Sheppard Line 4 Subway Extension (Proposed)

[Leo_Chan]

"Mostly" in North York. However, there is an eastern overflow into Scarborough.

See link for "ConsumersNext" for Consumers Road Business Park.

This is true, but a Consumers Station on the Sheppard/Relief Line would more likely be at Sheppard/Consumers rather than Consumers/Victoria Park, therefore in North York.

 

[W. K. Lis]

This is true, but a Consumers Station on the Sheppard/Relief Line would more likely be at Sheppard/Consumers rather than Consumers/Victoria Park, therefore in North York.

The main arterial roads would be position a station at Victoria Park and Sheppard to join with both Line 4 Sheppard and the Relief Line, for better or worse, for richer or poorer, .... Consumers Road wouldn't warrant a station since the area is "suburbia".

 

[Leo_Chan]

The main arterial roads would be position a station at Victoria Park and Sheppard to join with both Line 4 Sheppard and the Relief Line, for better or worse, for richer or poorer, .... Consumers Road wouldn't warrant a station since the area is "suburbia".

Oh, so a 2-stop Sheppard East Subway Extension would more likely be a 1-stop?

 

[TransitBart]

Oh, so a 2-stop Sheppard East Subway Extension would more likely be a 1-stop?

Everyone realizes that the only place this is actually being discussed in the known universe is in this room, right? I am uncertain we are in a position to debate the likelihood of anything.

 

[drum118]

The main arterial roads would be position a station at Victoria Park and Sheppard to join with both Line 4 Sheppard and the Relief Line, for better or worse, for richer or poorer, .... Consumers Road wouldn't warrant a station since the area is "suburbia".

Thats a very dumb idea, considering what been built at Consumers Rd today and plan down the road.

 

[UD2]

The idea isn't to serve North York or Scarb. It is to serve the second largest employment and office zoned area in Toronto.

The idea that infrastructure should be built to serve meaningless expired city boundries that no longer exists is that exact thing that's preventing us from building anything useful in this city.

 

[M II A II R II K]

They can skip over Warden and Birchmount stations with the option of adding them in later if need be. It can be Consumers, VP, Agincourt, Progress, then SCC.

 

[11th]

They can skip over Warden and Birchmount stations with the option of adding them in later if need be. It can be Consumers, VP, Agincourt, Progress, then SCC.

68 Warden is a good feeder route. You'll lose the Bridletowne and Bamburgh clusters riders by skipping the station.

 

[M II A II R II K]

Unless spurs of those busses headed to the VP station.

 

[FW36]

I think it would be reasonable to extend the line west and have a station at Bathurst and Sheppard west

East it should be extended to consumers rd than Victoria park

I would not extend the line further unless ridership would increase

from Victoria Park, an express bus can be used with stops at major intersections only
the stops would be
1.victoria park
2.Pharmacy Ave
3.Warden Ave
4.Birchmount Rd
5.Kenedy Rd
6.Midland Ave
7.Brimley Rd
8.McCowen Rd
9.The Scarborough Town Centre

 

[kEiThZ]

What I find most confusing is that our illustrious Premier wants this intersection:

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.7898249,-79.2587782,3a,75y,191.31h,108.57t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sxq-U5KIwv51uDRMIJqHfcA!2e0!6s//geo3.ggpht.com/cbk?panoid=xq-U5KIwv51uDRMIJqHfcA&output=thumbnail&cb_client=maps_sv.tactile.gps&thumb=2&w=203&h=100&yaw=277.16342&pitch=0&thumbfov=100!7i13312!8i6656

to be served by two subway lines.

I never understand this kind of thinking.

1) What's there now can be replaced.

2) Lines often will intersect somewhere. Why do they always have to be at major centres? Seems to me this is a function of Toronto not having a lot of transit so that interchange stations are accorded massive importance.

3) If the province is ponying up most of the capital cost, why should people care? That seemed to be the view when a subway was proposed to a literal green field in Vaughan. What's changed now?

 

[OneCity]

I never understand this kind of thinking.

1) What's there now can be replaced.

2) Lines often will intersect somewhere. Why do they always have to be at major centres? Seems to me this is a function of Toronto not having a lot of transit so that interchange stations are accorded massive importance.

3) If the province is ponying up most of the capital cost, why should people care? That seemed to be the view when a subway was proposed to a literal green field in Vaughan. What's changed now?

As much as Id prefer the BDL subway extended to Markham and Milner instead of McCowan (Sheppard subway could reach anyway) there us a lot of future land to develop at McCowan and Sheppard. Once the land is sold it can be planned as a community and not just piecemeal buildings. The Canadian Tire land alone is massive.

 

[kEiThZ]

As much as Id prefer the BDL subway extended to Markham and Milner instead of McCowan (Sheppard subway could reach anyway) there us a lot of future land to develop at McCowan and Sheppard. Once the land is sold it can be planned as a community and not just piecemeal buildings. The Canadian Tire land alone is massive.

If we're not solely looking at ridership and it's just network building, I don't think there's any justification to go past Agincourt.

And I still argue this entire corridor would be better off with conversion to LRT. So that we can continuous single-seat service from the zoo to Downview, with branches to STC (along McCowan) and Malvern (along the Progress Hydro Corridor). That would do a lot more than any subway would, while still avoiding all the nonsense transfers.

 

[OneCity]

If we're not solely looking at ridership and it's just network building, I don't think there's any justification to go past Agincourt.

And I still argue this entire corridor would be better off with conversion to LRT. So that we can continuous single-seat service from the zoo to Downview, with branches to STC (along McCowan) and Malvern (along the Progress Hydro Corridor). That would do a lot more than any subway would, while still avoiding all the nonsense transfers.

Conversion of the existing stub to LRT would certainly be the best if achievable. Its a complex conversion and that will likely scare off an political support.

I also liked the alignment of dropping down Agincourt and adding an North west stop at SCC. McCowan and Sheppard was my least favorite for the SSE but just because of the other options go thru existing Centres but It still works well for development, and a future LRT or Sheppard subway. Politically I believe Markham/Milner will be connected seamless with either LRT or subway.

 

[44 North]

I'm not a fan but if you must make it an LRT throw in some extended platforms and make it high floor LRT.

Or simply convert to a subway with similar dimensions to what can run on Line 3 (Vancouver has the Innovia 3 with widths at seat height no different than a Flexity Freedom LRV - i.e wider than what's on Line 3 today, but narrower than the TR on Sheppard). Order a TR variant not unlike that. Doing so we can easily utilize the existing Line 4 (5.5km), utilize the existing Line 3 structures between Kennedy and McCowan (2.5km), utilize the EA spec'd corridor from McCowan to Sheppard via Centennial (3km), with the only gap requiring more thorough planning being Don Mills to Kennedy (6km). In other words the majority of the corridor is laid out, with a good chunk of the stations being in place and optimized for high-floor subway vehicles.

Six-car conventional Toronto subways is overkill and stupid since it leaves too many areas unserved, as perfectly exemplified by Lastman's Sheppard boondoggle. And in-median curb platform LRT - although offering great local service and development potential - unfortunately doesn't offer the speed advantage as a subway or neighbouring 401. Something slightly different than a usual subway was effectively the answer for a northern crosstown in the 60s and 70s, and in my eyes could be the answer today.

I generally wouldn't support it per se in that I think our priority should be a sweeping U into DT from Etobicoke/NY in the west to Scarb/NY in the east, not some northerly beltline bypass. However if the focus is Sheppard I think there'd be a lot of merit to it compared with the two extremes we've become used to seeing offered. There's obviously a lot more than two ways of going about this.