TTC: Bloor Danforth Line 2 West Extension(s)

[BurlOak]

Just resurrect the Crosstown GO route from Erindale to mid-Pickering, and throw in an Etobicoke RT which can connect at Long Branch, Sherway, Line 2, Pearson, and more.

Something like this. I would guess Bus with shoulder lanes on 427. Very little is needed - just an on ramp just north of Cloverdale for 427 NB.

If there is a Woodbine GO station added, I would go across Dixon and run up 27 instead of 427 from Pearson.

It does seem that the 3km detour to get from 427 to Kipling hurts the line. Probably adds 10 minutes or more to the trip.

 

[MrsNesbitt]

Just resurrect the Crosstown GO route from Erindale to mid-Pickering, and throw in an Etobicoke RT which can connect at Long Branch, Sherway, Line 2, Pearson, and more.

This. Coupled with the Etobicoke RT and improvements to MiWay including a Hurontario LRT, so many commutes could be eased by a more direct route across the centre of Toronto and the GTA to Mississauga. I'm a big believer in the potential that GO-ALRT had. Nostalgia much

 

[Rainforest]

Is that 10,000 at the terminal station or at the peak station. When considering B-D extension, people seem to talk that it is the terminal station.

TTC counts ridership at the peak point of the planned extension. If it exceeds 10,000, then subway is justified.

This approach is a bit simplistic and can lead to strange results.

For example, if the planned extension has stations A, B, C (C is terminus), and the projected ridership approaching station A is 11,000, then the whole extension is justified; even though the projection is only 8,000 approaching B, and 5,000 approaching C.

But what if, at first, we build just an extension to station A? Now if we evaluate a subsequent extension to B and C, the peak projection is only 8,000, and the extension is no longer justified.

 

[MrsNesbitt]

TTC counts ridership at the peak point of the planned extension. If it exceeds 10,000, then subway is justified.

This approach is a bit simplistic and can lead to strange results.

For example, if the planned extension has stations A, B, C (C is terminus), and the projected ridership approaching station A is 11,000, then the whole extension is justified; even though the projection is only 8,000 approaching B, and 5,000 approaching C.

But what if, at first, we build just an extension to station A? Now if we evaluate a subsequent extension to B and C, the peak projection is only 8,000, and the extension is no longer justified.

That's a terrible system and might explain some of the TTC's strange priorities for their subway extensions - Finch West and York University are there to justify Vaughan Centre for example? The logic reminds me of the observer principle in quantum mechanics - if you actually measure an observable of a system, you change it in doing so.

 

[nfitz]

That's a terrible system and might explain some of the TTC's strange priorities for their subway extensions - Finch West and York University are there to justify Vaughan Centre for example? The logic reminds me of the observer principle in quantum mechanics - if you actually measure an observable of a system, you change it in doing so.

TTC only ever proposed extending the subway to Steeles. Vaughan was a scheme cooked up by Region of York.

 

[MrsNesbitt]

TTC only ever proposed extending the subway to Steeles. Vaughan was a scheme cooked up by Region of York.

Fact. Of course the TTC eventually had to acquiesce to building the Vaughan extension, and now must (or rather, in a sane world should) justify picking up the tab for operating the extension. And that's a really awful system to justify it along ridership lines.

 

[M II A II R II K]

A new station further west could also scoop up the Mississauga routes which would lead to less bus highways, especially if it were a transit hub with a moved GO station and an Etobicoke RT. And an Etobicoke RT can scoop up more Mississauga routes along its length.

 

[JasonParis]

Getting the #2 line to the 427 (with a large commuter lot) either up around Cloverdale Mall and/or down by Sherway Gardens is all I'd realistically expect.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

TTC counts ridership at the peak point of the planned extension. If it exceeds 10,000, then subway is justified.

This approach is a bit simplistic and can lead to strange results.

For example, if the planned extension has stations A, B, C (C is terminus), and the projected ridership approaching station A is 11,000, then the whole extension is justified; even though the projection is only 8,000 approaching B, and 5,000 approaching C.

But what if, at first, we build just an extension to station A? Now if we evaluate a subsequent extension to B and C, the peak projection is only 8,000, and the extension is no longer justified.

That's a terrible system and might explain some of the TTC's strange priorities for their subway extensions - Finch West and York University are there to justify Vaughan Centre for example? The logic reminds me of the observer principle in quantum mechanics - if you actually measure an observable of a system, you change it in doing so.

Agreed MrsNesbitt. I bet if midday (I'm talking 11am) ridership was counted many parts of the current system would not be up to snuff.

 

[Cobra]

Wouldn't the combination of the Hurontario LRT to Cooksville GO Station + RER Frequent Service to Union be less expensive and just as efficient?
I just feel that extending the subway all the way to Square One would be very expensive and redundant while Toronto has a serious lack of Rapid transit as it is.

 

[rbt]

Wouldn't the combination of the Hurontario LRT to Cooksville GO Station + RER Frequent Service to Union be less expensive and just as efficient?

Much more efficient. An underground spur of the Milton line at 10 minute frequencies (during rush) would have a far higher value than a subway with frequent stops could at this time.

 

[BurlOak]

Much more efficient. An underground spur of the Milton line at 10 minute frequencies (during rush) would have a far higher value than a subway with frequent stops could at this time.

The subway extended to 427 is enough. As stated before, a BRT could go from Long Branch to Humber College, hitting Sherway (optional), Line 2 (B-D), ECLRT, Pearson, Woodbine GO (if built) and Humber.

STC should be served by GO and/or Hurontario LRT.

 

[M II A II R II K]

That kind of BRT should have it's own transitway.

 

[rbt]

The subway extended to 427 is enough. As stated before, a BRT could go from Long Branch to Humber College, hitting Sherway (optional), Line 2 (B-D), ECLRT, Pearson, Woodbine GO (if built) and Humber.

STC should be served by GO and/or Hurontario LRT.

How is this an improvement over Square One Milton branch with frequent and fast service to the existing Kipling Station and Union Station? Kipling is only about 15 minutes away from SqOne by GO REX (including average waiting time) and there are substantial benefits to linking Union directly to the Square One bus terminal with with express frequent service (35 minute trip?)

Yeah, given infinite capital money I'd do both. Right now, with the money on the table, GO improvements win by a substantial margin.

 

[Cobra]

How is this an improvement over Square One Milton branch with frequent and fast service to the existing Kipling Station and Union Station?

You're right. The Bloor line is already near capacity and adding more passengers when there's already a viable alternative route is counter-productive especially when funds are limited. RER GO combined with the Hurontario LRT is the best option. Besides, it's not like Mississauga asked for it either.