Whose vision of transit in Toronto do you support?

[Dan416]

While I see the similarities between Don Mills stn and Sherway stn, in that they're both attached to malls, they're very different. Don Mills was not originally planned to be a terminus, it is now because that's where the funding was cut, and they chose the best point to finish with the funds they had. Sherway is not at the end of a stubway, it's at the end of a very successful line. And despite being the terminus of a stubway, Don Mills does very well at intercepting southbound commuters from the 404. This funnelling is likely the only reason why the Sheppard subway's ridership is anywhere near where it is. There's the same chance to do this with Sherway, intercepting people using the QEW who would otherwise continue along the Gardiner into downtown. Heck, during rush hour, taking the subway from Sherway to downtown may even be faster than sitting on the Gardiner.

In terms of connectivity to Sq1, I do support a subway eventually, but I think that in the short term, the connectivity of the Mississauga BRT to the Etobicoke Busway that's proposed in MoTo is a good start.

Personally I think the Mississauga BRT is a waste of money that won't really serve anyone in Mississauga anyway.

Sherway was under consideration in RTES and the extension to MCC follows naturally from that. That is why it should be on the SOS plan. How far in the future is irrelevant. It needs to be on there. If we're putting a DRL West (which really isn't needed) in Phase II, then the MCC extension needs to be there just as much.

 

[GraphicMatt]

Would people actually use a subway extension to Mississauga for local trips in significant numbers - like going from Sherway to Islington or vice versa - or would it just be glorified commuter rail that eats away at the operating budget running empty trains outside of rush hour?

 

[scarberiankhatru]

Bus and streetcar service all over the city is adequate. We expand transit transit because we want to, not because it is absolutely necessary. We want faster travel, and easier connections, and stations in certain spots and so on. "Demand" is infinitely malleable and one study that said the cost/benefit ratio of an extension to Sherway wasn't worth it could be replaced by another study making different assumptions and be wildly enthusiastic. We can divert bus routes to other places and cut "demand" for one corridor in half or double it somewhere else. We can plan for more growth in one place and no growth in another. It's about city-building.

How's that? It follows the pattern of our subway system, which is to extend out from downtown and end at the major suburban subcentres (Etobicoke, North York, and Scarborough Centres). This makes perfect sense, as people are commuting to these subcentres from downtown and the suburbs.

I can't understand why SOS hates the Sheppard LRT because of the artificial transfer point at Don Mills, but wants to create another such point at Sherway. The situation is analogous, and in this case the subway should go all the way to the next true subcentre (Square One) or stay where it is.

You should go look at a map. Our subway system doesn't extend to Scarborough Centre, it extends to Kennedy & Eglinton, which is the middle of nowhere and where hardly anybody wants to be but is a place people are forced to travel through because that's where all the routes end. It's a terrible place to site major infrastructure. Finch station is also a poor terminus, featuring nothing but a parking lot and fed by a comical number of overlapping routes, but it didn't go to Steeles because the city wasn't supposed to grow that way. The Downsview to York U gap is being filled in, and the Jane & 7 area is, on paper, at least, planned to turn into a useful hub.

Planning for the Bloor line to Islington predates the suburban centres planning model as well as the towers at Islington station. The extension to Kipling is a good example of going "just one more stop" and then failing to bring the line to the next useful terminus point. There was nothing at Kipling when it was built and there isn't anything there now except bus connections.

Don Mills isn't an artificial transfer point. It's an intersection with a mall, a busy perpendicular route, and good highway/arterial road access, as well as a sea of nearby apartment and office towers. Sherway is not an artificial transfer point, either. The notion of 'Square One or bust' is laughable...the features that make Square One a good intermodal hub are all true for Sherway, as well...a mall next to a highway filling in with condos. Of course, one is about 3km away while the other is 10-12km away, and there may or may not be any ridership west of Sherway, especially since many Mississauga buses could continue running to the Dundas/427 intersection and connect with the Bloor line there.

 

[Dan416]

I think there'll definitely be ridership west of Sherway. The next stop west is Dixie, which would be served by the 5, next stop Tomken, served by 51, then Cawthra, served by 8, and Hurontario would be served by all the Hurontario routes, especially the 19. Furthermore, the subway would take over all of the 1 and 201 Dundas routes ridership east of Hurontario, plus it would divert riders from the 20 Rathburn, 26/76 Burnhamthorpe and 3 Bloor.

In the meantime a Sherway extension is definitely needed, although that's more to serve Etobicoke than Mississauga.

 

[gweed123]

I think there'll definitely be ridership west of Sherway. The next stop west is Dixie, which would be served by the 5, next stop Tomken, served by 51, then Cawthra, served by 8, and Hurontario would be served by all the Hurontario routes, especially the 19. Furthermore, the subway would take over all of the 1 and 201 Dundas routes ridership east of Hurontario, plus it would divert riders from the 20 Rathburn, 26/76 Burnhamthorpe and 3 Bloor.

In the meantime a Sherway extension is definitely needed, although that's more to serve Etobicoke than Mississauga.

After looking at what Metrolinx has planned, specifically with the Dundas and Hurontario LRTs, it may make more sense to use a combination of the Dundas LRT and the Hurontario LRT to link Sq1 and Sherway (Metrolinx wants it to end at Kipling, but I think Sherway makes more sense, that way the transfer area can be built properly, with an LRT transfer in mind). I know this may sound weird coming from someone who is pro-subway, but hear me out:

The Dundas LRT is slated to go along Dundas St into Kipling Stn, and the Hurontario LRT from the lake up into Brampton. They will naturally cross at Dundas and Hurontario. Rather than replacing parts of the routes with a subway, causing a break-up in transit along the routes, you can grade-separate the Dundas LRT from Sherway to Hurontario, and then grade separate the Hurontario LRT from Dundas to Sq1. This way, you get subway speeds, as well as any number of combinations of routes using the same tracks (Sq1 to Sherway, Dundas route, Hurontario route). The sections that are not part of the link between Sq1 and Sherway can be in-median, but the sections that are really needed can be grade-separated.

As much as I hate the idea of having a forced transfer at Sherway, I think maintaining network compatibility and keeping the routes interlinable trumps a transfer. If someone was going from the corner of Eglinton and Hurontario down to the lake, if there was a subway there, they would need to be on the North Hurontario LRT for a couple blocks, transfer to the subway, and then transfer off it again at Dundas and back onto the South Hurontario LRT, to reach the lake.

I know this may sound really weird coming from someone who is pro-subway, but in this case, it actually does make sense. It's the same reasoning why I was fighting to have Eglinton be a full subway, because of the interlining opportunities that could exist between it and the DRL.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

Would people actually use a subway extension to Mississauga for local trips in significant numbers - like going from Sherway to Islington or vice versa - or would it just be glorified commuter rail that eats away at the operating budget running empty trains outside of rush hour?

And would reliable, convenient GO Service to Kipling, Mimico, etc which is then tightly integrated into the TTC network perform the same job just as well?

 

[The Mad Navigator]

And would reliable, convenient GO Service to Kipling, Mimico, etc which is then tightly integrated into the TTC network perform the same job just as well?

Why the hell not?

Improve service frequency on existing GO lines if possible. I mean, the infrastructure is there.....

 

[jwill]

Planning for the Bloor line to Islington predates the suburban centres planning model as well as the towers at Islington station. The extension to Kipling is a good example of going "just one more stop" and then failing to bring the line to the next useful terminus point. There was nothing at Kipling when it was built and there isn't anything there now except bus connections.

Don Mills isn't an artificial transfer point. It's an intersection with a mall, a busy perpendicular route, and good highway/arterial road access, as well as a sea of nearby apartment and office towers. Sherway is not an artificial transfer point, either. The notion of 'Square One or bust' is laughable...the features that make Square One a good intermodal hub are all true for Sherway, as well...a mall next to a highway filling in with condos. Of course, one is about 3km away while the other is 10-12km away, and there may or may not be any ridership west of Sherway, especially since many Mississauga buses could continue running to the Dundas/427 intersection and connect with the Bloor line there.

Yes, I should look at the TTC rapid transit map which clearly shows the network extending one stop beyond major subcentres at each end (except Spadina, which is being extended to one-arguably). This is good planning. Serve the major centres with a stop, then extend a bit further past the centre for various reasons; allow space for parking, regional bus connections, promote outward growth of the subcentre, etc.

Yes, Square One is very different from Sherway, or even Don Mills. First, it has jobs, lots of them, and not just in the mall. Secondly its a major hub for local bus services. Thirdly, it will likely soon be the interchange point for an LRT and BRT. How Sherway even compares to this I really don't know.

You can disagree, but I fully support the Square One or bust approach. Its incremental thinking that got us a Sheppard Subway which we now have no political will to finish, and just creates a 'transfer city' as some have called it.

 

[The Mad Navigator]

It's subway pipe dreams to MCC that will further delay needed subway lines like the eastern DRL.

 

[gweed123]

It's subway pipe dreams to MCC that will further delay needed subway lines like the eastern DRL.

I don't really see how a subway extension in the suburbs is pushing back the DRL. If anything, it was the proposed Yonge extension that pushed the need for the DRL to the forefront, to the point where building the DRL first was made a condition of doing the Yonge extension. I think the idea of doing suburban subway expansions at the expense of inner-city expansions is a very pre-Metrolinx idea, and one of the prime reasons Metrolinx was even created (ie to eliminate the ward vs ward politics of transit planning).

 

[Dan416]

After looking at what Metrolinx has planned, specifically with the Dundas and Hurontario LRTs, it may make more sense to use a combination of the Dundas LRT and the Hurontario LRT to link Sq1 and Sherway (Metrolinx wants it to end at Kipling, but I think Sherway makes more sense, that way the transfer area can be built properly, with an LRT transfer in mind). I know this may sound weird coming from someone who is pro-subway, but hear me out:

The Dundas LRT is slated to go along Dundas St into Kipling Stn, and the Hurontario LRT from the lake up into Brampton. They will naturally cross at Dundas and Hurontario. Rather than replacing parts of the routes with a subway, causing a break-up in transit along the routes, you can grade-separate the Dundas LRT from Sherway to Hurontario, and then grade separate the Hurontario LRT from Dundas to Sq1. This way, you get subway speeds, as well as any number of combinations of routes using the same tracks (Sq1 to Sherway, Dundas route, Hurontario route). The sections that are not part of the link between Sq1 and Sherway can be in-median, but the sections that are really needed can be grade-separated.

As much as I hate the idea of having a forced transfer at Sherway, I think maintaining network compatibility and keeping the routes interlinable trumps a transfer. If someone was going from the corner of Eglinton and Hurontario down to the lake, if there was a subway there, they would need to be on the North Hurontario LRT for a couple blocks, transfer to the subway, and then transfer off it again at Dundas and back onto the South Hurontario LRT, to reach the lake.

I know this may sound really weird coming from someone who is pro-subway, but in this case, it actually does make sense. It's the same reasoning why I was fighting to have Eglinton be a full subway, because of the interlining opportunities that could exist between it and the DRL.

I have no problem with the LRTs that Metrolinx has "planned". The Hurontario is pretty advanced, but even it isn't approved or funded. If the Hurontario and Dundas LRTs do get built, then you ARE imposing a transfer (at Hurontario & Dundas) to get to Square One.

Anyway, there is no way the Dundas LRT is going to be grade-separated. Even most of Eglinton isn't grade-separated. I don't see the Dundas line having any grade-separation whatsoever. So no, it will not be subway-speeds. It'll be at the Transit City average.

I think if we do get a Hurontario and Dundas LRTs in the meantime, that'd be fine because it would allow a subway to follow a different alignment that would get it to Square One faster: Bloor Street (and then the line could still be called the Bloor-Danforth line and we wouldn't have to rename it Dundas-Bloor-Danforth).

As for the Mississauga BRT, GO can continue to use it, or it can be decommissioned.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

Why the hell not?

Improve service frequency on existing GO lines if possible. I mean, the infrastructure is there.....

Without getting into the same tired argument...

It's the single greatest argument against further subway expansion into the outer suburbs. GO Transit can serve the same demand and arguably do it better. Most people, though, counter with the anti CBD argument saying that all riders boarding at the outer subway stations are not destined for the downtown core (of course that ignores the experience of many people who ride the system every day) and that not extending forces an arbitrary transfer on riders simply based on point of origin (905 vs 416).

Regional rail seems to be the red headed step child in the entire LRT-HRT debate.

 

[gweed123]

I have no problem with the LRTs that Metrolinx has "planned". The Hurontario is pretty advanced, but even it isn't approved or funded. If the Hurontario and Dundas LRTs do get built, then you ARE imposing a transfer (at Hurontario & Dundas) to get to Square One.

Why? What's stopping them from running a route that goes directly from Sherway to Square One? Just because the routes intersect doesn't mean people have to transfer from 1 train to another. They're capable of making right and left turns right?

 

[kettal]

I can't imagine it having any transfer. I admit I haven't been following the Dundas LRT closely, but does it even go any further west than Hurontario? Obviously it is going to turn north and go to MCC.

 

[gweed123]

I can't imagine it having any transfer. I admit I haven't been following the Dundas LRT closely, but does it even go any further west than Hurontario? Obviously it is going to turn north and go to MCC.

The Dundas LRT is supposed to go all the way to Burlington. But there's no reason you can't have multiple routes running along the same set of tracks.