Downtown Rapid Transit Expansion Study

[balenciaga]

No, it isn't that obvious. I personally think Wellington is the best route if you're doing it as a completely separate line.

But in terms of total best option, I personally think it's linking the DRL with the University-Spadina line and decoupling US from the Yonge line.

It's not as black and white as it seems. I want to put my input into this process, preferably via public consultation.

I am not a planner so there must be better options. for example, I think the U-shape line is a stupid and inefficient idea too. Yonge is a 8 minutes walk to University, and these two lines can totally function as separate ones. But why linking DRL with the US line? Few people will take this new U-shape from northeast to northwest, will they? I think the DRL should simply extend westward straight along King/Queen after University ave. There is a lot going on at that area all the way to Dufferin.

Yonge should serve as a straight line, but extended to Queen's Quay, with a stop just before the railway, and then connecting to the QQ LRT, making the waterfront a lot more accessible (plenty of condos and Georgebrown). Honestly no one wants to walk past the gardiner and railway to get to the lake, or take a slow bus from Union.

And don't you think all this study after study, proposal after proposal is a bit excessive? We should have made a decision on this a LONG time ago.

 

[W. K. Lis]

I am not a planner so there must be better options. for example, I think the U-shape line is a stupid and inefficient idea too. Yonge is a 8 minutes walk to University, and these two lines can totally function as separate ones. But why linking DRL with the US line? Few people will take this new U-shape from northeast to northwest, will they? I think the DRL should simply extend westward straight along King/Queen after University ave. There is a lot going on at that area all the way to Dufferin.

Yonge should serve as a straight line, but extended to Queen's Quay, with a stop just before the railway, and then connecting to the QQ LRT, making the waterfront a lot more accessible (plenty of condos and Georgebrown). Honestly no one wants to walk past the gardiner and railway to get to the lake, or take a slow bus from Union.

And don't you think all this study after study, proposal after proposal is a bit excessive? We should have made a decision on this a LONG time ago.

If the first opening is as follows:

they can then extend it station by station until either:

or

but I would leave it as an express line, maybe divert it to serve Exhibition Place. However, I would leave the streetcars to provide local service, as well as emergency service whenever the DRL is down.

 

[M II A II R II K]

During rush hour the Lakeshore Line could provide empty trains starting from each 905 city and run express to downtown.

 

[gweed123]

I am not a planner so there must be better options. for example, I think the U-shape line is a stupid and inefficient idea too. Yonge is a 8 minutes walk to University, and these two lines can totally function as separate ones. But why linking DRL with the US line? Few people will take this new U-shape from northeast to northwest, will they? I think the DRL should simply extend westward straight along King/Queen after University ave. There is a lot going on at that area all the way to Dufferin.

Because the projected frequencies on the DRL are very close to the frequencies on the Spadina line. By running them as a single thru-line, you can tailor the frequencies pretty closely, as opposed to now where they have to short turn at St. Clair West because the Yonge line needs more trains than Spadina does.

Also, with the DRL running as an extension of the Spadina line, the DRL can potentially use Wilson as a yard, while Yonge can use Davisville as well as Wilson. A separate DRL would either require a complicated interchange with either YUS or B-D in order to transfer trains, or build a new yard around downtown, which is pretty prime real estate.

Also, it's a lot easier to build it this way, because you don't have to make any substantial modifications to existing stations, and you don't have to build 2 new stations right in the middle of the CBD.

Yonge should serve as a straight line, but extended to Queen's Quay, with a stop just before the railway, and then connecting to the QQ LRT, making the waterfront a lot more accessible (plenty of condos and Georgebrown). Honestly no one wants to walk past the gardiner and railway to get to the lake, or take a slow bus from Union.

Here's what I proposed a few months ago, I think it's somewhat what you're proposing:

And don't you think all this study after study, proposal after proposal is a bit excessive? We should have made a decision on this a LONG time ago.

I agree that the need should have been established a long time ago, but stuff has changed since it was last seriously proposed in the 80s. Alignment definitely needs to be looked at again.

 

[nfitz]

Any one else surprised none of the Exhibits have a station for West Don Lands?

Other than King/Parliament subway station, King/Sherbourne subway station (not sure why some have one, some have the other), Bayview/River Street subway and GO station, and the Cherry Street RT station?

How many more stations would West Donlands need?

 

[christiesplits]

Good points all. I completely forgot about the Cherry Street LRT

 

[M II A II R II K]

Will it be continuously built with early openings for the finished sections or have to start from scratch for each phase...

 

[nfitz]

Will it be continuously built with early openings for the finished sections or have to start from scratch for each phase...

The recommendation it to do a further study ... we're not even up to the EA yet, let alone the project staging.

 

[Dan416]

I also found the King St alignment interesting. I'd prefer a Union/Front St alignment though. But I guess that's what the EA is for. I also agree with decoupling Yonge and Universtiy and coupling University with the DRL instead.

 

[gweed123]

I also found the King St alignment interesting. I'd prefer a Union/Front St alignment though. But I guess that's what the EA is for. I also agree with decoupling Yonge and Universtiy and coupling University with the DRL instead.

Hopefully that option is one that they'll look at in the EA, and not be starting with the assumption that the DRL needs to be an independent line, which would immediately exclude the possibility of the decoupling option.

I for one certainly intend to bring that up in any public consultations that are held (which I'm really hoping there will be).

 

[W. K. Lis]

In addition to the summary Commission report (12 pages) at this link, there is the complete report (112 pages) at this link.

 

[ssiguy2]

I still think continuing the Yonge subway underground all the way to Barrie is a better choice.........................because it has a better chance of getting built within any of our lifetimes.

One thing I'll give the TTC.........they're ability to produce major reports mythical rapid transit lines is world class.

 

[balenciaga]

I still think continuing the Yonge subway underground all the way to Barrie is a better choice.........................because it has a better chance of getting built within any of our lifetimes.

I don't think anyone would agree that bring more people from Newmarket and Barrie on the yonge line to downtown Toronto is the priority. Plus, what's the point of digging expensive tunnels in the middle of miles of farmland? Unground subway only makes sense when density is high.

Plus, do you think Barrie dwellers will drive less because there is a subway leading to Toronto?

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

ssiguy:

What is so mythical about the DRL? The need for it is pretty clear, unlike the Skytrain-cum-monorail to Scarborough idea. To start off by saying this will never happen is just a case for making it a self-fulfilled prophecy.

AoD

 

[pman]

ssiguy:

What is so mythical about the DRL? The need for it is pretty clear, unlike the Skytrain-cum-monorail to Scarborough idea. To start off by saying this will never happen is just a case for making it a self-fulfilled prophecy.

AoD

I agree the need for the DRL is pretty clear. It may not be a bad thing to point out the considerable obstacles it will face though. For whatever set of reasons, Toronto's decision making process has ensured that since 1973, heavy rail rapid transit can only be built in low density areas and cannot be built where it actually makes economic sense. So over the past 40 years our subway expansions have been Spadina (twice - most recently through vacant fields and underground) and Sheppard. I'm not sure when Yonge was extended though at the time of construction it too would have been going into a very low density area. The DRL issue is more urgent now that Hudak has jumped on the subways to nowhere bandwagon with the Ford / Minnan-Wong crowd. Maybe a better way to address your concern is for people to say DRL will happen only with a tremendous amount of organizing, strategic voting, and opposition to Ford and Hudak's nutbar visions of transit planning.