[scarberiankhatru]

Wow. So Harsh!

It's an interesting idea, although maybe unfeasible, it's nice to see an original(?) idea for a change.

It's been brought up several times before by several people.

There's plenty of great, realistic ideas with wonderful benefits waiting to be built...but combining the DRL and Sheppard is certainly not one of them.

 

[Railization]

People need to explain why it's a bad idea. So far, this hasn't appeared. I'm also looking for a reason as to why Sheppard must go to STC when projections show only half of such capacity would ever be used, and why a DRL must go north of Sheppard when there's nothing to suggest such capacity would be needed.

Sheppard is a white elephant in its current state, and an extention to STC wouldn't really change that (it's be an improvement, but still a money pit carrying loads within LRT's range, well below the subway's minimum threshold). Sheppard will never really pay off if it is a feeder for the Yonge line, as it contributes to an existing problem. If it is connected to the DRL, it can function as an alleviator, which is what Yonge really needs.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

People need to explain why it's a bad idea. So far, this hasn't appeared. I'm also looking for a reason as to why Sheppard must go to STC when projections show only half of such capacity would ever be used, and why a DRL must go north of Sheppard when there's nothing to suggest such capacity would be needed.

Sheppard is a white elephant in its current state, and an extention to STC wouldn't really change that (it's be an improvement, but still a money pit carrying loads within LRT's range, well below the subway's minimum threshold). Sheppard will never really pay off if it is a feeder for the Yonge line, as it contributes to an existing problem. If it is connected to the DRL, it can function as an alleviator, which is what Yonge really needs.

No reason will satisfy you, so this post might be pointless. It's impossible to argue with the "not at capacity" crowd (as if utilizing capacity is the purpose of a transit system), largely since they apply this "at capacity" prerequisite only to subway lines.

Running the DRL up to or beyond Sheppard Avenue would do quite a bit to relieve Yonge & Bloor - this is undeniable - but merging it with Sheppard will accomplish nothing other than squandering more benefits than I have time to list here (one of them is the maximum relief of Yonge & Bloor). It'd only affect 3 stations, and almost all of these 3 stations' riders would be going out of their way if they used the DRL. It's kinda silly that you think extending Sheppard east to Downsview won't relieve Yonge yet you think people at Bayview are going to travel perhaps 10km out of their way (or people at Leslie, 8km). A one seat ride from Bessarion to downtown is pointless. It serves no purpose and solves no problem and is very bad planning. I can guarantee to you that Yonge & Bloor will see some relief from a westward Sheppard extension, far, far more than merging the DRL with Sheppard would do.

 

[cacruden]

I have to agree with scarberiankhatru. The increases in ridership will happen faster when there is an overall efficient backbone that allows the riders to travel to different parts of Toronto fairly fast and efficiently (i.e. a backbone) - to which buses can feed ridership to -- for those that do not live right on the subway. The more efficient the overall network is, the more attractive it is to some of those that currently drive. The DRL north should be left open for further expansion north - and the Sheppard line should be left open for further expansion - west/east (if it is not a completely new line - it will likely be easier to get funding for a station or two - than selling a totally new line when trying to expand the coverage of the subway.

 

[Chuck]

One idea that I've floated before is having two separate DRLs. The first one runs south on Don Mills to Eglinton, then west on Eglinton to Yonge, then south on Yonge on new express tracks to Union. The second DRL would be more conventional and travel along Queen via Pape and Dundas West Stations.

The justification for this idea is that the people who will use the DRL from the north end of the city would have a more convenient commute if they could get off right on Yonge rather than only at Yonge and Queen via the traditional DRL. It also provides subway service to Eglinton East, and would be of benefit to the 500,000+ daily users of the Yonge line by offering them express service between Union and Eglinton.

Assuming that Eglinton will one day have its own subway, the Eglinton portion of the DRL could be built either on 2 levels or be 4 tracks wide to accommodate the future subway service on Eglinton on dedicated tracks of its own.

Yes this idea is expensive, but it brings new subway service to many parts of the city, adds express tracks to Yonge, and kick starts the Eglinton subway. I believe that running the DRL through the Don Valley creates an artificial travel pattern given that most of those who live in the north end of the city are going downtown, not to the east end of the city via Pape Station.

 

[kEiThZ]

The debate as I see it is over what each of us considers should be the guiding philosophy at the end of each line. Some, like Railization and Steve Munro believe that lines should end where ridership drops below the TTC threshold. (30 pph/pd).

Personally, I am wiling to tolerate ridership dropping below thresholds where building lines will enhance the network and support urban growth centres. Call it a soft threshold philosophy if you will. That's why I see value in getting rid of the transfer at Kennedy for the 2/3rds of the riders who aren't from Malvern with an extension of the Bloor-Danforth line to Scarborough Town Centre. For me, it makes no sense to end the subway at Kennedy when the urban growth centre is not at Kennedy. To me that's as absurd as not having the subway run past North York Centre.

I think of the Sheppard line in the same sense. The line will only make sense if it terminates at a logical point, an urban growth centre like STC. Until then, it'll remain an under-utilized line. So I'd vote to leave the transfer in so that the option remains to go east at some point.


As for going north, I am a little more partial to Railization's views. I dunno how worthwhile it is to go past Sheppard although a station on Finch would be sweet!

Railization did raise a good point though about running the DRL on Vic Park instead of Don Mills. For me, it all depends on whether they are willing to extend Sheppard to VP or not.

 

[Railization]

No reason will satisfy you, so this post might be pointless. It's impossible to argue with the "not at capacity" crowd (as if utilizing capacity is the purpose of a transit system), largely since they apply this "at capacity" prerequisite only to subway lines.

You can drop the rhetorical dribble, and try taking a crack at fact-based arguments. The idea that capacity doesn't need to be utilized in a transit system is a complete falsehood.

TC is based on bus lines that are at capacity, although Finch East is mysteriously excluded, which many have noticed (and blamed on the politics of Sheppard). While it didn't target every bus route with high ridership, it distributed the network across the city for its first round (our currently proposed 7 lines).

Many years ago when the TTC was looking at opportunities for new streetcar routes, they actually sabotaged that report by setting such a high threshold that it was impossible for any bus line to reach that threshold (3,000pphpd, roughy what the King car carries) and thereby guaranteeing that there would be no new streetcar lines at the time that report was written (thankfully much has changed since). Spadina was struggling with demand as a bus before the 510.

Utilizing capacity is the purpose of the mode of the transit system, although not the purpose in and of itself of the system (but the condition must be met to some extent... after all, people don't like seeing their tax dollars wasted on buses operating empty). If the capacity isn't used, then the system loses far too much money. That's how the system works. Capacity management is a critical element that guides the system. To claim it's irrelevant is extremely ignorant.

Yonge became a subway because of capacity issues. Bloor-Danforth became a subway because of capacity issues. The reason the Spadina subway has low ridership is because it never had a foundation of higher-order transit (i.e. streetcars) that was needed to establish the ridership base for meeting the demand threshold of a subway. Sheppard suffers from the same.

Capacity is absolutely critical, you must have a reason for spending so much money to provide so much capacity. And there is no reason for the Sheppard to STC argument. Pretty lines on a map does not an argument make.

Running the DRL up to or beyond Sheppard Avenue would do quite a bit to relieve Yonge & Bloor - this is undeniable -

Wrong. The biggest single source of relief for Yonge & Bloor comes from diverted Bloor-Danforth ridership, by far. In future, ridership diverted from Eglinton will also be a source of some relief kick, but this is only after the impacts of the LRT start to manifest in the system, and even then, it will be somewhat limited, although still worthwhile. North of there, the trimmings become negligible, because the LRT network can be built out from the north side of the 401 to divide and funnel the ridership into the appropriate nodes to divide demand to meet capacity, without investing needless expense into a subway that would provide far more capacity than needed. Let LRT handle what LRT is suited to handle.

You act like current bus routes are fixed in stone, however that is far from the truth, and Sheppard is actually a text-book example; look at how many routes were jigged to feed Don Mills. While LRT tracks are set in stone, rather literally at that, the integrated network that makes LRTs so flexible means their routes are not set in stone, but are limited to the network's existing track layout. A Finch LRT doesn't have stay on Finch all the time, but has limited points where it can turn off Finch.

but merging it with Sheppard will accomplish nothing other than squandering more benefits than I have time to list here (one of them is the maximum relief of Yonge & Bloor). It'd only affect 3 stations, and almost all of these 3 stations' riders would be going out of their way if they used the DRL. It's kinda silly that you think extending Sheppard east to Downsview won't relieve Yonge yet you think people at Bayview are going to travel perhaps 10km out of their way (or people at Leslie, 8km). A one seat ride from Bessarion to downtown is pointless. It serves no purpose and solves no problem and is very bad planning. I can guarantee to you that Yonge & Bloor will see some relief from a westward Sheppard extension, far, far more than merging the DRL with Sheppard would do.

I'm not expecting many from Bayview to use it unless they're bound for the Portlands, but Leslie would be dividing line. That's still affecting a majority of the users of the Sheppard line since an overwhelming majority of the traffic is originating at Don Mills. No benefits are being squandered because it's not going to have any impact on relieving Yonge & Bloor. I don't know where you get this ridiculous idea that everybody riding on the Finch E. bus is bound for Yonge and Bloor and contributing a massive load to the crowding there. That doesn't make any sense whatsoever. What do you know about transit planning when that's what you try to pass off for logic? If you have this long list of reasons, and hopefully they're better than the imaginary releif on Bloor-Yonge from such a far-north point, please share, but get off your high horse.

Do you even know where the Bloor-Yonge load actually comes from?! Half of the ridership on Bloor-Danforth east of and including Sherbourne is coming from east of and including Main Street, and one quarter comes from Kennedy alone.

It's kinda silly that you think Downsview would do more than the DRL when Downsview still wouldn't provide a one-seat. Transfers take time, and between subways they tend to be crowded, too, so there is incentive for people to take the one-seat as it saves time, even when going out of one's way, and alleviates crowding at system choke-points. Yonge is going to be pretty crowded by Sheppard anyway after the RHC extension opens, and that's what makes the DRL tieing into Sheppard very beneficial. It offers people the opportunity as well, to transfer from Yonge to the DRL when coming in from the north, or even northwest, for a destination in the east, like Wynford, for example.

I have to agree with scarberiankhatru. The increases in ridership will happen faster when there is an overall efficient backbone that allows the riders to travel to different parts of Toronto fairly fast and efficiently (i.e. a backbone) - to which buses can feed ridership to -- for those that do not live right on the subway. The more efficient the overall network is, the more attractive it is to some of those that currently drive. The DRL north should be left open for further expansion north - and the Sheppard line should be left open for further expansion - west/east (if it is not a completely new line - it will likely be easier to get funding for a station or two - than selling a totally new line when trying to expand the coverage of the subway.

This philosophy that subway lines can be extended forever is a bit far-fetched. A line has to end somewhere. Arguably, the DRL shouldn't go north of Eglinton at all, but since we're stuck with Sheppard anyway, which will never be extended as a subway in either direction, its best purpose and best bang for the buck would be to funnel riders away from Yonge as the north end of the DRL. Future expansion of the LRT network could see lines on Finch East and Victoria Park pour riders in around Parkwoods Village area, for example. Warden in Markham (which York Region is targeting for LRT) could come down to Sheppard and then across to Consumers, as another example. It makes a good radial point for the northeast, which takes some pressure off Kennedy and leaves mostly the straight east for Kennedy to deal with (the SRT will of course still be a strong feeder, but I said mostly).

 

[Dan416]

we're stuck with Sheppard anyway, which will never be extended as a subway in either direction.

Your bias is revealed. Whenever someone uses the word "never" like that you know they're not being objective.

There is NO reason not to extend Sheppard to logical endpoints to the west and east. I don't think subways should extend forever, and nor does anyone on here. That's a complete red herring.

Extending Sheppard to Downsview is important, it gives an additional east-west connector between the Yonge and Spadina lines. Extending Sheppard to STC is where it was always planned to go to. And the EA to Vic Park at least I believe is already complete. Why are we even wasting money on the Sheppard East LRT EA when we already have a completed subway one?

The point about serving Urban Growth Centres is an important one. Why end the subway at Kennedy? It doesn't make sense! STC is two subway stops away! End the Danforth line where it's LOGICAL to!

 

[Amphibius]

Yonge is going to be pretty crowded by Sheppard anyway after the RHC extension opens, and that's what makes the DRL tieing into Sheppard very beneficial. It offers people the opportunity as well, to transfer from Yonge to the DRL when coming in from the north, or even northwest, for a destination in the east, like Wynford, for example.

Wouldn't Wynford-bound passengers be better served by just staying on YUS til Eglinton THEN transfering onto the Crosstown Line which will run straight by Wynford anyway?

This philosophy that subway lines can be extended forever is a bit far-fetched. A line has to end somewhere. Arguably, the DRL shouldn't go north of Eglinton at all, but since we're stuck with Sheppard anyway, which will never be extended as a subway in either direction, its best purpose and best bang for the buck would be to funnel riders away from Yonge as the north end of the DRL. Future expansion of the LRT network could see lines on Finch East and Victoria Park pour riders in around Parkwoods Village area, for example. Warden in Markham (which York Region is targeting for LRT) could come down to Sheppard and then across to Consumers, as another example. It makes a good radial point for the northeast, which takes some pressure off Kennedy and leaves mostly the straight east for Kennedy to deal with (the SRT will of course still be a strong feeder, but I said mostly).

Why would downtown-bound passengers already on the YUS Line want to swtich onto a DRL at Sheppard only to be whisked all the way over to Sheppard-Victoria Park en route? By that point alone one would already be past Summerhill Stn nearing on the downtown had they just stayed on-board YUS. It's a counterintuitive notion that the city/feds should invest to build subways just for the sake of elixiring a white elephant subway stub, which is mutually best served via LRT anyway (including the short distance between Consumers and Vic Pk) at least until HRT demand thresholds are quantified. That said, why must we have LRT lines route into several random different subway stops when all the lines could just radiate out from one central point (e.g. Don Mills/Consumers; Scarborough Centre; Malvern Town Ctr). Such an action lessens the need for interlining the DRL into Sheppard Subway as LRT in effect fills in the voids at a lesser cost.

Aligning a subway along Victoria Park-Eglinton is a poorly planned-out solution as well considering the land usage through that area (sprawling suburban car-oriented malls, low-rise apts, strings of residential houses, large swaths of parklands, hydro corridors). Besides Sheppard Subway is/was supposed to mitigate the concerns of traveling EAST-WEST across the 416 north of Hwy 401, not to be pigeonholed forever as the epilogue for the DRL; which too should be freed up to expand/extend in whichever direction as demand sees fit.

The niche markets of both subway lines are different too. The Sheppard corridor nodally links up (York U) > Downsview > NYCC > Fairview > Agincourt > SCC > Malvern > Zoo. DRL would link up Mt Dennis > Junction > BD Westside > downtown core & vicinity > BD Eastside > Thorncliffe/Flemingdon > Ont Sci. Passengers destiny-bound for these nodes/trip generators should be routed there in the most direct, time- & cost-effective manner as possible; not be subjected to unnecessary meandering jogs nor incessant transfers on the taxpayer's dime.

 

[Railization]

Your bias is revealed. Whenever someone uses the word "never" like that you know they're not being objective.

There's no bias, you just don't like the reality of the political climate and financial reality that's been exposed. Both are very clear. Sheppard isn't being extended.

There is NO reason not to extend Sheppard to logical endpoints to the west and east. I don't think subways should extend forever, and nor does anyone on here. That's a complete red herring.

Then why are there people insisting that the DRL has to go to Finch, Steeles, and beyond? Not a red herring when people are making comments like that. However, there is NO reason TO extend Sheppard anywhere because the ridership is far too low... FAR too low. It's a money pit. Extending it will only make it a bigger money pit. Really stupid use of tax dollars to provide capacity that isn't needed. The LRT is a far better solution to this. It's worth pointing out that even the LRT is on the low end of demand, only 3,000. Eglinton will about double that, for example, and Eglinton's ridership is also still too low for a full-blown subway. LRT is the best solution for these corridors and the best use of limited funds.

Extending Sheppard to Downsview is important, it gives an additional east-west connector between the Yonge and Spadina lines.

It's unimportant because both Eglinton and Finch will provide the exact same function, both of which will be (mostly) underground (Finch is probably too narrow east of Bathurst). Why do we need a subway between two LRT lines that can handle the traffic between the two perfectly well? The obvious answer is we don't, and Sheppard West is far too low in demand, making the subway completely unnecessary. North-South travelling passengers are going to hit Finch (from the north) or Eglinton (from the south) first before they reach Sheppard, and they'll transfer to either of those first unless their destination is on/near Sheppard itself. The subway is a total non-starter. This "subway or nothing" mentality is completely non-productive.

Extending Sheppard to STC is where it was always planned to go to. And the EA to Vic Park at least I believe is already complete. Why are we even wasting money on the Sheppard East LRT EA when we already have a completed subway one?

Actually the EA all the way to STC is complete. However, the Sheppard East LRT, EA included, is faaaar cheaper than building and operating the subway (they cost money to operate, and lots of it at that). The subway has had no detailed design work done on it. The LRT has. The LRT will be in service far sooner than a subway, too.

The point about serving Urban Growth Centres is an important one. Why end the subway at Kennedy? It doesn't make sense! STC is two subway stops away! End the Danforth line where it's LOGICAL to!

There is no point in extending the subway to just another transfer point when the existing transfer point is going to be dramatically shifted by the Malvern extension anyway. There is no logic in ending the Danforth at STC, and in fact is inferior to the LRT option since as a subway there'll still be at least 2 transfers to get downtown from Malvern (1/3rd of the STC ridership), whereas the LRT option for the SRT, routed through on Eglinton LRT, would get people from Malvern to downtown with a single transfer. This warped mindset that all trips start and end at STC is ridiculous. There's a lot more Scarborough than just STC.

 

[kEiThZ]

We are deviating...and I apologize for contributing to it. Back on topic, does anyone else have ideas about the DRL running on VP vs. Don Mills. There's some huge upcoming development on Don Mills that I'd like to see supported...but if the LRT is going to be in place then perhaps shifting the subway to Vic Park makes sense.

 

[nfitz]

Oh, they need to go further, do they? Based on what? How would north/east of Sheppard/VP not be within LRT's demand range?

It's extremely short-range planning. Once a subway line is built, we'll be stuck with it for decades, if not centuries. In that time frame there will likely be demand further north and east that would support subway service. The installating of LRT should see densification along those corridors that would allow for future subway lines. And there are those who already claim that there is enough demand to extend the Sheppard subway further east; and I'm sure Region of York will be pushing to extend a Don Mills line north to serve Markham.

 

[toraerach]

It's extremely short-range planning. Once a subway line is built, we'll be stuck with it for decades, if not centuries. In that time frame there will likely be demand further north and east that would support subway service. The installating of LRT should see densification along those corridors that would allow for future subway lines. And there are those who already claim that there is enough demand to extend the Sheppard subway further east; and I'm sure Region of York will be pushing to extend a Don Mills line north to serve Markham.

Exactly. I think we need to put this whole extension to Sheppard thing into perspective. Right now there is no concrete plan to build the first phase of the DRL (from somewhere on the Danforth line to somewhere on the Yonge line) no less a schedule for it's construction or a planned opening date. After that first phase is built there are already two extensions proposed - from the Yonge line west up to somewhere on the Bloor line, and from the Danforth line up to Eglinton. This could potentially take decades to get built if it ever gets off the ground at all. Once all this has been built, how much will have changed? Will the priority a Northeast extension up to Sheppard, or a Northwest extension up to Eglinton or points beyond? How will that area densify, or will it at all? Will transit ridership increase? Who knows, maybe the world will end in 2012. Right now it's like discussing the merits of a Yonge subway extension to Finch in the 1940s.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

You can drop the rhetorical dribble, and try taking a crack at fact-based arguments. The idea that capacity doesn't need to be utilized in a transit system is a complete falsehood.

I did not say capacity doesn't need to be utilized. Just because I don't define low ridership as anything and everything below overcrowding or a mode's theoretical capacity doesn't automatically mean I want empty vehicles running around the city.

Capacity management is a critical element that guides the system. To claim it's irrelevant is extremely ignorant.

To claim I claimed it's irrelevant is extremely ignorant. It's not the only thing that matters, though. It's certainly not a concern with much of Transit City or Metrolinx's plans. It's also not a concern with the web of streetcars plan branching all over Scarborough in lieu of a Danforth extension to STC [that would not preclude additional LRT lines].

Capacity is absolutely critical, you must have a reason for spending so much money to provide so much capacity. And there is no reason for the Sheppard to STC argument.

What there's really no reason for is running three lines out to Malvern.

Wrong. The biggest single source of relief for Yonge & Bloor comes from diverted Bloor-Danforth ridership, by far.

I did not say it'd provide more relief than diverted Danforth ridership. So much for fact-based arguments.

You act like current bus routes are fixed in stone, however that is far from the truth, and Sheppard is actually a text-book example; look at how many routes were jigged to feed Don Mills.

Actually, I'm acting like bus routes could be rejigged to feed into a DRL that ran north of Bloor. Not just buses though: I'd like to see Lawrence East, for example, get a streetcar ROW.

It's kinda silly that you think Downsview would do more than the DRL when Downsview still wouldn't provide a one-seat.

Again, it's obvious that I said extending Sheppard over to Downsview would accomplish more than having the DRL merge with Sheppard, not that it'd do more than merely running the DRL as far north as Sheppard, or more than than the entire DRL itself, wherever it may go.

I don't know where you get this ridiculous idea that everybody riding on the Finch E. bus is bound for Yonge and Bloor and contributing a massive load to the crowding there. That doesn't make any sense whatsoever. What do you know about transit planning when that's what you try to pass off for logic? If you have this long list of reasons, and hopefully they're better than the imaginary releif on Bloor-Yonge from such a far-north point, please share, but get off your high horse.

Do you even know where the Bloor-Yonge load actually comes from?! Half of the ridership on Bloor-Danforth east of and including Sherbourne is coming from east of and including Main Street, and one quarter comes from Kennedy alone.

What I know is that you haven't read my post very carefully and that you tried to list everything you think I don't know based on these misinterpretations. Which is fine...I know your mind isn't going to be changed. You already know many of the reasons I would list and would dismiss some of them for not resulting in overcrowded subways and dismiss the rest because you think I'm unfamiliar with travel patterns (so I'll save you from needing to type another 10000 words). Ending the DRL at Finch/Seneca would make a great hub, though, particularly if TTC/YRT fares/systems are integrated.

I do find your stance on diverting current Yonge line riders away from Yonge (and, yes, the Finch East bus pours thousands of riders down Yonge) as "imaginary relief" to be highly amusing, as if Bloor/Danforth riders are the only ones causing the overcrowding on Yonge south of Bloor or on the stairs and escalators and platforms at Yonge & Bloor station, and as if Yonge riders are imaginary.

 

[Chuck]

I do find your stance on diverting current Yonge line riders away from Yonge (and, yes, the Finch East bus pours thousands of riders down Yonge) as "imaginary relief" to be highly amusing, as if Bloor/Danforth riders are the only ones causing the overcrowding on Yonge south of Bloor or on the stairs and escalators and platforms at Yonge & Bloor station, and as if Yonge riders are imaginary.

Agreed. It is foolish to think that the only problem area on the Yonge subway exists south of Bloor. I get on at St. Clair, and before a single soul from the BD subway has even boarded, the Yonge line is already full enough to force some people to wait on the platform for the next train. The DRL will help portions of the subway south of Bloor, but it will clearly do nothing to solve the equally critical crowding situation north of Bloor. Getting existing Yonge riders off of Yonge is of equal importance as building the DRL, which is why the DRL must continue north of Bloor in order to truly be effective.

I completely agree that there is no existing at capacity transit service - or really any major transit service for that matter - operating on Don Mills. However, a Don Mills subway will allow at least half the people currently using the north-of-Bloor part of the Yonge subway an alternative. This will accommodate further expansion of Yonge north into York Region, and open up much of the city to redevelopment.