After a day-long debate, Toronto Council has approved continuing along the path set by Mayor John Tory to study and possibly to build the transit lines branded as “SmartTrack”. Although this proposal is now much different from the scheme that was Tory’s campaign centrepiece, the idea of SmartTrack continues to receive broad support among Councillors.
The debate covered a lot of ground with two related threads: how would Toronto actually pay for SmartTrack, and how much of the larger transit network many hope to see will actually be built.
Council has yet to consider a long-term financing strategy and possible “revenue tools” (new taxes in plain English) to deal with the combined capital and operating budget demands of the would-be network. Although there was much talk of the lost decades of underinvestment in transit, Council has yet to show that it really is ready to spend Toronto dollars (as opposed to money from any other source) at the level that will be needed. City staff will present a report on financing options in a few weeks, and the reaction to this will be telling.
What Did Council Approve?
Below is a consolidation of the staff recommendations and amendments adopted by Council arranged to keep related issues together. For full information, please refer to the detailed record of the item.
Note that in all cases where approvals relate to “SmartTrack” this includes both the six new GO stations and the Eglinton West LRT extension unless otherwise noted.
Process:
- (1) Adopt the “Summary Term Sheet and Stage Gate Process” which includes details of the many parts of the proposed agreements and (2) authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute agreements with the province to implement this.
- (3) Request staff to report at Stage Gate 5 for final approval of full funding for SmartTrack. A report on more definitive costing and the financing funding strategy has been requested for an earlier step in this process. See (18) below.
- (4) Approve the confidential staff recommendation regarding settlement of the Georgetown corridor funding issue. See also recommendation 15.
Technical and Planning:
- (5) Proceed with planning and design for the six SmartTrack GO stations, report back to Council, and launch the Transit Project Assessment Process (TPAP). This was amended by two further requests that the work include improvement of:
- the placement and access points of the Liberty Village Smart Track Station to maximize connectivity, and
- pedestrian connections to the existing Exhibition Place Station for both Liberty Village and Exhibition Place.
- (6) Confirmation of city support for transit supportive land use plans for areas around the SmartTrack and GO RER stations. Amendments related to this included:
- Amending the development strategy for public lands at stations, including air rights, to create ongoing operating revenue streams from development resulting from that strategy.
- Directing the Chief Planner to report in January 2017 with options to develop a comprehensive plan for managing development and growth related to transit expansion.
- Confirming that the Official Plan as well as other plans, bylaws and policies, are not changed by this decision on this item. The intent of this is to forestall any claim for additional density by would-be developers in advance of the passing of updated plans for area affected by transit projects.
- (7) Proceed with planning and analysis of the Eglinton West LRT extension up to Stage Gate 3 including finalization of stops and grade separations, provide a scope for this project up to the Renforth Gateway, and provide a class 4/5 estimate of the project’s cost, and conduct the TPAP. Note that this is a more restrictive approval seeking more detail than in the case of the ST/GO stations in (5) above.
- (8) Request a financial contribution from Mississauga and Pearson Airport to the outside-416 portion of the Eglinton West extension.
- (9) Ensure that the proposed new station design at St. Clair and Keele includes improved road operations and is co-ordinated with the St. Clair West Transportation Master Plan. A significant part of this would be the widening of the underpass east of Keele Street to remove the existing choke point.
- (10) Request Metrolinx to consider grade separations at Progress and at Danforth on the Stouffville corridor, with the proviso that any option closing existing roads would not be considered. This was amended at Council to add requests for grade separations at Passmore, McNicoll, Huntingwood and Havendale.
At Council, there was an attempt to have items (7) and (8) deferred until after the Waterfront Transit Reset report is considered by Council in 2Q17, effectively putting both of the proposed Etobicoke LRT proposals on the same approval timeframe. The deferral motions did not pass.
Finance:
- (13) Approve $71m for preliminary planning and design on SmartTrack (the 6 new stations plus the Eglinton West LRT)
- (14) Include $2b in net capital requirements for SmartTrack (stations plus LRT) in the city’s 10 year capital projections.
- (15) Approve $95m for settlement of the Georgetown South issue with the province.
- (16) Approve $62m for Toronto’s share of 5 grade separation projects.
- (17) Approve $60m for GO capital expansion (2 stations at Bloor/Lansdowne and at Spadina on the Barrie corridor). This was amended to ask that staff work with Metrolinx on including the study and design of the Railpath along the Barrie line between Bloor and Dundas West.
- (18) Request staff to develop the financing and funding strategy, and report back when a class 3 cost estimate is available for a definitive Council commitment to the SmartTrack project.
Two additional amendments ask for:
- strong TTC in developing procurement options, and
- negotiations with the province for resumption of operating subsidies.
Commitment to the full cost of the new stations and the Eglinton West LRT will not occur until much more detailed cost estimates come back to Council over the next year (or possibly more). In the event that Council opts not to proceed with any component for which Metrolinx has spent money on development prior to the point of final approval, Council will be responsible to reimburse Metrolinx for its costs.
With respect to the additional grade separation studies requested for the Stouffville line, it is unclear how work on this would be funded, although one might expect Metrolinx to respond with a request for some up-front payment and guaranteed participation in funding if any of these goes ahead.
The Status of Other Major Transit Proposals and Projects
Planning and building any part of SmartTrack should be seen in the wider context of other transit needs and schemes, let alone wider demands on the city’s operating and capital budgets.
- The Spadina Subway extension to Vaughan (TYSSE) is scheduled to open at the end of 2017, although startup costs will affect the TTC’s operating budget before any passengers are carried. For 2018, the current estimate of the annual operating cost to Toronto is $30 million including whatever marginal fare revenue the extension will bring in. This line’s capital was covered roughly one third by each level of government, with about 60% of the municipal share falling to Toronto based on the proportion of the route within its boundaries.
- The Scarborough Subway from Kennedy Station to Scarborough Town Centre remains the subject of much debate. Although its capital cost is already covered by money from all three levels of government, the proportions are unequal, and any increase to the overall Scarborough transit scheme will be on the city’s tab. The extension will be part of the TTC’s operation along with the net new operating cost, an unknown amount at this time. A critical issue will be whether the cost estimate overall will hold or increase before final project approval, and how this will affect what actually gets built.
- The Eglinton Crosstown LRT is now under construction by Metrolinx between Kennedy Station and Mount Dennis (at Weston Road) with a planned 2021 opening, subject to issues about vehicle delivery. This project’s capital cost is funded totally by Ontario, but operating costs will be billed back to Toronto at an anticipated annual net amount of about $40 million in then-current dollars.
- The Eglinton East LRT extension from Kennedy Station to University of Toronto Scarborough College is part of the Scarborough package approved with much fanfare earlier in 2016. The capital cost is part of the same “pot” as the Scarborough Subway extension, but how much will actually be available after that extension’s scope and price are firmed up remains to be seen. This will be an early test for Council. Does it really believe in a “network”, are councillors willing to accept the extra cost as part of building our city, or is the argument still dominated by an outlook claiming that tax restraint must take precedence. An updated Scarborough report is expected in coming months.
- The Eglinton West LRT extension from Mount Dennis to the Renforth Gateway (at the western city boundary) and then north to Pearson Airport is part of the SmartTrack package. Funding for the line is still uncertain because city plans depend on contributions from Ottawa (likely as part of the Liberal’s infrastructure program), from Mississauga and the airport authority (GTAA) for the portion outside of Toronto. This extension is now the more expensive portion of “SmartTrack”, and ironically appears to survive mainly because of that branding despite opposition from some Etobicoke councillors.
- Like the central part of the Crosstown, the two extensions would be operated at the city’s expense even though the lines would be owned by Metrolinx.
- The Metrolinx GO RER program is provincially funded, although the matter of the municipal contribution to GO’s capital remains a sore point between Queen’s Park and the GTHA. Toronto will pay for six new stations as part of SmartTrack and will also contribute to two stations on the Barrie corridor (Bloor/Lansdowne and Spadina). GO RER’s net operating costs will all be a provincial responsibility, and the amount of service that will actually operate depends on future subsidy levels for Metrolinx. Similarly, the full build-out of RER fleets, electrification and service levels will depend on future provincial budget decisions.
- The Relief Line remains under study thanks to a provincial infusion of $150 million, and both city and TTC staff emphasize that it is a necessary part of Toronto’s future network. While some relief to Yonge line crowding will come from GO RER and the new SmartTrack stations, this will only blunt but not stop the growth in subway demand. A big problem, as readers have discussed here at length, is the project’s scope and the perception that it is intended for a comparatively small part of the system’s ridership, downtowners. The further north the eastern RL branch goes beyond Danforth (to Eglinton or even to Sheppard), the more it performs a service for the city as a whole, but this benefit is routinely underplayed relative to the cost of a new north-south subway. Major capital spending for the Relief Line would not begin until the mid 2020s, but this will still compete with other city priorities.
- Waterfront LRT to the west is popular with councillors from southern Etobicoke and has begun to overshadow the shorter eastern LRT line in debates. Both parts of a future waterfront network are under review with the “Reset” study now in progress that has only progressed to the point of developing a moderately long list of options. The strategy appears to be to keep this list as open as possible as long as possible so that political fights over the details are held off at least until there is a better understanding of what will work and what the options might cost. Like the RL, waterfront transit has suffered from being perceived as a “downtown” project despite the scale of development it will have to serve.
- The Finch West LRT is still on the books, and Metrolinx hopes to begin work in this in 2017. There remains some opposition to the line, and it will be a test of the Wynne government’s resolve to see whether actual work is pushed back beyond the 2018 election.
- The Sheppard East LRT is also still on the books, although it is no secret that many politicians at City Hall and Queen’s Park would love to see this sacrificed for a Sheppard Subway extension. The LRT would be a provincial project with some federal money. There has not yet been any cost sharing commitment to a subway replacement from any government in part because the cost is unknown. It will almost certainly be greater than the LRT line, and like the extension north from Kennedy, will serve a considerably smaller part of Scarborough than the LRT would have. Any decision on this point is likely to fall to the next provincial government, although it will likely be part of the electioneering to reinforce the “subway champion” brand by all parties if this scheme gains traction at Council.
- The Richmond Hill extension of the Yonge Subway is a project long-sought by York Region, but the idea is tangled up with network relief from GO RER, the Relief Line and other capacity improvements still pending for the existing subway. Some of these, such as added operating cost for more trains on Line 1 YUS, and capital cost for station capacity impeovements, will fall to Toronto. Whether any of the funding pools now thought to be available for transit projects generally will still be available by the time a decision on Richmond Hill faces council, indeed whether this decision will even be in Toronto Council’s hands, are questions for a future beyond any of the existing governments.
- Not to be forgotten for its demand on city funding is the surface transit system including the bus and streetcar network. While billions in new projects preoccupy debates, a long-standing problem faces Toronto with population growth, much of it “downtown”, that has not been matched by additional transit. Indeed, transit service today is little changed from twenty years ago largely because the TTC streetcar fleet sits roughly at late 1990s levels, and traffic congestion has been responsible for service cuts to stretch the available fleet. Current operating budget plans at the TTC foresee a major shortfall in 2017 that appears unlikely to be addressed by a supposedly pro-transit council and mayor, and this will almost certainly continue into the 2018 election year. On the capital side, the TTC requires an additional batch of streetcars beyond the 204 now on order from Bombardier. Both the financing and supply of this fleet expansion are on shaky ground. As for the bus fleet, TTC management seems more preoccupied with simply replacing its existing fleet of hybrid buses with diesels rather than actually expanding the level of bus service to Toronto.
In this context, the SmartTrack decision is only a small part, and Council has yet to be presented with a comprehensive view of the effect building a real transit network, rather than a few lines, will have on its budget and future financing requirements.
Steve Munro 
So we’re now building transit on faith and those who refuse to go along are branded as “non-believers”. The mayor and his cronies might as well start calling those opponents heretics and burn them at the stake. This idea that we just need to get going no matter how poorly-planned, under-financed and sub-optimal the particular transit project is, and damnation on any who would oppose this progress, makes me think I’m back in Catholic school.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The SmartTrack (Tory campaign or version two) section along Eglinton West would have to be entirely grade separated. The original Transit City version (one) of the Eglinton West LRT would have been at grade. Now with version three, there will be grade separations at several intersections and Eglinton Flats, hence the higher possible cost.
Just wondering if there will be versions 3.1, 3.2, 3.4…, or even a version 4?
LikeLike
What’s the deal with all the grade separations on the crosstown west extension? It amounts to wasting a lot of extra money on construction for the privilege of spending more money on upkeep. It introduces accessibility issues just so we can also make it prohibitively expensive to expand the network.
Is it just another sop to Johnny’s poor ego? That would explain it, but it’s a piss poor reason to do it.
Steve: The plans for the Eglinton West LRT included intersection designs that were just plain dumb, but try telling that to the folks at TTC who were running the process. There was extensive use of “hook turns” that would have created big problems, and this alienated a lot of people. The problem, then, is to determine how intersections on the LRT lines can actually work. It is so odd that designs for Sheppard and Eglinton East were all the “traditional” layouts, but not on Eglinton West (and parts of Finch West too).
Are the underpasses actually warranted based on planned levels of service or are they overkill? What will stations look like at these locations? We are still suffering from some of the bad design decisions made during the Transit City era.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Why does the City project the federal contribution to the Eglinton West LRT as 1/3 when the federal government now seems willing to pay up to 50% for a single project?
LikeLike
I’ve probably said this before, but I’d like to see an operating subsidy/maintenance built into the price of a capital project. For example, if the TYSSE extension were to cost $30M a year to operate, raise the price tag by $0.9B and then put that money in a reserve fund.
Steve: Or at least when comparing projects, include this cost as a discounted future cost. Actually that has been done for some studies, notably those by Metrolinx, but is less common in Toronto where the issue is either ignored or presumed to not be a significant factor. That is to say “we want to get from x to y, and the op cost is a constant regardless of the alignment”. Toronto generally has not done future value comparisons because they tend to look at one closely defined project at a time. This is changing, but is not yet “baked in” to the process. A related problem is that the TTC’s ability to forecast future costs like this is a bit dubious, in part because they don’t have a good, finely grained database of past experience.
If one uses current costs, they will reflect the general condition and age of the network as it exists, not as it has or will evolve from “shiny new out of the box” to “run down maintenance intensive unreliable”.
Do they want “to maximize connectivity with existing residential and employment uses in Liberty Village” or do they want to “optimize connectivity, constructability, and capital costs”?
Steve: The debate, and specifically comments from Councillor Layton who moved this amendment, arose from the fact that, as Layton put it, Liberty Village Station is not in Liberty Village. The site has shifted because of constructability concerns, but in the process the purpose and utility of the station is reduced. This is a basic fact of geography that has been ignored at the level where people simply are putting dots on a map.
Exhibition GO Station already has an ongoing “brainstorming” exercise. It’s a difficult station due to the proximity of the Gardiner and streetcar loop. There is an access on Atlantic Ave that lines up well with the existing tunnel. To the west is Fraser Ave, but the south platform doesn’t extend that far, so really it should be a City project (A bit more west is Mowat Ave, which is 100m from Dufferin St). To the east beyond the GO station is the TTC loop, so people would have to walk west anyway.
Steve: A further issue here is the proposed western extension of the streetcar tracks to Dufferin and beyond. That is the context in which the whole “Exhibition Hub” should be rethought, not as a one-of review of access to the GO station. Indeed, if there were much better LRT service (leaving aside how it will actually get to Union) this could reduce the “demand” for better GO access which, I believe, is an artificial one created by current access and service levels.
This seems like a total muddle of levels of work. The TPAP is Stage-Gate® #4. Stage-Gate® Stage 3 is 10% Detailed Design, whereas grade separations and stops should be finalized as part of Stage Gate #5. Plus Stage 3 is what Metrolinx is already working on.
Steve: The problem lies in my precis of two paragraphs in the recommendations, I think. The full text is:
In other words complete work on stage 3 now in progress, report at the next stage (4 by implication) including a class 4/5 cost estimate, and authorize that a TPAP be conducted. In other words, this is a blanket approval to keep working up to and including the TPAP, but requesting an update report at stage gate 4. Sorry for the confusion. I was attempting to boil down many pages of recommendations and amendments for simplified reading.
I’m going to assume Mississauga says thanks, but no thanks to this. They are already extending the Transitway to the Renforth Gateway. I’m going to assume they’d rather have MiWay users have a one-seat ride rather than needing to transfer from BRT to LRT. Otherwise, a Dundas West LRT from Kipling to Hurontario would be much more useful to everyday riders for only 50% more (7.7km in Mississauga, 2.3km in Toronto).
Steve: It is worth remembering that the idea of serving the Airport Corporate Centre by continuing “SmartTrack” west along Eglinton rather than north to the airport was part of Tory’s campaign scheme, and before that was part of SRRA’s idea of making the land in the ACC more attractive for development. With the LRT line, the route changes back to swing north into the airport. (The SRRA scheme would have seen a bus shuttle between the LRT and the airport.)
This would be a good place for the feds to step in and grease the wheels a bit in the name of aiding a “national” transportation hub. Whether they will or not depends on whether anyone thinks of using this approach.
So who is going to do the expropriation? To the west of the rail corridor, the ROW is from the face of the building on the southside to the retaining wall on the north side. The north turn lane was a separate sliver, but the other yard and stairs are part of the same townhouse parcel of land.
Steve: This is Councillor Palacio’s motion and a major issue in his ward. I agree that fitting all of this in will be challenging, but it’s one of those situations where saying “it won’t work” before the detailed engineering and the bill land on Council’s desk would not be practical. This is a problem at other “ST” stations too, and the reason why the total cost of six surface stations is estimated at $1.2 billion. Despite John Tory’s hanging on to his brand as if his life depended on it, I don’t think all six stations will be built once the cost and implications become evident.
Can Council ‘Request Metrolinx to consider’ ‘providing steak and egg breakfasts on all trains, with the proviso that any option of actually paying for it would not be considered’? We’ll get rid of the SRT just to build a new elevated railway through Scarborough? I’m sure Metrolinx will come back and say “sure, if you want to pay for everything, you can have as many grade separations as you like”. This is at least a $0.5B request (using the $62M for 15% of 5 number). Danforth is particularly difficult with the intersection of Midland/Danforth being 30m to the west. If someone ponies up, the best long-term option would be a rail tunnel from St. Clair to Corvette Park.
Steve: Metrolinx is proposing to close streets where, in their evaluation, crossings are not warranted.
The Scarborough councillors are rather miffed about this, but it will likely come down to a tug of war over cost sharing.
Scarborough Golf Club Rd: They didn’t consider just closing this one? It’s from RER not SmartTrack…
Morningside Drive: It’s from RER not SmartTrack…
Galloway Rd.: It’s from RER not SmartTrack…
Finch Avenue East: Tangental to SmartTrack.
Steeles Avenue East: Shouldn’t York be paying for half of this 15% share?
The RER projects are happening no matter what, and the city is on the hook for 15% under federal rules. This just gets the funding approval out in the open now rather than as a surprise in future budgets.
Finch is also a SmartTrack station location and the city will have money in that project as part of the $1.2b allocated to stations.
Steeles is an interesting question and I wonder if York Region has been asked separately for 15% by Metrolinx. This is a question worth pursuing.
This seems like quite the bargin. I’m assuming it’s not covering any of the City’s pedestrian connection to Lansdowne Subway Station?
Steve: No, it’s just a contribution to the overall GO costs which by analogy to other station projects is certainly a bargain. This is also part of a “settlement” of the long standing claim for GO capital cost sharing. The cost of a link to Lansdowne Station is extra and not yet costed, although the overall agreement commits the city to providing it. Building the link will be a challenge because the west end of the station box is just west of Lansdowne Avenue (the ventillation shaft is on the northwest corner of Wade and Lansdowne), and it’s not simply a case of breaking into an existing station structure at the railway. At that point, the subway is in a bored tunnel passing under the rail corridor.
This is yet another example of placing a dot on a map without understanding the geography, but this “deal” is part of Metrolinx’ accommodation of neighbourhood concerns re the Davenport Diamond project. I suspect the new station will be bundled with construction of the south approach to the proposed rail bridge.
The study and design of the Railpath on the Newmarket subdivision between Bloor and Dundas West is complete. It won’t fit without expropriation. You have the old Davenport Diamond to the north and the confluence with the Weston subdivision to the south. Minimum clearance for double track is 9.152m (plus an inch for every degree of curvature) then there are two 4.7m platforms (or spreading of tracks plus one 7.2m platform in the middle and tunnels on each side). Wasn’t all of this already covered in the Davenport Reference Panel?
Steve: You are dealing with a local councillor who is making sure she has “visibility” on this going into the next election when her ward is merged with neighbouring areas.
For those that don’t know a Class 3 Cost Estimate is the same as a preliminary cost estimate at generally at a 10% to 40% design level. For comparison, the 3-stop SSE study was a Class 5 estimate (0% to 2% design) and 1-stop SSE costing was Class 4.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Why not add a GO station at Ellesmere? If proper connection is made with the surroundings, then it can be very usable. The SRT Ellesmere station has no buses or proper street connections to serve it which is why it has relatively low ridership. The Ellesmere GO station I propose would be quite close to the Scarborough Centre.
LikeLike
What was the rationale for tying West Waterfront and Eglinton West LRTs to the same timeframe? It doesn’t make sense except from a strictly budget viewpoint, and that only makes sense in the “we might only be able to afford one” way.
The problem with planning on a network basis is that there’s so much needed yesterday, the costs become eye-popping. This is how individual costly projects (hello Scarborough!) get funded, by not worrying about other transit needs. But until politicians and the public do decide to just get on with it, giving the whole picture will just elicit “Whoah! That’s way too much!”
Steve: Councillor Campbell does not think Eg West is worth the cost, and does not want a commitment to it while the Waterfront West project is still under study. A shame he can’t just come and say that he fears some transit projects will fall off of the table, but the Tory mantra is that there will be money for everything, even the DRL.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That’s only for Quebec, the province that has a chokehold of power in the federal government. Gone are the good old days when we had a Toronto born Prime Minister, we have a Quebecois in charge now.
LikeLike
What happens to SmartTrack if the Go RER project falls through?
SmartTrack is dependent on RER actually happening but if there are delays getting started (possible) and a change in provincial government in 2018 (possible), RER could get cancelled so it’s a contingency that council should consider.
Steve: Yup, a big problem. The whole business about Metrolinx setting a November 30 deadline for Toronto’s decision is linked to the need to get RER construction underway before a new government can cancel it. Even then, electrification is not a done deal, and that affects some of the assumptions about RER service.
LikeLiked by 1 person
On how to pay for everything, consider that in the U.S. election this week, about 70% of referendums for transit passed.
These included sales tax increases, some of which needed ⅔ majority in the referendum.
Steve: The real challenge will be getting the federal matching money now that an anti-transit regime will be in control in Washington.
LikeLike
Ellesmere was analysed as part of the 120+ sites, 50+ stations, 17 Initial Business Case process that netted 6 ‘SmartTrack’ stations. There is 2km between Agincourt GO Station and Lawrence Ave. If the Lawrence GO/ST Station is built to the north side, and you use a standard length of 320m for the station, that means the two sections between would split the remaining 1.36km (680m/680m north-side or 1km/360m). That means you’d have one or two train-lengths between stations.
Steve: Actually, Agincourt Station is at Sheppard which is 4 km north of Lawrence. Ellesmere is the half way point. But in any event, it’s not a high traffic area, and will always suffer from being under the bridge.
Mississauga says their BRT Transitway will cost $259M. Might it make more sense to extend the BRT east than the LRT west? Might have trouble calling MiWay Express buses something with SmartTrack in the name.
Steve: The question of where the LRT would end and where the BRT would start has bedeviled planning for Eglinton for decades. In the more recent studies, a connection at Mount Dennis fared poorly because this imposed a transfer on many more riders than if the transfer is at Renforth. This really needs to be considered in the context of how an airport area circulation/distribution system would be designed.
I think Patrick Brown is enough of a pragmatist to take transit goodies off the electoral divide. He’s already said he’d continue to fund the Hamilton LRT ($1B) and support revenue-neutral carbon pricing. More likely is that once in power our collective foot is taken off the accelerator somewhat and we electrify in 20-30 years not 5-15 years.
LikeLike
I heard that the Finch West LRT is no longer at street level and will run in a trench at the side of the road. I wasn’t aware of this change until I asked about it to a friend who works for one of the consulting firms. When was this?
Steve: That’s news to me, especially considering that all of the public presentations have been based on street level operation. I don’t know how a side of the road trench could work, and this sounds more like someone is thinking of early designs for Eglinton where the Richview Expressway lands could have been used for this type of design (but not now). This idea might make sense through the highway interchange, but not for the entire route.
LikeLike
@Mikey Perhaps your friend is talking about the terminus at Humber College, where it will be in a trench alongside Hwy 27? I think that’s the latest on that, anyways.
LikeLike
If the SSE is built, the subway station at Scarborough Town Centre picks up the Ellesmere traffic.
Steve: Yes, it’s hard to believe that the TTC would not route the 95 (and many other routes) into STC to feed the subway.
LikeLike
There should be a ST station on Ellesmere and a Subway station on Lawrence. But Scarborough is only allowed to choose between poorly integrated LRT vs. a strict quota as to the number of stations of any other technology. Attention to key details is certainly not a strong point in Scarborough transit building.
Steve: That is the sort of “polarizing” misrepresentation you complain about in your previous comment. Ellesmere was a rather sleepy place when the RT was built over 30 years ago, and the 95 did not run very frequently. That’s why there was no provision for buses to loop into Ellesmere Station. I agree it was a bad decision, but for comparable stupidity “downtown” you need only look at a station like Dufferin that should have had a big bus interchange, but doesn’t, or Pape that has one the size of a postage stamp. These designs reflect the route patterns in effect when the line was built. Even the stations right in the core are undersized for the volume of traffic between them and the surrounding buildings. This is not a Scarborough phenomenon, it is common through much of what we build. Indeed, cheaping out is the reason Scarborough is only getting one stop on the subway extension.
LikeLike
@TranspoPlanner
Perhaps I misheard my conversation. Hope it’s just that part.
LikeLike
Just got back from KW, and I think the Ion people have found a way to deal with Bombardier’s Flexity delivery schedule: Miss all the deadlines on your construction sched, and you won’t need the LRTs anytime soon.
I’m not suggesting that Ion is incompetent; they may be, but I doubt it. The problem is that when you’re building an LRT almost totally from scratch, even when it’s on the surface, there is an unbelievable amount of work to be done.
Much of it is new to this generation of construction contractors, and that leads to many small, but time consuming ‘complexity miscalculations’.
It will become easier the second time around [eg. Hamilton], but I don’t think that surface LRTs will ever be as cheap to construct as today’s budgetiers seem to think. LRTs are vital to our urban future, but getting all the necessary cash on the barrelhead is going to be a very large problem.
LikeLike
You mean east, but it’s actually not that difficult because Midland drops down to the north of the intersection before rising to become level with the Stouffville line just south of Danforth before dropping down again to get under the Lakeshore line. So it should be possible to drop Midland and the intersection without resorting to crazy road grades. The real problem is the apartment buildings along Greystone Walk Drive to the southeast of the intersection.
LikeLike
Can I just say that it is absolutely insane to me that the Spadina Subway extension has taken so long to build? I can remember sitting in my old house around late 2007 or so, back when the expected completion date was something like 2014, and thinking how crazy it was that it was going to take so long to build a six stop extension. Flash forward to late 2016 and we’ve still got about a year before the extension will be carrying passengers. I mean seriously, it took them five years in the late forties and fifties to build a very slightly shorter line through the core of downtown Toronto, yet it takes nearly a full decade to build a line mostly through empty fields sixty years later? I understand that regulations have changed and there’s a lot more planning work and environmental assessment to get out of the way first nowadays, but my god do they ever need to figure out a way to speed up construction on these projects. At this rate, assuming it’s ever even built, my mid-twenties self will be in my forties before the first train ever runs on the Bloor-Danforth extension to Scarborough.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I totally agree with Steve, about the hook turns being dumb, particular since they had changed to make the U-turn across the tracks instead of on the roads without tracks, thus adding more places where the LRTs could be delayed.
However, I do wonder whether the fact that this is now part of SmartTrack may not have had an even greater influence on the design. After all, SmartTrack is supposed to deliver service at “subway speeds” and subways do not have to wait at traffic lights.
LikeLike
Sorry, I was sleepy yesterday. It’s 2km from Sheppard to Ellesmere and 2km more to Lawrence, so it would be 5-6 train length between the stations.
The main issue with plopping a SmartTrack station at every Avenue is that is increases travel times for everyone upstream. How well liked in the Ellesmere Station on the SRT to the 95% of everyone else that’s just made to wait? It’s actually worse than Bessarion Station on the Sheppard line.
I’m pro-Lawrence Subway Station and anti-Ellesmere GO Station.
Encountering TWO historical log roads definitely didn’t help. Archeology is always a hit-or-miss, scheduled as a miss.
LikeLike
Not even close. The comment I addressed was a direct low life bully insult towards the people of Scarborough.
I was making an true observation that Scarborough is only to build stops if it’s transfer LRT that gets built. It’s odd that the number of stops was part of the rallying cry in the media and Politicians. Now with the new plans they don’t seems to care.
Please feel free to disagree but don’t paint in the same light as your abusive posters.
Steve: Actually several politicians do care about the loss of stops and in general the loss of coverage for Scarborough. It’s the way this would be achieved that we disagree on.
LikeLike
What is the Georgetown south issue with a price tag of $95M? Thanks.
Steve: When a railway upgrades its infrastructure, as GO did in that corridor, and at the same time replaces or upgrades municipal works such as water, sewer, roads, sidewalks, etc., then the municipality pays part or all of the cost depending on the circumstance. For example, if the GO work requires replacement of a 60 year old watermain, this is work that the city would have to do anyhow eventually. Therefore GO pays for the future value of the asset (the time during which it could remain in service) while the city pays for the portion that is already “used up”. If the design lifespan were 80 years (i.e. if the city planned to replace the watermain in 20 years anyhow), then the work would be split 25/75 between GO and the city.
In some cases, the city takes advantage of work like this to improve what is already there. This is different from replacement cost and remaining lifespan described above, and all of the marginal cost is charged to the city.
The $95 million represents a settlement of GO’s claims for the work that they did on the city’s behalf.
Note that similar payments will be required as part of upgrades on other corridors for ST and RER, and it is unclear how much of this has been built into the city’s budgets.
LikeLike
I’ve heard many people complain about Scarborough having “downtown planners” etc. impose their will on Scarborough, so what part of suggesting that leaving the City to be able to do as desired equal a “direct low life bully insult”?
It’s all moot anyway because it’s not an option for either Scarborough or Toronto, but a provincial decision (amalgamation under Harris).
That’s the central issue: a “transfer” for 7K peak hour riders that board at STC rather than Kennedy or 5.5K peak hour riders that would continue on the Eglinton Crosstown plus everyone in Scarborough that doesn’t actually want to go downtown.
LikeLiked by 1 person
When I was in Rome a number of years ago, someone told me that this is an extreme problem for any subway construction they have or will see. You can’t dig for more than a few dozen metres in that city without running into something that holds up the project.
It can go so far as to change the design of the project (never mind the cost of those change requests) to the point that there are a number of zig-zag, s-curves in the track alignment on their system.
LikeLike
When in KW do as the Romans. It’s swell that Ion didn’t run roughshod over the wooden King Street, which became a tourist attraction for a while. If only the city fathers had treated the old Grand River Railway [1907] with the same respect. They are using part of its right of way for Ion, but there would have been much more if they hadn’t bike trailed it in 1993. In fact they could have used it all if someone had lobbied effectively for non abandonment of passenger service in 1955.
During the Battle of Waterloo, the naysayers used two arguments: local merchants would be ruined by the construction chaos, and we don’t need it. They lost because the second point has become crazily irrelevant in the modern metropolis that is Kitchener-Waterloo-Cambridge, but their first point seems even more valid today.
It is a great bike trail, BTW.
LikeLike
Exactly my point.
Whether it’s integration or number of stops It seems there is always something that has to be left out when designing Scarborough’s transit.
It shouldn’t be an either or. Especially considering the big picture and total bill of Transit building in the GTA.
LikeLike
Is this true: building a GO or SmartTrack station at Lawrence or Ellesmere would end any hopes for an LRT replacement of the SRT? If so, then neither station can be built while the SRT is still in operation.
Steve: That is correct. Expanding the GO corridor to include stations at either location does not leave enough room for the RT or an LRT (or a “surface subway” either). One way or another, there will be a period with no station of either type at Lawrence East.
LikeLike
“Whether it’s integration or number of stops It seems there is always something that has to be left out when designing…..”
All transit.
LikeLike
True enough. Has there been any consideration given to eliminating the bridge as a barrier to allow for improved development potential around the stations (e.g. Ellesmere, Lawrence, and Kennedy)?
Steve: No. In fact more grade separations are coming at other crossings because of the increased frequency of service on GO RER.
This is a major problem generally for development at stations on rail corridors crossing arterials.
LikeLike
Question for Steve: Will the two way nature of rush hour travel on the Spadina Subway extension lead to much lower operating costs than would be expected from a normal one way line. I’ve always assumed that York University would provide the two way. It is a huge place that is filled with buses AM and PM.
Steve: Counterpeak demand can yield more riders at little additional cost, although this also depends on feeder services. For example, Scarborough is notorious as a place where reverse commuting is difficult. Just try to figure out how to get from GO to STC as an AM commute. The system is stacked against you in both GO and bus service (the AM peak “ends” inward fairly early and outbound service falls to daytime schedules). If there actually were a strong counterpeak demand on anything other than the SRT, the TTC would have to operate more service.
There will be some saving in reduced bus costs for the TYSSE, but this will be more than offset by the much higher cost of operating and maintaining a subway all the way to Vaughan. Bus savings north of Steeles accrue to York Region, but the TTC is stuck with the bill for operating the subway. Frankly, I suspect that if the McGuinty/Sorbara government had not forced Toronto into that arrangement, York Region would never have coughed up the operating dollars. They are paying only for some minor maintenance of surface facilities at stations. This is the sham that is “regional integration”, and one of the reasons I don’t trust Queen’s Park one bit when they start talking about fare and service integration.
The TTC is currently predicting the full year effect of opening the Spadina extension to be $30 million net after counting new revenues (source: TTC Capital Budget 2016 Project Summary, p. 969). They had hoped to get a TTC fare from the York Region students coming from the north, but that was scotched, and they will travel free on the north end of the subway using their York Region transfers. I would not be surprised to see the TTC arm-twisted into reducing that estimate, but it’s a catch-22 if they come up short and have to cut service/maintenance elsewhere. This will be an issue in the 2018 budget debates that will hit as we go into the next election cycle. The effect for 2017 is only $7 million in startup costs with almost no offsetting revenue because the line won’t carry passengers until the very end of the year.
LikeLike
While it’s likely overall good news, I was disappointed that we aren’t able to re-work thinking on the Smart Spur option (as it’s called), given the torquing of data etc. by the TTC now more out. There was a valid proposal a decade ago to close down the SRT for about 8 months and presumably use buses, but the presumption was that this couldn’t occur, and thus having a new spur line transit on the east/west portion of the current SRT would require new land and thus very costly expropriation etc. so it was all dismissed as unworkable/too costly, and the SSE cruised along. It’s too bad we can’t seem to squeeze those billions, and I’m not saying we don’t need to spend bigger money, just there are needs everywhere, not just Scarborough.
LikeLike
It wouldn’t end it, but it would make it more complex. In theory, you could build the Ellesmere to Kennedy station portion as a centre of the road LRT along Kennedy. However, that would leave you with the big problem of how to connect the Kennedy segment with the elevated portion if you even wanted to connect them.
LikeLike
Metrolinx has uploaded this staff report update on new stations.
The Relief Line is only mentioned in the section about a hypothetical Gerrard station and as a tiny bullet in the Unilever illustration.
Technical and feasibility analyses are still pending.
LikeLike
I forgot to highlight the new tidbit here which I had not heard of before now. In regards to the hypothetical Gerrard station on SmartTrack.
Steve: This material was in the City’s report on SmartTrack stations. It only really makes sense in the context of this being a major node between the Relief Line, Smart Track and the surface network.
LikeLike