On June 11, Dr. Vukan Vuchic spoke in the Council Chamber of the Waterloo Region Council on the subject of medium capacity transit modes. Dr. Vuchic has been around transportation issues for decades. He organized the first Transportation Research Board Light Rail Conference in 1975 in Philadelphia, an event that became a series of 12 such meetings, the last in 2012.
Dr. Vuckic’s presentation (just over an hour long) covers a lot of historical ground going back to the early days when “LRT” as a mode distinct from “streetcars” – the missing link between bus systems and full-scale subways or rapid transit – started to gain popularity. Vuchic’s speaking style isn’t breezy. He could cover his material faster (and probably with less text on the Powerpoints running behind him), but he gives us the history of transit evolution over four decades.
This is not an all LRT, all the time, presentation, and it gives fair credit to the importance of buses at the core of transit systems. The point, as always, is to use the right mode for each implementation.
Steve Munro 
So why are LRTs bad for Scarborough?
Steve: Not by me they aren’t.
The Scarborough LRT would have ideal conditions on a completely separated right-of-way, a much improved subway connection at Kennedy and potential for extension up into Malvern.
The Sheppard LRT, including the Morningside extension down to UTSC, would run in the centre of a road that has quite adequate capacity for this function, and would provide capacity for growth in demand along this corridor. I am always amused by arguments against LRT that go “but what if ridership grows to subway levels”, but then do an about face saying “we don’t need LRT capacity for what buses could do”.
The Eglinton LRT west of Kennedy suffers from the fact Metrolinx was too cheap, initially, to pay for road widening (the space is available) where the “we will lose traffic lanes” argument actually held water (leaving aside the fact that those lanes are reserved for buses in the peak period today). Metrolinx has changed its mind, privately, but in the current political environment, they are keeping their heads down.
LikeLike
This video may contain material deemed inappropriate to non-transit users. User discretion is advised.
Steve: I am sure there is an appropriate filter that can be applied to avoid inadvertent access by innocent minds.
LikeLike
Only in Toronto do we built the world’s most expensive LRT line on Eglinton that costs more per km including the above ground section than some fully grade separated subway systems.
Only in Toronto do we build two incompatible types of rail on Sheppard.
Both would have been real subways had Mike Harris not been elected in 1995.
Kitchener is a totally different case, the demand is far lower.
Steve: And in Toronto, we pander to voters in one municipality, convincing them that the rest of the city is prejudiced against them, with plans for a subway that will serve fewer people and will cost almost $1b more in taxpayer dollars. While you’re citing the lower demand in KW for their LRT, you might ask why we need a subway on Sheppard East, let alone a “North York Relief Line” on Sheppard West, or a Finch West subway.
Meanwhile, proposals for a new downtown subway that would carry more riders than any of the planned suburban lines are dismissed as something we can do without, something downtown doesn’t need.
I can respect subway advocates, even though I may not agree with them, but a little consistency would help their arguments a lot.
LikeLike
Andrew, I think the issue is the voters. People in North York, Scarborough and Etobicoke speak out of both sides of their mouth when it comes to transit.
LikeLike
On a related note, the Star is reporting that Steven Del Duca is going to replace Glen Murray. Is this a good, bad or neutral thing for the state of LRT in the province?
Steve: Well, I am really unsure of Del Duca as an advocate for urban transit, and this may shift the focus back to the 905. Murray’s support for Waterfront East would have been useful, but the real challenge will be that Brad Duguid is now looking after Economic Development which includes the Infrastructure ministry, formerly part of Murray’s double-barreled appointment. Money will rain down on Scarborough, and it will be interesting to see what life remains in the LRT plans even though Metrolinx claims to be still active on them.
LikeLike
In the video Dr. Vuchic mentions that fully automated, non-driver rail systems are often flexible. This is because you can keep running trains at high frequencies even during less busy times without incurring high labour costs: simply reduce the number of cars in each train (to reduce energy costs), and keep running them often to improve service/convenience.
How strong is this argument in Toronto for trying to create driverless subways and LRT (Eglington and future routes)? Automated systems are a bit of a poisoned well here, given people’s experiences with the SRT, but there are many working lines across the planet.
Steve: The problem is that despite the absence of operators, the automated systems have high capital costs, and there lack of drivers does not eliminate the need for technicians to look after the system. Yes, you can have very frequent off peak service, but it comes at a price. There is also the small matter of fitting the infrastructure into the urban environment unless one is prepared to go underground.
LikeLike
Once again pro LRT people fail to address the issues as to why LRT in the current plans is not preferred in Toronto.
If we were getting rapid transit style LRT like Calgary or Edmonton, then Toronto people would like it.
But building LRT down the middle of a road, that is only going to be 2 or 3 minutes faster than the bus it is replacing, is a waste of money, and will not attract ridership, because it will be to slow to compete with the car.
If transit fails to offer a reasonable travel time to destinations, it will lose out.
Why can’t you guys address this issue?
Support proper LRT and people will stand behind you. But telling people in Scarborough to sit on an LRT for 50 minutes, for a trip they can do in 10 minutes by car, is unacceptable.
It is so unacceptable that Steve and other on this blog will not agree to live in Scarborough and rely on transit, because they would never put up with how slow the system is.
Steve: It is roughly 15km from Don Mills to Meadowvale on Sheppard. The EA states quite clearly that the anticipated operating speed of the LRT would be 22-23 km/h, or about 40 minutes end to end (a trip most riders will not make). Even if this were a subway at an average of 30km/h, this would still be a half hour trip. The problem, of course, is that the level of demand will never come close to subway requirements, and the line you think the rest of the city should pay for will never get built.
And, by the way, I have no plans to move to Scarborough, and I don’t own a car.
LikeLike
Steve, even though the Liberals have won a majority, I can see the new transportation minster cave on the LRT and give Sheppard East the subway if city council reopens the issue and is able to run over a John Tory type mayor.
What are your thoughts?
Steve: Council has to reopen the issue first, and then someone has to come up with the money. A Sheppard Subway is not in the provincial plans, and additional city money (another transit tax) would be needed to fund it from that end. If we wind up with a council that simply spends tax money every time Scarborough feels ignored, this will not play well in other parts of the city.
LikeLike
Moaz: they would have been “real subways” but they wouldn’t have been any good at doing much beyond overloading the Yonge Line. Neither line was going cross-town and would have left large swaths of Toronto not covered by rapid transit.
Two “cross-town” LRT lines (on Eglinton and Sheppard) with partial tunnels (Keele to Don Mills on Eglinton and Bathurst to Bayview on Sheppard) would have been far more effective than the two proposed “stub-ways.”
Cheers, Moaz
LikeLike
Hahahahaha. Good one. SRT much? What a bunch of disingenuous BS. I have a feeling the people who complain the loudest are people who don’t use transit now and never will.
Ever see Finch West during rush hour? I’m pretty sure transit vehicles in reserved lanes will be moving faster than cars inching along at walking speed.
LikeLike
LRT’s are good if integrated in the right locations. The Sheppard & Malvern Loop would be great if bundled with a Subway to Scarborough Center. An LRT to the heart is just not the right fit for Scarborough. Few people out here in the East end have faith well actually receive a system that would serve us efficiently. Too many self serving politicians throughout the areas of Toronto that could care less about the future of Scarborough..
Now many of us have come to terms it’s just better to join the City on the same subway transit technology as North York Center and Etobicoke Center. Then the Clan can carry on with their shtick on how the DRL’s & bike lanes downtown are what’s really best for Scarborough.
De-amalgamate us please! One can only dream out here.
Steve: De-amalgamate? I would be happy to if it meant that the tax to pay for the Scarborough subway stayed in Scarborough, and the revenue from downtown development stayed in the old City of Toronto. And, of course, we can put all those “Zone 2” fare signs back up at the boundary. The dog-in-the-manger attitude you show here ignores the basic fact that suburban Toronto benefits from being part of “Metro” which has existed since 1954 when much of Scarborough was farmland.
Your argument is strange — you support LRT in the “right locations”, and yet if any line is ideal for high end LRT, it’s the SRT including the Malvern extension.
LikeLike
And I have a feeling those who are pushing this LRT network on Scarborough don’t have any real experience commuting from North, South or Eastern Scarborough.
I use Scarborough’s craptacular transit daily & completely agree with Michael. It’s not the LRT technology we don’t like, it’s how it’s been integrated into the grid on Scarborough.
Steve: A subway to Sheppard and McCowan is not going to fix the problems with Scarborough transit unless you happen to live beside one of the stations and want to travel downtown. In your previous comment, you were happy to leave people on Sheppard East with an LRT provided that you get a subway to STC. Maybe you are turning into a “downtowner” forcing an “inferior” transit mode on the part of Scarborough where you don’t travel?
LikeLike
Here is an mp3 for those who are so inclined
LikeLike
Kevin’s comment:
It is very, very, very important to them that the transit they will not use be nothing but subways, subways, subways.
LikeLike
Although I am sympathetic to the argument that only those who deal with transit in an area can understand the specific needs in that area, there is always a need for a macro view looking at things from the perspective of the grid as a whole.
The subway to a Canadian Tire parking lot is too darned expensive for what it provides.
There have been attempts to jury rig figures to indicate that subway will be financially viable. I remain unconvinced by arguments that take every person who takes GO from Markham and puts them on that subway.
Until proponents of that subway can come up with better arguments than
a) you don’t live here
b) we deserve what others have
they will continue to have their pet project challenged.
LikeLike
Well they share Rob Ford’s basic approach, they want to ensure that they do not have to deal with or look at transit of any kind. I am sure that they would love to get the buses underground as well.
What I find amusing is the notion of LRT not being integrated into the network. Surface transit is going to be much easier to integrate in general, simply by the fact that it will be more accessible.
As to the comment with regards to a long trip, on Scarborough, (or any LRT that has proper signal control), I do not see how there can be an issue on the RT right of way, and it is the actual integration with local transit that will slow the trip, on Sheppard and Eglinton, if there is decent signal control, it should again be that integration that slows the trip. You either face longer trips (in bus or on foot) to access the high speed transit, or more stops on the higher speed system to make the trips shorter.
Make an argument for greater stop spacing if you are really looking for higher speed, say that you are looking to ride the bus and reduce the stops to crossings with major bus routes, or major bus routes plus a stop where distance exceeds say 750 metres between stops.
Service for locals along Yonge north of Eglinton as Steve has said is terrible, and from the centre point between stops riders may face a walk a kilometer in either direction. A stop between Eglinton and Lawrence in my mind for instance would hugely improve the Yonge Line for local use. Those Scarborough residents who want downtown like access, need to be reminded that when the subway was built in downtown the stops were very close. It is not that hard a walk from Union to Dundas, skipping 2 stops along the way. Seems to me that walk from Bloor to Queen is about the same as Eglinton to Lawrence. Walking north on Yonge at Eglinton this is a big decision, at Queen, you get to change your mind repeatedly.
The LRT plan is much closer to giving Scarborough downtown like access than the subway plan is. Like downtown it also provides the option of going in more than one direction.
LikeLike
Is it that strange that the City’s largest Borough would have a subway connect to its City center just like its smaller neighbours Etobicoke and North York & be connected on the same grid. Whats really strange is Downtowners & other Borough’s of the City making the decision for whats best for us considering the infrastructure you already have.
I’m sorry you will have to pay good money so your neighbours enjoy the fruits you enjoy. Scarborough doesn’t just need a subway. There’s much more transit Scarborough will need for the future but I’m pretty sure all we will get is a 3-4 stop subway or a hacked up LRT grid.
Warning: A “Poor Scarborough” is coming. Close your eyes and go to your happy place so you can keep believing its not true.
Cash flows inside out in this City & Scarborough is the beneficiary of getting the short end all to often and getting little in return. In the end downtown is always the priority with our tax dollars.
Strange but true.
Steve: Begging your pardon, but there was no city centre in Etobicoke when the Kipling extension opened, and in fact development built up around Islington because that’s where there was a market. In North York, Mel built something of a Potemkin village along Yonge Street, but it’s not a “downtown” in any real meaning of the word. Scarborough tried the same thing at STC, but the development industry decided that condos were a better bet than office towers, to the degree that anything was built. The real irony is that when Kennedy Station was built, Scarborough Council made sure that little development would happen there lest it detract from the manifest destiny of STC as the centre of their universe. The fundamental problem here is the disconnect between dreams of grandeur and what actually happens.
“Poor Scarborough” is a construct I am tired of hearing about. If there are problems, and there certainly are, far more is needed than a subway line to fix them. Indeed, the subway may distract from much needed spending, including the classic problem of big capital hogging the limelight while operating funding is throttled.
LikeLike
Former Scarberian here. Reading this blog has made me into an LRT over subway proponent, but primarily because it seems like the LRT could fulfill the vision that I (and my Scarborough friends) had when we talked about subways; an actual network that would stretch across the city rather than a set of arteries running into downtown. It does seem like the complaint has been reduced to “Scarborough should get a subway too”, but I think it started with the vision of being able to get places in the city via transit, rather than being able to get to downtown and back.
If LRT can provide that (and it seems like it can, if built sanely), then I’m all for it.
Steve, I’m not sure if you’ve commented on this before (sorry if I missed it), but what if the stars aligned and all levels of government were willing to really fund transit in Toronto at a serious and sustained level. Apart from a law mandating carefully spaced headways, would you still want an LRT grid? Or would a subway grid (even with bigger gaps between stations) provide a network for the city that would exist 20-30 years from now? (And then imagine that the gov’t would commit the money for express and local tracks!)
Steve: There is always a temptation to start from a premise of unlimited money to build the “ideal” or “dream” network, but the problem with this is that such a network will never exist. It should not even be something that we are aiming at because we will always consider everything else second or third rate. I think it’s worth thinking back to those highway plans that would have covered the city in expressways, although obviously what we have now is only a pale imitation. There is a truncated “North York” expressway, and the Scarborough Expressway never got off of the drawing board (except for a stub leading east from the Gardiner). What the motoring lobby might consider ideal has spin-off effects on neighbourhoods, not to mention chewing up every dollar for a network that might never be completed.
To me, an ideal network would be one that had, at a minimum, the Transit City LRT lines, but with some important tweaks to fix places where LRT is simply impractical such as the bottom end of the Jane and Don Mills lines. Also essential would be a massive improvement in service on the GO corridors especially to the outer corners of the 416 and the inner 905. We really need to peel the demand from these areas to downtown off of the local transit network so that we don’t keep proposing subways so that someone can get from Malvern to King & Bay in the blink of an eye. There is a rail corridor that makes the same trip, although it has no GO service on it.
It would also be important to improve service on the bus routes in between the LRT lines so that buses could lose some of their “second rate” status as transit routes. This will mean more service and more reliable service.
As for subway extensions, I really want to see an unbiased (if that is possible) projection of demand on an overall network that includes the three tiers of services: regional GO (or equivalent) on frequent, all day headways; rapid transit routes serving demand within the 416 and possibly the near 905 where there is enough demand; and local services. For too long we have seen estimates that included gerrymandered land use assumptions and subsets of networks that ensured force-feeding of whatever was the favoured new route that day. We also need network subset models so that we don’t just see an end-state 30 years in the future as if every part of a master plan is built, but comparative outcomes under different sets of assumptions. When The Big Move came out, Metrolinx claimed it was too expensive to do that sort of modelling, and yet without it we cannot make intelligent comparisons of alternatives.
I believe that there is a place for a DRL/Don Mills Subway at least to Eglinton (as opposed to LRT) if only because building such a line on the surface is physically impossible. That was a gaping flaw in Transit City, and we lost valuable time (and credibility) thanks to it. The purpose of such a route is to provide more and redundant capacity into the core, but also to link Thorncliffe/Flemingdon and provide a link into the Eglinton line much like that provided by the existing subway at Eglinton West Station.
There is a constant demand for something across the city (and for that matter, across the 905), but north of Eglinton it is not clear just what this should be. The discontinuous land use patterns east and west of Yonge don’t help much either. I am frankly not certain what would work up there, but another “stubway” along Sheppard just to fill in the map from Yonge to Downsview would not begin to address the problem.
Other subway extensions, I am less sure of because they get into that in between territory where GO has a role for some of the demand. That’s why we need better modelling info.
LikeLike
What really worries me about all these arguments against subways, is that they could have been used to stop construction of the original subway extensions to Warden, Kennedy, Kipling, Islington, and yes York Mills and Finch stations.
The same arguments used to promote LRT on streets like Sheppard, are also the same king of transit planning arguments which would call for a bus at best operating every 30 minutes on Sheppard, because of projected demand due to density.
At the end of the day, we have to ask if a project is improving mobility for a large number of people, reducing commute times, making transit frequent, and building a transit network that is competitive with the car.
Surface LRT on Sheppard and other major streets does not do that. It provides a nicer local service. But is spending billions on making a local service a little nicer really worth the money? Or should those billions go towards building a METRO style service on the GO Train network?
One also has to ask the question. If you support a project but cannot say that you would be able to live in an area and rely on the transit service. Then the project is probably not a good one. Saying you prefer to live downtown or in the inner city is not a good enough excuse to support a project, but also not to say that the project is good enough that you could live in Scarborough and rely on the service.
At least Adam Giambrone had the guts to say that the Sheppard LRT would be so slow that it would not be attractive to anyone but existing bus riders.
As a transit planner myself, I know that if I cannot rely on transit in an area, that I have work to do. It is not good enough to tell other people to make do with a 60 minute bus service, or a slow LRT service, if myself am not prepared to also put up with that.
LikeLike
A subway is about rapid transit. The industry norm across the world now is generally 1km between stops outside of city centers, even in Europe. There is nothing wrong with operating a local bus service above a subway route, and the Yonge North extension does just fine.
Steve: The spacing between Eglinton and Sheppard stations is 2km, and it will be even longer on the Scarborough Subway. The surface route on Yonge north of Eglinton does not carry many riders because it is infrequent and unreliable. Indeed, it is worse than many services in Scarborough (although not all). During most periods, the existing bus service on 16 McCowan runs more frequently than 97 Yonge.
LikeLike
But I thought Steve that you are the father of LRT / streetcars. I guess that’s a tough one and only Maury Povich can answer this one. To find out who is the father, please watch The Maury Show.
Steve: No, I’m just a close friend of the family.
LikeLike
Amazing what a subway can do to help an area grow & Etobicoke has seen very good development along the subway line and it’s not because of the Islington Market… That just makes it “trendy”.
Steve: The growth at Kipling is very recent even though the station has been there for almost half a decade. Its main function is to act as a bus terminal.
Steve said: “Poor Scarborough” is a construct I am tired of hearing about. If there are problems, and there certainly are, far more is needed than a subway line to fix them.
Lets start with the Subway line and move forward from there.
The City bias has gone on too long. “Poor Scarborough” is not going away unless the City learns how to build all areas of the City fairly.
LikeLike
Don’t confuse Rob Fords reasoning with the reasoning of many citizens of Scarborough for wanting a Subway in the heart of the City. There would [be] few complaints of streetcars, LRT’s or BRTs if they surrounded the main Artery which efficiently connects us to the City.
But all some of you seem to understand is “LRT, LRT, LRT”.
LikeLike
But Eglinton East LRT, Sheppard East LRT, and Finch West LRT don’t have the “ideal conditions on a completely separated right-of-way”. As a Scarborough native, I don’t speak for Finch West but we in Scarborough are willing to compromise. Give us any 2 of the Bloor Danforth subway extension into north eastern Scarborough, Sheppard subway extension into Scarborough, and complete grade separation of Eglinton (underground and/or elevated and/or whatever). Give us any 2 of those 3 and as a compromise we will drop the demand for the remaining third. Downtowners should also be willing to compromise to bring down the cost of the DRL and should give up several low ridership stops.
Steve: Which low ridership stops do you have in mind downtown? Meanwhile you want TWO subway extensions? That is no compromise.
LikeLike
You should really hope that you are getting the LRT, because, even if you only get part of it, small amounts of money will allow it to expand. Getting expansion on a subway requires massive allocations, and therefore large political favors. LRT, you could find the money for substantial expansion every election cycle.
If you got the current plan whole, you would be extremely well served. On the RT route, the ability to expand would be substantial, more than enough to drown any excess capacity on the current subway and make it a moot point.
LikeLike
Not a downtown, but, Yonge Street between Sheppard and Finch has developed something of a walking culture, something akin to the Danforth east of Broadview, but with Korean and Iranian food as against Greek.
Finch and Yonge is one busy intersection for pedestrians, and the vast majority are not coming from or going to transit.
I would put this down to cheap rentals in all the condos – not transit.
LikeLike
No, I did not say that. Please read my previous comment again carefully. I said 2 subway extensions or 1 subway and grade separated Eglinton East LRT (fully grade separated and doesn’t have to be underground) and the remaining third can be cheap middle of the street LRT. I didn’t even choose which two for fear of being accused of picking the two which benefit me the most as I have fairness to Scarborough in my mind rather than what benefits me the most personally.
Steve: When someone says they are “compromising”, but want a few billion as their starting point, that’s just plain greed masquerading in a false claim for “equity”.
LikeLike
@Joe M, the reason that many of us are pushing LRT, is that we are conscious of the notion of both the entire need, and the limited resources in play. I am personally fairly sure that a 3 stop subway will not substantially address the needs of all of Scarborough, but will burn $3.6 ++ billion, or about 20-25% of the total that will be likely really be allocated to the entire GTHA in the next decade or so. This will not address the balance of the needs, nor even connect Scarborough all that well to the core, as the connection point will be overloaded. LRT versus subway, should be a question of capacity. Speed is a question of design and number of stops. Subway with many stops is slow, LRT with few and good signal priority is fast.
There are locations that require BRT, LRT and even a subway required in Toronto. Subway should be built only when LRT will not serve, LRT only when BRT will not serve, and BRT only when conditions justify.
LikeLike
We are not starting on an equal playing field. We are asking for equality and that’s the cost.
Steve: Now you are just getting pretentious. This conversation is at an end.
LikeLike
So if it does not address the needs of Scarborough, then why will that 3 station subway extension carry vastly more people than the planned LRT lines which are three times the length?
The resources are not limited. A city sets goals and budgets based on those goals. Toronto is spending the most money in North America of any other region on transit expansion. The money is there. The real question is, are we going to waste this money on glorified local transit. Or actually use it to build proper rapid transit routes?
That reasoning does not work in this day and age on most routes. People will abandon transit for the car instead of waiting for a transit line to hit subway capacity before building a subway. This is not 1950’s Toronto and never will be again. The conditions on Bloor and Yonge will not happen today, because people have options and will not sit on crowded buses or streetcars until a subway is built.
Steve: I return again to the point that people who want to make long, fast trips to downtown (the primary market for the Scarborough subway) should be on GO corridors, not on a very expensive rapid transit line. This is not just a subway vs LRT debate.
LikeLike
I also am tired of the constant comments denouncing the suburbs (like Scarborough) and subway extensions.
Whether you guys want to admit it or not (and given how well versed Steve is in the history of the TTC, I would think he would be more of a champion of this), the TTC’s ridership success has little to do with the inner city, and everything to do with the suburbs, and subway expansion to the suburbs.
It is Scarborough, North York, and Etobicoke, where expansion of quality frequent bus service feeding into suburban subway extensions, allowed the Metropolitan Toronto area to become one of the only western cities to reverse per capita transit decline and increase it to a very high degree.
I was just on the subway two weekends ago at midnight. The train was packed with standees (as it usually is even late at night). I got off at York Mills, and it took us getting to York Mills before any substantial number of people got off where seats were available. That being said, the train still departed York Mills with standees.
Clearly the much hated suburban subway extensions are carrying vast numbers of riders, and contributing highly to the ridership numbers on our subway network.
It is Toronto’s world class bus/subway integration, which does not rely just on development within walking distance, which produces this high ridership.
And it is in the suburbs where this is creating the ridership that makes the TTC rank so high.
LikeLike
Steve, as for your question on what would work north of Eglinton, I will have to see your analysis of 195 Jane rocket. While I do want to advocate for the transit city bus plan, I don’t know if it would be useful if I don’t have the numbers to see if conversion to rocket service is worthwhile for cross town service (even though 190 and 199, the prototypical routes for transit city bus plan work fine).
Steve: I have the data for Jane before and after the Rocket’s implementation, but many other issues (not all of which involve blogging) compete for my time. I hope to get to Jane and other routes in the summer.
LikeLike
You realize that was the exact thought behind the creation of Transit City right?
LikeLike
Joe M. and Michael don’t really care. They want a subway because in their mind, it’s about expensive infrastructure that they feel Scarborough should have. God forbid, Michael has to ride a horrible LRV and make a brief transfer at Kennedy!
It’s pointless arguing with people like them. It’s better to have a discussion with people whose argument isn’t “You don’t live in Scarborough, why not live here, and see what’s like.”
LikeLike
Yes, and that is why there is a great need now to permit more direct access to high speed transit, not just via long bus rides. It is also why setting up a network of parallel capacity is so important. Currently too much of Toronto hangs on the capacity of the Yonge line.
Yonge cannot reasonably take on the load from Richmond Hill, nor can Markham be added to the Bloor Danforth line, especially due to the likely impact on the Yonge line south of Bloor. GO transit needs to be tied in as a price and schedule competitive service. Parallel capacity has to be developed, and more of the city needs a higher level of service in more corridors.
LRT has the advantage of expandability both in terms of route length and capacity. BRT, not much discussed, also has the ability to be set-up as express service. Commuter rail is more appropriate and faster for a 20+km trip to the core, it cannot however provide the finer grained local service. Toronto now needs an integrated network, that most cities that have actually developed substantial new service in the last 30 years have been moving towards, including LRT and BRT in the mix (including Paris that Mecca of subway). Just extending a subway already at or near the breaking point, and attracting riders that could be better served for less, is not the answer. Subways with stops every 2 or 3 km, will not create good access, but start to seem more like commuter rail.
LikeLike
“The Compromiser” wants a Sheppard East Subway, a B-D Subway extension, and a combined SRT/ECLRT(elevated) – or at least 2 out of 3.
The problem is that the B-D extension and the combined SRT/ECLRT are mutually exclusive. They are two different approaches to serving STC and beyond. The latter would cost $1B less and served a greater area of Scarborough, so our politicians chose the former.
The main problem was that the initial plans included 0 of the 3. If the SRT/ECLRT would have been combined from the start, the extra would have been a few hundred million dollars. They played a game of Russian Roulette to save the +/-$200M and instead wound up paying an extra $1.5B to $2B.
LikeLike
I’ve never lived in Scarborough, but I did commute there on a daily basis from Toronto. Depending on how my connections worked out, my trip sometimes involved bus-subway-bus-bus or bus-subway-SRT-bus. When the weather was good and I got lucky with timing I could sometimes cut it down to walk-subway-bus. Point being I understand full well how rough transit in Scarborough can be.
I can tell you that, as someone whose destination was only rarely STC, there’s not a chance in hell I would take a 3-stop Subway over LRT which (1) will have better integration with local networks and cover more area (2) offers hope for future expansion and (3) saves a bunch of money that could be reinvested in transit elsewhere. So no, it’s not just “downtown elites” who would prefer an LRT, plenty of people who would actually use it on a daily basis would rather have that as well.
LikeLike
The station has been there for almost 25 years, and indeed there’s been little to no development until the past five of them. Islington has been there over 45 years, and other than the ’70s vintage office towers, it’s surrounded by a neighbourhood of bungalows.
For the people who say “Etobicoke has subway development, Scarborough needs it too!!!!!” I would ask them to point out the subway that’s enabling the massive condo developments around Park Lawn and Lake Shore. All that’s there is … ahem … a streetcar and a bus.
Steve: Ah yes … Islington is near half a decade, Kipling’s a bit younger dating from 1980 (35 years, not 25). As for Park Lawn, don’t forget that it has TWO buses including the mighty Humber Bay Express! Maybe with Peter Milczyn off to Queen’s Park, the TTC can finally put that one to rest, although with recent interest in express buses as the saviour of civilization as we know it, this might remain a hard call.
LikeLike
Sorry Steve, I believe you mean almost half a century.
Steve: I am having a temporal disfunction today, it seems.
I believe that when Islington was built Mississauga was still not amalgamated, and Toronto was much much smaller (GTA was about 1/2 its current). A quick look at those buildings speaks volumes as to the fact that development came to the line, because Etobicoke allowed it to. Scarborough made another choice.
Steve: Yes, Scarborough bet on their “Town Centre”, an artificial construct built around the fact that Eaton’s owned land for the development. The development is intensely road oriented even though it is serve by the RT. I know that for the time I worked there (2000-2009), almost everyone in our office arrived by car, not by TTC.
LikeLike
The problem is that, the decision that BRT will not serve, is generally where the peak demand is on the order of less than 5k per hour, LRT where the peak is less than 10-12. Subway is deemed to be required when demand is anything more than 12. LRT and BRT can be each made to serve twice that. LRT in the RT route could easily absorb all the projected traffic for a subway extension, and still be comfortably below loading standards, only requiring the stations be built for 4 cars. If you did manage to fill this service, you would, frankly, overwhelm the subway. As previously noted, to the rider, an LRT implemented decently in this type of completely separated ROW, seems to the user very much like a subway.
If you built a good express BRT in the Gatineau power corridor for instance, you could run express service on 1 or 2 minute headway to a Don Mills subway and then to the core faster than any other alternative, including subway. That BRT should stop only at the major bus lines (STC, Kennedy, Warden, Vic Park, Don Mills).
A BRT on 7 will draw much of the Markham traffic to GO, especially if it is done as a high frequency service. This will remove much of the projected demand from a subway extension.
The one point I would give you in terms of LRT in Scarborough, is for Sheppard, and that is Toronto seems uniquely bad at signal priority. If the city actually makes an earnest effort, or the province simply takes control, and brings in signal controls that work, this will be a minor issue. Capacity is a question of design choices, and frequency.
LikeLike