Toronto Ontario Line 3 | ?m | ?s

[crs1026]

The issue of course is the need then to come up with an alignment for Phase 2 prior.

Absolutely - that's the ultimate question.

The thing I like about Shaw is - while it's not a good place to terminate the line, pretty well all the potential options take the line this far, so it's a no-risk place to build from. And the dump truck route is optimal. So why not insert here and by the time Phase II is decided on, Phase I will be reaching Osgoode, or maybe beyond. Bathurst-University can be Phase 1.1

- Paul

 

[DonValleyRainbow]

This does beg the question of where the insertion/extraction shafts will be (assuming TBM construction). The insertion point is where the tailings are removed, so sees heavy dump truck traffic. There are far fewer open spaces along this route than on Eglinton.

My theory would be to insert from the east, perhaps at Moss Park or near the Don. Extract from in front of Osgoode Hall. If we buy a single station midway between Yonge and University, there is room to extract just west of the west end of the future station. Don't close up the extraction shaft until the Phase II west leg has arrived - timing the arrival of the Phase II TBM for just after the Phase I TBM has been dismantled and removed. In effect, we reuse the extraction shaft.

Phase II would go into the ground near Shaw where Queen is wide and the CAMH lawn is available. It could also be used to launch westwards.

That puts the dump truck routes down Strachan and on the Bayview extension. We don't want to totally mess up the central area with these.

EDIT - I realise that Phase II is not a given, but nothing will mess up downtown as much as ripping up Queen St twice. There is a good argument that the economic impact of two tunnelling projects is worse than just borrowing another $1-2B and doing the whole thing in one pass.

- Paul

The Scarboro discussion has made me wonder if we should just go ahead and start tunnelling a whole bunch of routes, and then bank the tunnels for when we have the money to dig the stations and finish the lines. It would get us closer to the "build a mile a year for 20 years" approach - which we should have been doing all along - and it would take some of the shifting sands out of the planning process. So long as we don't elect another Mike Harris to fill them all in again, anyways. By the end of Crosstown, Toronto will have scrapped eight perfectly good TBM's.....why not just keep boring?

- Paul

This is why I would like to see Phase II of the DRL (west of downtown) dug now. Just keep boring to a convenient extraction area, reduce your fixed costs of re-mobilizing to a site and buying new TBMs, and implement stations later when you decide on where to put them and get a good purchase on the land.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

The thing I like about Shaw is - while it's not a good place to terminate the line, pretty well all the potential options take the line this far, so it's a no-risk place to build from. And the dump truck route is optimal. So why not insert here and by the time Phase II is decided on, Phase I will be reaching Osgoode, or maybe beyond. Bathurst-University can be Phase 1.1

I wonder how one would terminate the western extension of RL - given the troubles with the 501 in Etobicoke, perhaps Queensway (which is loaded with redevelopable properties) might work, and you can end the line at Sherway, which will be a good node in its' own rights particularly in light of Sherway Area Study. Plus it is pretty proximate to the yard by Kipling that can be converted for servicing the line, should TTC pick it up. Not much point having the U since Weston is already spoken for by ST.

AoD

 

[gweed123]

The Scarboro discussion has made me wonder if we should just go ahead and start tunnelling a whole bunch of routes, and then bank the tunnels for when we have the money to dig the stations and finish the lines. It would get us closer to the "build a mile a year for 20 years" approach - which we should have been doing all along - and it would take some of the shifting sands out of the planning process. So long as we don't elect another Mike Harris to fill them all in again, anyways. By the end of Crosstown, Toronto will have scrapped eight perfectly good TBM's.....why not just keep boring?

- Paul

Interesting idea. Yes, a large part of the costs is the stations. Maybe tunnel from Danforth to Moss Park and Moss Park to Ossington, but only actually complete stations from Danforth to City Hall. All that would be done for the rest of them would be headwalls.

Of course, you would still need to dig the ventilation shafts and stuff, so there would still be some surface disruptions. Also, it would be difficult to politically justify basically saying "look, we're going to tunnel underneath you, but you can't use it for another 5-10 years".

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Interesting idea. Yes, a large part of the costs is the stations. Maybe tunnel from Danforth to Moss Park and Moss Park to Ossington, but only actually complete stations from Danforth to City Hall. All that would be done for the rest of them would be headwalls.

Of course, you would still need to dig the ventilation shafts and stuff, so there would still be some surface disruptions. Also, it would be difficult to politically justify basically saying "look, we're going to tunnel underneath you, but you can't use it for another 5-10 years".

Phase I should go all the way to Spadina just because of all the development activities in the area.

AoD

 

[gweed123]

I wonder how one would terminate the western extension of RL - given the troubles with the 501 in Etobicoke, perhaps Queensway (which is loaded with redevelopable properties) might work, and you can end the line at Sherway, which will be a good node in its' own rights particularly in light of Sherway Area Study. Not much point having the U since Weston is already spoken for by ST.

AoD

If it's going in as a TTC Subway, I would terminate it at Roncesvalles, with the Queensway ROW and King streetcar both having underground connections to the station (removing the clusterf**k at that intersection). It could be built in part below the existing TTC barn.

Now if it's being built as a local branch of RER, you can have it merge onto the Lakeshore West corridor west of Roncesvalles, and continue on with local stops at Park Lawn, Mimico, maybe one at Kipling, Long Branch, maybe one at Cawthra, and Port Credit. You could also build a section of track just east of Dufferin that comes to grade in the Georgetown corridor, providing the same type of local option for that corridor.

 

[gweed123]

Phase I should go all the way to Spadina just because of all the development activities in the area.

AoD

If you're continuing the tunnelling, then yes adding 1 station at Spadina is certainly worth it. I'd even add one in at John if they're going with the 1 central station instead of 2 stations that straddle either side of the loop (Bay to Yonge, University to Duncan). If they do the 2 stations, then John isn't needed.

 

[WislaHD]

I wonder how one would terminate the western extension of RL - given the troubles with the 501 in Etobicoke, perhaps Queensway (which is loaded with redevelopable properties) might work, and you can end the line at Sherway, which will be a good node in its' own rights particularly in light of Sherway Area Study. Plus it is pretty proximate to the yard by Kipling that can be converted for servicing the line, should TTC pick it up. Not much point having the U since Weston is already spoken for by ST.

AoD

I'm thinking this too. If GO-RER/ST happens with the vision of providing 416 service, then there is no need to connect the subway up to Dundas West. The Queensway will be a future area of explosive growth in this city, might as well jump-start that and send the Relief Line from Sunnyside to Sherway Gardens via The Quensway. We can extend Line 2 from Kipling to Sherway Gardens as well.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

I wonder how one would terminate the western extension of RL - given the troubles with the 501 in Etobicoke, perhaps Queensway (which is loaded with redevelopable properties) might work, and you can end the line at Sherway, which will be a good node in its' own rights particularly in light of Sherway Area Study. Plus it is pretty proximate to the yard by Kipling that can be converted for servicing the line, should TTC pick it up. Not much point having the U since Weston is already spoken for by ST.

AoD

That area won't warrant a subway in this lifetime.

 

[DonValleyRainbow]

Now if it's being built as a local branch of RER, you can have it merge onto the Lakeshore West corridor west of Roncesvalles, and continue on with local stops at Park Lawn, Mimico, maybe one at Kipling, Long Branch, maybe one at Cawthra, and Port Credit. You could also build a section of track just east of Dufferin that comes to grade in the Georgetown corridor, providing the same type of local option for that corridor.

Erm, with all due respect, but why is this idea still floating around? Heavy rail has never been floated in a Queen/King relief tunnel, IIRC this was a crazy fantasy that grew legs in the SmartTrack thread.

 

[gweed123]

Erm, with all due respect, but why is this idea still floating around? Heavy rail has never been floated in a Queen/King relief tunnel, IIRC this was a crazy fantasy that grew legs in the SmartTrack thread.

It was actually studied by Metrolinx back in 2011, when looking at options to relieve future congestion at Union. That was pre-RER though. The report on which SmartTrack is based also called for a downtown tunnel for that route to use, instead of going through Union.

It makes sense, IMO, because if the goal is to maximize relief, using RER technology allows branches to spread far further into the suburbs than a traditional subway ever could (barring finding a pot of gold). By having branches into all corners of the city via existing rail corridors that are scheduled to be upgraded to RER standards anyway, you can capture riders before they even hit the subway network, which is a far more effective way to relieve the subway network than merely providing them with an alternate route once they're already on the network.

 

[dowlingm]

Little current demand? A station at Queen will encourage DRL usage by those currently using Dundas. Dundas station ridership is significantly higher than King (or Queen) station ridership.

So many peak NB trains I've been on that have arrived at a crowded Dundas platform and taken on nobody because the train is already full.

By the way, in case anyone's wondering - my usual station is King so a DRL there is better for me personally than at Queen - just not, I believe, for many many other people.

 

[crs1026]

I would be happy with a simple loop at Roncy, and DRL terminating there. If even that is too far (it may be), a Flexity-friendly tunnel from St Joe's Hospital under Queen over to wherever DRL ends is fine. I would like to see a plan that upgrades the Roncy-Park Lawn segment of 501 to an actual LRT standard. That would add enough capacity to mitigate Humber Bay and beyond for a couple decades.

There have been all sorts of suggestions about bringing the DRL back up the west side of the city. In my view, a stopping service on the Weston Sub (call it what you will) is all that's needed, unless you have actual ridership projections to table that say otherwise.

- Paul

 

[LNahid2000]

So many peak NB trains I've been on that have arrived at a crowded Dundas platform and taken on nobody because the train is already full.

By the way, in case anyone's wondering - my usual station is King so a DRL there is better for me personally than at Queen - just not, I believe, for many many other people.

I've been left stranded on the platform at Queen many times. Queen is definitely my preferred alignment since you'll have SmartTrack at the south end of the financial district, and the DRL at the north end of the financial district. With PATH connections to both, walking is no big deal.

 

[jcam]

I wonder how one would terminate the western extension of RL - given the troubles with the 501 in Etobicoke, perhaps Queensway (which is loaded with redevelopable properties) might work, and you can end the line at Sherway, which will be a good node in its' own rights particularly in light of Sherway Area Study. Plus it is pretty proximate to the yard by Kipling that can be converted for servicing the line, should TTC pick it up. Not much point having the U since Weston is already spoken for by ST.

AoD

Long long long term, maybe you have DRL morph into the Circle Line by merging it with Sheppard.

Circle line segments
-Sheppard stubway
-DRL short Pape to Spadina
-extend to Eglinton
-extend to Don Mills
-extend to Sunnyside
-extend to Jane (Line 2)
-extend up Jane, past Lambton (St. Clair LRT, Milton GO) to Mount Dennis
-extend Yonge-Sheppard to Sheppard West
-complete loop, Jane north to Sheppard, east to Sheppard West.


We talking needs waaaaaaaaay into the future (or arguably never at all), but a circulator sure is nice to dream of.