sixrings
Senior Member
As an Eglinton resident I will gladly take the SELRT money and finish the Eglinton line to the airport if you don't want it.
|
|
|
TTC: Sheppard Subway Expansion (Speculative)
- Thread starter LAz
- Start date
As an Eglinton resident I will gladly take the SELRT money and finish the Eglinton line to the airport if you don't want it.
EnviroTO
Senior Member
Sheppard West will happen to get subways to the yard if it happens at all. Whether or not it has stations along the route will depend on ridership projections which I'm not sure will be that impressive.
Dan416
Senior Member
I'm sure there'd at least be a station at Bathurst
Solid Snake
Active Member
I don't live there either but use to live on Sheppard. 1 billion for Sheppard east is wasted money.A BRT for now or reserved lanes for bus makes more sense for now and use the money to elevate or separate Eglinton east from the traffic.
If I had to choose between Eglinton West and Sheppard, I choose Eglinton.Most people on Sheppard wants temporary improvements like reserved lanes for bus until the subway can happen. it's reasonable and pragmatic. they just want to wait their turn instead of gettingthe lrt
This obsession at building the LRT for over a billion while the DRL, improvements on Eglinton or even finch west are needed is beyond bizarre and wasteful.
Last edited:
Rainforest
Senior Member
^ A station at Bathurst is almost certain. There area has a large plaza on the north-west corner, several highrises on the east side of Bathurst (both north and south of Sheppard), and the Earl Bales park is just 200 m away.
It's not like the node mandates construction of a subway line; but if the line goes through it anyway, I don't see how they could justify not building a station.
It's not like the node mandates construction of a subway line; but if the line goes through it anyway, I don't see how they could justify not building a station.
Solid Snake
Active Member
Bathurst as a station is a no brainer
dunkalunk
Senior Member
Agreed. If stations are to be built mid-run at Faywood or Seniac, I would propose that the construction of those stations be sponsored by a developer and that they would pay the money for street-level access on at least 2 corners of the intersection to the station box. If no developer wants to step up to the plate at construction start, then the station boxes would be roughed-out as emergency exits and the developer would pay to fully fit-out the station.
Last edited:
sixrings
Senior Member
Doesn't each station cost about 300 million to construct? Are you suggesting that a developer would contribute 100 million+ just to be able to build there? How much is a parking lot downtown? Why would they choose to build here where they are being blackmailed versus somewhere else? How would it be profitable after spending so much on the subway station?
BurlOak
Senior Member
Based on the ECLRT, Metrolinx stated that the Leslie Station, that is below river level, would cost $80M. Faywood and Senlac with (almost) no bus bay requirements would be similar or less expensive than this.
sixrings
Senior Member
even if that is true thats significantly more than the money that downtown Councillors are getting to help their wards by development levies.
Mike in TO
Senior Member
Stations in those locations (or any location) will not generate even close to the funds required to construct a station... Contribute a small portion of the total costs - yes, pay for the station - not even close.
BurlOak
Senior Member
I think developers, local residents and businesses could provide more by agreeing to additional traffic disruptions and more construction disruptions. If cross streets such as Bathurst, Faywood and Wilson Heights could be closed at Sheppard, and if single lane local traffic were allowed on Sheppard during the construction - maybe in a few stages so not all at once - then the saving in construction costs would be more than the cost of a couple of minor stations.
nfitz
Superstar
The new TTC report on subway versus LRT on Sheppard East is out, for next Monday's meeting.
http://www.ttc.ca/About_the_TTC/Com...upplementary_Reports/Response_to_Commissi.pdf
It clearly lays out costs and ridership, making it clear that even if you built subway, you are only looking at 4,500 passengers per hour in 2031 (and only 6,000 under the most extremely-optimistic assumptions), while the LRT has a capacity of 8,000 passengers per hour with 3-car trains in mixed traffic, and a ridership projection of 2,500 passengers per hour. If anything the numbers suggest the line should be downgraded to BRT instead of upgraded to subway.
http://www.ttc.ca/About_the_TTC/Com...upplementary_Reports/Response_to_Commissi.pdf
It clearly lays out costs and ridership, making it clear that even if you built subway, you are only looking at 4,500 passengers per hour in 2031 (and only 6,000 under the most extremely-optimistic assumptions), while the LRT has a capacity of 8,000 passengers per hour with 3-car trains in mixed traffic, and a ridership projection of 2,500 passengers per hour. If anything the numbers suggest the line should be downgraded to BRT instead of upgraded to subway.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
Still think the bloor subway should be extended, but alas, it cannot be.
Really bugs me that BRT wasn't even considered. I mean, it would be one thing if it was considered and then ruled out for legitimate reasons, but to not even look at it? Pisses me off.
EDIT: Ironically BRT was actually studied as an option for the SRT replacement, where clearly it would make no sense. So the only place in the entire report where BRT is even mentioned is in a place where clearly it makes no sense at all and was added in as a "look! we considered a bunch of options!". But in a place where it could actually be the preferred choice if it was actually studied? Yeah, don't need it there.
Last edited: