News   Apr 26, 2024
 2K     4 
News   Apr 26, 2024
 445     0 
News   Apr 26, 2024
 1K     1 

TTC: Sheppard Subway Expansion (Speculative)

^ Plus, the Sheppard - Spadina connection will be useful for some E-W trips: get to Sheppard subway, travel to the Spadina segment, and then transfer to a westbound Wilson bus, Lawrence bus, or Eglinton LRT. There is no single major origin-destination pair that would match such pattern, but the multitude of the possible combinations will improve the Sheppard's total ridership count.
 
The only underground "alternative" is cut and cover construction. If the professional whiners complain about the disruption caused by the St. Clair Disaster, I'd love to see their reaction to a huge trench running down Sheppard for the next 5 years. Cognitive dissonance would be the flavour of the day.

How about an alternative of not having a mezanine level. Could the subway be built just below ground? Maybe jsut have a pedestrain tunnel under the tracks at the station. If surface LRT can be all-door boarding, why not subway. If cut-an-cover is used, can precast concrete box tunnels be used. I think you could really cut down the construction time. Stations would not be nearly as deep, so their construction would be a lot shorter.

If these people want a subway, let them suffer a little with construction. Again there option should be either a less expensive subway with significant construction disruption, or no subway at all. A gold plated (during construction and completion) subway is not an option.

I hate to suggest P3, but someone needs to think outside the box. (maybe think outside the tunnel, I am suggesting thinking in the box).

(I think the DRL people should also consider this, since I do not see the full $6B to $8B coming anytime soon.)
 
Last edited:
Considering alternate financing schemes for the western extension of Sheppard, what would people think of selling the Davisville Yards to developers? Once the Sheppard line is extended west, I can't imagine that expanding the Wilson yard would be that expensive, particularly if the track connecting Allen-Sheppard (not to be confused with the astronaut) to the University Line were used for revenue service.

I know your suggestion is in jest. But what about selling the air rights? Nice place to put up some offices.
 
I know your suggestion is in jest. But what about selling the air rights? Nice place to put up some offices.

The TTC building itself would be a great place to put in a taller building. But I agree, this is a great idea to build over the yards, although I would imagine that building over it would be pretty expensive, so the buildings would need to be pretty tall in order to make it worth it.
 
The TTC building itself would be a great place to put in a taller building. But I agree, this is a great idea to build over the yards, although I would imagine that building over it would be pretty expensive, so the buildings would need to be pretty tall in order to make it worth it.

What is the difference doing this and doing the Hudson Yard Project in NYC??

It must be the NIMBY's.

Building over this yard has been on the books since the 70's that I know of and could be earlier than this.
 
Well that expert panel is recommending LRT's are the way to go on Sheppard. The report is to be released tomorrow. They are also recommending tolls to fund future projects. Council better get their act together and make a decision on Mar 21. The provincial budget is coming down Mar 21 and there are infrastructure projects that will be cancelled or put on hold according to minister of finance.
 
Last edited:
Graphic Matt linked to a TTC report on comparing options for Sheppard. It still has some issues, but I think it's one of the most interesting presentations to come out of this debate so far. I just wish the PDF included the speaker's notes.

http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2012/cc/bgrd/CC20_1_app3_6.pdf

It's good to see a document which doesn't simply say "the projected demand is within the LRT capacity" but actually recognizes that demand will be higher with a subway. (Page 60)
 
Graphic Matt linked to a TTC report on comparing options for Sheppard. It still has some issues, but I think it's one of the most interesting presentations to come out of this debate so far. I just wish the PDF included the speaker's notes.

http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2012/cc/bgrd/CC20_1_app3_6.pdf


It's good to see a document which doesn't simply say "the projected demand is within the LRT capacity" but actually recognizes that demand will be higher with a subway. (Page 60)

Is it possible that according to that report that York pop is expected to grow 93%, Peel 54%, Halton 52% and Toronto only 19% by 2031? Considering the Employment figures for North York and Scarborough have been way off from what was projected.
 
Its funny that if you look at the scoring grid (Table 15, page 41), and take away the financial indicators, the LRT still wins hands down.

I think these experts were a little too biased.

You can call it what every you want and split numbers tell the cows come home, Sheppard cannot support a subway for 50 years and this includes STC.

Unless the residents of Scarborough are willing to pay an extra $2,000 yearly in taxes to build and operate the line, not going to happen. I will lay dollars to donuts that if a formal vote was held for the residents north of STC on paying for this lines, it will loose hand down.

As for the rest of the city helping to pay for this line, they will be looking at covering their cost for their lines in their areas.

Even if you went out and held a referendum not only for this line, but others city wide, you are looking at 12-18 months to come up with a referendum that people will understand what they are approving or rejecting for this master transit plan.

Even if you built 1km of the line per year, you will not be ridding the line until 2025 at the earliest.

The DRL is more important than this line follow by the Yonge extension to Steeles and the Bloor line to Cloverdale. I would have said the Danforth extension to STC, but its an extra cost at this time with the SRT being converted to LRT, as well running to the west side of the city.

Employment centers is really lacking for this line and only have to go over to VP & Consumer Rd area to see empty buildings there now. Yonge is going out strip this line for everything north of Sheppard.

I could never understand the idea of building this line back in 90's in the first place and nothing has change my mind since then, other than there will be one there in a 100 years or less.

As long as you keep building residential units with 1.3 to 2.7 cars each, not going to get people out of their cars. Maybe once gas gets to $5/lt with 7/24 gridlock.
 
They need to start building houses on 7.5 (25 feet) lots. No garages or garage in the back (like in the older part of the city).
 
Its funny that if you look at the scoring grid (Table 15, page 41), and take away the financial indicators, the LRT still wins hands down.

I think these experts were a little too biased.

I read the report, and also find it biased, at least when comparing the LRT option with the Hybrid option:

1). They used $1.0 billion for the LRT option cost, whereas the number from 2009-2010 documents is $1.1 billion. It looks like a small difference, but it matters when the Hybrid alternative is at $1.5 - $1.8 billion.

2) Why do they assume that the subway extension in the Hybrid option is 2.7 km long (page 12), when the distance between Don Mills and Vic Park is only 2 km? Even if they include longer tail tracks at the Vic Park terminus, do those tail tracks have to be 700 m long?

3) Somehow, the Hybrid option ranks below LRT on:

Network Connectivity (LRT 4.71; Hybrid 3.29)
Level of Service (LRT 4.14; Hybrid 3.29)
Equity and Accessibility (LRT 4.57; Hybrid 3.14)

How is it possible, is anyone's guess. The Hybrid option would have exactly same list of stops and same network connections as the LRT; just compare Figure 1 with Figure 3.
 

Back
Top