Sheppard Line 4 Subway Extension (Proposed)

[KhalilHeron]

Isn’t three quarters of Toronto third class?

in all seriousness I hate the bus and I’m pretty sure I’m not alone considering how busy the kiss and ride area is at suburban subway stations.

The bus bays at most stations are far busier than the kiss and rides. I actually love the bus but whether someone likes the bus or not doesn't really matter, because it's just a reality for most ttc riders. Hopefully better bus infrastructure would help change some people's minds about the bus and take some people out of cars.

 

[afransen]

The bus bays at most stations are far busier than the kiss and rides. I actually love the bus but whether someone likes the bus or not doesn't really matter, because it's just a reality for most ttc riders. Hopefully better bus infrastructure would help change some people's minds about the bus and take some people out of cars.

I think this is an example of this illusion:

Lots of vehicles <> lots of people

 

[drum118]

Over a 30 year life cycle and depending on ridership growth, an LRT will save $90-$250 Million in operation cost as well replacement cost compare to an BRT. Upfront cost is mostly won by BRT over the LRT since many run on roads they don't have to pay to have them fix or replace unless its a true BRT in its own ROW away from traffic like Mississauga Transitway or Ottawa system.

The biggest cost is the person who is driving X. 40' to DD buses can carry only so many riders before you need to add another bus or so to meet the ridership needs while an LRT depending on the system can carry more than any type of bus in service legally in NA before increase its length or add an car or 2 to the one in service without adding another driver. In TTC case, it gone from a 50'-75' car to a 100' car that carries more so say TTC and may get away going to 130' before it needs to add another car to the line for extra riders. Never will see MU streetcar in Toronto like there was with the PCC unless they run on a line like the Crosstown Line.

Having a bus trunk line with many branch is a standard used in many places Worldwide as a cheap way of providing higher quality of service for the centre section of an line and does not provide the RT the the Scarborough Folks wants.

If you get down to numbers, Sheppard only justify an BRT with some interlining of service that does not provide the tools to increase density that range in the $3-$5 return on each dollar investment for it. An LRT sees $10-$12 return on investments with some seeing higher and a few less than $10. A subway is around $15-$20 return on investments and can be more or less depending where it place. Sheppard subway has mostly been flat from day one as a poor investment,

If you look at Line 1 & 2, they are a mix bag for various sections of the line from being flat to over $20 return on the investment. In some cases, Streetcars had a higher return before the subway came along for sections that are now flat or below the investment for it.

 

[sixrings]

Sitting on a bus making stops every 200m and constantly stuck in traffic sucks. An express bus with dedicated lanes and 400-500m stop spacing is similar to an LRT but on tires instead of rails

Once you put in the bus lanes why not just put down the tracks and have a lrt?

I think when we all see finch we will be more open minded to what lrt can offer. It won’t be a subway. But it’s definitely not a street car. It’s more like the express bus you are describing with larger capacity and a smoother ride.

It still boggles my mind how suburban people are jealous of the downtown legacy lines network but would rather a bus because maybe that lets them get a subway expansion in the future. There will always be a linear transfer on sheppard. The question is if it’s going to be a bus or a lrt. At the very least a underground lrt linear transfer will be better than a above ground bus transfer.

 

[afransen]

Once you put in the bus lanes why not just put down the tracks and have a lrt?

I think when we all see finch we will be more open minded to what lrt can offer. It won’t be a subway. But it’s definitely not a street car. It’s more like the express bus you are describing with larger capacity and a smoother ride.

It still boggles my mind how suburban people are jealous of the downtown legacy lines network but would rather a bus because maybe that lets them get a subway expansion in the future. There will always be a linear transfer on sheppard. The question is if it’s going to be a bus or a lrt. At the very least a underground lrt linear transfer will be better than a above ground bus transfer.

LRT cost what... 5x as much as BRT?

 

[sixrings]

LRT cost what... 5x as much as BRT?

As drum and others pointed out over the life the LRT is cheaper or the same.

 

[ARG1]

Once you put in the bus lanes why not just put down the tracks and have a lrt?

I think when we all see finch we will be more open minded to what lrt can offer. It won’t be a subway. But it’s definitely not a street car. It’s more like the express bus you are describing with larger capacity and a smoother ride.

It still boggles my mind how suburban people are jealous of the downtown legacy lines network but would rather a bus because maybe that lets them get a subway expansion in the future. There will always be a linear transfer on sheppard. The question is if it’s going to be a bus or a lrt. At the very least a underground lrt linear transfer will be better than a above ground bus transfer.

LRTs are a lot more expensive for not much benefit. With LRT you have to commit to A) Placing down track, B) Buying new rolling stock, and C) Installing new dedicated infrastructure like signaling and stops. BRTs completely avoid having to do Part A and B. Paving is MUCH cheaper than placing down track, you can reuse the same busses you used before, and you don't even have to build brand new giant MSFs. This also means that not only can they act as a development tool, there is also very little commitment to have them around as long as possible. With the Hurontario LRT, because they purchased new MSFs and brand new rolling stock, there will now be pressure to keep the line running for at least 30 years as part of the P3, even though ridership projects expect ridership to reach a level that would justify a subway in 10 years. If instead of the LRT they had instead painted dedicated bus lanes, they could have saved a ton of money, while still building up ridership on the corridor, and when ridership justified something higher order and more effective like a light metro. The Hurontario LRT costs 5 BILLION DOLLARS, half of the cost of the DRL, and around the projected cost of the entire Highway 413, which is absolutely insane, and now its going to be a line Mississauga is stuck with 30 years. I forget if it was Syn or W.K. Lis who pointed this out, but Transit City was supposed to be what the old streetcar was, temporary transit infrastructure that would be replaced by higher order transit when needed. With the skyrocketing price in LRTs, this is basically impossible. Now there is going to be pressure to keep these LRTs running for as long as possible since they do not have the benefit of using existing vehicles and infrastructure, and you better use those LRVs you spent a billion on for as much you can. Think of it this way. If the Don Mills LRT was built, the earliest we would've gotten a Relief Line North (something the city desperately needs) in 2050. With a BRT, we would've gotten it by 2035.

As drum and others pointed out over the life the LRT is cheaper or the same.

I find that hard to believe. You do know that a low floor LRVs cost around twice as much to maintain as a Subway train correct? LFLRVs are extremely prone to breaking down and needing urgent repairs compared to either busses or high floor trains. Maybe you're saving on not having to pay for gas, but with technologies like Battery Electric coming online, that is going to be less and less of an issue.

 

[afransen]

As drum and others pointed out over the life the LRT is cheaper or the same.

Cheaper altogether, or has lower opex cost but not lower overall cost when considering upfront capital? This argument only works if we think Sheppard should always be LRT with linear transfer (we keep this permanently).

 

[afransen]

I think you build BRT and take some of the savings to buy land to reserve for stations for future elevated metro upgrade. Do the engineering work up front, so property owners along the ROW know what to expect, and how they should build along the corridor. I can see the promise of BRT now and investments toward metro upgrade in future being more effective for investment along the corridor than LRT.

 

[sixrings]

I think you build BRT and take some of the savings to buy land to reserve for stations for future elevated metro upgrade. Do the engineering work up front, so property owners along the ROW know what to expect, and how they should build along the corridor. I can see the promise of BRT now and investments toward metro upgrade in future being more effective for investment along the corridor than LRT.

because you have been pro lrt in other situations like hurontario then I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt. But it is my feeling that many who advocate for brt on sheppard are really doing so simply to keep the subway dream alive even if that’s a 100 years from now. In other words it’s them pretending they are pro transit but really they are simply anti lrt and the only acceptable transit is subway subway subways. We could have had a lrt by now and then worried about subways a 100 years from now. Anyways if sheppard residents were willi by to have elevated transit on sheppard I would be happy to have it as a test to see how it works out. I’m just skeptical anyone near by resident is going to be ok with elevated when they know all they need to do is complain and either nothing gets built or underground gets built.

 

[tsm1072]

because you have been pro lrt in other situations like hurontario then I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt. But it is my feeling that many who advocate for brt on sheppard are really doing so simply to keep the subway dream alive even if that’s a 100 years from now. In other words it’s them pretending they are pro transit but really they are simply anti lrt and the only acceptable transit is subway subway subways. We could have had a lrt by now and then worried about subways a 100 years from now. Anyways if sheppard residents were willi by to have elevated transit on sheppard I would be happy to have it as a test to see how it works out. I’m just skeptical anyone near by resident is going to be ok with elevated when they know all they need to do is complain and either nothing gets built or underground gets built.

BRT on Sheppard doesn't make sense if that is the only route you add BRT to, but if you also added BRT infrastructure on Victoria Park, Warden, and McCowan, BRT should provide a better transit coverage at a lower cost than LRT due to the shared infrastructure. Now, if line 4 is never extended beyond the 404, building the Sheppard LRT to open with an OL extension to Don Mills makes that a transfer node instead of a straight linear transfer.

 

[sixrings]

BRT on Sheppard doesn't make sense if that is the only route you add BRT to, but if you also added BRT infrastructure on Victoria Park, Warden, and McCowan, BRT should provide a better transit coverage at a lower cost than LRT due to the shared infrastructure. Now, if line 4 is never extended beyond the 404, building the Sheppard LRT to open with an OL extension to Don Mills makes that a transfer node instead of a straight linear transfer.

As a former Scarborough resident is advocate for every major road in Scarborough to have a brt or lrt. But again there are people who are smarter than me that believe the lrt is in fact cheaper.

 

[ViveleCanada]

...If instead of the LRT they had instead painted dedicated bus lanes, they could have saved a ton of money, while still building up ridership on the corridor, and when ridership justified something higher order and more effective like a light metro. The Hurontario LRT costs 5 BILLION DOLLARS...

From what I found, the Hurontario line will cost $2.1 billion in construction costs and $2.5 billion in operational and maintenance costs. I don't think we have the operational costs for the Ontario line yet so I don't think that's a fair comparison (unless the numbers for Hurontario have been updated of course). Not going to lie, that is still pretty pricey for an LRT since the Canada line cost around the same amount whilst also having a long tunneled segment (the line is also about the same length as the Hurontario line).

It still boggles my mind how suburban people are jealous of the downtown legacy lines network but would rather a bus because maybe that lets them get a subway expansion in the future. There will always be a linear transfer on sheppard. The question is if it’s going to be a bus or a lrt. At the very least a underground lrt linear transfer will be better than a above ground bus transfer.

I don't believe that a linear transfer is justified just because that has been the status quo. The whole point of expanding transit is to improve the status quo. It is well-documented that transfers do come with a penalty even if walking and waiting times are zero. From a study done in 2018 (citation at bottom), one transfer equates to 15-17 minutes in equivalent in-vehicle time (EVIM). That basically means that people are willing to put up with a 15-17 minute increase in vehicle times to avoid transferring once. It goes up to around 20 EVIM when wanting to avoid 2 transfers. Arguably, Don Mills would be a transfer point regardless assuming the OL gets extended up there. However, the status quo will still be in place for those suburb to suburb trips which was something that Transit City was trying to encourage.

Obviously, some linear transfers are justified especially if a corridor changes density or character at certain points. However, Don Mills doesn't feel like a natural terminus like Yonge is, especially since the character of the street doesn't really change until east of Kennedy when the street becomes much more industrial.

Garcia-Martinez, Andres. “Transfer Penalties in Multimodal Public Transport Networks.” Transportation Research., vol. 114, Pergamon Press,, 2018, doi:10.1016/j.tra.2018.01.016.

 

[sixrings]

From what I found, the Hurontario line will cost $2.1 billion in construction costs and $2.5 billion in operational and maintenance costs. I don't think we have the operational costs for the Ontario line yet so I don't think that's a fair comparison (unless the numbers for Hurontario have been updated of course). Not going to lie, that is still pretty pricey for an LRT since the Canada line cost around the same amount whilst also having a long tunneled segment (the line is also about the same length as the Hurontario line).


I don't believe that a linear transfer is justified just because that has been the status quo. The whole point of expanding transit is to improve the status quo. It is well-documented that transfers do come with a penalty even if walking and waiting times are zero. From a study done in 2018 (citation at bottom), one transfer equates to 15-17 minutes in equivalent in-vehicle time (EVIM). That basically means that people are willing to put up with a 15-17 minute increase in vehicle times to avoid transferring once. It goes up to around 20 EVIM when wanting to avoid 2 transfers. Arguably, Don Mills would be a transfer point regardless assuming the OL gets extended up there. However, the status quo will still be in place for those suburb to suburb trips which was something that Transit City was trying to encourage.

Obviously, some linear transfers are justified especially if a corridor changes density or character at certain points. However, Don Mills doesn't feel like a natural terminus like Yonge is, especially since the character of the street doesn't really change until east of Kennedy when the street becomes much more industrial.

Garcia-Martinez, Andres. “Transfer Penalties in Multimodal Public Transport Networks.” Transportation Research., vol. 114, Pergamon Press,, 2018, doi:10.1016/j.tra.2018.01.016.

But the problem is sheppard never justified a subway to begin with. As a user I too am frustrated with linear transfers when they appear. However sometimes for various reasons they exist. Hopefully with the OL and the extended Scarborough subway that less people will be using sheppard subway making the linear transfer a lesser issue then say what we see currently at Kennedy station. Btw I used to live in Scarborough and am familiar with the annoyance of both transfers.

 

[afransen]

because you have been pro lrt in other situations like hurontario then I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt. But it is my feeling that many who advocate for brt on sheppard are really doing so simply to keep the subway dream alive even if that’s a 100 years from now. In other words it’s them pretending they are pro transit but really they are simply anti lrt and the only acceptable transit is subway subway subways. We could have had a lrt by now and then worried about subways a 100 years from now. Anyways if sheppard residents were willi by to have elevated transit on sheppard I would be happy to have it as a test to see how it works out. I’m just skeptical anyone near by resident is going to be ok with elevated when they know all they need to do is complain and either nothing gets built or underground gets built.

I am anti LRT as an interim solution. LRT is very expensive, we can't think of it as interim. If it is something we expect ridership to outgrow in 20 or 30 years, I'd rather we build BRT now and metro (elevated) later when BRT capacity is exceeded. Subway is never going to happen. Finch W makes some sense to me, as I can't image us building metro on FInch, but maybe I am wrong.

The problem is that median LRT is not true rapid transit. It is not much better than BRT, other than in capacity or opex. But if the ridership is there to support LRT, elevated metro is a better long term choice as it doesn't cost that much more than median LRT, provides far more capacity, more reliability and higher speeds. Also, even lower opex because it can be automated.

I don't know how you can say someone is 'subways subways subways' when they are advocating for BRT? If anything, I am anti-subway, as in pointlessly underground rail transit in subways that can support elevated. I am pro-grade separation. It is insanity to spend billions to move people long distances in road medians with lots of conflicts with pedestrians and cars. LRT is great for shorter distances where buses can't support the volumes (streetcars downtown) and we are not able to build elevated rail.