The “Scarborough Subway Solution”

April 2017

“There are intelligent, practical, and cost-effective ways to integrate multiple modes of public transit for moving people more efficiently in the Greater Toronto Area” “When public servants fail to effectively perform their duties to serve the public interest – the public must take action.” Paul Chomik, P.Eng.

Proposed Solution The current proposal for replacing the Scarborough “Rapid Transit” system is far too costly and operationally-ineffective compared with other options to be seriously considered. A cost-effective alternative solution is readily implementable at a considerable cost-savings to taxpayers – which will have a far superior result in terms of useful rapid transit infrastructure. Because all Toronto taxpayers are required to pay a special tax to fund the Scarborough Subway extension, it is expected that the most cost-effective subway option should be selected.

Rationale The exploding cost of the current Scarborough Subway extension is due to the extensive underground tunnelling that is now required, as well as the re-configuration of the route at Scarborough Centre requiring the construction of a new station. Tunnelling a new route to Scarborough Centre precludes retaining the existing transit stops along the Scarborough RT route. A rational alternative to the excessively-expensive course of action that is being undertaken is to either re-use the current Kennedy Station, or build a new Kennedy Subway Station adjacent to the current location, in conjunction with a new underground alignment that rises and connects with the existing Scarborough RT right-of-way (necessary to by-pass the very sharp RT curves at the existing Kennedy station). These options would only require about 0.5 kilometres of underground tunnel, instead of the extensive 6.0 km of tunnel required for the single-stop option that is currently proceeding. The existing Scarborough RT right-of-way would be retained and the track re-gauged to subway wheel width the rest of the way to Scarborough Town Centre. Such a move would result in considerable construction cost savings – which could be diverted to other important transit projects.

Figure 1: Two most cost-effective alignments for the Scarborough Subway Extension.

The “Scarborough Subway Solution” involves either reusing the existing Kennedy Subway Station, or building a new station along the alignment of the subway tracks just west of the current station, and tunneling a short section underground to link up with the existing Scarborough RT right-of-way. By re-using and upgrading the current RT infrastructure and adapting it to subway standards, cost savings of over $3-billion should be realized. That valuable public-transit infrastructure funding could be more effectively utilized elsewhere, such as extending the subway system further into Scarborough by extending the Sheppard Subway line to Scarborough Centre. The project would require re-using the existing subway infrastructure with or without the construction of a new subway station, plus a new underground track section connecting the existing subway tracks up to the old RT line, and re-gauging the RT tracks to the same track gauge as the subway system. The majority of construction can be undertaken while the existing Subway/RT system continues to operate normally. The final connection and alteration to the Scarborough RT right-of-way can be staged over the summertime to reduce disruption to commuters as more people are away from work during that period. 2

Such a project would eliminate a totally-needless physical transfer from the subway system to the RT system right-of-way, due to the complete incompatibility of the two existing transit systems. Additional cost savings can also be possible by constructing subway stations to a basic standardized design – instead of expending exorbitant sums of taxpayers’ money on totally- unnecessary architectural extravagance which does nothing to contribute to faster and more- effective transit service. As much of the preparatory construction can be undertaken while the existing Scarborough RT continues to operate, service disruptions to transit riders can be minimized. By staging the final track connection and re-gauging to the summer months, again, service disruptions can be minimized. Because the time required to make the final connections will be minimal compared to the other construction requirements, existing bus transit routes could be supplemented in the vicinity of the RT corridor to provide fast connections to the existing Kennedy Subway Station.

Interference from “SmartTrack” It is well-established that the reasoning for not re-using the existing Scarborough RT right-of- way is due to interference from the “SmartTrack” proposal since it duplicates much of the Scarborough RT route, and is to be located directly adjacent to the existing Scarborough RT right-of-way.

Figure 2: John Tory’s Smart Track. 3

The resulting failure to maintain and capitalize on existing TTC transfer points and established ridership patterns will disrupt the established flow of transit riders and will unnecessarily inconvenience riders feeding into those existing stations. Five (5) existing RT stations will be replaced with only 2 SmartTrack stations that do not include the Scarborough Centre station. By recognizing that GO Transit rail service and the Regional Express Rail (RER) proposal along rail corridors within Toronto, and the SmartTrack proposal essentially all duplicate each other, eliminating that unnecessary duplication and complications caused by SmartTrack and operating the proposed RER system at a higher frequency of service tailored to demand throughout the day should be much more cost-effective for taxpayers – particularly due to the elimination of SmartTrack’s bureaucracy which simply costs taxpayers even more on an ongoing basis.

“• The SmartTrack line will be 53km in length. It is mainly a retrofit of two existing GO lines operated by Metrolinx. Approximately 90% of its length will be on existing GO trackage.” ref: (pg. 3) THE ONE TORONTO TRANSIT PLAN - The SmartTrack Line (JOHNTORY.CA)

Figure 3: GO Transit routes illustrating “SmartTrack” duplication with concurrent competing transit services.

On the east side of Toronto, GO Transit rail service, RER and SmartTrack are planned to operate concurrently along the eastern rail corridor. On the west side, GO Transit rail service, RER, SmartTrack and the Union-Pearson Express service are essentially duplicate transit services along the western rail corridor. Most importantly, all of these competing transit services will simultaneously funnel transit riders to Union Station, potentially elevating transit rider density to levels similar to the Bloor-Yonge subway station – or even worse.

Figure 4: Public Transit routes showing “SmartTrack” duplication and displaced Scarborough Subway Extension In addition, SmartTrack essentially parallels Toronto’s future “Downtown Relief Line” on the future western approach from the Bloor-Danforth Subway line. It also parallels part the eastern portion of the Relief Line up to Gerrard Street-Pape Avenue. SmartTrack represents a colossal waste of taxpayers’ money on top of everything else due to excessive multiple over-duplication of competing public transit services. The unnecessary duplication of bureaucracies, systems and personnel represents a complete failure to maximize the effective return for expenditures of taxpayers’ money on public transit. The most important question to ask is: why are public servants incapable of figuring this out? And do they simply consider taxpayers to be a bottomless pit of money to spend on inadequately-planned transit proposals? 5

Figure 5: Downtown Relief Line (east) showing parallel route of SmartTrack from Gerrard-Pape (which will funnel even more transit riders to Union Station)

Figure 6: Downtown Relief Line (west) showing parallel route along the Canadian Pacific Railway corridor where SmartTrack, GO Transit, RER and Union-Pearson Express are to operate concurrently.

As well, SmartTrack is expected to result in a time savings of about 10-minutes between Kennedy Subway Station and Union Station according to Toronto Mayor John Tory. Little justification can be made for such a poorly-performing transit initiative when the Downtown Relief Line is the real public transit priority. The minimal SmartTrack time savings compared to the existing subway system is highly unlikely to be justified by the unnecessary costs incurred for transit duplication by SmartTrack since the Downtown Relief Line will similarly reduce transit trip times to Union Station.

“• The SmartTrack line will slash commute times for suburban passengers. Estimates indicate that riders can expect a less than 30-minute commute from Kennedy subway to Union Station. Today, that same commute takes approximately 40 minutes on the current subway network.”

ref: (pg. 2) THE ONE TORONTO TRANSIT PLAN - The SmartTrack Line (JOHNTORY.CA)

There are a total of 19 subway stops from Kennedy Station to Union Station (13 stops on the Bloor-Danforth line - and 6 stops from the Yonge Station to Union Station). SmartTrack will include only 5 stops between Kennedy Station and Union Station. One would expect a significantly shorter trip time using SmartTrack instead of a marginal improvement of about only 10 minutes (which cannot seriously be considered to be “slashing” commuting time), particularly since SmartTrack is to also provide a direct service to Union Station without any transfers. The cost to taxpayers must be considered for such a small reduction in trip time – particularly when there are numerous other areas where that money could be better utilized to provide urgent priority public transit services. By rights, the additional costs of moving the Scarborough Subway Extension away from the future SmartTrack corridor should be attributed to SmartTrack due to its impact on the final alignment for the subway extension to Scarborough Centre. The St. Clair Avenue streetcar/LRT is a prime example of a considerable expenditure of taxpayers’ money resulting in a marginal (at best) improvement in trip time – notwithstanding severe adverse impacts on communities along its rather short route. It is also important to note that construction of LRT (Light Rail Transit) systems, which are essentially streetcars typically operating in partially-segregated rights-of-way with cross-street intersections at grade within the City, are not “rapid transit” – unlike Toronto’s Subway system or GO Transit rail operations. LRT systems are designed for short to medium-distance travel at a slower pace than rapid transit, and cannot effectively compete with faster rapid-transit systems for commuting over longer distances.

Toronto taxpayers expect that public servants, who are employed at taxpayers’ expense and who are expected to take direction from the public and to serve the public, will implement the most cost-effective and operationally-effective public transit projects.

Public transit projects are far too often uncoordinated (e.g. unnecessary duplication of competing transit systems in close proximity to each other such as GO Transit RER, SmartTrack and the Downtown Relief Line, as well as GO Transit rail service and proposed local LRT projects) – resulting in overly-expensive and less effective service overall since other priority transit services lack funding. That does not take into account the colossal waste of taxpayers’ money and the related costs to transit riders in terms of longer and more inconvenient transit trips in other areas of Toronto than is necessary. Taxpayers expect that their money will be spent on optimized projects that operate effectively - instead of what sounds good, but never lives up to the grand promises made to taxpayers as occurs far too often.