Transit City: Sheppard East Debate

[nfitz]

Given that the thread is about an LRT line, discussion about fantasy subway construction costs have no relevance.

 

[Second_in_pie]

Given that the thread is about an LRT line, discussion about fantasy subway construction costs have no relevance.

I don't think I made any direct reference to the Eglinton subway either. Again, I was merely making a point that subways aren't as expensive as the TTC states they are. I used trenching/elevating as an example of laughably low subway cost for building. Since I believe a couple people were mentioning a subway being built on Sheppard instead of LRT, again, that point and my post are totally relevant to the topic.

 

[Fresh Start]

The TTC tends to overbuild things in general. Case in point: Downsview Stn today sees half of its bus bays sitting unused at all times of the day and soon only a few routes will need for Downsview at all. When they were building it, they must have known it'd only be a temporary terminus such not to get too excessive.

It's almost futile pointing any of this out to the TTC's planning dept though. They'll just scoff and say new city by-laws demand the subways must be built in the most elaborate ways possible for "safety reasons" that haven't been an issue for the rest of the system for some 50 odd years.

On topic: maybe open-trench is not possible right across Sheppard but the decision to abandon the cut-and-cover method in favor of TBMs is really what's causing the price to jump this high. TBM is only necessary in areas of high-density where proximal building foundations force the right-of-way to tunnel deeper underground than cut/cover allows. Discarding TBMs after only one excavation usage also balloons costs via purchasing new equipment as they're needed.

 

[nfitz]

The TTC tends to overbuild things in general.

I'd disagree ... I spend most of my time on the Bloor-Danforth and Yonge line ... and I'd say they are grossly under-desigened.

I did venture up to Leslie the other day, and headed out the east exit. I don't know where all this "overdesigned Sheppard stations" comes from, but given the concrete walls in the station, and the concrete floor of the walkways ..., and very utilitarian exit. I really can't see how it's overdesigned.

As for Downsview being temporary ... it will be 20 years old by the time it's not the terminal. 20 years is longer than either Eglinton or Union were terminals!

 

[UD2]

I'd disagree ... I spend most of my time on the Bloor-Danforth and Yonge line ... and I'd say they are grossly under-desigened.

I did venture up to Leslie the other day, and headed out the east exit. I don't know where all this "overdesigned Sheppard stations" comes from, but given the concrete walls in the station, and the concrete floor of the walkways ..., and very utilitarian exit. I really can't see how it's overdesigned.

As for Downsview being temporary ... it will be 20 years old by the time it's not the terminal. 20 years is longer than either Eglinton or Union were terminals!

^^^

I agree with everything niftz said in this thread.

I'm glad some people here have more patience than I do to uphold what's true.

 

[MisterF]

^
The problem w/ Calgary and Edmonton is that they are designed for speed. Urbanistically, they are just about as attractive as a highway. Calgary made its' goals very clear from the beginning; low cost, high speed, rapid transit. The TTC seems much more intent on the grab bag ideal of "local service" which prioritizes public realm improvements. Take for instance this segment of the C-Train. The line goes into an underpass through a pseudo highway interchange and onto a the median of a pseudo highway. Calgary has no intention on transforming the surrounding area into some kind of Potemkin Euro city.

I think Calgary has a better implementation of LRT, but it is disingenuous to equate anything the TTC is planning to what Calgary and Edmonton have achieved. They are apples and oranges.

EDIT: There is a big difference between "LRT" and "LRT" in general. It is such a vague term that just about anything that has any sort of level crossing is considered "LRT," which ignores the rather large differences between the systems. The Hiawatha line or the C-Train are both quite efficient systems that have low costs, high speed (the C-Train's average speed is only 2kmh less than most of our subways) and fairly high capacities. They do that by running in more or less desolate ROWs that minimize the amount of crossings necessary (i.e. industrial lands, disused freight railways, highway medians, parks...). The TTC's obsession with St. Clair style "LRTs" is fundamentally incompatible with these other, more efficient, systems.

Despite your sarcastic rhetoric about Europe, I think we generally agree. Sheppard may be an Avenue, but I don’t see it ever urbanizing in the sense of being a pedestrian-oriented, mixed use street. Densify yes, urbanize no. The street pattern and design in that area simply won’t allow for it. For that reason something similar to Calgary’s light rail lines would be appropriate for that street.

But I’m not equating what the TTC is planning with what Calgary and Edmonton have. I’m simply pointing out that you can have faster speeds without grade separation. There’s no reason that the Sheppard LRT couldn’t be the same speed as the Bloor subway.

 

[Whoaccio]

I didn't mean to be sarcastic, I just think the idea of building a row of 3 storey mid rise buildings with Euro styling in front of god knows how many hectares of typical North American sprawl is oddly Potemkin-ish in concept.

EDIT: It is like when they clear cut a forest up north, but leave the area in 50m to either side of access roads untouched to fool yuppie cottagers into thinking they are a kind of rustic, pristine environment. I'm surprised there has been no serious criticism of just how fake and unauthentic the entire "Avenues" plan is. Especially given that the only other major example I can think of of this kind of linear facadery is Dubai.

 

[Second_in_pie]

But I’m not equating what the TTC is planning with what Calgary and Edmonton have. I’m simply pointing out that you can have faster speeds without grade separation. There’s no reason that the Sheppard LRT couldn’t be the same speed as the Bloor subway.

I suppose it's always possible, but the TTC would have to either close down the street, elevate the line, or demolish a line of houses along the way. Then, there would have to be underpasses or at least full signal priority at crossings, and a stop spacing more like 800 km instead of 300 or 400. I'm not against this for some routes, but I just don't think it can work on Sheppard.

On the other hand, if the TTC said the Eglinton LRT would use metro-style trains with high platforms, make underpasses at arterial roads and full signal priority at all other large roads, as well as using the Richview Corridor as a LRT-only ROW, I might be less likely to shoot it down as insufficient. That sort of thing might actually work on Eglinton, but I dare say never on Sheppard. It's true that Sheppard has some room, but it doesn't have that much room.
They're trying to turn the peripherals of Eglinton and Sheppard, not to mention Jane, Finch and Don Mills, into nice avenues with 4-story mixed-use condos lined with coffee shops and dotted with Ye Olde Book Stores. It's a stupid idea, not what's needed, a piss-poor way of going about planning transit, and is getting shoved further down our throats as we speak.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

Transit City (with some exceptions) is not a rapid transit system. The trams of Europe that the TTC points to are generally not rapid transit systems, they are supplementary corridors to the metro and suburban rail systems and good for short to medium distances or as the main system for small cities like Grenoble. Some cities have trams using rail corridors and some put them underground, but the TTC is only doing this for a small portion of Transit City.

But isn't this exactly what the City/TTC are advertising it as? I mean why build a crosstown route to your international airport if it is going to be marginally faster than a bus? Granted I can see Eglinton having lots of passenger turnover, particularly in the central core. However that IMHO makes the connection to the airport rather meaningless, wouldn't you think?

Going back to Sheppard, will there be more activity along and within the Sheppard East LRT or will the majority be headed to the Sheppard subway (and subsequently Yonge)? If it is the later then a decision needs to be made about whether it makes sense to continue the subway or to build LRT and force another transfer on riders. Seems the TTC has chosen to force a transfer on it's riders.

 

[jwill]

I would say that due to Eglinton's potential for high turnover and the necessity of relatively closely spaced stops for proper service, its a bad candidate to serve the airport.

It would be better in the long term to route the DRL to Pearson, providing a direct service to the core without having too many stops along the way.

Thats a long way off though, and for now the airport is a reasonable place to terminate the line.

 

[Dan416]

i think Sheppard is a blatantly terrible candidate for LRT in light of the existing subway. I wish someone would explain this to Miller, Giambrone & Co. But I'm afraid explaining anything to them would be completely useless.

It's nice to see that one councillor actually believes in these corridors as subways.

And btw this thread is about the Sheppard East LRT: it's not the "Glorify Sheppard East LRT above all else" thread. Criticism is what this board is about, and criticizing the Sheppard East LRT and discussing the practicality of subway in lieu of LRT on THIS corridor is VERY relevant.

 

[nfitz]

However you've made your case again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and ...

... it's getting dull. In the planning stage sure ... but the money is all there, design is underway, and the construction contracts are being readied for tender. Clearly it's too late!

 

[Fresh Start]

Too late? Oops! I guess the few and far in-between residents of Twyn Rivers will feel very privileged to have a euro chic "rapid" tram stopping at their doorstep while the densely populated/visited Scarborough Centre languishes without a subway link to this day.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

Leslie is overbuilt and that's before the proposed Canadian Tire HQ will add yet another entrance. Anyone who claims it isn't overbuilt has probably not walked the whole length of the thing and used all of the exits and the comically underused 4 bus bays. It also takes up more than an entire block on the surface. Some of this infrastructure would have been infinitely better off being built at Bessarion to give that station an entrance at each end to properly serve what's east and west of Bessarion. Leslie does not need 4 entrances - all on the same corner of Sheppard & Leslie, too. Sure, adding one entrance is a trivial cost bump in terms of the whole line, but the precedent is dangerously expensive.

It's not though, there's lots that can be done to improve average speed without grade separation. Most important is to give it complete crossing priority - never being subjected to red lights and car traffic stopping to let LRT trains pass. Calgary and Edmonton treat their LRTs like this and they're both mostly at surface. Calgary's average speed is 30 km/h including the slow downtown section. Edmonton, with a downtown tunnel that has very short station spacing, averages 37.

The C-train is mostly separated from car traffic, actually. Highway medians, rail corridors, tunnelling under intersections, tunnelling where it turns, running beside roads, etc., constitute the bulk of the system, despite it mostly running on the 'surface.' An LRT line crossing one road is less complicated to operate effectively than an LRT running in the median of one road while crossing another road, and sometimes crossing another road with a second LRT line in its middle. There is one stretch of the NE C-train in a median ROW, but that road is extremely suburban and the stretch only has like 3 stations. Grade-separation is possible on the surface...the whole point is to remove city streets from the equation, which the C-train does most of the way.

A C-train-type line could have been built along Eglinton or Don Mills (places where a line could run under the road, beside the road, above the road...wherever it fits and will be fast), but would have been difficult along Sheppard without plain tunnelling, and if you're gonna tunnel, you might as well just extend the subway and get some benefits out of the capital expenditure.

As Whoaccio mentioned, the Hiawatha line is sort of similar to the C-train...slower and scenic and touristy downtown, and then it gets a lot faster farther out, when the focus is on getting people from point to point as quickly as possible. Everyone wishing there had been more coordination between local LRT lines and regional GO lines is correct, but it just didn't happen.

Despite your sarcastic rhetoric about Europe, I think we generally agree. Sheppard may be an Avenue, but I don’t see it ever urbanizing in the sense of being a pedestrian-oriented, mixed use street. Densify yes, urbanize no. The street pattern and design in that area simply won’t allow for it. For that reason something similar to Calgary’s light rail lines would be appropriate for that street.

For most of Sheppard, no it won't happen, but it could happen in Agincourt, with minimal effort, even. The city can permit whatever it wants on streets like Hickorynut Drive, Malamute Crescent, Spring Forest Square, or Scotney Grove, but I agree, the odds of anything even remotely approaching 'urban' sprouting in these backyards is pretty slim. Agincourt has loads of potential, though.

What really damns the city's policies on the relationship between transit and Avenues development, though, is that the first substantial implementation of an Avenue is Sheppard West, a street seeing no transit improvements other than the York U Rocket, which doesn't even stop to serve the Avenues development. Finch West was also seeing Avenues-style projects long before the LRT line (though the townhouse complexes along Finch are crappy and not urban).

 

[Paleo]

i think Sheppard is a blatantly terrible candidate for LRT in light of the existing subway. I wish someone would explain this to Miller, Giambrone & Co. But I'm afraid explaining anything to them would be completely useless.

It's nice to see that one councillor actually believes in these corridors as subways.

High praise for the voice of NIMBY opposition to development on top of subway corridors.