News   Jul 19, 2024
Menkes' Maison 77 Clarendon Topped Off in South Hill
 307     0 
News   Jul 19, 2024
TTC's Next Big Step: Replacing Rick Leary
 1.5K     4 
News   Jul 19, 2024
Third Phase of Quad Residences Advances at York University
 590     1 

TTC: Sheppard Subway Expansion (Speculative)

Wrenkin said:
If they went back to this, it would be the time to take a look at integrating with GO. This all presumes Presto anyway. Hamilton, zone 7?
Click to expand...

A full GTHA fare zone structure would presumably be a lot more complicated than just a TTC fare zone structure. But yes, it would make sense to do a wholesale integration. Especially given the fact that TTC rapid transit is going to start extending more and more beyond Toronto's borders, and more 905 transit is going to be coming in (Durham Highway 2 BRT, Mississauga Transitway, VIVA, etc).
 
gweed123 said:
I know it's a bit off-topic, but this is the type of fare zone I'd like to see for the TTC:
Click to expand...
With those fares, the TTC will still likely run deficits, because the shorter trips will be paying much less than it is currently. The 1 zone fare will need to stay close to $3; while a 3+ zone fare will have to be $4~5 - but that'd just discourage transit use.
And other comments on the map:
1) smaller zones - zone 2 divided into east and west, a "suburban central" zone between Dufferin/Spadina subway and Don Mills;
2) base fare should be for 2 zones - solves the zone boundary problem.
 
11th said:
With those fares, the TTC will still likely run deficits, because the shorter trips will be paying much less than it is currently. The 1 zone fare will need to stay close to $3; while a 3+ zone fare will have to be $4~5 - but that'd just discourage transit use.
And other comments on the map:
1) smaller zones - zone 2 divided into east and west, a "suburban central" zone between Dufferin/Spadina subway and Don Mills;
2) base fare should be for 2 zones - solves the zone boundary problem.
Click to expand...

Good points. Keep in mind though, the zone fares only apply to Presto. Cash fare (which a lot of people will still pay) would be $3.50. What I'm hoping for with that fare structure is that those people who do use the Presto fares will increase the number of short distance trips they take. For example, if they need to take the streetcar from Bathurst to say University, right now for $3 a lot of people will choose to walk that. But if it's only $2? I'd think a few more people would consider the TTC a valid option.

I've also experimented with the smaller zone thing, but the problem with that, especially when it's extrapolated to a regional scale, becomes really complicated to figure out.

One of the things I noted at the bottom of that map is the 'refund model', where when the Presto card is tapped, the full $3.50 is deducted. If you travel less than 3 zones, tap off when you exit the system and your card is credited with the difference. This will reduce fare zone dodging (paying for 2 zones, but travelling 3). There will also be a few people who will forget to tap off, and then the system gets a few extra bucks. People will be much more willing to tap off if they get money back, rather than charging base fare when tapped on, and then charging again when they tap off.
 
M II A II R II K said:
Or a more modern smartphone type of pay system that's customizable to the penny depending on where you start and end up.
Click to expand...

I like this idea. $4 for a single fair, or you can get a special card that allows distance based spacing (based on the number of stops you travel on the subway, or it responds with a GPS system on a bus)
 
innsertnamehere said:
I like this idea. $4 for a single fair, or you can get a special card that allows distance based spacing (based on the number of stops you travel on the subway, or it responds with a GPS system on a bus)
Click to expand...

Honestly, I like the London, UK system. Flat fare for buses. Variable fares for subways. You can go cheap and take hours to get there. Or pay more and get there faster.
 
its going to look quite different in 2022 as well.

on another, more depressing note, it has now been 10 years since rapid transit was expanded in Toronto. And to think we still have another 4 before the next part opens!
 
I was tempted to wear a party hat during my commute today.

Sheppard also finally broke the 50,000 mark in ridership...that's both uplifting and depressing.
 
JayBeeGooner said:
The Yonge line probably broke 50,000 in 1954!
Click to expand...

Possibly closer to 1924. The Witt trams ran in 2-car trains and still had very close intervals between trains.

The King line carries 56,700 passengers per day today and has a much lower level of service than Yonge did at that time. While King passengers to approach from 2 directions, my grandmother (who rode Yonge daily while in school during the 30's) has told me that the Yonge line ridership going north in the morning wasn't exactly empty space (anecdotal, but all I have for evidence).
 
Last edited:
rbt said:
Possibly closer to 1924. The Witt trams ran in 2-car trains and still had very close intervals between trains.

The King line carries 56,700 passengers per day today and has a much lower level of service than Yonge did at that time. While King passengers to approach from 2 directions, my grandmother (who rode Yonge daily while in school during the 30's) has told me that the Yonge line ridership going north in the morning wasn't exactly empty space (anecdotal, but all I have for evidence).
Click to expand...

Given that the Sheppard line is very short and was obviously intended to be longer the ridership isn't really all that bad. The Yonge line is an exceptional case as it was the very first line; even in the first phase from Union to Eglinton was somewhat longer and has more stops. It would be pretty hard for any new line (other than the downtown relief line) to match that. The Yonge extension to Hwy 7 and the Eglinton line will probably be considerably lower, the Spadina extension to Vaughan might well have lower ridership than Sheppard. The Sheppard subway has an unusually high amount of condo development for a recently built subway line, and I think has the potential to capture a lot of car traffic if extended (traffic on Sheppard Avenue and 401 is bad, and the daily traffic volumes on 401 are well over 300,000 on the section between Yonge and DVP). It is simply not very useful because it is short, and due to the lack of other connecting subway lines making it useless for going anywhere that is not on the Yonge Line. It is very noticeable that far more people who live in the area drive than take the subway, particularly during off peak hours. Although this is a wealthy area, the traffic is terrible so I think people would use the subway, if it were extended and were useful for getting other places than downtown.

Short subway lines hardly ever get terribly high ridership. Paris' 3bis and 7bis are way lower than Sheppard, the Waterloo & City line in London is comparable (though hard to compare because it is closed evenings and Sundays) and both go through much more densely populated areas than Sheppard. Berlin has the U55 which was intended to be an extension of U5, but part of it was deferred and it is disconnected from the rest of the U-Bahn, and has low ridership. I'm not sure about the shuttle lines in New York or the "Ramal" in Madrid. The Scarborough RT is about the same as Sheppard (but seems much more crowded because the cars are smaller). The Canada Line in Vancouver is considerably longer than Sheppard, but not that busy - the per km ridership of Sheppard is higher.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top