News   Jul 19, 2024
Menkes' Maison 77 Clarendon Topped Off in South Hill
 413     0 
News   Jul 19, 2024
TTC's Next Big Step: Replacing Rick Leary
 1.8K     4 
News   Jul 19, 2024
Third Phase of Quad Residences Advances at York University
 683     1 

Sheppard Line 4 Subway Extension (Proposed)

nfitz said:
The first presentation was March 16, 2007. The first mention in the media that something was coming was March 15, 2007. Perhaps there was early talk of it being above-ground - we certainly heard that there was early talk of putting LRT on Kipling, but the numbers didn't add up - but it doesn't really matter, as the proposal from day 1 (March 16, 2007) was underground - as you can see in the discussion we had at the time. urbantoronto.ca/forum/showthread.php/2935-Transit-City-Plan
Click to expand...
That's exactly how I remember it, so we don't disagree.
 
denfromoakvillemilton said:
That's false rainforest. Miller never intended for the Dufferin-Bayview section to be underground.
Click to expand...

No idea where you get you info.

All presentations I've seen, have the Keele to Laird section underground.

And anyway, it is not physically possible to add 2 LRT lanes there. Some parts of that stretch are 4 lanes wide, others are 5 lanes wide. A lot of businesses depend on on-street parking.
 
Last edited:
BurlOak said:
The central part was put underground because it was completely unacceptable to reduce Eglinton to 3 (total) lanes. But now, after spending $4B on tunnelling and underground stations, we are perfectly happy to reduce Eglinton to 3 lanes.

And what's this about "(so far, remains on surface)". The election made it abundantly clear that this will not change. You cannot get change by voting for the status quo.
Click to expand...

Two surface LRT lanes would not fit anyway, some central sections of Eglinton are only 4 lanes wide.

I do not know if it is a good or bad idea to reduce Eglinton to 3 lanes. But at least, LRT running underground will not be affected by general traffic.
 
Rainforest said:
No idea where you get you info.

All presentations I've seen, have the Keele to Laird section underground.

And anyway, it is not physically possible to squeeze 2 LRT lanes. Some parts of that stretch are 4 lanes wide, others are 5 lanes wide. A lot of businesses depend on on-street parking.
Click to expand...

There was talk of all above ground before the first official plan had them underground, that's what I'm saying.

Rainforest said:
Two surface LRT lanes would not fit anyway, some central sections of Eglinton are only 4 lanes wide.

I do not know if it is a good or bad idea to reduce Eglinton to 3 lanes. But at least, LRT running underground will not be affected by general traffic.
Click to expand...

We should not have to lose a lane because someone want's a station. And do you really think undergound LRT is a good idea?
 
denfromoakvillemilton said:
Please source this. I have McCowan Sheppard 8500, not anything close to Subway.
It will become none or all because if you give an inch they will take a mile
Click to expand...

Sorry I should have posted my source.

The 9500-14000 ppphd 2031 ridership projection for Scarborough subway was taken from this report from last summer:
http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2013/cc/bgrd/backgroundfile-60240.pdf

I got that document from googling.

The 5000 ppphd ridership projection for Sheppard east subway was from the Sheppard LRT EA:
http://thecrosstown.ca/sites/default/files/pdf/reports/Sheppard-EA/ea_report_master_part1.pdf
 
ehlow said:
Sorry I should have posted my source.

The 9500-14000 ppphd 2031 ridership projection for Scarborough subway was taken from this report from last summer:
http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2013/cc/bgrd/backgroundfile-60240.pdf

I got that document from googling.

The 5000 ppphd ridership projection for Sheppard east subway was from the Sheppard LRT EA:
http://thecrosstown.ca/sites/default/files/pdf/reports/Sheppard-EA/ea_report_master_part1.pdf
Click to expand...

Oh was just look for Bloor Danforth, I believe you on sheppard because I've read that my self many times :) Still I believe in sticking to your guns and Metrolinx/Ontario didn't do that.
 
denfromoakvillemilton said:
Oh was just look for Bloor Danforth, I believe you on sheppard because I've read that my self many times :) Still I believe in sticking to your guns and Metrolinx/Ontario didn't do that.
Click to expand...

All I'm saying the ridership projection for Scar subway puts it at around the minimum for a subway, but Sheppard east is only 50% of the minimum in 2031.
 
The scarborough subway had 11,000 PPHD projection from Metrolinx, that is what I like to use as the city number is so wild in variation.
 
It amazes me how greatly the projections differ between TTC and ML for all our LRTs. I don't have the numbers in front of me, but the differences are massive. The TTC seems to be more conservative in their estimates.
 
TheTigerMaster said:
It amazes me how greatly the projections differ between TTC and ML for all our LRTs. I don't have the numbers in front of me, but the differences are massive. The TTC seems to be more conservative in their estimates.
Click to expand...

Maybe this is for a reason. LRT ridership partly depends on whether it serves locals only, or adds people who take a short bus ride to LRT instead of a longer but more direct bus ride.

Say, will someone boarding at Finch and Brimley and wishing to get onto the Yonge subway, take a long bus ride straight to Yonge, or take a short bus ride to LRT to Sheppard subway to Yonge?

Since both options are somewhat reasonable, it is hard to predict in advance what the majority of riders will actually do.

My semi-educated guess is that surface LRTs will mostly carry locals, and hence are at no risk of going over capacity. But there are some concerns regarding Eglinton LRT, both in the east (riders from Lawrence East bus and 100 Flemmington bus boarding the LRT at Don Mills), and in the west when the line is extended (riders from Kipling, Islington, and Royal York bus transferring to Eglinton LRT instead of staying on the bus till Bloor subway).
 
denfromoakvillemilton said:
And do you really think undergound LRT is a good idea?
Click to expand...

Compared to do-nothing, underground LRT is a good idea. Existing Eglinton bus is a major PITA during the rush hours; LRT will make traveling along Eglinton much easier and faster.

Compared to a subway, or an LRT that stays underground longer, hard to say now. Much depends on how the rest of the network is expanded.
 
denfromoakvillemilton said:
We should not have to lose a lane because someone want's a station. And do you really think undergound LRT is a good idea?
Click to expand...

LRTs which have parts underground or elevated do make sense. Why wouldn't they?

Boston, SF, Brussels, Edmonton, Ottawa (under construction), Newark, LA and probably many other cities have light rail running partly underground.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top