways where connections are very important. The idea of adopting standard headways on suburban TTC routes came up from time to time, but always foundered because some routes would get “too much” service and the dollar argument triumphed over convenience.
We? Not we but Scarborough. Any change left over must go to improving transit in Scarborough.
Steve: The extra money “for Scarborough” comes from taxes levied across Toronto, and from a federal program that allocates money to all of the city, not just to Scarborough. Indeed, 60% of Toronto’s share would go just to the Scarborough subway.
And money for Sheppard LRT (assuming LRT is constructed instead of the subway that is needed) is separate and you cannot save that money towards the DRL that you desperately want. If LRT is constructed to replace SRT instead of the subway that is needed, then all the money that the Sheppard LRT would cost plus all the money saved by not constructing subway to replace the SRT must still be spent on improving transit in Scarborough and not one penny should go to any DRL.
Steve: I am baffled by this comment because I never intended to take money away from Scarborough’s LRT projects. It is the extra money from the feds and the city that is up for grabs.
And regardless of what Tim Hudak says about building a DRL before the election, you must remember that Dalton McGuinty promised to bury the Eglinton Crosstown completely just before the 2011 election only to change his mind as soon as he won the election. So, even if you get a pro-DRL mayor in Toronto, no DRL would be built (which is a good thing as no DRL is needed) if Hudak becomes premier as he too is allowed to change his mind just like McGuinty. We can start discussing about whether or not to build a DRL 10 years later if the Liberals are back in power.
Steve: If the Tories win, you won’t see transit construction anywhere because they will be too busy balancing the budget, and spending money on rural ridings where they have lots of votes.
By the way, you keep submitting multiple copies of your comments. They will not appear until I approve them. If you want to substitute a revised version, please say so at the beginning of the one you want kept.
LikeLike
I guess that explains the obsession over having a single-seat ride to downtown.
LikeLike
If you build things right the money will follow. Etobicoke & North York are proof of that. If Downtown had never built the subway it would not be what it is today with business and people flocking to that 100% transit score. It is what it is today because of proper investment in long past generations. If a Subway had been run to Scarborough initially instead of the SRT we wouldn’t even be having this debate right now.
Steve: I beg to differ, but we have been around this bush many times, and there is no point in repeating the arguments. The fundamental problem is that most of the people coming to STC originate in directions opposite to those which would bring subway riders.
LikeLike
Honestly if the voters in Scarborough were given a 100% guarantee that a “complete” Transit City would will be built you’d likely see enough to of us to agree. Otherwise we can only shake our heads at the political mess being forced upon us for the future.
Our options are:
1. LRT transfer lines which were cut short of anything useful & wouldn’t make the original destination proposed. Nothing like bus or two to get to an LRT, to get to a subway, to get to another subway.
2. A 3-Stop subway
Can’t blame the voters for being a bit undecided. Both options are complete crap and make the commute just slightly less ridiculous than it is now. Do we really live in Toronto too?
LikeLike
I personally understand the skepticism that Scarborough residents feel.
However, I think the problem is that yes, you are really a part of Toronto, and like much of the rest of the city, you have been sold projects that were grandiose, spectacular, or simply wrong headed. The Sheppard subway was aborted because it was going to cost too much, and as a direct consequence it frankly now looks goofy, and has saddled North York with a dud, that will be hard to make right. The SRT should have been called what it was, bleeding edge technology, when it was put in Scarborough. It was a demonstration project, and that should have been a major warning signal. The province used Scarborough for show and tell, using a technology that was far too expensive to extend for an application where it was inappropriate. Etobicoke has been lucky in that it has had no big promises started and therefore aborted, just nothing started at all in since the Kennedy-Kipling extension (34 years ago).
In essence major infrastructure projects that were not based on pure politics have not been built since. Even rebuild improvements like the Spadina streetcar ROW have been undermined by the city (and that is downtown), by the effective frustration of light priority, St Clair is an improved streetcar, in a small ROW. The big politics-only projects tend to be half assed, wrong headed and abortive attempts at massive schemes, sold to get elected or stroke ego, not to serve transit. The LRT was sunk by politics and was the only project in Toronto since 1980 that actually had a chance of making real sense, and therefore being completed because at every turn the next couple of kilometers would be fundable, and would make sense in terms of making the system work, improving service, and reducing operation costs by replacing many more buses and operators. However, it needed to get off the deck to work.
Unfortunately this is now not just a Scarborough problem, but whole city issue, as much of the city is equally skeptical. Maybe when Mississauga builds their LRT we will see the light.
LikeLike
It’s worth pointing out that at the time Scarborough council was extremely happy to get their modern Scarborough RT rather than boring old streetcars.
I expect that if the Scarborough RT had been built using CLRVs as originally proposed, it would be running to Malvern as originally planned and there would be an Etobicoke RT running to the airport by now.
Cheers, Moaz
PS on the topic of Durham Transit, I was told that TTC had considered applying for the contract to service Durham region … buses would have been run from the Scarborough bus division. M
Steve: It’s worth noting that the Davis government, so revered for its devotion to transit, held a loaded gun to the TTC and City’s head saying that if they didn’t switch the Scarborough line from LRT to ICTS (Skytrain), they would get no subsidy. Also, Scarborough Council was bamboozled by claims that the LRT would need to be elevated through STC to avoid “land locking” property south of the transit corridor because traffic would not be able to cross the line. There were a lot of lies told about Ontario’s wonderful new technology which, despite claims by its advocates, is not being widely adopted around the world while LRT systems continue to grow.
LikeLike
It’s amusing that you believe the TTC cared about property development schemes when the Yonge and the Bloor-Danforth lines were built rather than just building those lines to replaced overburdened streetcar routes.
LikeLike
Steve just for fun wanted to ask a question. Would the following strange proposal not make as much or more sense as the existing subway idea, in terms of serving demand for core bound traffic, and serving Scarborough internal traffic: build radiating LRT from the STC, and then an Express LRT down the Gatineau power lines, with stops only at STC, Kennedy, Warden, Vic Park, the intersect with the Cross town, Flemingdon & Thorncliffe Park, into a tunnel and straight to Wellington & Bay. This way, Scarborough would get a subway (underground LRT) and not have to share except for the poor people of these underserviced areas. This would nicely deprive downtown of any additional subway, keep the load off existing system south of Bloor, and be really fast for those deprived Scarborough residents. Yes, I understand that this is a very Scarborough centric proposal, however it would also connect those 2 additional underserved high density neighborhoods directly downtown, and look really funny on a map to boot. I would suggest a stop at Danforth, but that might provide service to downtown and we would not want that.
LikeLike
They made the right decision when it was time to upgrade. Those subway lines were worth every damn penny.
LikeLike
That’s the thing, they built them to upgrade heavily used surface rail lines.
They would never have built subways to upgrade heavy bus lines like the 196B or 16.
LikeLike
No in those days the TTC planned, and was good at building what was required. If they had an overloaded bus line, they would have replaced it with a surface rail line, just like we should now.
LikeLike
Why was Spadina-University- Subway extension passed with no worries in 2005 ? – Metrolinx had a LRT option and Chow and Miller voted Yes to Subway – So…. Scarborough doesn’t deserve the same ? A subway will last 60 yrs plus – no chance a LRT will – VAN sky train has an expectancy of 30-40 yrs ? Why has Scarborough always been left like it is Scarberia ?
Steve: There is no way that Spadina was going to be built as LRT, although it would have made a very nice southern end of a VIVA LRT network. Queen’s Park was 1000% percent behind subways and the whole idea was to make property in Vaughan more valuable.
Metrolinx had an LRT option? Metrolinx did not even exist in 2005, and discussions that led to the Transit City LRT plan did not start until mid 2006, long after all of the design work and approval for the subway extension were out of the way.
Your assumptions about technology are woefully off track, not to mention your history. Scarborough could have had an LRT network like cities all over the world, but instead what you got was that half-baked RT technology foisted on Toronto by Queen’s Park.
LikeLike
Do you read before writing? Steve and others have on several occasions discussed the issue of longevity of various ways of building transit. Briefly, the only part of a subway that will last 60 years is the part that LRT doesn’t (typically) even have — the tunnel.
By this standard, we might as well say the LRT will last until the next glaciation scrapes the entire City into the Lake. Yes, the tracks will be replaced occasionally, as will the signals, vehicles, and overhead. But that is true of the subway as well.
How can we reasonably discuss various opinions about issues if people won’t take note of the indisputable facts?
LikeLike
The Murray subway “plan” suggested shifting the GO tracks to the west side of the ROW at Kennedy to avoid having to rebuild a tunnel north of Ellesmere.
Was this option ever considered for the LRT extension to possibly save time or money?
As I recall there were a few sidings along the east side so maybe it wouldn’t be feasible to eliminate those.
Steve: The Murray plan took advantage of the fact that the subway is already underground at Kennedy and has to be rebuilt on a different alignment just to make the turn north into the rail corridor. In the process, it gets a new underpass north of Eglinton replacing the one now at Ellesmere. In other words, we get to “save” the cost of a new LRT underpass at Ellesmere at the cost of a completely new Kennedy subway station and the changes required to move the GO line. Not exactly applicable to the LRT scheme.
LikeLike