TTC: Sheppard Subway Expansion (Speculative)

[kkgg7]

While I agree that distant suburbs need better downtowns, people still need to get between those downtowns and Toronto (in both directions). In the case of Mississauga and Brampton these should be served by the GO network not the subway network. On routes with no rail corridors that can be expanded, subway expansion may be needed, such as Eglinton/Sheppard for east west suburb to suburb travel and to relieve the 401, Yonge north to Highway 7 which goes through fairly urban areas (remember that Richmond Hill is useless for people going anywhere but Union) etc. I do not agree that we should neglect transit expansion in the suburbs in favor of that in the city because (a) many "suburbs" of Toronto are pretty urban now (like North York Centre) and (b) housing is costly in this city, condos suitable for families are hard to find and expensive so people may need to commute.

I am not say suburbs don't need subways, it is just of low priority, both because the low density and a means to discourage them from living that far.
I don't think a Sheppard line will relieve anything on 401... most people up there have cars (I suppose) and parking is almost always free. Why don't I just drive there and park wherever I want to be, but walk 5-10 minutes to the station, go down, board the train, get to the place, go up the stairs, and probably walk another 10 minutes to my destination, especially when it is cold outside? Plus, it costs $5 bucks both way. No, it seldom makes sense to have subway from one suburb and another. If you look at the chicago subway map, each lines goes through LOOP and there is a reason for that.

The only reason for such a subway is because it passes the Yonge line which goes south to downtown. The problem is we don't want to put further pressure on this particular line. In my opinion, Toronto needs another non-straight South-North line that goes to Yonge/Dundas or financial district, so that more people closer to downtown (for example, St Clair and Dufferin, East York, Laird/Eglinton) will be able to take advantage of it, not all those people living as far as Finch/sheppard st (hopefully they will move).

In all, subway should be built to discourage spawl, not to encourage it.

 

[44 North]

If our subway system had proper expansion over the last 30 years - mimicking the style of radiating rapid transit lines found in every major city - our discussions/argument right now would be:

-Where in Scarborough should we be extending the eastern leg of the DRL? Perhaps it could take a jog along Sheppard?

-Should the western leg of the DRL be extended along Black Creek to meet the 401/400 interchange?

 

[Paleo]

Costly and impractical. It wasn't recommended for a reason. The optics of it are just horrible. It'll never happen.

The Toronto of yesterday had foresight (Prince Edward Viaduct).

The Toronto of today is falling behind on yesterday, and not even thinking of the future.

The Prince Edward Viaduct example needs to die. It was an insignificant part of the whole. The type of "foresight" you're talking about on Sheppard would have had them build the entirety of the Bloor line out to the fringes of Etobicoke and Scarborough in 1910.

Really though, I think the people on Sheppard just want what they were promised. They want their subway finished!

Wow! The residents and businesses of Queen Street must really be fuming then. They just want what they were promised. They want their subway finished!

No one is going to be convinced one way or another here. On one side you have people looking at current numbers and short to medium term projections versus costs and say it's not worth it. On the other side you have the people whose only points for are "it's a Place to Grow" or something else that is similarly nebulous. Concepts like opportunity costs and ROI are alien.

The Sheppard subway eats up about 2.5% of the TTC's operating subsidy annually. A completed line will likely eat up many more times that amount for many more years into the far future. How much is too much? 5%? 10%? 15%? Chicago might be happy losing money hand over fist but where's ours going to come from? This question is never answered by boosters.

When we're talking about that level of money, the build it and they will come attitude that has become the story of the Spadina line for the past 30 years isn't a good enough reason.

 

[kEiThZ]

I am not say suburbs don't need subways, it is just of low priority, both because the low density and a means to discourage them from living that far.

This kind of nonsense is actually what prevents a transit culture from taking hold. People in the outer 416 are in the worst position. They don't get the GO service and fare integration that the 905 gets. They get road congestion from low transit usage (in some areas driven by poor TTC frequencies and long bus rides for a lot of folks) and tons of 905 commuter traffic. They don't get seats for the majority of their ride when coming home. And now some advocate not giving them higher order transit because they need to be "discouraged from living that far".

What elitist tripe. The reality is that the vast majority of those outer 416 residents live where they do because they can't afford to live in the core (with its half million dollar bachelor pads) or live without decent transit on a fully surburban lifestyle in million dollar mcMansions the 905. And yet these are the people you want to screw over to teach them a lesson in the hopes that providing them less options will somehow drive up transit usage?

If your logic is accurate perhaps we should consider foregoing any expansion of the GO system? After all, if we expand higher order transit in the 905, we are encouraging people to live in less dense areas right?

Let's take your logic to the extreme. Let's get rid of GO and all surburban subway service. If you live outside of downtown Toronto, you don't deserve squat. You need to be taught a lesson.

I don't think a Sheppard line will relieve anything on 401... most people up there have cars (I suppose) and parking is almost always free.

Parking is free? What are you smoking? It's not free. And most people don't drive to subway stations anyway.

The purpose of Sheppard was to facilitate cross-town travel. It was not meant to feed the Yonge line. But since Sheppard wasn't built as intended, it's not performing that well or used as intended. Mind you, for a gimped line, most cities worldwide would kill to have that much ridership.

No, it seldom makes sense to have subway from one suburb and another.

Have you travelled outside Canada at all? The lack of suburb to suburb connection is exactly what is holding back transit adoption in the GTA. You need a car to go anywhere but downtown. And once you have a car you'll use it. What makes other cities so transit friendly is that you get from one suburb to another.

By your logic New York should never have built subways outside Manhattan.

If you look at the chicago subway map, each lines goes through LOOP and there is a reason for that.

Nobody's going to take you seriously if you start comparing Toronto to Chicago. Look at transit ridership in Chicago and then come back and argue we should follow their example.

The only reason for such a subway is because it passes the Yonge line which goes south to downtown. The problem is we don't want to put further pressure on this particular line. In my opinion, Toronto needs another non-straight South-North line that goes to Yonge/Dundas or financial district, so that more people closer to downtown (for example, St Clair and Dufferin, East York, Laird/Eglinton) will be able to take advantage of it, not all those people living as far as Finch/sheppard st (hopefully they will move).

You are conflating so many issues. Toronto needs more higher order transit. It does not mean that subways or LRTs alone are the solution. A sensible system would have all day GO service with fares and service integrated into the TTC serving the whole 416. That would relieve Yonge and cut commute times in half for a lot of Toronto residents. All without building a subway line.

We need subway lines. And we need them in the core too. But those aren't our only transport needs and nor are subways the only way to address the city's transport needs.

In all, subway should be built to discourage spawl, not to encourage it.

Where in Toronto's experience has sprawl been encouraged? Enlighten me. Did you see Sheppard before the subway was built? What a wasteland of sprawl it's become, right?

 

[kkgg7]

KeithZ:

If you compare Toronto and Paris, my favorite city, the two cities have similar population, yet Toronto's land (630sq km) is exactly 6 times of the City of Paris (105 sq km), which mean the entire Toronto population can fit in 1/6 of its current area, how big will that be? I did some work on the map, and the area covers Lake Ontario to the south, Lawrence Ave to the North, DVP to the East and Keele to the West. The entire great city of Paris fits in this area, yet Toronto has to spread as far as 6 times large. If that's not sprawl, I don't know what it.

Imagine how life will be easier if Toronto is the size of Paris, without all those either vacant or extremely sparsely populated areas where I have to build subways to, yet Toronto will be much denser and more vibrant on the street.

 

[44 North]

Let's take your logic to the extreme. Let's get rid of GO and all surburban subway service. If you live outside of downtown Toronto, you don't deserve squat. You need to be taught a lesson.

What frustrates me is that "the people [in the outer 416] have spoken!" Street-grade LRT is not good enough. It's subways (in this case, two for Scarborough) or nothing. Which IMO is rubbish. What about Etobicoke?

What makes other cities so transit friendly is that you get from one suburb to another...
By your logic New York should never have built subways outside Manhattan.

New York only has one subway line solely outside of Manhattan; the 'G'. Even then, that line runs close to Manhattan...it's the equivalent of St Clair. If you want to take a subway from the Bronx to Queens, or Staten Island to Brooklyn, or Brooklyn to the Bronx; you have to go through Manhattan. Otherwise, it's a bus trip.

We shouldn't build subways that cater to suburb-to-suburb commuting, because the demand doesn't exist for that. That's why Sheppard will always be a feeder line.

 

[andrewpmk]

What frustrates me is that "the people [in the outer 416] have spoken!" Street-grade LRT is not good enough. It's subways (in this case, two for Scarborough) or nothing. Which IMO is rubbish. What about Etobicoke?



New York only has one subway line solely outside of Manhattan; the 'G'. Even then, that line runs close to Manhattan...it's the equivalent of St Clair. If you want to take a subway from the Bronx to Queens, or Staten Island to Brooklyn, or Brooklyn to the Bronx; you have to go through Manhattan. Otherwise, it's a bus trip.

We shouldn't build subways that cater to suburb-to-suburb commuting, because the demand doesn't exist for that. That's why Sheppard will always be a feeder line.

Except that the point of the G is to connect NYC's secondary centres (Downtown Brooklyn and Long Island City) while Sheppard connects to the North York Centre area and Eglinton connects to Yonge & Eglinton. North York Centre is not suburbia, it is a rapidly growing secondary downtown area. Also tons of people clog up the 401 commuting from the suburbs e.g. Scarborough to North York Centre, and parking is definitely not free there, so this would be a very successful market for an extended Sheppard line. Plus I think many other suburb to suburb commuters will switch to the subway to avoid traffic on the 401 - the 401 will always be congested, but the subway will absorb a lot of the growth in traffic volumes preventing it from getting worse.

 

[Palma]

It totally makes sense to have LRT north of Eglington. I even think the downtown streetcars make little sense unless they have their own center lane. LRT is much much cheaper and takes shorter time to construct. Why do you need to spend billion to big holes under Fitch Ave or Sheppard, the most of part of is very low density?
I strongly believe the city should focus density on South-of-Eglington areas. When subway goes there, condos follow, people follow and business follow. The good result is a much denser midtown, resulting in shorter commute in general. Extending Yonge/Spadina further north is a horrible idea and will not encourage people to live farther and farther away.

I agree with all the posters regarding focusing transit, density and subway south of Eglinton

 

[11th]

I agree with all the posters regarding focusing transit, density and subway south of Eglinton

There is an easier solution to solve part of the transit problem south of Eglinton, which the many residents there are strong supporters of - biking.

 

[kkgg7]

What frustrates me is that "the people [in the outer 416] have spoken!" Street-grade LRT is not good enough. It's subways (in this case, two for Scarborough) or nothing. Which IMO is rubbish. What about Etobicoke?



New York only has one subway line solely outside of Manhattan; the 'G'. Even then, that line runs close to Manhattan...it's the equivalent of St Clair. If you want to take a subway from the Bronx to Queens, or Staten Island to Brooklyn, or Brooklyn to the Bronx; you have to go through Manhattan. Otherwise, it's a bus trip.

We shouldn't build subways that cater to suburb-to-suburb commuting, because the demand doesn't exist for that. That's why Sheppard will always be a feeder line.

If you look at the tube map of London, it is the same. Every line cross the city center, or goes just by the periphery of it (the circle line).

I can predict if a full Sheppard/Finch line is built, more than 90% of its rides' destination is some station on Yonge St, or downtown.

 

[kkgg7]

There is an easier solution to solve part of the transit problem south of Eglinton, which the many residents there are strong supporters of - biking.

Biking will never be the solution for the following reason
1) it is only viable to bile for 6 months in Toronto (will you bike today?) and even during warm days it might rain
2) the old, the very fat, people carrying heavy stuff, people with small children, and those who either can't or dislike biking
3) bikes get stolen often (yes, I tried to bike last summer, and my bike was stolen within 2 months)

I would say biking should be encouraged, but it should never be depended upon to replace rapid transit.

 

[kkgg7]

I agree with all the posters regarding focusing transit, density and subway south of Eglinton

As I mentioned earlier, the entire population of Paris (2.2M) managed to fit into 1/6 of Toronto's current land area. Policies and infrastructure should be determined to encourage high density within the downtown/midtown area, provide more convenience and make it attractive, rather than make it easier for people to live farther and farther away from the core. These people tend to complain about congestion and traffic the most, and it is precisely them who choose a lifestyle that leads to these urban issues. And don't complain about high housing price, your 4 member family doesn't necessarily need 2500 sf single detached house to start with, why? Look at Paris again. No one says Canadians are simply entitled to 2X the living space.

We don't like extreme high density like some Asian cities. however, there is plenty of room in Toronto to get reasonable density, as right now even many parts of downtown is not really dense, and anywhere in midtown except close to Yonge st is rather sparse, not so much different from the suburbs. It is frustrating to see the city getting increasing bigger while people live increasingly farther apart, and then infrastructures were built just to cater these people's need, where the money could be put in much better use to make our city more livable. If someone decides he needs big space and chooses to live in Brampton or Richmond Hill, then fine, you have nothing to do with Toronto and Toronto is not responsible for bringing into the city to work.

 

[Justin10000]

It totally makes sense to have LRT north of Eglington. I even think the downtown streetcars make little sense unless they have their own center lane. LRT is much much cheaper and takes shorter time to construct. Why do you need to spend billion to big holes under Fitch Ave or Sheppard, the most of part of is very low density?

LRT can be a precursor to eventual subway expansion. It's why the Yonge Subway, and to a slightly lesser exent, the B-D subway have such significant ridership, they replaced heavily used streetcar lines that reaches capacity. Of course there is the argument the City should have kept the Yonge and Bloor cars..

Brampton and Mississauga's LRT plan is exactly what the suburbs need. Many suburban arterials are wide enough to accommodate surface rapid transit, speed will be comparable to underground transit, and will replace hundreds of buses currently running on Hurontario.

 

[agoraflaneur]

Anyone arguing for expansion in the suburbs right now must be blinded by their living there. Only someone who is totally biased and self-centered would suggest that the Sheppard line deserves any kind of priority - much less this absolute absurdity of extending the subways further and further north. GO trains can take care of that, they are much more efficient means of transporting people that distance, objectively.

Finch should be the last station on Yonge for the foreseeable future, while I support an extension to York University due to its prominence as a destination. At rush hour people living south of Sheppard right now can hardly get on the subway because of the entitled suburbanites who have crowded the subways.

A downtown relief line must be the absolute priority right now, followed by an Eglinton line, followed by whatever else further from the core.

Frankly we could use a subway extension to mississauga more than markham.

 

[kkgg7]

Anyone arguing for expansion in the suburbs right now must be blinded by their living there. Only someone who is totally biased and self-centered would suggest that the Sheppard line deserves any kind of priority - much less this absolute absurdity of extending the subways further and further north. GO trains can take care of that, they are much more efficient means of transporting people that distance, objectively.

Finch should be the last station on Yonge for the foreseeable future, while I support an extension to York University due to its prominence as a destination. At rush hour people living south of Sheppard right now can hardly get on the subway because of the entitled suburbanites who have crowded the subways.

A downtown relief line must be the absolute priority right now, followed by an Eglinton line, followed by whatever else further from the core.

Frankly we could use a subway extension to mississauga more than markham.

A downtown relief line on Queen makes most sense. The traffic on Queen W is insane. It will serve the Queen W shoppers, the beaches, growing residents of Parkdale and Liberty Village, among other up-and-coming neighbourhoods.
Then the city also needs stations in the west part beween Dufferin and University/Spadina line, south of Eglington. Those folks live within 9 km to the core but have no subway access whatsover.

As to the north, the minute you decide to live North of Eglinton, you have decided a suburban lifestyle, which means cars and highways and low density. Subway doesn't really belong to this picture.