Sheppard Line 4 Subway Extension (Proposed)

[Hopkins123]

The Sheppard line is a suburban feeder line. It doesn't need stops every 1km unless justified by current density. Faywood, Senlac and Willowdale all do not have enough density currently or planned to justify a station. There is no food traffic and the 104, 98 bus routes run infrequently and often have less than a handful of people on them. I'm surprised the 98 hasn't been cancelled. It never has more than a few people on it. It would be cheaper for the TTC to run a minivan service.

Even with the mid-rise developments along Sheppard, the density isn't there. This subway should be used as an express route to get across the city. Eglinton will be faster than the bus once it opens but it will be slower than the Bloor line. If Sheppard connected Sheppard West to Scarborough Centre it would be a quick connection that could make travel across the top of the city very quick in rush hour.

Underground LRT costs more than subways yet the Eglinton Crosstown is getting stop frequency of every 800 metres. Building stations at the midblocks puts less pressure on the Bathurst, Yonge and Bayview stops. And kilometers apart spacing still would more of an express than most segments of other lines we've got. We don't need commuter rail under Sheppard.Even TYSSE is abiding by kilometre apart spacing for Pete's sake.

 

[smallspy]

Underground LRT costs more than subways.....

Says who?

Considering the exact same amount of infrastructure is needed in both cases....

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[rbt]

Says who?

Considering the exact same amount of infrastructure is needed in both cases....

Well, the tunnelling bill would have been a bit higher (more material to move and slightly longer bore time period). Tunnelling Eglinton was around 10% of the total price, so a 10% increase in tunnelling costs would result in a 1% increase in the overall project cost.

However, this assumes everything else is similar like ability to climb a grade. The LRV chosen has cost benefits in that regard (lower average station depth) over the Toronto Rocket though there is no reason why a Toronto Rocket with larger motors couldn't be ordered.


That single above ground station at Leslie more than offsets the added costs of the underground section.

 

[Zach6668]

(Crosstown) LRT stations are a lot smaller than our current subway stations, so presumably that saves money, both capital and maintenance.

 

[rbt]

(Crosstown) LRT stations are a lot smaller than our current subway stations, so presumably that saves money, both capital and maintenance.

Station length has to do with maximum train length, and that's very independent of whether it's LRT or high-floor metro stock (like Toronto Rockets). Both come in a huge variety of lengths.

That said, Eglinton trains (and therefore the platforms) aren't all that short. Eglinton is designed for 90m long trains which is between the 4-car Sheppard trains and 6-car Yonge trains in size.

 

[coffey1]

The Sheppard line is a suburban feeder line. It doesn't need stops every 1km unless justified by current density. Faywood, Senlac and Willowdale all do not have enough density currently or planned to justify a station. There is no food traffic and the 104, 98 bus routes run infrequently and often have less than a handful of people on them. I'm surprised the 98 hasn't been cancelled. It never has more than a few people on it. It would be cheaper for the TTC to run a minivan service.

Even with the mid-rise developments along Sheppard, the density isn't there. This subway should be used as an express route to get across the city. Eglinton will be faster than the bus once it opens but it will be slower than the Bloor line. If Sheppard connected Sheppard West to Scarborough Centre it would be a quick connection that could make travel across the top of the city very quick in rush hour.

Its not just about density along the route well atleast was never an issue before. If we are going to have this discussion lets open it right up to start removing current stops to increase speed. Many of the stops whether its 10K or 30k per day down the road provide better convince and access. And I can get behind that if we do it across the board.

If we can project out that a stations growth 40 years based on development and have a measure that says it needs to have estimate ridership of 20K within 40 years after being built otherwise it should be scrapped. And we should also review and scrap those existing stations which currently have "failed" this metric. That will certainly help with the rapid issue that so important to the already fairly populated suburbs.

Bye Bye Summerhill, Glencairne, Rosedale, High Park, Dupont etc.....

Lets not change the rules to save coin in the pockets of those that have subway service at the expense of other key Toronto commuters. If quick, fast and maximum cost savings is the name of the game than the existing network needs to be modified

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Lets not change the rules to save coin in the pockets of those that have subway service at the expense of other key Toronto commuters. If quick, fast and maximum cost savings is the name of the game than the existing network needs to be modified

If you want to play this game, you should try having stations built at the same cost, inflated to present value. I highly doubt you can get a Rosedale priced station built - and if the line was built today, you probably wouldn't put two stations between St. Clair and Yonge/Bloor either - just look at the spacing for DRL.

Furthermore if you want to talk about fairness - Yonge was paid by plebiscite all the way to Eglinton by the then old city. They put their skin in the game.

AoD

 

[aquateam]

Its not just about density along the route well atleast was never an issue before. If we are going to have this discussion lets open it right up to start removing current stops to increase speed. Many of the stops whether its 10K or 30k per day down the road provide better convince and access. And I can get behind that if we do it across the board.

If we can project out that a stations growth 40 years based on development and have a measure that says it needs to have estimate ridership of 20K within 40 years after being built otherwise it should be scrapped. And we should also review and scrap those existing stations which currently have "failed" this metric. That will certainly help with the rapid issue that so important to the already fairly populated suburbs.

Bye Bye Summerhill, Glencairne, Rosedale, High Park, Dupont etc.....

Lets not change the rules to save coin in the pockets of those that have subway service at the expense of other key Toronto commuters. If quick, fast and maximum cost savings is the name of the game than the existing network needs to be modified

According to TTC statistics, the worst performing stations are:

70 Leslie 5 489
71 McCowan 4 677
72 Midland 2 886
73 Bessarion 2 533
74 Ellesmere 1 190
Which are all on the SRT or Sheppard line.

Compared to:
68 Summerhill 5 876
69 Glencairn 5 501
66 Rosedale 6 993
58 High Park 11 423
55 Dupont 14 553

If you want to play this game, you should try having stations built at the same cost, inflated to present value. I highly doubt you can get a Rosedale priced station built - and if the line was built today, you probably wouldn't put a station there either.

Furthermore if you want to talk about fairness - Yonge was paid by plebiscite all the way to Eglinton by the then old city. They put their skin in the game.

AoD

Another thing worth pointing out, when the Bloor-Danforth line was constructed, those areas were mostly more densely populated than they are today. There has been widespread depopulation of the Old City of Toronto since the 1950s (except for the southern core).

 

[coffey1]

According to TTC statistics, the worst performing stations are:

70 Leslie 5 489
71 McCowan 4 677
72 Midland 2 886
73 Bessarion 2 533
74 Ellesmere 1 190
Which are all on the SRT or Sheppard line.

Compared to:
68 Summerhill 5 876
69 Glencairn 5 501
66 Rosedale 6 993
58 High Park 11 423
55 Dupont 14 553



Another thing worth pointing out, when the Bloor-Danforth line was constructed, those areas were mostly more densely populated than they are today. There has been widespread depopulation of the Old City of Toronto since the 1950s (except for the southern core).

The SRT line is a complete POS most avoid unless you have to. Along with the crap technology & route its stop locations are absurd. Its not even a comparable whatsoever.

Build subway stops at Midland, Lawrence & Ellesmere in locations which are not constructed in an industrial wasteland rail corridor without a garbage technology that is integrated seamlessly & then see what the numbers are in 40 years.

Then you'd have something to compare

Furthermore if you want to talk about fairness - Yonge was paid by plebiscite all the way to Eglinton by the then old city. They put their skin in the game.

AoD

The City in all areas is much much different now. And yes "Skin in the game" is BIGGEST issue. Time to pay up for all Toronto to build a fair network based on today's costs.

So instead of skin we attempt to minimize each others growth by cutting corners, requesting removal of stops & simply cause further Political chaos. Its far overdue & the real problem at hand....

Its time to design & build a well connected public transit network connecting the entire City and deal with the associated costs.. Either way it cost a boatload no reason to keep fighting over scraps instead of dealing with reality. That'll get us nowhere, just as it always has.

 

[mdrejhon]

IMHO, I think we need to wait till the fate of the Scarborough RT before deciding on a Sheppard East RT...

A $3.2 billion subway STOP, if it is going to be built, might actually be more economically beneficial (better taxpayer return, turning lemonade into lemons) to keep the TBM's running towards Sheppard, to connect Sheppard with Danforth, for quicker ridership increases and economic benefits.

It's not as cost efficient as other transit options (e.g. building an LRT) but still seems more efficient long-term-future transit-wise than a $3.2 billion dollar Scarborough STOP...

Whatever is built to replace Scarborough RT, ideally should be extended all the way to the eastern end of the Sheppard subway. This potentially creates bidirectional peak commuter flow, and may be able to double ridership (roughly, approximately-ish) -- are there any studies on ridership increases of connecting Sheppard and Danforth as a contiguous subway?

Obviously, I do think that DRL needs to go first

 

[lead82]

Its not just about density along the route well atleast was never an issue before. If we are going to have this discussion lets open it right up to start removing current stops to increase speed. Many of the stops whether its 10K or 30k per day down the road provide better convince and access. And I can get behind that if we do it across the board.

If we can project out that a stations growth 40 years based on development and have a measure that says it needs to have estimate ridership of 20K within 40 years after being built otherwise it should be scrapped. And we should also review and scrap those existing stations which currently have "failed" this metric. That will certainly help with the rapid issue that so important to the already fairly populated suburbs.

Bye Bye Summerhill, Glencairne, Rosedale, High Park, Dupont etc.....

Lets not change the rules to save coin in the pockets of those that have subway service at the expense of other key Toronto commuters. If quick, fast and maximum cost savings is the name of the game than the existing network needs to be modified

As others have said if hose stations were proposed today they would not have been built. The lowest used stations today are on Sheppard. Leslie is a good example. It's surrounded by huge new condo development but gets no usage. Neither does Bessarion. It makes no sense to build stations for less than 5-6K users a day. Unless Sheppard is zoned to have the density as similar as Yonge, then one stops have to be cut. You could certainly build the line flat there to support adding them later if situation changes but why spend hundreds of millions on fancy stations that will need to be maintained for no one.

The Spadina will suffer the same fate. Downsview Park, and 407 will be ghost towns. 407 would get more users from GO but not significant. Downsview park will definitely be a ghost town, and with the York U riders gone, Sheppard West will also be quite empty of riders.

My point is that Toronto suburbs just don't need high frequency stops, they need speed of travel. If we are building underground, the lines need to connect to major travel nodes like York U or to intersect subway lines for redundancy in the network.

Otherwise just built LRT above ground wit 800m-1km replace the busy bus routes in the former suburbs.

 

[coffey1]

As others have said if hose stations were proposed today they would not have been built. The lowest used stations today are on Sheppard. Leslie is a good example. It's surrounded by huge new condo development but gets no usage. Neither does Bessarion. It makes no sense to build stations for less than 5-6K users a day. Unless Sheppard is zoned to have the density as similar as Yonge, then one stops have to be cut. You could certainly build the line flat there to support adding them later if situation changes but why spend hundreds of millions on fancy stations that will need to be maintained for no one.

The Spadina will suffer the same fate. Downsview Park, and 407 will be ghost towns. 407 would get more users from GO but not significant. Downsview park will definitely be a ghost town, and with the York U riders gone, Sheppard West will also be quite empty of riders.

My point is that Toronto suburbs just don't need high frequency stops, they need speed of travel. If we are building underground, the lines need to connect to major travel nodes like York U or to intersect subway lines for redundancy in the network.

Otherwise just built LRT above ground wit 800m-1km replace the busy bus routes in the former suburbs.

As someone with a grueling long as commute I can see the case for less stops but I also see a benefit to the 5-10K per who would have a line running by . My issue with this model some are trying to create is the same should be applied to the existing network and we should stop maintaining these stops under 15K.

You say they wouldn't be built today. So time to stop save time & coin for those who dont have these luxury's, have long commuted & play by similar rules. Id be OK with either decision to cut or build on a similar ridership model. Not comparing the current ridership either. The ridership when those lines were built because that was the model.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

As someone with a grueling long as commute I can see the case for less stops but I also see a benefit to the 5-10K per who would have a line running by . My issue with this model some are trying to create is the same should be applied to the existing network and we should stop maintaining these stops under 15K.

You say they wouldn't be built today. So time to stop save time & coin for those who dont have these luxury's, have long commuted & play by similar rules. Id be OK with either decision to cut or build on a similar ridership model. Not comparing the current ridership either. The ridership when those lines were built because that was the model.

Each station stop is 30s - closing stations won't change an iota - and doing so for what's built in the name of "fairness" is downright odd. And why 15K/d as a threshold? You are pulling a number out from nowhere as your justification and then claim it is "fairness".

You want fairness? Let's talk about assessed property taxes, overall density, level of transit usage - how come that never gets mentioned? Stop counts are never about fairness - it's about what make sense in the setting. As to skin in the game - show me the willingness to take on revenue tools by area councillors?

PS - you're not the only one with a grueling commute.

AoD

 

[coffey1]

Each station stop is 30s - closing stations won't change an iota - and doing so for what's built in the name of "fairness" is downright odd. And why 15K/d as a threshold? You are pulling a number out from nowhere as your justification and then claim it is "fairness".

You want fairness? Let's talk about assessed property taxes, overall density, level of transit usage - how come that never gets mentioned? Stop counts are never about fairness - it's about what make sense in the setting. As to skin in the game - show me the willingness to take on revenue tools by area councillors?

PS - you're not the only one with a grueling commute.

AoD

You right we all have transit issues in this City. Mine is insanity with multiple modes but lets not get into that debate. Im sure its sucks on your end too. You've also changed the topic from stop equity back to revenue. But since you went here... lets go.

Tory is hinting he is going at revenue tools shortly. I truly hope he can stay firm on this. But at the end of the day, a bulk of Toronto's infrastructure needs should come from raised property taxes. Just like the SSE did under the " Ford admin". Car taxes will not be enough & kinda unfair to attack solely when outside comutters have little decent options. Im Ok with the tolls but also we adequate property tax increases. Im not OK with hacking in a separate network, poor route designs, or reducing stop in Scarborough. The City will hardly notice and the cost of living increase is minimal to other factors driving the cost of living up. People will still flock here for investment. If not even more and more spread out with better transit.

I already said in an earlier post those ridership numbers above were just for example. You tell me what the NEW threshold is for a stop and Ill want to see the same measure taken against the current subway stops. We can all pull numbers out of our ass to save money. But all I want to see a an integrated network based on whats existing or changes made to the existing to integrate and expand. The cost to do so are the costs. Its reality. Time to shut up an pay. Showing examples of how the people of old Toronto paid all by themselves when the suburban farmers at that time didnt help is useless in today's City. But if there is a radius of homes around the DRL that would like to pay all of the City's portion so be it. Im joking and quick frankly thats just absurd. We have way to many needs to keep beating each other around Politically when the reality is we have a lack of funds and political preparation.

I think we both I agree its time full the whole City to stop bickering with limited funds and face reality that this is expensive no matter what. In a City that makes so many people rich like Toronto there is no reason to cut corners. Do it right. There is alot of merit to having stops even in lower ridership locations. They cant all be 40K plus, nor should they. But if the line goes by (especially on surface routes) give then a stop. In the long run its worth every penny to provide convince to the 5-15k along the way.

If Tory fails to increase taxes we are doomed. Things will get worse and punting back between downtown and suburban polarizing mayors will keep the wheels to nowhere spinning. Based on how Tory took on the Left council and City media attacks Im hopeful under this admin we can start moving forward in the direction we should have been all along for taxes & integration. He likely take on a new attack from the "anti tax" Right wing media in this City but I hope hell stand just as firm and take the abuse for the better of the City

 

[BurlOak]

I don't see revenue tools adding much. They have already maxed out advertising and underground kiosk stores. Maybe they can allow some development on top of existing stations to collect additional funds, although this has already been done for the expensive downtown.

What's left is raising taxes. But this is very difficult for governments that have a reputation for wasting money. I think nothing of substance will be done until after the next round of elections.