Sheppard Line 4 Subway Extension (Proposed)

[JSF-1]

If it had a connection to Line 2, it could use those yards too. Not ideal, but it is a possibility. An LRT would also need a yard, so where was it going to be plunked down?

The yard for the Sheppard East LRT (and Scarborough Malvern LRT) was to be along Sheppard just east of Morningside Ave. I believe that is still the plan today for the Eglinton East LRT.

 

[micheal_can]

The yard for the Sheppard East LRT (and Scarborough Malvern) was to be along Sheppard just east of Morningside Ave. I believe that is still the plan today for the Eglinton East LRT.
View attachment 553440

Then there is the solution. Build the subway to there.It could even be used for Line 2 if needed.

 

[JSF-1]

Then there is the solution. Build the subway to there.It could even be used for Line 2 if needed.

Just to add on here is the official plan from the Sheppard East LRT EA.

 

[micheal_can]

Just to add on here is the officialView attachment 553441 plan from the Sheppard East LRT EA.

Although LRTs are different sizes, this likely could be modified to house what is needed for the extension and possibly the current Line 4 cars too. My hope would be that this would be looked into when the plan gets created.

 

[micheal_can]

Going to the planned LRT MSF would add 6 km,so the line would be extended about 14km. That is almost as long as the current (under construction) line 5 is. If it could be done in 2 phases, it might sit better with the politicians.

 

[Northern Light]

Then there is the solution. Build the subway to there.It could even be used for Line 2 if needed.

In a word, "No"

That yard will not be used to store Line 2 trains running all the way out to Conlins.

Its not large enough anyway.

Also the City if it proceeds with the very suspect Eglinton East LRT has put in dibs on the yard to service that line.

 

[micheal_can]

In a word, "No"

That yard will not be used to store Line 2 trains running all the way out to Conlins.

Its not large enough anyway.

Also the City if it proceeds with the very suspect Eglinton East LRT has put in dibs on the yard to service that line.

Then the only other option is expropriation.

 

[Northern Light]

Then the only other option is expropriation.

For what?

A yard for Line 4?

IF the line is extended west, it will connect to Wilson Yard which has additional expansion room.

IF the line is not connected to Wilson, then the yard will almost certainly go into what is now CP's Toronto Yard, there's ample space, its simply a matter of building the connection. Depending on where one branches off its as little as a 500m spur.

To be clear, I am over simplifying, but I am being accurate just the same.

 

[micheal_can]

For what?

A yard for Line 4?

IF the line is extended west, it will connect to Wilson Yard which has additional expansion room.

IF the line is not connected to Wilson, then the yard will almost certainly go into what is now CP's Toronto Yard, there's ample space, its simply a matter of building the connection. Depending on where one branches off its as little as a 500m spur.

To be clear, I am over simplifying, but I am being accurate just the same.

I was just told that both of those are not options.

 

[JSF-1]

Then the only other option is expropriation.

The most likely option would be constructing tail tracks at the east end of the line to store trains overnight like what is being done on the SSE. This would be a 3 or 4 track wide "storage" yard", 2 trains deep for a capacity of either 6 or 8 trains. Wilson Yard could be used for overnight storage of trains at the west-end of the line with either Wilson or Davisville being used for more involved maintenance. The storage tracks are just for overnight storage with only interior cleaning and inspection being done there. Everything else would be done at either Wilson or Davisville. This is how the Sheppard Line currently works with trains being stored overnight in the tail tracks west of Sheppard where they also receive basic interior cleaning, while the more involved maintenance work happens at Davisville Yard. This also happens on Line 2 with trains stored at Keele Yard.

 

[Northern Light]

I was just told that both of those are not options.

If so, they were wrong, but you need to quote that post so I can see what the person said.

I'm not wrong.

 

[micheal_can]

What “yards” for Line 2?. There is Greenwood and that’s it. Obico is looking quite far in the future, and Vincent isn’t worth counting.

As for Wilson, yes, if Sheppard is also extended west (and the billion dollar Humber crossing at Bathurst). But now the cost is rocketing even further AND quite a large number of eggs are in the Wilson basket.

EDIT: the proposed LRT yard was at Sheppard and Conlins.

If so, they were wrong, but you need to quote that post so I can see what the person said.

I'm not wrong.

That is the one I was following.

 

[Northern Light]

That is the one I was following.

Mark did not say Wilson was not feasible, he said storing trains on Line 4 in the tail tracks would be insufficient.

He ialso said, and is correct if Wilson Yard is used that's a lot of eggs in the Wilson Basket, but it is do-able.

He didn't comment on the use of CP's Toronto Yard.

****

Michael all of this has been posted about at length before, use the search function on UT, or google " Term Term Urbantoronto.ca" if you've chosen your terms properly you'll find that virtually every question you ask has been answered previously.

 

[micheal_can]

Mark did not say Wilson was not feasible, he said storing trains on Line 4 in the tail tracks would be insufficient.

He is also said, and is correct if Wilson Yard is used that's a lot of eggs in the Wilson Basket, but it is do-able.

He didn't comment on the use of CP's Toronto Yard.

****

Michael all of this has been posted about at length before, use the search function on UT, or google " Term Term Urbantoronto.ca" if you've chosen your terms properly you'll find that virtually every question you ask has been answered previously.

I did not realize, nor could I find any official announcement of changing the plan from the Sheppard LRT to the Sheppard Subway. What would I need to put in the search bar to have found that?

 

[Rainforest]

Stations at a very crude level would be the same as above, but you have greater tunnel distance, ~3.7km or so.

That gives you a low-end range of 2B, to a top end of maybe 2.5B

There's a lot of fuzzy in there such as what land is used to build an above-grade station and how large that station is, and whether you could get closer to the surface and maybe cut and cover some of the route.

The route I show below uses the old Canadian Northern Right-of-Way north of Sheppard:

View attachment 553419

The ROW is 30M wide. In theory, wide enough for tunnel or trench; though you're running between backyards, so people would love that.

The ROW at Street level today:

View attachment 553421

Although, if the goal is to get a subway to Malvern Centre, then it might be easier to send Line 2 there. In the tunnel to the south of CP corridor, then turn parallel to the CP line, and continue at the surface level.

The area between the CP corridor and Nugget Ave / McLevin Ave is commercial, and can presumably be bought out, simplifying the construction.

The subway could switch to undergrpound somewhere between Markham Rd and Tapscott Rd.

Another possibility is connecting the McCowan subway station to Malvern Centre using LRT, and routing that LRT either south of the CP corridor or on the north side of Nugget Ave / McLevin Ave.