sixrings
Senior Member
Also if Sheppard was converted to LRT it would be cheaper to extend west to Downsview or even Weston in comparison to a SUBWAY.
|
|
|
Transit City Plan
- Thread starter 299 bloor call control.
- Start date
SimonP
Active Member
The general problem with the outer urban growth centres is that established neighbourhoods don't want intense development. As a result, outside of the core, high density is only zoned in areas where people don't already live. The problem is that there are reasons people haven't chosen to live in these areas. They are isolated, industrial, and cut off from the frabic of the city. Is it possible to create a sucessful high density community in an area that isn't already integrated with the city? Around Toronto there are many failed (Crescent Town, Flemingdon Park) or mediocre (Scarborough City Centre) attempts. Perhaps by 2010 we've learnt how to do this, but I'm not yet convinced.
nfitz
Superstar
It's now 4 trains to downtown in morning rush, and 5 back in PM rush (departures about every 30 minutes from 4:20 pm to 6:30 pm). And there's always the option of only taking it some days, or one direction. Or when you know the TTC is really messed up somehow.
They are adding trains. And they've promised to go to all-day service by 2020. (whether that means in 2012 or 2020 remains a mystery - but I expect they will continue to add trains).
Agreed ... however if one isn't concerned about the extra fare, it's an option. Personally I do this from Danforth station to save a few minutes and transfers.
It's a tool. It's not perfect ... and it's hard to have local knowledge of every route at every time of day. Google Transit has some strange quirks though ... try taking the GO Train from Oshawa station to Oakville station - it doesn't know that you don't have to change trains at Union, or when you do it's a guaranteed connection ... so it makes you wait an hour at Union, or take a bus:
nfitz
Superstar
Much cheaper as you can run it as surface LRT for part of the route. If I was mayor I'd really push to look at cheaper ways of converting it.
But we know it's not happening ... so it's kind of pointless. Ford might be talked into a few things, but I can't imagine he'd ever want that kind of optics.
Metrolinx has to offer some thing to let him save face. Perhaps something along the lines of continuing the Sheppard East LRT (and Eglinton) because it would delay for years to switch to an unfunded subway, but commit that the SRT replacement is subway (but good grief, extend it to Sheppard/McCowan to intercept the the Sheppard East LRT, please!).
Last edited:
sixrings
Senior Member
I think if Sheppard East LRT was completed and the SRT transfer was eliminated it would cause people to rethink if the transfer to SUBWAY makes much sense at DON mills as well. Especially if they want to continue building it west to downsview.
nfitz
Superstar
Some of the case of extending it west to Downsview, is it allows you to feed trains from Wilson Yard to the Yonge Extension, without having to build a new subway yard on Yonge in Richmond Hill. So you would lose that benefit if you convert, and you only have 2 legs left to justify the west extension instead of 3 (improved service and network connectivity).
Dan416
Senior Member
I do not see Ford ever going for a Sheppard subway-to-LRT conversion. I don't see any politician going for that. An LRT in a subway tunnel won't cost any less to operate than the subway that's there now, and it costs money to do AND requires it to be taken out of service to do (a la converting the SRT to LRT).
Maybe Sheppard should have been built as LRT originally. But that doesn't mean we downgrade it now.
Changing the SRT to LRT is pointless by the same reason for me: you have to take it out of service to do that. A subway extension can be done with no shutdown in service of the SRT. Yes, the SRT needs replacement, and it'll probably get a bit worse for wear in the latter years before the subway opens. But it'll be worth it.
As I said before, I'd use the SELRT money to replace the SRT with a subway extension to STC.
Maybe Sheppard should have been built as LRT originally. But that doesn't mean we downgrade it now.
Changing the SRT to LRT is pointless by the same reason for me: you have to take it out of service to do that. A subway extension can be done with no shutdown in service of the SRT. Yes, the SRT needs replacement, and it'll probably get a bit worse for wear in the latter years before the subway opens. But it'll be worth it.
As I said before, I'd use the SELRT money to replace the SRT with a subway extension to STC.
sixrings
Senior Member
But you would still have the reason that people need to get to the spadina line to get to york or to take riders off the yonge line.. So a conversion doesnt mean that a west extension cant happen. Especially considering how cost effective it would become.
nfitz
Superstar
So how would Commisioner Norm Kelly vote on that? His ward extends approximately from Victoria Park in the wset to the railway tracks half-way between Kennedy and Midland in the east; and from Finch to Ellesmere.
He would lose the Sheppard East LRT from Victoria Park to Agincourt. And also the SRT station at Ellesmere. His constituents would get nothing in return ... Danforth subway to Scarborough Town Centre doesn't really benefit them, as it's too far east.
They've been promised a Sheppard subway instead of LRT - and instead they will get to keep their crowded buses, and insult to injury lose the Ellesemere station (okay, no one uses it ... but it's only an insult, not an injury
)Serious question ... I don't know where Kelly would go. Would he really favour no transit to the LRT?
Asterix
Active Member
What is the practicalities of a connection from eastbound Sheppard to northbound Yonge at that point? Not exactly a simple thing to do and surely not worth being used as justification for extending Sheppard.
scarberiankhatru
Senior Member
Thank god Transit City is focused on such undesirable places! Oh, wait, that's a bad thing. Meanwhile, growing neighbourhoods like everything along the Gardiner, or the Sheppard corridor from Downsview to STC, or Yonge north to wherever, are ignored.
And downtown had no vacant land? Then what were all those parking lots in the 60s/70s/80s/90s? Didn't you ever go up the CN Tower as a kid and see nothing but pavement?
STC didn't get as many jobs as planned, but it didn't get good transit, either, other than the web of bus routes, though that benefits the mall much more than the offices. Spots like Consumers aren't even on that map but have quite a few jobs. Obviously, you can serve fabled urgan growth centres like STC at the same time as other places, like Consumers and Agincourt. It's not one or the other unless you don't know what one and the other are.
I don't think you really get the difference between density and concentration. "Density" means little if you're calculating it using neighbourhoods filled solid with compact housing that stretches beyond walking distance of whatever point you're focusing on. How many acres of parking lots and fields make up the density figures you're using for a spot like STC? Does it include employment? Does it include shoppers? The mall is one of the biggest transit trip generators in the entire city, regardless what drum118 says. After large office clusters, malls are the most important things to serve with transit. One mall at a transit station is worth a truly astounding number of residents, an entire college or university, or a massive employment area (well, the mall is an employment area). STC may not yet be dense, but is clearly concentrated.
David Miller and others can blab on and on all they want about how we need to create medium density Avenues, but the reality they're ignoring is that this city's overwhelming people pattern is one of concentration...massive nodes and clusters and most of the time with nothing but ravines and industry and regular houses in between, and this true pretty much from Steeles down to virtually the YUS loop. These clusters are everywhere and most do not exist because of the subway. Adam Vaughan is trying to scare people into a NIMBYfest of "Oh my god, they're going to put 40 storey buildings across from me!!!" and presenting us with the spectre of 'nothing in between' but we're already doing this all over the place. There's barely a major corridor in the city that doesn't have 12-18 or even 30+ storey buildings at most intersections. North York Centre and the Sheppard corridor are not nodal, interestingly. They are continuously developed - or will be, with Sheppard.
Last edited:
SimonP
Active Member
Are malls such a great trip generator? If they are why doesn't Yorkdale station have vastly more riders than the others along the Spadina line? Or why don't the buses to Sherway have much higher ridership? Suburban malls are fundamentally car oriented developments, and even great transit won't do much to change that. Moreover, traditional malls are becoming somewhat archaic. Today it is big box power centres that people prefer to shop at and developers like to build. STC is still doing fine, but if current trends continue, where will it be in 20 or 30 years?
As to concentration vs. density, I don't really see how it matters. What I feel matters is how many people are within walking distance of a subway station. If a station serves only a single tower with 1000 people surrounded by parking lots or serves 500 houses each with 2 people the total ridership won't be much different, if the demographics match.
I also think you're very wrong that Toronto's pattern is one of concentrated nodes. Outside of downtown it's really quite even. As the numbers posted earlier show there are only about 60,000 workers in the outer nodes, and 700,000 workers outside the core but not in nodes. Residential patterns are similar.
As to concentration vs. density, I don't really see how it matters. What I feel matters is how many people are within walking distance of a subway station. If a station serves only a single tower with 1000 people surrounded by parking lots or serves 500 houses each with 2 people the total ridership won't be much different, if the demographics match.
I also think you're very wrong that Toronto's pattern is one of concentrated nodes. Outside of downtown it's really quite even. As the numbers posted earlier show there are only about 60,000 workers in the outer nodes, and 700,000 workers outside the core but not in nodes. Residential patterns are similar.
Dan416
Senior Member
I think it really depends on the mall. For an easy example, compare Square One to Erin Mills or even South Common. Square One, as a mall, is busier than both. Erin Mills, as a mall, is busier than South Common, but South Common is a real transit hub. I think STC is more along the lines of Square One and Eaton Centre than Erin Mills or Sherway.
howl
Active Member
You're right about malls not being great trip generators. People who shop don't want to drag their bags home on the subway if they have access to a car and free parking. Most of the trip generation at Yorkdale or SCC is probably park-and-ride or teens going to hang out at the mall. However malls have great potential. They hold onto large swaths of land until the market is right for them to redevelop. Anyone remember the Warden Woods Mall at Warden and St.Clair. It's now a transit oriented development. That on a much larger scale will happen to SCC one day. Yorkdale may take a lot longer to evolve.
Dan416
Senior Member
And look how many condos have sprouted up around Square One. And how many more are coming!