Urban Toronto - Powered by vBulletin
UrbanToronto News - the latest headlines
Steel Roof Frame Continues The Curves Atop Emerald Park
ALSO

View Poll Results: Where would you route the DRL between University and Yonge?

Voters
167. You may not vote on this poll
  • North of Queen

    2 1.20%
  • Queen Street

    61 36.53%
  • Richmond/Adelaide

    31 18.56%
  • King Street

    34 20.36%
  • Wellington Street

    26 15.57%
  • Front Street

    27 16.17%
  • Rail Corridor

    14 8.38%
  • South of the Rail Corridor

    3 1.80%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 23 of 23 FirstFirst ... 13212223
Results 331 to 334 of 334

Thread: DRL routing. Where would you put it?

  1. #331

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by car4041 View Post
    For reference, this is what Steve said. http://stevemunro.ca/?p=6218
    I'm not sure if he thinks it's impossible, but at the very least he seems to think that it's extremely difficult and not worth the huge disruption that would be involved.
    Also note that Steve seemed to be working on the assumption that to do so, would involve building a double-decker station at Union - which would interrupt Union Station for a long period of time. You could actually achieve it in other ways, such as stopping Yonge service at the old end of the line just west of Union for years, and instead building new deep platforms for the University line under York instead of under Front, and then extending the Yonge line west on Front, and the University line south on York, and presumably turning east somewhere between the tracks and the lake.

    I doubt you'd really want to do this until you've built a DRL though - and ultimately, you'd be looking at 2 additional east-west lines. Maybe in a century or two.


  2. #332
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Ottawa (formerly Downtown Toronto)
    Posts
    5,418

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nfitz View Post
    Also note that Steve seemed to be working on the assumption that to do so, would involve building a double-decker station at Union - which would interrupt Union Station for a long period of time. You could actually achieve it in other ways, such as stopping Yonge service at the old end of the line just west of Union for years, and instead building new deep platforms for the University line under York instead of under Front, and then extending the Yonge line west on Front, and the University line south on York, and presumably turning east somewhere between the tracks and the lake.

    I doubt you'd really want to do this until you've built a DRL though - and ultimately, you'd be looking at 2 additional east-west lines. Maybe in a century or two.
    The assumption that I was working under was not to double-deck Union, but to build a new Yonge platform between Bay and Yonge, south of Front. Basically it would run NE-SW under the bus terminal and rail tracks. The biggest change would be a regrading of the Yonge tracks from King down to Union, whereby the new tracks would pass underneath what would become a wye. Rather than the DRL taking a 90 degree turn after leaving Union like it does now, it would pass through the wye going straight under Front eastbound.

    The whole setup at King would be similar to what exists at the upper level of St. George, where the trains can either go straight and descend to Spadina - Bloor Platform (New Union), or turn right and continue to Spadina - YUS Platform.

    No reconfiguration of Union necessary, just the tracks east of it.

  3. #333
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Bridgetown, Barbados. No, really!
    Posts
    1,700

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gweed123 View Post
    South of Pape? Pape runs North-South...
    Pape Station. The 'traditional' BD intercept for the DRL.

    Quote Originally Posted by gweed123 View Post
    And those neighbourhoods you mention will be served by a combination of the DRL and the East Bayfront LRT. There may be small pockets of densification on the east side of the Don, but nothing compared to the west side.
    This statement confuses me -- are you suggesting both a Parliament line and a DRL? A Parliament DRL will presumably curve to Union/downtown north of Distillery and well west of WDL. An East Bayfront LRT will only serve QQ until such time as it is connected to Cherry. None of those are alternatives that make a Parliament DRL alignment palatable.

    Quote Originally Posted by gweed123 View Post
    As for the GO connection, having a subway GO connection at a place where both lines are going to the exact same place (Union) is a bit redundant, isn't it? I'd much rather see a GO-TTC connection exist at Queen with a Queen LRT than a DRL, at least then they're going to different places.
    I'd agree that a Gerrard GO transfer is probably going to be like Main, i.e. underused. I'd say that a GO/DRL transfer at the new 'corporate campus' would work very well for reverse commuters from WDL and workers stopping there. Where'd the Queen LRT idea come from? That's never going to happen, so how does it get mixed into a Parliament DRL alignment discussion?

    Quote Originally Posted by gweed123 View Post
    No you aren't, you run the line through the Don Valley. Yes, the line would skip Riverdale and the area around Pape north of the Danforth, but that's it. There isn't an extraordinary amount of density along that route (heck, half the route south of Danforth is through a rail corridor with only a couple stops planned).

    But it still hits the major pockets of density like Thorncliffe & Flemingdon Parks. Also, crossing the Don from Pape over to Thorncliffe would be a pretty expensive feat. By not having to cross the Don at all, you eliminate that. Building the line at-grade through the Don Valley from Castle Frank to Overlea would be a heck of a lot less expensive than tunnelling from Pape-Danforth, then building a bridge over the Don Valley, and then going back under Overlea.
    So... you think it's less expensive to tunnel down the hill from Castle Frank over/under Rosedale Valley Drive, then over/under Bayview, the train tracks, the river? That's a LOT of vertical! Or are you trying to argue that you're going to punch a subway line through Craigleith Gardens, Glen Road, and Chorley Park? Bwahahahahaha.... good luck with that.

  4. #334
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Ottawa (formerly Downtown Toronto)
    Posts
    5,418

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Riverdale Rink Rat View Post
    Pape Station. The 'traditional' BD intercept for the DRL.
    Oh ok, the way you worded it made it sound like Pape Ave.

    Quote Originally Posted by Riverdale Rink Rat View Post
    This statement confuses me -- are you suggesting both a Parliament line and a DRL? A Parliament DRL will presumably curve to Union/downtown north of Distillery and well west of WDL. An East Bayfront LRT will only serve QQ until such time as it is connected to Cherry. None of those are alternatives that make a Parliament DRL alignment palatable.
    A Parliament DRL would run underneath either Front St or the Esplanade until after Sherbourne, where it would then curve north under Parliament. It would be reasonably close to the Distillery District. The Cherry LRT ROW is being built now, and it'll be connected to the East Bayfront LRT when it's built. From what I understand, they'll be running buses until then. So it' not like WDL won't be serviced.

    Quote Originally Posted by Riverdale Rink Rat View Post
    I'd agree that a Gerrard GO transfer is probably going to be like Main, i.e. underused. I'd say that a GO/DRL transfer at the new 'corporate campus' would work very well for reverse commuters from WDL and workers stopping there. Where'd the Queen LRT idea come from? That's never going to happen, so how does it get mixed into a Parliament DRL alignment discussion?
    It's not official, but it's definitely needed. And it gets mixed into the DRL discussion because having the potential for that line affect potential alignments for the DRL.

    Quote Originally Posted by Riverdale Rink Rat View Post
    So... you think it's less expensive to tunnel down the hill from Castle Frank over/under Rosedale Valley Drive, then over/under Bayview, the train tracks, the river? That's a LOT of vertical! Or are you trying to argue that you're going to punch a subway line through Craigleith Gardens, Glen Road, and Chorley Park? Bwahahahahaha.... good luck with that.
    No, I say tunnel under Castle Frank Station, and then cut through the hill, cross Bayview, and then run beside the Richmond Hill GO line until the water treatment plant, where it would then get tunnelled into the hillside and under Overlea. The overpass over Bayview pales in comparison to the crossing of the Don Valley that would be required at Millwood if it was to use Pape.

    There's no way in hell that that option would be more expensive than tunnelling that huge distance under Pape.

Page 23 of 23 FirstFirst ... 13212223

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •