[nfitz]

I can't help but wonder if that is what in fact may happen. Granted they'd have to find a way to power 4 TBMs from the same site, but that seems like relative small potatoes - especially considering the power sources available there.

I'd think it would be difficult from a contracting perspective. Either you'd have to change part of the tunnelling from one contractor to the other and have them operating out of the same Site, or you'd have to get the contractor doing the northern tunnels a significant change order to do both simultaneously, because it would drive up their costs.

I'd think a more likely scenario is that if the northern tunnels have fallen that far behind, we'll see a staged opening to Steeles West in 2015, with the Vaughan stations following later.

 

[Sir Novelty Fashion]

Or, by the same token, why not just launch both pairs once each. For instance, instead of launching at Sheppard West and going north to Finch West, then disassembling everything, taking it back down to Sheappard West, and re-launching it all - why not just start at Finch West and go straight down to Downsview?

 

[rbt]

I can't help but wonder if that is what in fact may happen. Granted they'd have to find a way to power 4 TBMs from the same site, but that seems like relative small potatoes - especially considering the power sources available there.

Sounds risky to me. Any serious accident would take all 4 TBMs out of service.

Doubling the amount of work in the same area (dirt extraction, liner insertion, etc.) increases risk of an accident.

 

[unimaginative2]

For anybody that thinks it's completely insane and unprecedented to build a subway to a relatively undeveloped area in anticipation of future development, this is Queens Boulevard on what is now the 7 train when it first opened:


Queens Boulevard elevated #7 line under construction in 1917 #nyc by Jesse Nover, on Flickr

The majority of the early subway system (Dual Contracts and earlier) in New York was built into virtually empty fields. That's why the city's development is so transit-oriented. If they had, instead, followed the Toronto approach of waiting for a bus route to become woefully overcrowded, then building a light rail line and waiting for it to become woefully overcrowded, and then finally building a subway line, New York as we know it would not exist.

I have high hopes that, while what Vaughan builds might not be extremely attractive (though the inclusion of Jack Diamond gives me hope), it will at least be transit-oriented. This New York example also shows the obvious mistake of not taking advantage of all the undeveloped land in Vaughan to build a cheap elevated line rather than tunneling under empty fields.

 

[CDL.TO]

The majority of the early subway system (Dual Contracts and earlier) in New York was built into virtually empty fields. That's why the city's development is so transit-oriented. If they had, instead, followed the Toronto approach of waiting for a bus route to become woefully overcrowded, then building a light rail line and waiting for it to become woefully overcrowded, and then finally building a subway line, New York as we know it would not exist.

I have high hopes that, while what Vaughan builds might not be extremely attractive (though the inclusion of Jack Diamond gives me hope), it will at least be transit-oriented. This New York example also shows the obvious mistake of not taking advantage of all the undeveloped land in Vaughan to build a cheap elevated line rather than tunneling under empty fields.

That's obviously a good model to follow. In my opinion, the big issue is that Jane and Hwy 7 does not consist of empty fields, but instead low density employment lands. Also, I'm skeptical about Vaughan's ability to drive development in a transit-friendly manner. Do their planners know how to recognize a development application that is inappropriate for the location (for example, a gated condo community)?

Also, once the high density construction rolls around along with the traffic congestion that entails, I can see anti-development politicians getting elected.

Maybe I'm just too much of a pessimist, but we already know that the presence of a subway does not ensure appropriate redevelopment. Developers, planners, and politicians must all have matching visions.

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

That's obviously a good model to follow. In my opinion, the big issue is that Jane and Hwy 7 does not consist of empty fields, but instead low density employment lands. Also, I'm skeptical about Vaughan's ability to drive development in a transit-friendly manner. .

That's a fair concern but there actually is a fair amount of open field. The whole south side of 7, from the 400 to Tormont is basically all a field north of the AMC complex. There's also a huge amount of undeveloped land on the north side, surrounding the Walmart etc.

Tormont is getting redeveloped for certain and the northeast corner is basically a field that's soon going to be Expo City so...the blank slate really is there. The question, as you say, is whether Vaughan can drive the right sort of development there but it sounds like it's more or less working so far.

They've already got 35-storey towers coming on one corner and the company most famous in Canada for perpetuating sprawl hired Diamond/Schmitt to do their master plan. That's gotta be a bit encouraging...?

 

[andrewpmk]

For anybody that thinks it's completely insane and unprecedented to build a subway to a relatively undeveloped area in anticipation of future development, this is Queens Boulevard on what is now the 7 train when it first opened:


Queens Boulevard elevated #7 line under construction in 1917 #nyc by Jesse Nover, on Flickr

The majority of the early subway system (Dual Contracts and earlier) in New York was built into virtually empty fields. That's why the city's development is so transit-oriented. If they had, instead, followed the Toronto approach of waiting for a bus route to become woefully overcrowded, then building a light rail line and waiting for it to become woefully overcrowded, and then finally building a subway line, New York as we know it would not exist.

I have high hopes that, while what Vaughan builds might not be extremely attractive (though the inclusion of Jack Diamond gives me hope), it will at least be transit-oriented. This New York example also shows the obvious mistake of not taking advantage of all the undeveloped land in Vaughan to build a cheap elevated line rather than tunneling under empty fields.

Tell this to the people who are opposed to the Sheppard subway extension.

There are over 100 apartment/condo buildings along the Sheppard subway route now. There are large clusters at Yonge, Bayview, Don Mills and Scarborough Centre. Plus there are a fair number of condos between Allen and Bathurst and at Victoria Park, and there is the Metrogate development at Kennedy which has 3 towers built, a 4th under construction and which Tridel plans to make as big as the Bayview condo tower cluster. Sheppard Avenue is becoming a very dense area now, a huge contrast to what Sheppard looked like in the 1990s when the Sheppard subway was under construction. Furthermore both Highway 401 and Sheppard Avenue are severely congested in rush hour, and Bayview/Sheppard is apparently the worst congested intersection in the city according to the Toronto Star, likely the result of the Sheppard subway not being useful to people in this area who work outside downtown/North York Centre because the Sheppard subway does not go east of Don Mills, and because there are not enough other subway lines in the city. If we could justify building subways through vacant land in New York 100 years ago, we can certainly justify building them in the much higher density and rapidly growing Sheppard Avenue area.

 

[nfitz]

Tell this to the people who are opposed to the Sheppard subway extension.

If the proposed Sheppard East subway extension actually got all these people where they wanted to go, it would be a great idea. It doesn't ... it takes them to North York of all places. That's why even when completed, the projected ridership 20 years from now west of Victoria Park is lower than the current piece is today. And all are lower than what TTC was projecting the opening day ridership was going to be for Phase 1, back in the late 1990s.

Build it and they will come - great. But not when the subway goes in the wrong direction. Look at the 7 line. It's very useful, it takes people from Queens right to Grand Central station and Times Square. Even New York City hasn't yet built any subway lines from Queens to the Bronx, from Brooklyn to Staten Island ... and barely has any connections from Brooklyn to Queens. And yet we want to build a line from Scarborough to North York?

 

[rbt]

Tell this to the people who are opposed to the Sheppard subway extension.

There are over 100 apartment/condo buildings along the Sheppard subway route now.

Sheppard has 3 intersections in the top 10 most congested list within Toronto: Yonge, Bayview, and Leslie.

They may have moved there for the subway but it seems they're using highway 401 instead.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Sheppard has 3 intersections in the top 10 most congested list within Toronto: Yonge, Bayview, and Leslie.

They may have moved there for the subway but it seems they're using highway 401 instead.

Why are the streets is congested (with single occupant cars) when there is a Sheppard Subway near them. A Subway that still has low ridership numbers, even with all those condos built.

 

[nfitz]

Why are the streets is congested (with single occupant cars) when there is a Sheppard Subway near them. A Subway that still has low ridership numbers, even with all those condos built.

It's all about getting cars to the highway. Wow, hard to believe there are 10 intersections worse than Eglinton and Allen.

 

[Dan416]

Why are the streets is congested (with single occupant cars) when there is a Sheppard Subway near them. A Subway that still has low ridership numbers, even with all those condos built.

If I had to guess I'd say it's because Sheppard currently doesn't go anywhere as it was never finished.

 

[datamouse]

Suburbanites love their cars. Ug there's a subway here, use it! If you're buying a condo in the area for 401 access you're a fool if you expect anything other than congested traffic.

 

[Voltz]

If I had to guess I'd say it's because Sheppard currently doesn't go anywhere as it was never finished.

Ah yes, the plethora of people who live in these condos and work at the STC are the ones clogging up these streets, we need to spend billions to build these workers a subway!

 

[andrewpmk]

Suburbanites love their cars. Ug there's a subway here, use it! If you're buying a condo in the area for 401 access you're a fool if you expect anything other than congested traffic.

If traffic is bad this encourages people to use the subway, if the subway goes where people want to go. The trouble is, since the subway only goes between Don Mills and Yonge and there are not enough other lines in the system people use their cars instead, since most people in this area do not work in downtown Toronto. Highway 401 and Sheppard Avenue between Yonge and Highway 404 are bad for much of the day, not just in rush hour. The large cluster of condos around Sheppard/Bayview has caused a big increase in traffic congestion, and I worry that we will see the same effect at Sheppard/Kennedy when more buildings in the Metrogate complex are built. If the subway went to Scarborough then this would encourage people who work in Scarborough to use it instead of driving; if there were other subway lines in the system like Eglinton (e.g. for people in this area who work in Mississauga near the airport), a line along Don Mills (for people who work in the Don Mills area and in Markham), etc. then even people who own cars would use the subway.