A Win-Win Transit Solution for Toronto

Cherise Burda and Graham Haines

February 17, 2011
 A transit solution for Toronto
• TTC and Metrolinx are developing a new
transit plan for Toronto: a compromise
between subway extensions and more cost-
effective light-rail transit.  
• This is the Pembina Institute’s analysis of the
options on the table and our recommended
best compromise transit plan for Toronto.
 A win-win transit solution:
• Serves four corners of the city
• Offers an appropriate mix of subway, LRT,
surface and underground
• Is fiscally responsible — matches ridership with
required capacity
• Prioritizes projects that can begin construction
now
• Is cost effective — aims for highest ridership
per dollar invested
• Minimizes car lane loss to transit lines
 Funds are limited
• A transit plan should aim to bring rapid
transit to the doorsteps of as many
Torontonians as possible.
• Dollars spent unwisely in one area means
less money for the rest of the system.
Recommended Compromise Plan
Recommended Compromise Plan
1. Finch West Express: New surface LRT line  
2. Eglinton Crosstown: New hybrid surface and
underground LRT line
3. Scarborough Subway: Extension of the Bloor-
Danforth subway  to replace the current SRT
4. Sheppard East: A hybrid line that includes:
– Underground subway or LRT on Sheppard from
Don Mills to Pharmacy  
– Surface LRT between Pharmacy and Meadowvale
 1. FINCH WEST EXPRESS
11 km of new surface LRT rapid transit line on Finch
Cost: $0.9 billion
 FINCH: Relief for a crowded bus
Finch West 36 is currently the busiest bus
route in Toronto and will only get busier.
•Current bus service cannot support the
demand
•Finch needs rapid transit with greater
capacity and frequency
 FINCH: Rapid transit to those who
need it most
Finch is the highest and fastest-growing population of
low-income, immigrant, single-parent and youth
populations in the city.
•Many of these residents cannot afford vehicles and have
to travel further to find employment.
•Currently are the most underserved by rapid transit
•Lack of transit access is a main cause of increasing
poverty in these areas.
•Providing rapid transit would help to reverse this trend.
 FINCH: Cost effective
The Finch surface LRT is the most cost
effective transit line on the table.
•Finch is an 11 km “bargain” for less than
$1 billion
•Compare this to 8 km of Sheppard subway at
$3 billion
 FINCH: Cost-effective options
Right-of-way bus rapid transit (BRT)
• Half the cost
• Can be implemented quickly, and replaced by LRT over
time
• However….Would not provide the needed capacity:
– Projected ridership: 4,500 people per hour per direction
– BRT maximum capacity: 3,000.
– LRT capacity: Over 8,400
• Speed and ‘attractiveness’ of LRT brings in more new
riders than a BRT
• Therefore, LRT for Finch is recommended in this
compromise plan
Comparison: Transit options for Finch
Finch Transit Speed Capacity Projected Cost/km
km/h $2010 Billions
Options Ridership
Rush hour riders 2031

Bus Rapid ~ 20 2700 4500 0.4

Transit (BRT)

Light Rail ~25 8400 – 4500 0.9

Transit (LRT) 25,200*

*8400 for one-vehicle trains; 25,200 for three-vehicle trains operating at crush
load (280 passengers per vehicle)
 FINCH: It makes sense
• The most cost-effective transit line on the table
• Serves the largest low-income population that
needs transit
• Right-of-way rapid transit line would not take
away lanes of traffic away from vehicles
– (Except for 300 metres at the CPR bridge)
 2. EGLINTON CROSSTOWN
Surface LRT between Kennedy station and Jane St;
underground currently between Laird and Black Creek Drive
Cost: $4.9 billion
EGLINTON: Time to build, not debate
• Eglinton has broad support as a priority line
• Groundwork has been done, including time-
consuming environmental assessments
• Boring machines have been bought and paid
for and construction can begin now on the
underground section
• Phase One of the Crosstown is fully funded
by Metrolinx
EGLINTON: Highest projected ridership
Proposed transit line Projected peak ridership
2031

Eglinton Crosstown 7,800

Scarborough RT 6,400* - 7,600**
Finch West 4,500

Sheppard East 3,100* – 5,300**

* peak ridership for LRT
** peak ridership for subway
 EGLINTON: Linking the City
• Eglinton Crosstown creates a complete link
across the city.
• Begin with the 11 km underground section,
and consider how best to complete the
additional 8 km of phase one
• Phase 2 (not included in this plan) would
eventually connect the “Crosstown” line to
Pearson airport
 3. SCARBOROUGH SUBWAY
• 8 km extension of Bloor-
Danforth subway to
replace aging SRT
• New routing, runs from
Kennedy Station to
Sheppard Ave E
(connects with Sheppard
E LRT)
Cost: $2.4 billion 
 SCARBOROUGH SUBWAY:
Minimizing surface disruption
• SRT is aging, running at overcapacity and needs to
be replaced.
• A Scarborough LRT (proposed under Transit City)
would upgrade the current SRT; a Bloor-Danforth
Subway extension would build along a new route.
• Therefore a subway would minimize disruption for
riders, because current SRT could continue to
function while the subway is being constructed.
 SCARBOROUGH SUBWAY:
Capacity and cost
• For cost-effectiveness, subways require minimum
peak ridership of 10,000 to 15,000 people per hour
per direction
• Projected peak ridership of Scarborough is: 7600.
However, ridership could increase by:
– Linking with the Sheppard LRT would bring higher
ridership (part of our proposal)
– Linking with the Danforth-Bloor subway line
 SCARBOROUGH SUBWAY:
A costlier compromise option
Cost of Scarborough LRT: $1.8 Billion
Cost of Scarborough Subway extension: $2.4 Billion
• Subway is more expensive but comes with benefits:
– Service can continue on existing SRT during construction
– Cost more comparable to underground LRT than a
subway on Sheppard
– Higher potential ridership on Scarborough Subway
relative to cost
– Link to Sheppard LRT link could increase ridership and
further justify cost and capacity
 4. SHEPPARD EAST
A hybrid line that includes:
• 2 km of subway or underground LRT from Don Mills to
between Victoria Park and Pharmacy
– Cost: $0.5 billion 
• 9 km above-ground LRT from Victoria Park/Pharmacy to
Morningside
– Cost: $0.8 billion 
 SHEPPARD EAST:
Cost effectiveness
• Subway will cost over four times as much per
kilometre as LRT
• Eight kilometres of Sheppard subway would
consume 1/3 of the total available transit
budget for the next ten years
 SHEPPARD EAST:
Capacity and fiscal responsibility
• For cost-effectiveness, minimum peak
ridership (people per hour per direction)
– Subways: 10,000 to 15,000
– LRT: 3000 to 5300
• Projected peak ridership (Sheppard, 2031):
3,100 to 5,300
• Population is not sufficient to support a
subway
SHEPPARD EAST: win-win solution for
drivers and transit riders
• A full Sheppard LRT would lose 1.5 km of
traffic lanes east from Consumers Road
• Therefore, extending the underground
section from Don Mills to Pharmacy retains
all traffic lanes
• No traffic lanes will be needed to
accommodate surface LRT from Pharmacy
to Morningside
 SHEPPARD EAST:
A fiscally responsible option
Sheppard Express “hybrid line” of 2 km
underground (LRT or subway) and 10 km
surface LRT
•Removes no traffic lanes
•One-third of the cost of the proposed subway
•Serves 1.5 times more people than proposed
subway
 SHEPPARD EAST:
Options in perspective
Sheppard East LRT Subway Hybrid
options (Phase 1) Line
Length (km) 12 8 12
Cost $1.0 $2.9 $1.3
($2010 billions)
Cost per km $85 $360 $113
($2010 millions)

Traffic lanes 1.5 0 0

removed (km)
 RECOMMENDED COMPROMISE
PLAN: Overview
• Balances mix of subway, LRT, underground and
surface rapid transit
• Serves all four corners of the city
• Matches appropriate transit capacity with
population density and projected demand
• Fiscally responsible
• Environmental assessments complete on
Eglinton Crosstown, Sheppard East and Finch
West Express — work can commence
 RECOMMENDED COMPROMISE
PLAN: By the Metric
• Proposed lines bring rapid transit to the
doorsteps of 440,000 Torontonians
• Will bring rapid transit to 32,000 low-income
people
• Will remove between 90,000 and 120,000
cars out of gridlock
• Will reduce greenhouse gas emissions by
143,000 tonnes
 Meeting the budget
• This compromise solution: $9.6* billion**
• Most recent funded (LRT) plan on the table:
$8.7* billion
• Extra cost of compromise solution is due to
added underground subway and subway
yard (if needed)
*2010 dollars non-accelerated
**Additional $500 million may be required if a new rail yard is needed to service Bloor-
Danforth extension (Scarborough Subway)
 Meeting the budget
• Additional funds are needed to ensure a balanced
plan that services the city’s regions fairly and
brings a compromise to subway and LRT
supporters.
• Shortfall could be financed by various levels of
government: Federal, Provincial and/or Municipal.
• Any private financing agreements via future
development charges should be made for transit
projects that match ridership with capacity and are
low risk.
 Appendix 1:
Transit plans in perspective
Proposed Subway 4 LRT Priority Compromise
Extension Projects Phase 1 Solution
Length (km) 18 52 50

Cost ($2010) $6.2 billion $8.7 billion $9.6 billion

Cost/km $344 million $167 million $192 million

Torontonians 185,000 460,000 440,000

served *
Low Income 11,000 33,000 32,000
population served
Cars out of 60,000-80,000 80,000-110,000 90,000-120,000
gridlock
GHGs removed 75,000 132,000 143,000

*within 500 m of a transit stop

 Appendix 2: Line comparison – cost and service
Line Length Cost Cost/km Torontonians Low-income
(km) ($2010-B) ($2010-M) served* population
reached
Scarborough (SRT) LRT 9.9 1.8 184 100,000 5,900
(Phase 1)
Scarborough (SRT) Subway to 8 2.4 300 82,000 4,800
Sheppard
Scarborough (SRT) Subway to 6 1.8 300 61,200 3,600
SCC
Sheppard W. Subway (Yonge to 4 1.5 375 45,000 2,800
Downsview)
Sheppard E. Subway 8 2.9 363 82,000 4,800
(Don Mills to SCC)
Sheppard LRT 12 1.0 85 122,400 7,200
(Phase 1)
Finch LRT 11 0.9 85 78,100 7,600
(Phase 1)
Finch BRT 11 0.4 40 78,100 7,600
(Phase 1)
Eglinton Crosstown 19 4.9 258 155,800 12,000
(Phase 1)
Eglinton Crosstown – 11 3.3 300 90,200 7,000
underground section only