News   Jul 17, 2024
Don Valley Floodway
 214     0 
News   Jul 16, 2024
Minto Submits Modifications to Grand Park Village Plan in Mimico
 780     0 
News   Jul 16, 2024
News Roundup for July 16, 2024
 628     0 

Toronto Crosstown LRT | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx | Arcadis

denfromoakvillemilton said:
We could change whole thing right? I like that. Have it run on finch west, or this. Or this is what I did:

I got rid of sheppard, but the idea is there.
Click to expand...

Well, the existing Sheppard subway will not disappear, it will remain in operation in one form or another.

The most practical solution is to leave the subway as is, add Sheppard East LRT, and Finch West+East LRT. It will improve feeder ability (from LRTs to Spadina / Yonge / Don Mills / BD extension trips), although will be too slow for long crosstown trips.

An alternative (but it is probably belongs to Fantasy Maps thread due to the high total cost) is a fully grade-separate mini-metro line that incorporates the existing Sheppard subway tunnel. Features of that line would be:
- High floor (hence the conversion of existing Sheppard subway is easier than to low-floor LRT)
- Smaller footprint / somewhat lower capacity than that of the standard TTC subways, to reduce the cost
- Cost of extending to both the eastern and western limits of the city must nor be astronomical
- Ability to handle tight turns (there will be quite a few; in the west it will have to get from Sheppard to Finch somehow; in the east it will have to divert south to STC and Centennial campus, then maybe turn north and reach Malvern)
- Average speed should be higher than that of other TTC subways (say, 40 - 45 kph versus 30 - 35), but the stop spacing must not be too wide (perhaps 1 - 2 km)
- Standard motors (no linear induction motors, which have problems with snow, and bind TTC to a single supplier)
- Partial fare-by-distance, to offset the operating costs; perhaps riding up to 1/2 of the length would be for the standard TTC fare, but more than that would be for a $1 surcharge. If the line goes to Pearson, that could be for a $2 surcharge.
 
Rainforest said:
Well, the existing Sheppard subway will not disappear, it will remain in operation in one form or another.

The most practical solution is to leave the subway as is, add Sheppard East LRT, and Finch West+East LRT. It will improve feeder ability (from LRTs to Spadina / Yonge / Don Mills / BD extension trips), although will be too slow for long crosstown trips.

An alternative (but it is probably belongs to Fantasy Maps thread due to the high total cost) is a fully grade-separate mini-metro line that incorporates the existing Sheppard subway tunnel. Features of that line would be:
- High floor (hence the conversion of existing Sheppard subway is easier than to low-floor LRT)
- Smaller footprint / somewhat lower capacity than that of the standard TTC subways, to reduce the cost
- Cost of extending to both the eastern and western limits of the city must nor be astronomical
- Ability to handle tight turns (there will be quite a few; in the west it will have to get from Sheppard to Finch somehow; in the east it will have to divert south to STC and Centennial campus, then maybe turn north and reach Malvern)
- Average speed should be higher than that of other TTC subways (say, 40 - 45 kph versus 30 - 35), but the stop spacing must not be too wide (perhaps 1 - 2 km)
- Standard motors (no linear induction motors, which have problems with snow, and bind TTC to a single supplier)
- Partial fare-by-distance, to offset the operating costs; perhaps riding up to 1/2 of the length would be for the standard TTC fare, but more than that would be for a $1 surcharge. If the line goes to Pearson, that could be for a $2 surcharge.
Click to expand...
I can agree with some of this. Not fare by distance. That hurts the far out points in the suburbs. I also think that since we are losing money on sheppard a decision will have to be made. Sheppard and Finch East created a redundancy.
 
denfromoakvillemilton said:
Not fare by distance. That hurts the far out points in the suburbs.
Click to expand...

Yes; but if we choose not to give them rapid transit at all, it hurts them even more.

I understand the school of thought that says we need to maintain flat fare to help people living on the fringes of the city, many of whom are on low income. However, if we make such a resolution, then estimate the cost recovery of a potential transit line and decide not to build it at all since we can't afford to run it; then we obviously defeat the purpose of the first resolution.

denfromoakvillemilton said:
I also think that since we are losing money on sheppard a decision will have to be made. Sheppard and Finch East created a redundancy.
Click to expand...

Sheppard is not losing that much. Subsidy per rider is even greater for a number of non-arterial bus routes, but I don't think we want to get rid of them.

There will be no redundancy if both Sheppard and Finch get LRT lines. LRT is more local in nature, and riders from Finch will not want to take a bus to Sheppard LRT, or vice versa. And, in fact, a single street-median LRT line might get into capacity problems if it has to handle the combined load of Finch East and Sheppard East.

If we end up building a mini-metro, with higher capacity than a street-median LRT, then indeed it should be a single line; and the existing Sheppard tunnel would likely be re-purposed for such line.
 
Rainforest said:
Yes; but if we choose not to give them rapid transit at all, it hurts them even more.

I understand the school of thought that says we need to maintain flat fare to help people living on the fringes of the city, many of whom are on low income. However, if we make such a resolution, then estimate the cost recovery of a potential transit line and decide not to build it at all since we can't afford to run it; then we obviously defeat the purpose of the first resolution.



Sheppard is not losing that much. Subsidy per rider is even greater for a number of non-arterial bus routes, but I don't think we want to get rid of them.

There will be no redundancy if both Sheppard and Finch get LRT lines. LRT is more local in nature, and riders from Finch will not want to take a bus to Sheppard LRT, or vice versa. And, in fact, a single street-median LRT line might get into capacity problems if it has to handle the combined load of Finch East and Sheppard East.

If we end up building a mini-metro, with higher capacity than a street-median LRT, then indeed it should be a single line; and the existing Sheppard tunnel would likely be re-purposed for such line.
Click to expand...

Difference with the bus routes is that their not a major artery. What purpose does sheppard serve?
 
denfromoakvillemilton said:
And Finch West/East would do the same. That's not enough to keep losing money.
Click to expand...

Only some routes: 139, 224, YRT's 90 and maybe Huntingwood.

85 Sheppard and 190 STC express will not divert to Finch and feed into LRT. You would have to run a large number of buses between Don Mills and Yonge to replace the subway.

And even if you allocate those buses and they cost somewhat less than operating the subway, travel times will increase for many riders and they will be very annoyed. The number of annoyed riders will exceed the number of users of 10 or 15 TTC's least used bus routes, if the said routes were cancelled.
 
Rainforest said:
Only some routes: 139, 224, YRT's 90 and maybe Huntingwood.

85 Sheppard and 190 STC express will not divert to Finch and feed into LRT. You would have to run a large number of buses between Don Mills and Yonge to replace the subway.

And even if you allocate those buses and they cost somewhat less than operating the subway, travel times will increase for many riders and they will be very annoyed. The number of annoyed riders will exceed the number of users of 10 or 15 TTC's least used bus routes, if the said routes were cancelled.
Click to expand...

So they let's just give Scarborough what they want: Sheppard to STC. Of course it will change just about nothing, but people can bleat about having two subway that are 5-7 km from their house. If people don't want the LRT(I think it's a great idea) there's not much we can do. I guess if people are prepared to go to STC to get downtown so be it.


As for Eglinton, it should have been HRT but now that ship has saled, how do you feel about an extension to Morningside/Kingston? It could happen with Hudak if it was underground.
 
Last edited:
denfromoakvillemilton said:
So they let's just give Scarborough what they want: Sheppard to STC. Of course it will change just about nothing, but people can bleat about having two subway that are 5-7 km from their house.
Click to expand...

Exactly. It will change nothing, and yet you draw your fantasy maps with the sheppard line going across the entire city.


As for Eglinton, it should have been HRT but now that ship has sailed, how do you feel about an extension to Morningside/Kingston? It could happen with Hudak if it was underground.
Click to expand...

With Hudak, it will me a miracle if anything gets build at all, whether it's underground or not.
 
salsa said:
Exactly. It will change nothing, and yet you draw your fantasy maps with the sheppard line going across the entire city.




With Hudak, it will me a miracle if anything gets build at all, whether it's underground or not.
Click to expand...

Well their fantasy maps. I was trying to accomodate them, until I realized that was pointless. Although I have some map without sheppard and finch across the entire city. I think Hudak knows if the DRL doesn't begin by 2020 he be out of office and out of politics.
 
denfromoakvillemilton said:
sorry 2018. That project has to start in 4 years at the most.
Click to expand...
They don't anticipate the major spending and construction on the Danforth extension in Scarborough to start until 2018. I don't think there will be much reaction in a 2018 election if there's not much action on the project after that.
 
nfitz said:
They don't anticipate the major spending and construction on the Danforth extension in Scarborough to start until 2018. I don't think there will be much reaction in a 2018 election if there's not much action on the project after that.
Click to expand...

They said the DRL was supposed to be done in 2026, don't know when the plan to start but it should be soon I guess?
 
2025 completion (which is presumed on a 2014 funding announcement, where appears set now regardless of who wins office) would mean a 2019 or 2020 construction start.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top