Transit City: Sheppard East Debate

[Rainforest]

Both are crosstown lines but Bloor goes downtown, the biggest trip generator in the GTA by far, while Eglinton doesn't. Case closed.

Bloor only touches downtown in the north. From Eglinton or Bloor, most of downtown-bound passengers will transfer to Yonge, Spadina, or DRL anyway.

 

[Rainforest]

So Bloor ridership is going to fall in half, down to 12,000, and Eglinton West is going to surpass 15,000? Are you serious?

I can't predict exact numbers, but let's try to reason. We have 24,000 at peak on Bloor and 2,000 on existing Eglinton buses, and assume a modest 25% growth in future. That leads us to 32,500 combined. If the split between Bloor and Eglinton is 50% to 50%, each gets more than 16,000 at peak.

Even if the split is 60% to 40% in favor of Bloor, we would have about 20,000 on Bloor and 13,000 on Eglinton - which means within capacity, but just barely there.

Clearly, if that happens, the answer is to build an LRT on Lawrence Avenue, which will cause Eglinton to go down to 6,000...

This is certainly an option; but the combined cost of of those two LRT lines will exceed the cost of Eglinton subway. Eglinton LRT alone is at about 60% of subway cost already. Lawrence LRT would need sizeable tunnelled sections, too.

... and the sound of crickets chirping will fill the Bloor subway.

Please don't exaggerate: northern lines will not divert riders who live near Bloor subway, or reach it from the south.

 

[Justin10000]

Eglinton LRT alone is at about 60% of subway cost already.

Which is 40% cheaper than a subway... *ding*

 

[Rainforest]

^ Sure. But if we end up needing both Eglinton at 60% and Lawrence at 60%, the two together would be 20% more expensive.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

So Bloor ridership is going to fall in half, down to 12,000, and Eglinton West is going to surpass 15,000? Are you serious?

Clearly, if that happens, the answer is to build an LRT on Lawrence Avenue, which will cause Eglinton to go down to 6,000, and the sound of crickets chirping will fill the Bloor subway.

Wow, and you accuse the Pro Subway crowd of spouting hyperbole. The vast majority of Bloor riders do orginate North of the line (unless Mermaids are crawling out of the lake and heading to the subway) so it's fair to say that if an Eglinton line were attractive enough to someone originating from North of to slightly south of Eglinton that they would transfer there rather than continue on to Bloor. Is that number 12 000? I don't know but I do know that it would have some impact on Bloor's ridership numbers.

 

[Justin10000]

^ Sure. But if we end up needing both Eglinton at 60% and Lawrence at 60%, the two together would be 20% more expensive.

It highly unlikely there would an LRT running East of Yonge. You would only need to build LRT west of Yonge. And the tunnel would probably only have to go as far as Dufferin St. You could probably build Lawrence LRT and Eglinton Crosstown for the cost of a full Eglinton Subway.

And Kettal was joking around BTW.

 

[Rainforest]

It highly unlikely there would an LRT running East of Yonge. You would only need to build LRT west of Yonge. ... You could probably build Lawrence LRT and Eglinton Crosstown for the cost of a full Eglinton Subway.

This is possible, provided that DRL East is built, Lawrence East route feeds into DRL East and does not need to reach Yonge.

Then again, if the goal is to carry large volume of passengers, do we benefit from splitting it between two lines built for the same combined cost? It is harder to manage and is more disruptive ...

And the tunnel would probably only have to go as far as Dufferin St.

I've travelled Lawrence West a few times. It is wide (6 lanes would fit, or exist already) between Bathurst and Jane. The section east of Bathurst up to Yonge would certainly have to be tunnelled, and the route from Jane to the Scarlett / Dixon area, probably too.

 

[kettal]

Then again, if the goal is to carry large volume of passengers, do we benefit from splitting it between two lines built for the same combined cost? It is harder to manage and is more disruptive ...

I say 100% YES. Ever head of "don't put all your eggs in one basket"? There's a reason for that. One big busy line has a single point of failure, and multiple lines are more convenient for more people.

If they can build on the surface on Finch from Bathuirst to Yonge, I don't see why Lawrence would be a problem.

 

[Ansem]

I think its very safe and realistic to assume that when the DRL gets built and becomes operational,

-The majority of commuters using the Bus routes North East and North West of both Eglinton-Don Mills and Eglinton-Jane will use the Eglinton Crosstown line to transfer to the DRL to go downtown.

Even some of those using bus routes north of the Central underground section of Eglinton could choose the DRL over YUS

*Assuming the DRL goes to Eglinton on Both ends*

With the logic of trying to get to your destination (downtown) as fast as possible, most of them would not continue the bus trip to Bloor Danforth

Assuming that this scenario comes true...Subway is warranted and I could see the LRT crosstown being a problem in the future.


*****Please remember this important fact*****

The TTC only studied Eglinton Crosstown projection based on the line being independant of DRL

They have no data and did not study Eglinton with DRL projection... and that's why they say LRT over subway....

Its frustrating to see the TTC always failing to think outside of the box...

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Same on Sheppard... They studied the ridership of Sheppard based on these criterias

-East of Don Mills to meadowvale-zoo
-Not going to STC
-->Solution LRT...
They are right to think that way but they neglected so many other factors

-RTES report studying the line From Don Mills to STC (8400 pph) for the Sheppard area alone...not taking into consideration people from York region driving to the new sheppard station and York region rerouting some of their bus routes to make the trip shorter...

-Not taking into account the ridership potential of THE WHOLE LINE (dowsnview to STC)

Our stubway is busier than
*3 of Chicago's subway line,
*4 time longer,
*4 time more stations,
*all going downtown

-Connectivity of the network and NYCC being link to STC

-Growth potential

-Downsview beginning its expension : Federal government are getting cold feet at developing the whole Downsview park like it was supposed to happen which means that more condo projects could be announced in the future. (It was in the Toronto star)


--------------------------------------------------
Its really about
a short term vision vs long term vision

Long term vision: More expensive now but in the future less expensive.

-With a complete subway system: DRL,Eglinton, Sheppard (which is all this city will ever needs for the next century)
*The only improvements needed would be cheaper LRT line or BRT


Short term vision: Building Transit City gives us 120 KM of LRT/Streetcar service. cheaper than HRT

But it will get very expensive later because some of the TRansit city line will need to be change to subway at some point
-Sheppard
-Eglinton

-Removing LRT ROW or partially removing it to put BRT there
-Digging below the street and increase cost in the future for subways...
-New LRT and BRT lines of top of it.

-----------------------------------

Praticality vs long term growth.
-Short term vision is pratical and brings limited growth to the city
-Long term vision is more expensive now but brings massive growth to the city.

Subway now means

-more expense (I like to call it investments)-->
Brings more business, commerce and residential project-->
attracts even more people and new residents (new tax revenue)-->
More people attracts more business and commerce and residential projects-->
creates more jobs--->
which attract more people who wants to live closer to work--->
more taxpayer--->
paying higher property taxes--->
more revenues for the whole city--->
city use those revenues for project and maintenance...etc...

This loop show how you can effectively use public transit to stimulate growth to your city

Even the TTC/Metrolinx EA says that subway bring much more growth than LRT

 

[Justin10000]

Then again, if the goal is to carry large volume of passengers, do we benefit from splitting it between two lines built for the same combined cost? It is harder to manage and is more disruptive ...

You do benefit. You are providing Lawrence riders with faster, higher quality transit. For the cost of one subway line, you are getting two rapid transit lines.
Makes sense.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

Then again, if the goal is to carry large volume of passengers, do we benefit from splitting it between two lines built for the same combined cost? It is harder to manage and is more disruptive ...

I say 100% YES. Ever head of "don't put all your eggs in one basket"? There's a reason for that. One big busy line has a single point of failure, and multiple lines are more convenient for more people.

You do benefit. You are providing Lawrence riders with faster, higher quality transit. For the cost of one subway line, you are getting two rapid transit lines.
Makes sense.

Where (or more specifically why isn't there) is the same logic on the Yonge line. There is a single MASSIVE point of failure, the Yonge-Bloor interchange, that can cripple the entire system. Where are the plans to mitigate that part of the system, and don't say the DRL since it was barely in the City's/TTC's plans at all until the Yonge-RHC extension came about. Only then did the city act, one wonders if it was legitimate concern over system crowding or a delay tactic to avoid more subway construction.

This is exactly why Transit city should have been proposed as a combination of new LRT and Subway.

 

[GraphicMatt]

Where (or more specifically why isn't there) is the same logic on the Yonge line. There is a single MASSIVE point of failure, the Yonge-Bloor interchange, that can cripple the entire system. Where are the plans to mitigate that part of the system, and don't say the DRL since it was barely in the City's/TTC's plans at all until the Yonge-RHC extension came about. Only then did the city act, one wonders if it was legitimate concern over system crowding or a delay tactic to avoid more subway construction.

This is exactly why Transit city should have been proposed as a combination of new LRT and Subway.

The DRL was on the city's radar in the mid-80s. It was taken off the city's radar because of opposition from downtown councillors, led by Jack Layton, who feared it would bring too much growth downtown. Suburban councillors opposed it generally because they felt neglected by transit to begin with. Lastman used this to push successfully for the Sheppard subway.

TC's big strength politically is that it's a diversified plan of a number of relatively cheap lines. Even if only half of it gets built (and at this point I wouldn't be surprised if we only ever see Sheppard, Finch, Eglinton and the SLRT) the city still sees net transit growth.

Focusing on big projects like the DRL, the Eglinton West subway and a full Sheppard subway is tougher to navigate given political and funding realities. Big transit projects like that are easy targets for higher levels of governments during economic downturns, as the city saw with both Eglinton West and Sheppard.

That said, I'd scrap TC in a second if it meant the DRL would get built in the next decade.

 

[kettal]

Woodbridge

You are absolutely right, there needs to be more alternatives to the yonge, such as increased go service, drl and don mills lrt.

 

[Second_in_pie]

Catching up with things...

Eglinton West, even as it is, would definitely see an equal ridership with the Bloor line. They have similar densities (and if one was to have more density, it'd be Eglinton.) I've mentioned this before unless someone was working along the Bloor-Danforth line, anyone coming south to Bloor would choose Eglinton instead. This is simply for the reason that it eliminates an entire 4 km of bussing. Since not a huge amount of people work in that specific area of Southern Etobicoke, it should be safe to say that it'd intercept over 60% of bus traffic to Bloor. Combining current Eglinton ridership, that's definitely approaching the limits of LRT. And it doesn't even take into account what would undoubtedly be an influx of airport-bound trips from just about anyone vaguely connected to the RT network outside of Downtown, new high density development along the Richview Corridor, and a big draw on people that don't already use transit within the large catchment zone that RT would bring.

So at the Lawrence argument, it's quite stupid and I do hope it's a joke. Putting all your eggs in one basket may be a bad thing, but it definitely makes sense to invest in a corridor with higher order transit.

Ansem has done quite a good breakdown of why subway actually makes sense. When it gets down to the core, I really don't understand why we're so alienated by the rest of the world. Every other city of our size (other than Los Angles) has actually built real Rapid Transit. So why are we so special that it's blatantly obvious we don't need it?

 

[nfitz]

How do you come to this conclusion that flies in the face of every professional study ever done on what the Eglinton demand would be?

And what does it have to do with the Sheppard East LRT project currently under construction in Scarborough? Wrong thread?