News   May 27, 2024
Quayside Resubmission Refines Timber House and Block 2 Plans
 1.2K     0 
News   May 27, 2024
Clad and Glazed, 666 Spadina Avenue Tops Off
 1K     1 
News   May 27, 2024
Toronto Unveils the David Crombie Park Redesign
 5.3K     3 

Sheppard Line 4 Subway Extension (Proposed)

Even if the line does hit capacity, tunneling the eastern section at great expense seems to be the nuclear option. I would not expect this to happen before 2060, even if it was necessary. We've been dragging our knuckles on the DRL for about 50 years, there is no way I can see the eastern crosstown being in any way considered a priority.

Surely buying more cars (3 car trains every 2 minutes would offer an immense increase capacity over 2 car trains running every 5 minutes) would end up working out to be cheaper than tunneling another 8 km.

What is the maximum length of trains that can fit in the underground stations, and can they be easily expanded through knockdown walls?
 
nfitz said:
Oh ... perhaps because there is no 934 currently! I'm surprised that hasn't been restored with major construction on Eglinton long gone.

So it is only 34A during peak through the Golden Mile (or anywhere east of Wynford Drive in North York). I see every 9 minutes (6⅔ buses an hour) in AM peak and every 7½ minutes (8 buses an hour) in PM peak. A capacity of 350 to 400 per hour.

What's your source for every 3'30"? (still only about 17 buses an hour - about 875 passengers an hour).
Click to expand...

I used Next Bus, and looked at the times at the stop at Swift Drive, they were, 3, and 4, and 7.
 
Can I point out to everyone at this juncture that this is the Sheppard subway thread, not the ECLRT thread.

Tangents happen, and I'm as guilty as the next person, but this is one I've tried to reel in for a bit..........

****

To (hopefully) put a finishing note on the above, I was not suggesting at any point that the ECLRT would be or should be buried at the eastern end in the next 5, 10 or 15 years. The point was merely that it will be necessary based on the densities making their way through the planning process.

I'm agnostic. I'd be happy to see far less density happen, and that solves the problem.

I'm also content with a number of other '1/2 and 1/2' solutions.

My point was merely that we ought not to grossly under-build based on this city's current tendency as seen in the portlands thread to just chuck everything in the bin and randomly up the density by 50% after careful planning for infrastructure supporting 1/3 less than that.

Enough information is public to see the trend, the habit and the consequences.

But I'm fortunate enough to have a peak behind the curtain and can see a much bigger pipeline than is yet widely known.

Which brings this back to the thread at hand...........Sheppard..........

Density is set to spike, substantially, and under-building would be profoundly unwise, in my opinion.

I'm an appreciator of R.C. Harris, the City of Toronto Planner from the early 20thC.

Of note, among his legacies, he insisted the water treatment plant that now bears his name, should have capacity to serve 800,000 residents........at a time when the City of Toronto and any early suburbs was under 300,000.

He likewise championed that the Bloor Viaduct should accommodate a future subway; I'd like to point out, that when he did this...........Danforth was a dirt road.

Take a moment to consider, he designed for a subway, 50 years before one would operate on that route.

I have a bias towards this type of thinking, pro-active, not reactive.
 
Last edited:

I found this to help us talk numbers.

Using this, I looked at what routes either cross or follow the section between the existing subway and the future McCowan station. The blank ones I did not see them listed.

85 19042
985B 11258

24B
157
159B
157A

24 19665
58
17 8632
43B
57 6881
21C

180
129 8269
131 4672
169 1342

Is that enough for a subway? If not, what is the threshold?
 
T3G said:
What is the maximum length of trains that can fit in the underground stations, and can they be easily expanded through knockdown walls?
Click to expand...

I believe, the underground stations are easily expandable to 3 cars. Which might be good enough for a long time, if not forever.

The actual stations are even longer, but the space beyond the 3-car length is used for some equipment. I don't know if that equipment can be squeezed more tightly to make room for trains longer than 3-car.
 
Islington Express Bus said:
I thought the underground stations on Eglinton were built for 3 cars right now but with knockout walls to expand to 4 cars.
Click to expand...
One car is what- 20m long? I think the typical proposed stations for Eglinton were designed to provide a 60m platform and 30m reserved before service areas.

I can’t confirm they actually followed through with that since this is one of the least transparent public project developments in the digital age.
 
Islington Express Bus said:
I thought the underground stations on Eglinton were built for 3 cars right now but with knockout walls to expand to 4 cars.
Click to expand...
No, they are built for 3 cars, with no expansion. Or not much - perhaps they can handle the slightly longer 2-car Finch trains?

reinventingthewheel said:
One car is what- 20m long? I think the typical proposed stations for Eglinton were designed to provide a 60m platform and 30m reserved before service areas.
Click to expand...
Each car is 30 metres long. The entire 90-metre platform is fully built out.

I forget the Finch West car length - 48 metres? Something like that. If so, the Finch West stations have 96-metre platforms - allowing for a maximum of 2-car trains. Which is still longer than the current Line 4 configuration.

And much longer than lines like the Canada Line subway in Vancouver - with 40-metre platforms; though an expensive expansion could in theory bring them to 50 metres. Though that sounds increasingly unlikely and expensive every time I hear something.
 
nfitz said:
No, they are built for 3 cars, with no expansion. Or not much - perhaps they can handle the slightly longer 2-car Finch trains?

Each car is 30 metres long. The entire 90-metre platform is fully built out.

I forget the Finch West car length - 48 metres? Something like that. If so, the Finch West stations have 96-metre platforms - allowing for a maximum of 2-car trains. Which is still longer than the current Line 4 configuration.

And much longer than lines like the Canada Line subway in Vancouver - with 40-metre platforms; though an expensive expansion could in theory bring them to 50 metres. Though that sounds increasingly unlikely and expensive every time I hear something.
Click to expand...
Additionally, there is also flexibility (when it comes to fleet replacement) to acquire longer vehicles, that will allow for the space between trains and extra cabs to be eliminated.
 
While longer vehicles could be acquired (or the Flexities could be expanded with drop in modules, as was done with Alstom Citadis in Dublin) one has to bear in mind the layout of storage tracks and the lifting jacks in the MSF.
 
dowlingm said:
While longer vehicles could be acquired (or the Flexities could be expanded with drop in modules, as was done with Alstom Citadis in Dublin) one has to bear in mind the layout of storage tracks and the lifting jacks in the MSF.
Click to expand...
Hopefully they could handle the extra metre or two required to close the gap.
 
nfitz said:
Hopefully they could handle the extra metre or two required to close the gap.
Click to expand...
Worst case you would take the approach of the German walk-though (high floor) LRVs, splitting them into mechanically independent vehicles that just happen to have an open gangway on one end.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top