News   May 09, 2024
Industry Updates: Construction Education, Housing Prices, Celebrating Excellence
 468     0 
News   May 09, 2024
30-Storey Infill Proposed on Jane Street Between Sheppard and Finch
 795     1 
News   May 09, 2024
News Roundup for May 9, 2024
 538     0 

TTC: Sheppard Subway Expansion (Speculative)

gweed123 said:
If the TBMs from Spadina are transferred there, it should make it more cost-effective. I agree that buying TBMs for that little stretch makes no sense though.
Click to expand...

The TBMs from Spadina aren't large enough. The plan was to use the two TBMs from the east end of the Eglinton Line on Sheppard before moving them to Laird to start their drives.

Justin10000 said:
Scrap the express buses! They're are even a larger drain on taxpayer budgets! Esp. the 145. Waste of money.
Click to expand...

The premium express buses are supposed to be offered on an operating cost-neutral basis. That is why they have a higher fare.

If you really want to save taxpayer dollars, scrap the highways. When was the last time they paid their way? (tongue firmly planted in cheek)

Dan
Toronto, Ont.
 
Last edited:
Rainforest said:
Interestingly, the worst is 192 Airport Rocket, despite being quite popular ... which brings a question whether a higher fare is justified on that route.
Click to expand...
That's only a handful of routes though. If you look at the the data they released in 2011 for all routes, you'll see that (apart from the since reduced 101 Downsview), the 107 Keele North is the most expensive route to operate, at $5,50 a ride, with a loss of $3.80; with the most profitable bus being the 64 Main at $0.52 a ride.

The assumption of a blanket $1.70 income per ride does tend to hide stuff though. If the average number of legs used by someone on the 107 is 1.2 and the average number of legs on the 64 is 3.5 (just pulling numbers out of the air), the result would be different.
 
Rainforest said:
That route certainly needs better management and perhaps should be split in two. However, the kind of rides (long rides) it serves will always be unprofitable in the flat-fare system; the losses will be just spread between other routes.

Interestingly, the worst is 192 Airport Rocket, despite being quite popular ... which brings a question whether a higher fare is justified on that route.
Click to expand...

When the TTC used zone fares, the Humber loop was the west terminal for the Queen (now 501) streetcar. An extra fare was needed to continue west on the Long Branch (now 501) from Humber. But now instead of getting 2 fares, there is only 1 fare being collected.
 
smallspy said:
The TBMs from Spadina aren't large enough. The plan was to use the two TBMs from the east end of the Eglinton Line on Sheppard before moving them to Laird to start their drives.
Click to expand...

For those who want the subway extended - the Spadina TBM's would work.
 
BurlOak said:
For those who want the subway extended - the Spadina TBM's would work.
Click to expand...

It was mentioned today on Steve Munro's blog that due to design and depth issues with the existing Sheppard subway any extension has to be cut and cover at least until well past the 404. It's too close to the surface to use a TBM. Then you're pretty much at Consumers where I suppose after the station you could dive down and start the TBM somewhere after VP.
 
Last edited:
Jonny5 said:
It was mentioned today on Steve Munro's blog that due to design and depth issues with the existing Sheppard subway any extension has to be cut and cover at least until well past the 404. It's too close to the surface to use a TBM. Then you're pretty much at Consumers where I suppose after the station you could dive down and start the TBM after VP. No idea if the grade change for that would work.
Click to expand...

I am not sure, but I understood that in the context of the LRT line which would be ascending toward ground level - which it would reach at Consumers Road. (With not enough earth above the tunnel, it can not be done by TBM). If the tunnel stays underground for a subway all the way to Kennedy (Agincourt GO), STC, or possibly even Vic Park, I would guess that the TBM's could be used.
 
Justin10000 said:
Scratching my head at the assumption that a Sheppard Subway is going to relieve GTA congestion.
Click to expand...

One can also assume that you're amusingly unfamiliar with this city. Almost all of the city's big trip generators outside of the YUS loop are in a band across the top of the city that only a long (20-30+km) Sheppard line could serve. This area's transit modal share is currently rather low, too, so there's room for growth. Cure congestion? Of course not. Help deal with congestion? More than any other east/west line can, that's for sure.

Rainforest said:
These numbers confirm that the most cost-effective routes are those with strong rider turnover: 510 / 509, Dufferin 29, and Bathurst 7 ... as expected in a flat-fare system.

Are the stats available for the Sheppard, YUS, and BD subways?
Click to expand...

Turnover impacts some routes but also important is whether or not these are routes with high ridership at the end of the line, far from the subway stations. Dufferin benefits from being split by the Bloor line (serving two riding patterns) and by not running all the way to Steeles, otherwise its numbers would plummet. The farther north you go on Bathurst, the more people there are. The 190 is a short route that ends at the biggest trip generator in the eastern half of the GTA. 509/510 doesn't have that much turnover, but it does combine two riding patterns (south from Spadina and west from Union). Etc., etc.

Queen's ridership has been weak for a long time and the long section west of Roncesvalles doesn't help the overall numbers. Sheppard runs all the way to Rouge Hill GO station and that final 10km stretch sees mostly empty buses. If you terminated the 85 at Markham, you'd shave off over half the length while keeping almost all the riders. The 190 has also cannibalized the 85 somewhat.

The more profitable routes are simply the ones that do not continue running on into a low-density area since maintaining a shred of decent service in these areas (like outer stretches of Etobicoke or Scarborough) saps the numbers.

And is a subway line 'profitable' if its ridership is dependent on a dozen feeder surface routes each losing millions of dollars per year to fill the subway line up?
 
LAz said:
OMAN new article just out!


http://www.thestar.com/news/transpo...ayor-rob-ford-floats-tolls-to-finance-subways
Click to expand...

Mayor Rob Ford emerged from a meeting with about 20 prominent property developers Wednesday saying they urged him to build a Sheppard subway, not the light rail transit line likely to be approved by city council.
Click to expand...

However, sources say developers balked at the mayor’s proposal for massive increases in development charges, saying he would have to tap Torontonians for other options to help fund the multi-billion-dollar extension to Scarborough Town Centre.
Click to expand...
Surprise, surprise, developers want a subway as well- but they don't want to pay for it either!
 
Last edited:
People seem to have this negative attitude toward developers...but who is building all the skyscrapers and other developments that are happening in this city that caused Urban Toronto to exist in the first place?

I agree with Rob Ford and I agree with the developers.

I sincerely hope Ford can bring these new revenue tools online and get the Sheppard subway (and DRL!) back on track.
 
scarberiankhatru said:
One can also assume that you're amusingly unfamiliar with this city. Almost all of the city's big trip generators outside of the YUS loop are in a band across the top of the city that only a long (20-30+km) Sheppard line could serve. This area's transit modal share is currently rather low, too, so there's room for growth. Cure congestion? Of course not. Help deal with congestion? More than any other east/west line can, that's for sure.
Click to expand...

Riiiigghhtt.. One can assume you're assumingly full of S*it. But I'll let you keep on pimping your RTES fantasy. Have fun!
 
jje1000 said:
Surprise, surprise, developers want a subway as well- but they don't want to pay for it either!
Click to expand...

More likely, the city will have to expropriate property at a "fair market price", then jack up the price as they turn around and sell it to the developers. At the same time, the zoning will have to changed one way or other to have high density next door to the property owners that remain.

Step one would be the removal of appeals to the OMB.
 
This just in... people like the best that money can buy when they don't have to pay for it. I bet if you show people the subway stations of Moscow that people will like them too. I just don't get why this would seem to be news to Rob Ford. I just found out people want subways... brilliant. Too bad life is a little more complex than wanting and getting. What about economics, capacity requirement realities, and competing needs?
 
Coruscanti Cognoscente said:
People seem to have this negative attitude toward developers...but who is building all the skyscrapers and other developments that are happening in this city that caused Urban Toronto to exist in the first place?

I agree with Rob Ford and I agree with the developers.

I sincerely hope Ford can bring these new revenue tools online and get the Sheppard subway (and DRL!) back on track.
Click to expand...

Well, I don't disagree with him on this particular issue; if he can take SELRT funding, add some more from TIF and transit levies, and get the Sheppard subway expanded without pillaging funds from Eglinton and Finch, that's good.

However, he has hurt his own case dramatically by being incredibly stubborn. He had numerous chances to accept a compromise that includes both LRT construction and Sheppard subway expansion, but rejected all offers.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top