News   Nov 29, 2024
Feds Match $758 Million Investments for New Line 2 Subway Trains
 946     0 
News   Nov 29, 2024
Looking Back on a Year of Construction at Amexon's Central Park
 376     0 
News   Nov 29, 2024
33-Storey St Catharines Tower Would Retain Masonic Temple
 694     1 

Sheppard Line 4 Subway Extension (Proposed)

JSF-1 said:
Or they could just get off at the station at the station at Kennedy and then take the bus the rest of the way. It would be silly to take the bus to McCowan and Sheppard, transfer onto the subway, take it one stop south to STC and then transfer to Line 4 to continue east, when instead you can just stay on the bus and take to straight to Line 4 at Kenndy and Sheppard. If Line 4 terminates at STC ridership patterns will adapt to this reality. Now I'll admit the EELRT in its current incarnation would throw a big wrench into this since transferring from the EELRT at Sheppard and than either taking the subway one stop south, or hopping on a bus for an addition 2km ride to the subway at Agincourt is just as bad, but if Line 4 terminates at STC than the onus will be on the City to adapt its EELRT plan around this somehow. At the same time when we were all fighting over the Line 2 extension, the linear transfer at Kennedy to Line 3 was often brought up, but I fail to see how creating a linear transfer along Sheppard between Line 4 and the EELRT is any better. Maybe you bridge this potential gap by extending the EELRT 2 or so extra kilometres to Agincourt and create a hub there between Line 4, the EELRT, and the GO Train, but that's just shifting the linear transfer down the road. It would also make no sense to route the EELRT down McCowan to STC since that would just duplicate the subway. Simply put transit expansion into Scarborough was always going to be a mess, the EELRT complicates matters, and not everyone will be happy with the outcome we get.
Click to expand...
Yes I was talking with EELRT in planned. I'm not oppose to a linear transfer, I find it as a tradeoff for dollars saved somewhere. Yes I guess the EELRT could go to Agincourt, that makes sense. I'm more infatuated with the crosstown approach. 2 straight lines from Morningside & Sheppard to Sheppard West is cool. But the EELRT to Agincourt solves my gripe I guess.
 
Steve X said:
It makes more sense to just move the GO buses to Sheppard/McCowan and make a big hub there.

Shhh. People don't know that the 129, 130, 131, 132 and 169 would end up there. I think once TTC does a survey, everyone will pick the routes to stay at STC.

I really don't think they would keep the 985 once the subway opens. Heck the 85 would run like what runs parallel to Line 4. It might just be once branch from Yonge to McCowan running every 15 minutes or so.
We might see the 10 Van Horne and 169 Huntingwood split up again. The 169 could terminate at Victoria Park/Sheppard Station. The 167 Pharmancy North bus would too.
Since a transfer at Birchmount/Sheppard is difficult without a Birchmount Station, perhaps they could split the 17. Create a Birchmount North route terminating at Warden/Sheppard Station.
Same thing for Midland. Split the 57 and have a Midland North route terminating at Kennedy/Agincourt Station.
Click to expand...
I know I have discussed this in the SSE thread but based on current bus routes (which can obviously change) which stations the bus routes terminate at would likely be:

McCowan/Sheppard:
85 Sheppard East
16 McCowan (assuming it is extended north)
129 McCowan North (May continue to STC)
130 Middlefield
131 Nugget
132 Milner
169 Huntingwood
939A/B Finch East Express
920 (Durham Transit)

Scarborough Centre
9 Bellamy
16 McCowan
21 Brimley
38 Highland Creek
43B Kennedy
129 McCowan North (assuming it continues to STC)
133 Neilson Road
134 Progress
178 Brimorton (assuming this route is implemented)
938 Highland Creek Express
996 Wilson Express (Honestly this route should terminate at York Mills, and have a branch of the 995 serve STC)
900 (Durham Transit) (assuming it is extended to STC)
GO Bus Routes (41, 92, 94, 96B) (These could be moved to McCowan/Sheppard if GO and the TTC want)
Intercity Buses (These could be moved to McCowan/Sheppard)

To me the wild cards are the 16/129 McCowan buses as either the 16 will be extended to Sheppard/McCowan (and the 129 cut-back) or the status quo will be maintained with both the 16 and 129 continuing to terminate at STC. The GO and Intercity Buses are also up in the area as they can terminate at either STC or McCowan/Sheppard it just depends on where the intercity bus terminal will be built. Both stations could potentially have DRT connections although the Ellemsere BRT could change how DRT serves Scarborough; would the 920 still run if the BRT was operational and the 900 was extended to STC instead?
 
I decided to try and figure out how the other stations would be served by buses and what the stations could be called, so here's my idea:

Bathurst/Sheppard (Earl Bales Station) - No Bus Terminal
7 Bathurst (thru-service)
160 Bathurst North (thru-service)

Consumers Station - No Bus Terminal
85 Sheppard East (thru-service)
24B Victoria Park via Consumers (assuming this route is maintained)

Victoria Park/Sheppard (Sullivan Station) - Bus Terminal
10 Van Horne (assuming route is extended south)
24 Victoria Park (thru-service)
85 Sheppard East (thru-service)
167 Pharmacy North
169 Huntingwood
924 Victoria Park Express (thru-service)

Warden/Sheppard (Tam O'Shanter Station) - No Bus Terminal
68 Warden (thru-service)
85 Sheppard East (thru-service)
968 Warden Express (thru-service)

Kennedy/Sheppard (Agincourt Station) - Bus Terminal
17 Birchmount
43 Kennedy (thru-service)
57 Midland
85 Sheppard East (thru-service)
117 Birchmount North (assuming route split)
157 Midland North (assuming route split)

Sheppard/McCowan (White Haven Station) - Bus Terminal
16 McCowan (assuming it is extended north)
85 Sheppard East (thru service)
129 McCowan North
130 Middlefield
131 Nugget
132 Milner
169 Huntingwood
939A/B Finch East Express
920 (Durham Transit)

As for names these are what I believe to be the most viable options given how Metrolinx likes to name things. For the stop at Bathurst you have either Earl Bales or Bathurst Manor. For the stop at Victoria Park, the options are: Sullivan, Pleasant View, and Corinthian. For the stop at Warden the options are Tam O'Shanter, and Sullivan assuming it isn't used for the stop at Victoria Park. Lastly for the stop at McCowan the options are White Haven, Sheppard East, or Sheppard-McCowan but we know how Metrolinx feels about those kinds of names.
 
Last edited:
JSF-1 said:
Bathurst/Sheppard (Earl Bales Station) - No Bus Terminal
7 Bathurst (thru-service)
160 Bathurst North (thru-service)
Click to expand...

160 Bathurst North will probably get cancelled altogether. Its role north of Steeles is to serve New Westminister Dr (the northmost part) and Atkinson Ave. Once Yonge North subway is ready - well before any Line 4 extension - YRT will likely replace that service with its own route that connects to Yonge North.

Then, TTC might keep it running between Wilson Stn and Steeles, but once the Line 4 service begins, there will be no purpose left for that route (everyone can take Line 1, then Line 4, then bus #7 instead).
 
For the eastern side, my preference is 2A (to Sheppard&McCowan).

However, if 2B (to STC) is chosen, then as some already pointed out, the inconvenience north of the 401 can be partly mitigated by running bus 85 past McCowan and all the way to Kennedy Stn (or wherever the subway diverts from Sheppard).

Ditto for EELRT; either do not build the Sheppard section at all, or if built, send it past McCowan and connect to Line 4 directly.
 
JSF-1 said:
It shouldn't at all come as a surprise that people would prefer the line terminate at STC. The area around STC has been the central hub for Scarborough since it was built in the 70's and in this part of the city the collective belief is STC is the centre of Scarborough, it is our downtown. While there are plans for development at Sheppard and McCowan, that won't change the reality on the ground of how STC is viewed as the main hub of Scarborough both within Scarborough and outside of it. As well the development at McCowan and Sheppard is going to happen with or without Line 4 so I personally don't think it makes a good argument in flavor of option 2A. Their are arguments to be made, but development isn't one of them.
Click to expand...
Things is, you're right but why build Sheppard/McCowan at all? If the people want 2B, why did the province go up to Sheppard on the Bloor Danforth? It's a lack of foresight. People (including this board) were told this would happen but insisted Sheppard/McCowan was a good idea because of development. This just mirrors the STC/SRT situation with the McCowan Station there. I agree with running the EELRT Agincourt GO, that would just make the most sense.

11th said:
Curious as to how much the feedback varies between each consultation meeting locations.
Click to expand...
I think everyone wants STC, from regular users to transit enthusiasts.
 
Last edited:
denfromoakvillemilton said:
Things is, you're right but why build Sheppard/McCowan at all? If the people want 2B, why did the province go up to Sheppard on the Bloor Danforth? It's a lack of foresight. People (including this board) were told this would happen but insisted Sheppard/McCowan was a good idea because of development. This just mirrors the STC situation with the McCowan Station there. I agree with running the EELRT Agincourt GO, that would just make the most sense.


I think everyone wants STC, from regular users to transit enthusiasts.
Click to expand...
Crossing the 401 with Line 2 crosses an important barrier, that helps to bridge the pedestrian hostile gap, so I wouldn't say that it's entirely useless.
 
JSF-1 said:
Or they could just get off at the station at the station at Kennedy and then take the bus the rest of the way.
Click to expand...
the frequent 10 minutes or better 85 will almost certainly be cut back to Mccowan/sheppard, since they want to make that station a terminal for a ton of bus routes in scarborough and north york, regardless of what option is chosen. A branch will run maybe every 30 minutes between yonge and McCowan, like the current situation between don mills and yonge, so no this would not be an option
JSF-1 said:
It would be silly to take the bus to McCowan and Sheppard, transfer onto the subway, take it one stop south to STC and then transfer to Line 4 to continue east
Click to expand...
You are absolutely right, it would be silly, which is why people in Scarborough are opposed to 2B
 
mossynukes said:
the frequent 10 minutes or better 85 will almost certainly be cut back to Mccowan/sheppard, since they want to make that station a terminal for a ton of bus routes in scarborough and north york, regardless of what option is chosen. A branch will run maybe every 30 minutes between yonge and McCowan, like the current situation between don mills and yonge, so no this would not be an option

You are absolutely right, it would be silly, which is why people in Scarborough are opposed to 2B
Click to expand...
I think people in Scarborough want 2B and that will be reflected in the survey results. MX has its faults, but people don't want to transfer to go to STC which is what 2A means.
adys123 said:
Crossing the 401 with Line 2 crosses an important barrier, that helps to bridge the pedestrian hostile gap, so I wouldn't say that it's entirely useless.
Click to expand...
I agree with which is why I prefer it. I'm just saying from what the pop-up looked like, 2B is the most popular option.
 
Markster said:
Hey, I took photos at the Sheppard/Markham infosession. Unsurprisingly, the responses are very different.
I can't upload right now, but they're on twitter:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1803201440803934401

https://twitter.com/x/status/1803202352410964268
I'll come back and edit them into this post when I get a chance.
Click to expand...
I'm shocked option 3 is more popular, but that Sheppard/Markham area probably wants RT access. I think people don't wanna transfer at McCowan to go to STC unless there is another incentive for it, which option 3 provides, a one-seat ride across Scarborough.

Regarding your question about people picking the west extension in Scarborough, I think those folks probably work at NYCC and west and don't want to drive all the time.
 
Last edited:
Rainforest said:
160 Bathurst North will probably get cancelled altogether. Its role north of Steeles is to serve New Westminister Dr (the northmost part) and Atkinson Ave. Once Yonge North subway is ready - well before any Line 4 extension - YRT will likely replace that service with its own route that connects to Yonge North.

Then, TTC might keep it running between Wilson Stn and Steeles, but once the Line 4 service begins, there will be no purpose left for that route (everyone can take Line 1, then Line 4, then bus #7 instead)
Click to expand...
There is some value to having a one seat ride from north of Steeles down Bathurst. Perhaps if the 160 is cancelled the 7 could be extended another 2km down Bathurst to Promenade Terminal. A ton of condos popping up around that whole area. Also now that the fare wall is gone, there's really no good reason not to have more cross city boundary bus lines. If you look on Google Maps, there really isn't a substantial density change north of Steeles, so it is kind of silly that we turn back the 7 before density really starts to taper on Bathurst (more north of Centre).
 
denfromoakvillemilton said:
I'm shocked option 3 is more popular, but that Sheppard/Markham area probably wants RT access. I think people don't wanna transfer at McCowan to go to STC unless there is another incentive for it, which option 3 provides, a one-seat ride across Scarborough.

Regarding your question about people picking the west extension in Scarborough, I think those folks probably work at NYCC and west and don't want to drive all the time.
Click to expand...
As a former Scarborough resident. We all ended up at STC not because we wanted to but because all the busses went through there. I totally can understand why some people want a longer route on one street.
 
I feel like we could end up with a "compromised" (watered down) subway plan. Think Sheppard West to Victoria Park, with maybe the Consumers station removed. This would make the "stubway" a bit stubbier.

If they were to extend the subway to McCowan or STC, I wonder if one of Consumers or Victoria Park stations could be on the chopping block?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top