Sheppard Line 4 Subway Extension (Proposed)

[44 North]

However, mini-metro should be able to handle much sharper turns than a full-fledged subway, as well as fit into tighter corridors. That might permit cheaper routing choices. At the same time, converting the existing subway tunnel to high-floor mini-metro should be many times cheaper than converting it to low-floor LRT.

Nice map! Google tells me that a "minimetro" is a cable-propelled people mover...is that correct? Or a type of car, which is a more realistic future transportation choice for Scarborough than a Sheppard Subway extension.

Some of my postings earlier today brought me to reread about the GO ALRT program, which IMO is the single-largest missed transportation opportunity for the GTA. Although its crosstown route through northern Toronto using the Finch hydro corridor was viewed as costly and difficult, I still think the plan has legs. Even if it were to be a large combination of trenched and cut/cover along the corridor, it'd still come in as way cheaper track-for-track than any plan to extend the Sheppard Subway. Now if there were only some way to use the current Sheppard tunnel as part of this long ago plan, crosstown travel across north Toronto would be a much more promising prospect.

What could've been...

 

[gweed123]

In the end, the GO REX vehicles I'd like to see GO using wouldn't be all that dissimilar from that. An exterior similar to the image above or to the Berlin S-Bahn trains

and with an interior laid out much like this one (also an S-Bahn train, but I believe from Hamburg):

The end result is a hybrid of a current GO car and a subway train. The comfort of a GO car, but the accessibility (meaning the ability to board and de-board quickly) of a subway train.

 

[shivyyz]

LRT will bring more development. Both track-for-track, and overall (because the line is longer). Think about it. Any railed transit allows for upzoning to higher density, whether it's a heavy rail underground subway, or a trolley. An LRT would have more stops, meaning more linear development along the line. A subway has fewer stops, and therefore more nodal development along the line.

The current Sheppard line runs near a highway and what was once swaths of warehouses and greyfield/brownfield. In other words, prime for mammoth development. But don't let the recent high density development along the line fool you into believing the same thing will happen east of Don Mills, because it wouldn't. Current residents wouldn't allow for that level of rezoning, and other than a section between Vic Park and the 404, the neighbourhoods of stable residential/commercial have a street and lot layout that is incongruous to that type of development.

I'm not a big fan of the SELRT, but realistically it would be adequate for well over 50 years. Although Toronto's population is roughly where it was expected 40 years ago, NIMBYism and lack of private interest in Scarborough and North York have pushed that population growth elsewhere across the city (downtown, predominantly). It's a bit flawed to project high growth/employment around North York City Centre and Scarb Town Centre when the last thirty years have shown that not to be the case. There'd be development, but not anything that couldn't arise anywhere else across TO that's rezoned as such.

I think the nodal approach with fewer stops would be excellent for Sheppard East since many passengers are trying to get to STC or line 1. LRT is already at a speed disadvantage and having more stops combined with many involuntary stops (traffic lights) while covering the same distance as the parallel Bloor line would just make it feel like another bus or St Clair streetcar. As condo prices and density along Yonge and the core continue to increase, living along the (hypothetical) Sheppard subway becomes an attractive alternative.

So the LRT is sufficient for 50 years? That's great news! I guess we shouldn't build a subway then, since an LRT can handle ridership for 50 years, and if we built a subway now, it would be underused until the mid 2060's.

In the year 2064, when the Leafs finally win a Stanley Cup, ending a 200 year drought, and Augustus Ford, ancestor of Rob Ford is caught by a miniature surveillance drone swarm smoking crack, we can build a subway to replace the LRT. Similar to how both Yonge and Bloor had streetcars replaced by subways when the streetcar lines were over capacity.

But what am I thinking, by then we'll have aerial drones to take us everywhere, we won't need public transit.

All our subway lines were underused when they were first constructed and its better and cheaper to build when and where there are less residents to piss off and inconvenience and there is less existing infrastructure that needs to be reconfigured. It is my belief that if you make other areas as convenient and as accessible as Yonge or Bloor street people will move to them. Look at Keele and Steeles, ground is begging to be broken there for condos in anticipation of the U/S extension.

And where does the money come from? For $1 billion we get an LRT to go 12 km to Morningside. A subway there instead would be over $4 billion, but with very little ridership compared to the existing Sheppard subway.

It costs more upfront but it lasts exponentially longer and saves countless hours of passengers time and yes, I know this concept doesnt sit well with many Torontonians who are too risk adverse to support any major or radical changes. Ridership would increase if there were more places you could go on the line and development would also increase since there would be more reasons to live along Sheppard East.

Of course, you could accomplish that same thing by building the LRT and the converting the Sheppard Subway to run LRT trains. It's way under the max capacity for a subway right now, and it's even not at it's full original design capacity (it's running 4 car trains when it was designed for 6). 3 car LRT trains like the ones being proposed for Eglinton would be the perfect solution. You end up with a northern crosstown line that still has all the continuity of a completed Sheppard Subway, but without the massive capital price tag and on-going massive operational deficits that would accompany it.

The conversion option may seem unpopular now, but once the Eglinton LRT opens and people see how smoothly the line transitions from tunnelled to surface, tunes will change, and people will be wanting the same thing on Sheppard.

Actually they are running at 5 cars on the Sheppard trains and its been like that since the line first opened. I really dont mind the idea of an underground LRT, hell! I dont even mind the idea of underground bus tunnels if it meant faster transit and less squabbling at city hall. One of my thoughts behind keeping the line as an actual subway is that it could bring about more clever and alternative options for routing trains in the future.

For example when the Eastbound Sheppard train reaches the Bloor line at McCowan it could continue South and then West on the Bloor line before turning South on the DRL and when it arrives at Queen it goes the other way.

If we retooled the junctions at the Yonge line we could effectively have ring lines/trains that never officially terminate.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

In my opinion, the relation between the two subway projects is reverse: the approval of Danforth extension eliminates any chance that Sheppard extension will be approved within the next 10 years.

This is partly due to both subways competing for same riders; but mostly, due to the simple fact that councilors and MPPs from boroughs located outside Scarborough, would rather push for transit improvements in their boroughs.

Only some people in Scarborough don't work downtown. They work in Scarborough and in Markham and Richmond Hill, some in NYCC as well. Both subways would serve different parts. The problem is the ridership from the different parts enough?

 

[ehlow]

All our subway lines were underused when they were first constructed and its better and cheaper to build when and where there are less residents to piss off and inconvenience and there is less existing infrastructure that needs to be reconfigured. It is my belief that if you make other areas as convenient and as accessible as Yonge or Bloor street people will move to them. Look at Keele and Steeles, ground is begging to be broken there for condos in anticipation of the U/S extension.

And why should we built a subway on Sheppard East now that will be under-used for decades when we could build the DRL or Yonge north extension. DRL phase 1, 2 and 3 would all be much better used and much more urgent than a subway on Sheppard East.

Why should we build a subway on Sheppard which will be relatively empty for decades, vs one near King st downtown which will be very well used immediately and relieve the overcrowded streetcars?

There are so many subway routes I would put ahead of Sheppard East.

 

[nfitz]

It costs more upfront but it lasts exponentially longer...

In what possible way do subways last exponentially longer? Which exponent? 2? So streetcar track lasts 20 years and subway track lasts 400 years?

I think we've seen on the Yonge subway, the tunnel segments north of Eglinton opened only 40 years ago, how well that's going.

Subways still require maintenance. As do the large stations. How much does annual maintenance costs on Leslie station compared to a surface stop? Even basics like cleaning! And then there's these expectations about having staff in stations.

It's a massive waste of money. There may be a case of extending it a bit further to Victoria Park, to get it past the bottleneck at the 404 (same reason a Danforth subway should cross to Sheppard instead stopping it at Scarborough Centre). But the ridership estimates once you hit Scarborough, east of Victoria Park are abysmal.

There's a better case in the west, because a relatively short line provides connection to the Spadina line, and most importantly, connectivity into Wilson yard. But the estimated ridership to the west is still pathetic, lower than the existing piece between Yonge and Don Mills.

Ridership would increase if there were more places you could go on the line and development would also increase since there would be more reasons to live along Sheppard East.

And yet there's been relatively little development on Danforth between Yonge and Woodbine in the 50 years since that line started construction. Sure there would be some, but that was factored into the future estimated ridership, that was so low.

Actually they are running at 5 cars on the Sheppard trains and its been like that since the line first opened.

No, it's 4 cars.

It's amusing that the graphic you are using is from the Ford campaign. I'm not sure that provides much credibility to the idea!

Though connecting Sheppard to Danforth is interesting. Though I think further up the thread, or in another I suggest the same. And in the west I suggested connecting the existing Spadina line to the Sheppard line through Downsview and down Sheppard West.

One subway line for the entire city. However, I was being humorous!

 

[M II A II R II K]

They don't talk about extending the subway entirely outside to save money.

 

[ssiguy2]

Convertin the Stubway to LRT is a waste of time and will shut down the system for years. Not only would that add time to people's commute but would be havoc on the roads above. Also, to carry the equivalent number of passengers by bus would be expensive and more importantly would require a huge number of buses that would have to come from other areas of the city. That would mean bleeding service from the rest of the system.

Eventually a line to STC may be desireable and even necessary but the priority must be the connection between Yonge and Spadina. LRT is not possible as they would have to build an entire new garage/maintenance centre for that little segment.

Right now the Sheppard corridor is a series of endless transfers and a Yone/Spadina ext would get rid of one of the main ones. Also I think people are underestimating the increase in ridership that will result when Spadina is finished. Right now it is just as fast to take the Finch bus from York U than it is to go all the way to Yonge & Dundas just to ride a little 6 km route. God knows Finch is more desirable as at least you don't have to go thru the pain in the ass of all the endless transfers. With a Sheppard ext that would no longer be the case.

 

[gweed123]

Convertin the Stubway to LRT is a waste of time and will shut down the system for years. Not only would that add time to people's commute but would be havoc on the roads above. Also, to carry the equivalent number of passengers by bus would be expensive and more importantly would require a huge number of buses that would have to come from other areas of the city. That would mean bleeding service from the rest of the system.

Why do you assume that it would take years of the subway being shut down? Here's how you can convert it while still keeping it open as long as possible:

1) Shorten the trains down to pairs, instead of 4 cars, but double the frequency (keeps the same capacity, and the Sheppard Subway is running nowhere near it's maximum frequency).
2) Close off half of the length of the platforms, and do construction work to lower them to be accessible to low-floor LRT vehicles.
3) Do overnight installations of the power supply systems necessary for the LRT vehicles (close the subway down from 9pm until 6am or something if needed).
4) Shut the entire subway down over a period of a month or so or a summer to change the track gauge and switch everything over to accommodate the switch to LRT.
5) Reopen the subway using LRT vehicles on the halves of the platforms that are suitable for them.
6) Rebuild the other halves of the platform to match the lower height.
7) Extend the lengths of the trains so that they're they equivalent of the 4 car trains currently being used (3-car LRT vehicles).

That may draw the construction timeline out by a fair bit, but the subway would remain open for the vast majority of that time.

 

[Electrify]

I think the nodal approach with fewer stops would be excellent for Sheppard East since many passengers are trying to get to STC or line 1. LRT is already at a speed disadvantage and having more stops combined with many involuntary stops (traffic lights) while covering the same distance as the parallel Bloor line would just make it feel like another bus or St Clair streetcar. As condo prices and density along Yonge and the core continue to increase, living along the (hypothetical) Sheppard subway becomes an attractive alternative.

Properly designed LRTs tend to have similar stop spacing to a subway, and signal priority to minimize red lights, if not eliminate them. The SELRT will have the latter, but not the former. While these lines will not be streetcars, they definitely are not as rapid as I believe they should be. Still, try taking the Viva Purple from Bayview to Montgomery (just east of Woodbine) to get an idea of how the SELRT will run. Reviewing the video I recorded, it took about 11 minutes to go 4.6km, or an average speed of 25.1km/h. Not too shabby.

 

[Electrify]

I'm tempted to say that for those saying "we want subways" you give them a choice:

1. LRT as planned with construction from 2017-2020
2. Subway when the ridership warrants it and after several other subway/transit projects, at least 20-30 years later.

Note that 2 is effectively nothing.

If they say they prefer nothing as some did in that article, then the funds can be re-distributed to more urgent matters. Those people can be happy that they might get a subway 20-30 years or even longer from now.

Although, the sad thing is the people saying they'd prefer nothing over an LRT are likely people who never use transit, and those who do use transit in Scarborough would be continuing to use slow & low capacity buses that get stuck in traffic.

I say if they really, really want subways, we simply elevate the line. Perhaps if the option is to have an efficient surface line versus a giant concrete viaduct, the NIMBYs might change their tune.

(Full disclosure: I'm actually in support of els, and while controversial, would be in favour of such a line for the DRL)

 

[rbt]

That may draw the construction timeline out by a fair bit, but the subway would remain open for the vast majority of that time.

One tricky component might be changing the ceiling tunnel height in some places. Although a half-dozen weekend outages should be able to take care of that.

IIRC, the bored tunnel is tall enough but the cut&cover sections *may* be too low. I believe this change is reflected in the cost.

 

[44 North]

I say if they really, really want subways, we simply elevate the line. Perhaps if the option is to have an efficient surface line versus a giant concrete viaduct, the NIMBYs might change their tune.

(Full disclosure: I'm actually in support of els, and while controversial, would be in favour of such a line for the DRL)

Agreed. I think this should be the compromise given to many resients: in-median, or elevated.

Although I don't favour elevating our subway rolling stock above streets or near any residents. The viaduct would be too wide, and the trains themselves are mammoth. So I guess in this instance, the Sheppard Stub should be converted to LRT to serve as a crosstown line.

 

[ehlow]

Agreed. I think this should be the compromise given to many resients: in-median, or elevated.

Although I don't favour elevating our subway rolling stock above streets or near any residents. The viaduct would be too wide, and the trains themselves are mammoth. So I guess in this instance, the Sheppard Stub should be converted to LRT to serve as a crosstown line.

Although I personally like elevated transit lines: I like the view, I like that you can see the trains and that it's fully grade separated.

I think that many here:
A. Under estimate the cost
B. Over estimate how much people would like it.

It would be a similar situation politically as the Scarborough LRT (which was an elevated line) vs Scarborough subway (danforth ext). The costs will be something like $2.5 billion and subway $3 billion (making these numbers up), and politicians will say "why build elevated when for only 500 million you could have underground".

Other Ford-like politicians will say "Why does downtown get underground transit while Scarborough gets above ground. Downtowners will be in heated comfy stations while Scarborough people freeze their butts off outside".

Also: "world class cities build subways underground". Even though yes, London, NYC, Chicago and Paris all have elevated lines. You know they will say that.

The other thing is, no politician is proposing elevated trains. Maybe if the Eglinton part of SmartTrack happens, it could be elevated, I would be fine with that.

 

[BurlOak]

Also: "world class cities build subways underground". Even though yes, London, NYC, Chicago and Paris all have elevated lines. You know they will say that.

The other thing is, no politician is proposing elevated trains. Maybe if the Eglinton part of SmartTrack happens, it could be elevated, I would be fine with that.

The interesting thing is that the Fords were in favour of elevated transit - remember the Portlands "monorail". Everyone knows that "monorail" means elevated to the common person. Somehow I think that the Fords were not smart enough to think about elevated transit for Eglinton, otherwise they would have supported it. And no other politician wanted to suggest elevated and help with the Ford vision of grade-separated transit.