Toronto Ontario Line 3 | ?m | ?s

I'm a little sceptical about a subway past Eglinton. What is the ridership potential for the northernmost part of "long"? Would an LRT from Eglinton to Steeles for half the money actually serve the people in that area better?
 
CapitalSeven said:
I'm a little sceptical about a subway past Eglinton. What is the ridership potential for the northernmost part of "long"? Would an LRT from Eglinton to Steeles for half the money actually serve the people in that area better?
Click to expand...

DRL LONG, from Sheppard to King, is expected to move 19,200 pphpd.

In the DTRES, the DRL from King to Eglinton was expcted to generate 12,900 pphpd. With that in mind, we can estimate that usage between Eglinton and Sheppard is 6,300 pphpd.

Keep in mind that this is a very poor way to estimate usage of that section. Both studies used a different base case and set of assumptions. But this is the best estimation we can get until the second phase of the YRNS is completed.
 
Thanks, that's a helpful summary. The further north you go, the more the returns diminish. As the thing is likely to be built in stages even if the EA is all done it once, it could make sense to built to Eglinton and keep the options open.

I don't have an awful lot of experience with that corridor, but I do remember riding the bus all the way up to Finch to see it first-hand. I was struck by the large number of riders who were hopping on and off for relatively short rides - packs of kids and moms with strollers, etc. I think an LRT would serve a lot of those riders better than a subway likely to have stops 2 km apart
 
CapitalSeven said:
Thanks, that's a helpful summary. The further north you go, the more the returns diminish. As the thing is likely to be built in stages even if the EA is all done it once, it could make sense to built to Eglinton and keep the options open.
Click to expand...

Ridership between Eglinton and Sheppard increases by only 6,300. However, keep in mind that it relieves ridership on Yonge by another 5,600 pphpd. This is another primary benefit of the line that would make 6,300 pphpd between Sheppard and Eglinton more palatable.

Also, it's not entirely clear if future land use patterns was used to generate the ridership estimates. I suspect they did not. Of the 6,300 pphpd expected between Sheppard and Eglinton, 5,600 were diverted from Yonge. This leaves only 700 pphpd in new trips generated on that section. That number is unbelievably low. Even a handful of new condos between Sheppard and Eglinton on Don Mills would generate more trips than that.
 
WislaHD said:
I am not exactly sure that the employment in this area is all that viable. Major employers are leaving the area (Wrigleys, Celestica) and I am sure many smaller ones are too. It is not performing well, and with a subway these areas will be prime locations for redevelopment. From a city planning perspective, it is a little daft to enforce those restrictions.

I bet it just takes just one developer to succeed in convincing the OMB to construct their condo and the precedent will be set.
Click to expand...
A couple employers moving out doesn't mean that the entire employment area isn't viable. The city (and province) aren't just going to give up on it because of some turnover. The city has no choice but to enforce the restrictions in the Growth Plan and the standards it sets in re-designating land for non-employment purposes. Those standards are quite rigorous. The OMB follows provincial policy as well - they have turned down developer appeals to covert employment lands to residential in the past.

TheTigerMaster said:
Take a look at City Planning's Zoning By-law map: http://www1.toronto.ca/city_of_toro...ent/files/pdf/city-wide_allzones_569-2013.pdf

On the south side of the York Mills and Lesmill area, just about all of that area is zoned for industrial.

On the north side, a relatively small area has been zoned for industrial employment lands. The rest shows no zoning information. So it's possible that any redevelopment would be limited to the north side, which would still make for a very large scale redevelopment (about 175 acres vs. the 295 acre that I originally proposed).

However, I'm not certain how the province goes about designating what is industrial lands. Would they determine that solely on the zoning by laws for the area (as shown in the aforementioned map), or would they base it on the actual land use of the area?

Looking at street view images of the area, it appears that the north side is mainly commercial business parks. Hopefully this would make it eligible for redevelopment.
Click to expand...
I don't know why the zoning maps show blanks in that area, could be that it's under review. But since the zoning implements the Official Plan, the OP policy is what matters. The whole business park is designated Employment Areas in the OP.

Employment lands are defined in Places to Grow and the Provincial Policy Statement:
Areas designated in an official plan for clusters of business and economic activities including, but not limited to, manufacturing, warehousing, offices, and associated retail and ancillary facilities.
Click to expand...
 
The relief study states that the western half of the relief line adds cost without relieving Yonge much, which makes sense given that the University side of the subway already acts as western relief.

However, hopefully they recognize that there are other benefits to the western section even though it doesn't do much to relief Yonge. Sure the primary purpose is obviously to relieve Yonge, but does that mean we can't consider other benefits this subway would provide? The western half would relieve streetcars and provide rapid transit to the rapidly growing residential & commercial areas west of the downtown core.

All I'm saying is, if you're looking purely at relieving Yonge, it's true that going north relieves more and going west doesn't relieve much, but those making the decision could look at other factors as well besides that single one factor.
 
ehlow said:
The relief study states that the western half of the relief line adds cost without relieving Yonge much, which makes sense given that the University side of the subway already acts as western relief.

However, hopefully they recognize that there are other benefits to the western section even though it doesn't do much to relief Yonge. Sure the primary purpose is obviously to relieve Yonge, but does that mean we can't consider other benefits this subway would provide? The western half would relieve streetcars and provide rapid transit to the rapidly growing residential & commercial areas west of the downtown core.

All I'm saying is, if you're looking purely at relieving Yonge, it's true that going north relieves more and going west doesn't relieve much, but those making the decision could look at other factors as well besides that single one factor.
Click to expand...

This is why I think the western leg should go to Sunnyside rather than Dundas West.
 
The thing is in 30 years St George may need relief. It is ok for the DRL to go west of Dundas west but it should connect with bloor somewhere.
 
I'd like as many options as possible downtown in case a line forwhatever reaon has to close for repair or emergency.
 
ehlow said:
The relief study states that the western half of the relief line adds cost without relieving Yonge much, which makes sense given that the University side of the subway already acts as western relief.

However, hopefully they recognize that there are other benefits to the western section even though it doesn't do much to relief Yonge. Sure the primary purpose is obviously to relieve Yonge, but does that mean we can't consider other benefits this subway would provide? The western half would relieve streetcars and provide rapid transit to the rapidly growing residential & commercial areas west of the downtown core.

All I'm saying is, if you're looking purely at relieving Yonge, it's true that going north relieves more and going west doesn't relieve much, but those making the decision could look at other factors as well besides that single one factor.
Click to expand...

As important as a western segment is, relieving Yonge is the more pressing issue from a network perspective. I think a future western extension will be looked at once the initial eastern segment is closer to becoming a reality.

Whatever future capacity issues may impact the University line will undoubtedly influence where this western segment goes. I know the general consensus is Roncessvalles/Sunnyside/Dundas West but Dufferin could also be a very beneficial option especially if western relief becomes a priority as well as complementing surface routes.
 
Last edited:
M II A II R II K said:
And plus Dundas West will already have SmartTrack or whatever incarnation of RER passing through there.
Click to expand...
I have to question how beneficial that is for Dundas West alignment options. There already will be a DRL/SmartTrack interchange at Queen West.

Sunnyside on the other hand provides an as yet absent interchange with Lakeshore West. I am sure many Lakeshore passengers will get transfer onto the subway there to reach neighbourhoods and employment west of the core. This also helps to relieve Union Station, which may need more help than the University Line, and the streetcars that service Humber Bay Shores.

There is likely more development opportunity along Dufferin though. Dufferin Mall could undergo massive revitalization.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top