Hopkins123
Senior Member
Here's a illustration of how the Sheppard subway could route elevated through Scarborough. As you can see I have it through-routed with the abandoned Scarborough RT corridor and extended elevated to Malvern Town Centre.
|
|
|
Sheppard Line 4 Subway Extension (Proposed)
- Thread starter denfromoakvillemilton
- Start date
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
All of those curves seem way too tight for a heavy rail subway. It could perhaps work, but not very well. I don't think the TTC would ever approve of such tight turns for a heavy rail subway.
If you wanted to do this, smaller vehicles would be more appropriate. (Ahem... Light rail).
The elevation is something that really bothers me. Obviously from an urban design point of view, elevation is just about the worst thing you could do.
But even looking at this from a transportation point of view, I'm not sure elevation with so few stops is the best option. With the Transit City SELRT, the reason there were so many stations was because the modelling showed that it created more ridership than a LRT with greater spacing. Easy access is just as important (if not more so) as speed.
I hope this becomes clear if you look at this from the point of view of a passenger. All the stops on the Transit City SELRT would add on average 3 or 4 minutes to the trip (a high estimate; we're dealing with a difference of only a few km/h). Very few riders are going to decide not to go somewhere on the SELRT because of 3 or 4 minutes. They're more likely to decide not to go somewhere because the station is too far to be easily accessible.
If I had to modify your plan, I'd convert the Sheppard Subway to LRT and change the elevation on Sheppard to a ROW. The routing using the old SRT corridor looks like a good idea
If you wanted to do this, smaller vehicles would be more appropriate. (Ahem... Light rail).
The elevation is something that really bothers me. Obviously from an urban design point of view, elevation is just about the worst thing you could do.
But even looking at this from a transportation point of view, I'm not sure elevation with so few stops is the best option. With the Transit City SELRT, the reason there were so many stations was because the modelling showed that it created more ridership than a LRT with greater spacing. Easy access is just as important (if not more so) as speed.
I hope this becomes clear if you look at this from the point of view of a passenger. All the stops on the Transit City SELRT would add on average 3 or 4 minutes to the trip (a high estimate; we're dealing with a difference of only a few km/h). Very few riders are going to decide not to go somewhere on the SELRT because of 3 or 4 minutes. They're more likely to decide not to go somewhere because the station is too far to be easily accessible.
If I had to modify your plan, I'd convert the Sheppard Subway to LRT and change the elevation on Sheppard to a ROW. The routing using the old SRT corridor looks like a good idea
Johnny Au
Senior Member
...and there is a station at the end of Weybright, which would make Bessarion seem busy in comparison.
11th
Senior Member
Kennedy and Birchmount can merge into one station centered at Allanford/Sheppard. Then you'd get a smoother curve to the rail ROW.
M II A II R II K
Senior Member
Which also has the benefit of having less stations that would be tumbleweeds anyway. The Warden, Birchmount, and Kennedy busses can be split and redirected to an Agincourt Station, which would have VP preceding it.
Hopkins123
Senior Member
The relocated Agincourt Stn will be a major interchange between both the Stoufville GO Line as well as the proposed future Seaton (or Peterborough) GO Line. Plus all that greystone and brownstone property surrounding the rail junction will be ripe for redevelopment.
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
Don't count on much redevelopment happening in Scarborough.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
all the stuff already popping up along sheppard in anticipation of the LRT seems to say otherwise, but don't expect the entire street to be rebuilt in 20 years either.
The Agincourt station was planned to be located where Tridel's 6 tower condo development beside the 401 is, if you look at the old site plans you can see the stop being advertised as well as how they used to have an office building planned on the site (since scrapped). it would have required the re location of Agincourt GO to the south side of Sheppard.
The Agincourt station was planned to be located where Tridel's 6 tower condo development beside the 401 is, if you look at the old site plans you can see the stop being advertised as well as how they used to have an office building planned on the site (since scrapped). it would have required the re location of Agincourt GO to the south side of Sheppard.
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
After reading through this thread, I’ve come up for a proposal for transit on Sheppard Ave East that should work better than anything that has been proposed so far.
Vehicle
Originally I wanted this line to be an extension of the Sheppard Subway. The subway ends at Don Mills and it does seem rather logical to extend it eastward. However, after I looked at the data, it became clear that this subway extension would be too expensive to operate and maintain given how few people will be using the line. Instead I propose using an alternative technology. This technology will use vehicles that are smaller than the subway, but still large enough to provide enough capacity for the next century. The small size will allow the vehicle to operate in a variety of conditions, including underground in a tunnel, on an elevated structure, in a rail corridor, in mixed traffic (like they do in downtown) or in some kind of physically separated right-of-way. Since this vehicle won’t require expensive tunnel or bridge structures, it should cost significantly less than conventional subways (about a third of the cost I’m estimating). The vehicle should also be able to be used in configurations of one, two or three car trains. This will allow for additional capacity when needed. Unfortunately, due to the street environment, power cannot be collected from a wayside third rail. Instead, I propose that power is collected above the vehicle. It will be like a third rail, but with a wire that runs above the track.
Here is an incredibly realistic render of the vehicle I envision (I know I'm amazing) :
Grade Separation and Stations
I quickly ruled out putting the vehicle underground. It would be far too expensive given how few people will use the rapid transit line. Using a rail corridor was also impossible since there are none along the Sheppard corridor. This leaves us with a short list of elevation or running at street level. Elevation would have a significantly lager capital and maintenance cost than running it at street level. It’s also a poor choice from an urban design point of view. However my biggest concern is that due to the high cost of elevated stops we’ll be forced to limit the number of stops on the line. While fewer stops does mean slightly faster travel speeds, the smaller amount of stops means that the line will be less accessible to the public. Instead, I propose putting the vehicles in a street level right-of-way. This is far cheaper than elevation and enables us to build more stations. Stations should have moderate spacing of about 500 to 700m. This should provide a good balance between speed and accessibility, generating higher ridership.
Render of the right-of-way I propose:
Stations along this street level right-of-way will be more economical than elevated or underground stations. Probably less than a million dollars each. There should be a platform and perhaps heated shelters. This is a far better option than overbuilt subway or elevated stations
Another incredibly realistic render of the station (by the way, I brought perpetual summer to Toronto and palm tress now grow here. You're welcome):
Alignment
It runs along Sheppard Avenue East, starting at Don Mills Station with an eastern terminus of Morningside Drive. It will connect to Line 2 at McCowan.
I think I'm going to call this thing the "Sheppard East Light Rail Transit line". "Light rail" because it carries smaller loads than heavy rail transit (or maybe the rails went on a diet). "Sheppard East" because I think this thing goes somewhere along that street.
Personally I love the Sheppard East LRT that I've come up with. So much so that I'm going to propose this to Metrolinx and City Council. I have a feeling that they'd love to build this thing. Maybe I can even get a station named after me. I deserve nothing less for coming up with this brilliant plan
Vehicle
Originally I wanted this line to be an extension of the Sheppard Subway. The subway ends at Don Mills and it does seem rather logical to extend it eastward. However, after I looked at the data, it became clear that this subway extension would be too expensive to operate and maintain given how few people will be using the line. Instead I propose using an alternative technology. This technology will use vehicles that are smaller than the subway, but still large enough to provide enough capacity for the next century. The small size will allow the vehicle to operate in a variety of conditions, including underground in a tunnel, on an elevated structure, in a rail corridor, in mixed traffic (like they do in downtown) or in some kind of physically separated right-of-way. Since this vehicle won’t require expensive tunnel or bridge structures, it should cost significantly less than conventional subways (about a third of the cost I’m estimating). The vehicle should also be able to be used in configurations of one, two or three car trains. This will allow for additional capacity when needed. Unfortunately, due to the street environment, power cannot be collected from a wayside third rail. Instead, I propose that power is collected above the vehicle. It will be like a third rail, but with a wire that runs above the track.
Here is an incredibly realistic render of the vehicle I envision (I know I'm amazing) :
Grade Separation and Stations
I quickly ruled out putting the vehicle underground. It would be far too expensive given how few people will use the rapid transit line. Using a rail corridor was also impossible since there are none along the Sheppard corridor. This leaves us with a short list of elevation or running at street level. Elevation would have a significantly lager capital and maintenance cost than running it at street level. It’s also a poor choice from an urban design point of view. However my biggest concern is that due to the high cost of elevated stops we’ll be forced to limit the number of stops on the line. While fewer stops does mean slightly faster travel speeds, the smaller amount of stops means that the line will be less accessible to the public. Instead, I propose putting the vehicles in a street level right-of-way. This is far cheaper than elevation and enables us to build more stations. Stations should have moderate spacing of about 500 to 700m. This should provide a good balance between speed and accessibility, generating higher ridership.
Render of the right-of-way I propose:
Stations along this street level right-of-way will be more economical than elevated or underground stations. Probably less than a million dollars each. There should be a platform and perhaps heated shelters. This is a far better option than overbuilt subway or elevated stations
Another incredibly realistic render of the station (by the way, I brought perpetual summer to Toronto and palm tress now grow here. You're welcome):
Alignment
It runs along Sheppard Avenue East, starting at Don Mills Station with an eastern terminus of Morningside Drive. It will connect to Line 2 at McCowan.
I think I'm going to call this thing the "Sheppard East Light Rail Transit line". "Light rail" because it carries smaller loads than heavy rail transit (or maybe the rails went on a diet). "Sheppard East" because I think this thing goes somewhere along that street.
Personally I love the Sheppard East LRT that I've come up with. So much so that I'm going to propose this to Metrolinx and City Council. I have a feeling that they'd love to build this thing. Maybe I can even get a station named after me. I deserve nothing less for coming up with this brilliant plan
Last edited:
ehlow
Senior Member
That's an amazing idea Tiger Master!! It sounds like an economical and fast way to significantly upgrade transit along busy bus routes throughout the city and into the suburbs. Your transit dollar could go really far and buy lots of km of good quality transit in that case.
What if we also built several more of those lines since they are so cheap per km in order to build a whole network? Parts of the network could be underground where needed. It could create a network of frequent, traffic-immune, medium capacity transit lines spread through the city! It would be a transit-filled city!
We could call the plan: Transit-filled City!!!
What if we also built several more of those lines since they are so cheap per km in order to build a whole network? Parts of the network could be underground where needed. It could create a network of frequent, traffic-immune, medium capacity transit lines spread through the city! It would be a transit-filled city!
We could call the plan: Transit-filled City!!!
innsertnamehere
Superstar
^good idea. I propose cutting the "Filled" part of the title however, it seems unnecessary. "Transit City" has a nicer ring to it.
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
Transit City.... hmm. I like it. Has a nice ring to it.
Toronto will become a Transit City! Brilliant!
This 'Transit City' of ours should also have the Light Rail technology that I proposed along many suburban arterial roads. Starting with Sheppard East, Finch West and Eglinton. And since the central portion of Eglinton is too narrow for the right-of-way, that part could be a subway. The Eglinton Light Rail line will seamlessly transition from a subway to a right-of-way. Brilliant! This is revolutionary! And it should be cheap was well. I counted all the nuts and bolts and lightbulbs that will be needed, and it should cost about $8.4 Billion. We'll increase the size of our rapid transit network by over 50% for only $8.4 Billion. Wow. This is amazing. Way cheaper than subways! I can't believe this hasn't been proposed before.
And after we're finished with Finch, Sheppard and Eglinton, we should look at getting this thing on Jane and Malvern and the waterfront.
I also feel like we need some sort of improvements to bus service. It is the backbone of our network after all. We'll call it... the Transit City Bus Plan!
Toronto will become a Transit City! Brilliant!
This 'Transit City' of ours should also have the Light Rail technology that I proposed along many suburban arterial roads. Starting with Sheppard East, Finch West and Eglinton. And since the central portion of Eglinton is too narrow for the right-of-way, that part could be a subway. The Eglinton Light Rail line will seamlessly transition from a subway to a right-of-way. Brilliant! This is revolutionary! And it should be cheap was well. I counted all the nuts and bolts and lightbulbs that will be needed, and it should cost about $8.4 Billion. We'll increase the size of our rapid transit network by over 50% for only $8.4 Billion. Wow. This is amazing. Way cheaper than subways! I can't believe this hasn't been proposed before.
And after we're finished with Finch, Sheppard and Eglinton, we should look at getting this thing on Jane and Malvern and the waterfront.
I also feel like we need some sort of improvements to bus service. It is the backbone of our network after all. We'll call it... the Transit City Bus Plan!
GenerationW
Senior Member
Another $8.4 billion? Cool! Can't wait to see us not spend any of that on a DRL yet again.
sixrings
Senior Member
After reading through this thread, I’ve come up for a proposal for transit on Sheppard Ave East that should work better than anything that has been proposed so far.
Originally I wanted this line to be an extension of the Sheppard Subway. The subway ends at Don Mills and it does seem rather logical to extend it eastward. However, after I looked at the data, it became clear that this subway extension would be too expensive to operate and maintain given how few people will be using the line. Instead I propose using an alternative technology. This technology will use vehicles that are smaller than the subway, but still large enough to provide enough capacity for the next century. The small size will allow the vehicle to operate in a variety of conditions, including underground in a tunnel, on an elevated structure, in a rail corridor, in mixed traffic (like they do in downtown) or in some kind of physically separated right-of-way. Since this vehicle won’t require expensive tunnel or bridge structures, it should cost significantly less than conventional subways (about a third of the cost I’m estimating). The vehicle should also be able to be used in configurations of one, two or three car trains. This will allow for additional capacity when needed. Unfortunately, due to the street environment, power cannot be collected from a wayside third rail. Instead, I propose that power is collected above the vehicle. It will be like a third rail, but with a wire that runs above the track.
Here is an incredibly realistic render of the vehicle I envision (I know I'm amazing) :
Grade Separation and Stations
I quickly ruled out putting the vehicle underground. It would be far too expensive given how few people will use the rapid transit line. Using a rail corridor was also impossible since there are none along the Sheppard corridor. This leaves us with a short list of elevation or running at street level. Elevation would have a significantly lager capital and maintenance cost than running it at street level. It’s also a poor choice from an urban design point of view. However my biggest concern is that due to the high cost of elevated stops we’ll be forced to limit the number of stops on the line. While fewer stops does mean slightly faster travel speeds, the smaller amount of stops means that the line will be less accessible to the public. Instead, I propose putting the vehicles in a street level right-of-way. This is far cheaper than elevation and enables us to build more stations. Stations should have moderate spacing of about 500 to 700m. This should provide a good balance between speed and accessibility, generating higher ridership.
Render of the right-of-way I propose:
Stations along this street level right-of-way will be more economical than elevated or underground stations. Probably less than a million dollars each. There should be a platform and perhaps heated shelters. This is a far better option than overbuilt subway or elevated stations
Another incredibly realistic render of the station (by the way, I brought perpetual summer to Toronto and palm tress now grow here. You're welcome):
Alignment
It runs along Sheppard Avenue East, starting at Don Mills Station with an eastern terminus of Morningside Drive. It will connect to Line 2 at McCowan.
I think I'm going to call this thing the "Sheppard East Light Rail Transit line". "Light rail" because it carries smaller loads than heavy rail transit (or maybe the rails went on a diet). "Sheppard East" because I think this thing goes somewhere along that street.
Personally I love the Sheppard East LRT that I've come up with. So much so that I'm going to propose this to Metrolinx and City Council. I have a feeling that they'd love to build this thing. Maybe I can even get a station named after me. I deserve nothing less for coming up with this brilliant plan
How exactly do cars going north and south on major streets like Kennedy, warden, Victoria park, cross the train tracks?
That's a good point, I hadn't considered that. I was just looking at the cost difference in terms of extensions, not the conversion itself. Thanks for pointing that out.