R
roch5220
Guest
Yes, the DRL, coming from the NE, not NW.
|
|
|
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
R
roch5220
Guest
there goes the neighbourhood. upcoming forecast of essay filled responses filling pages and pages. though, I can't escape some responsibility.
A
allabootmatt
Guest
Thank you for all your help folks...I am going to try to write a coherent memo by this weekend, hopefully keeping it to 1000 words or so. Might anyone be able to render a quick map? The one on Transit Toronto isn't great as it doesn't show much north of Bloor, which I think is crucial to this.
U
unimaginative2
Guest
I think it's worth taking a look at the reports. The place I've found them most easily is unfortunately at the University of Waterloo. It's a three volume feasibility study, though the University of Toronto doesn't have the second, and most useful, volume. The Urban Affairs library probably has it.
I definitely wouldn't want to get distracted with all of these north-eastern and north-western extensions. The core section of route is definitely from about the Ex to Pape and Danforth.
Just to make it clear, the recommended first routing (and one I would more-or-less stick with) runs from Spadina and Front underground to Convention Centre at about John, then to Union Station. At Union, the station would go just south of the existing station, into the "moat". The additional platform presently under construction is already included in the preliminary design they did back in the eighties. From there, it would run diagonally under the Dominion Public Building and rail corridor to the south side of the rail corridor at about Yonge. It would then remain there until the Don. The corridor has enough empty space that there would be virtually no cost for this segment other than stations, which would be cheap and above-ground anyway, and the laying of track. The route from Yonge to the Don would literally be cheaper to build than a streetcar along Queens Quay. The Jarvis/Sherbourne station would serve the East Bayfront and St. Lawrence neighbourhood, while the Cherry stop would very effectively serve the West Donlands, east portion of the East Bayfrount, and the Port Lands. It could connect to the proposed Cherry streetcar. Beyond there, the recommended route shifted off the rail corridor to an underground alignment along Eastern Avenue, with the yard site at the present Toronto Film Studios, though that could be shifted. It would turn north at Pape, running up Pape until Danforth. This segment could definitely be re-examined, perhaps routing it along the rail corridor if room could be found. A stop at Queen and Pape is recommended to intercept streetcar passengers. It would also be an incredible catalyst for the revitalization of that area. I've actually even thought about running along Lakeshore east of the Don to Pape. It would seem to be possible to have an elevated line, if desired, and it could serve the eastern sections of the Port Lands, such as the new film studio, quite effectively, hastening their development. Pape and Gerrard is a great spot for a stop since the mall there could be easily re-developed. It was strongly recommended that the route end at Pape rather than Donlands, since that is a much busier subway station, is much more accessible by bus from the north, and is in an area where re-development is more desirable than at Donlands.
Don't be distracted by alternative routes along the Don Valley. The study examined them, thinking that they would be the cheapest, but finding out that they were even more expensive than Pape. There simply isn't enough room to add additional tracks in the valley, so they would have to tunnel. Add the cost of flood protection and the massive elevator/escalator at Broadview and it becomes quite impractical.
West of Spadina, the route would run along Front to Bathurst, then along the Front Street Extension corridor (already city-owned!) to the Exhibition. A stop at Bathurst (Fort York) would serve that major waterfront development area, while the Exhibition stop could potentially connect to that Waterfront LRT. I've been partial in the past to continuing to Roncesvalles and Queen, where a big streetcar terminal would be located, and underground up Roncesvalles to Dundas West. Lately, I've begun to consider the alternative recommended route up Dufferin from the Ex to Queen, and then north-west on the rail corridor.
North of Danforth (and Bloor), the route was only very vaguely discussed in the study, though in the east end an extension to Eglinton and Don Mills was examined, with intermediate stops at Cosburn and Thorncliffe Park. You could add an extra stop in there at Flemingdon Park, I think. The report considered running the route elevated along Overlea and Don Mills, though that was with Skytrain vehicles rather than the much heavier subway cars. Nevertheless, it should still be possible. It also wasn't able to determine whether the Leaside Bridge could handle the extra weight, or if a new and much more expensive bridge would have to be built.
I also consider extensions north of Eglinton to be quite useful, serving Don Mills in particular and relieving the circuitous Lawrence bus route.
It's been my life-long goal ever since I wrote that article what must be almost a decade ago to revive discussion of the DRL. I've tried every possible way, but I wish you good luck.
I definitely wouldn't want to get distracted with all of these north-eastern and north-western extensions. The core section of route is definitely from about the Ex to Pape and Danforth.
Just to make it clear, the recommended first routing (and one I would more-or-less stick with) runs from Spadina and Front underground to Convention Centre at about John, then to Union Station. At Union, the station would go just south of the existing station, into the "moat". The additional platform presently under construction is already included in the preliminary design they did back in the eighties. From there, it would run diagonally under the Dominion Public Building and rail corridor to the south side of the rail corridor at about Yonge. It would then remain there until the Don. The corridor has enough empty space that there would be virtually no cost for this segment other than stations, which would be cheap and above-ground anyway, and the laying of track. The route from Yonge to the Don would literally be cheaper to build than a streetcar along Queens Quay. The Jarvis/Sherbourne station would serve the East Bayfront and St. Lawrence neighbourhood, while the Cherry stop would very effectively serve the West Donlands, east portion of the East Bayfrount, and the Port Lands. It could connect to the proposed Cherry streetcar. Beyond there, the recommended route shifted off the rail corridor to an underground alignment along Eastern Avenue, with the yard site at the present Toronto Film Studios, though that could be shifted. It would turn north at Pape, running up Pape until Danforth. This segment could definitely be re-examined, perhaps routing it along the rail corridor if room could be found. A stop at Queen and Pape is recommended to intercept streetcar passengers. It would also be an incredible catalyst for the revitalization of that area. I've actually even thought about running along Lakeshore east of the Don to Pape. It would seem to be possible to have an elevated line, if desired, and it could serve the eastern sections of the Port Lands, such as the new film studio, quite effectively, hastening their development. Pape and Gerrard is a great spot for a stop since the mall there could be easily re-developed. It was strongly recommended that the route end at Pape rather than Donlands, since that is a much busier subway station, is much more accessible by bus from the north, and is in an area where re-development is more desirable than at Donlands.
Don't be distracted by alternative routes along the Don Valley. The study examined them, thinking that they would be the cheapest, but finding out that they were even more expensive than Pape. There simply isn't enough room to add additional tracks in the valley, so they would have to tunnel. Add the cost of flood protection and the massive elevator/escalator at Broadview and it becomes quite impractical.
West of Spadina, the route would run along Front to Bathurst, then along the Front Street Extension corridor (already city-owned!) to the Exhibition. A stop at Bathurst (Fort York) would serve that major waterfront development area, while the Exhibition stop could potentially connect to that Waterfront LRT. I've been partial in the past to continuing to Roncesvalles and Queen, where a big streetcar terminal would be located, and underground up Roncesvalles to Dundas West. Lately, I've begun to consider the alternative recommended route up Dufferin from the Ex to Queen, and then north-west on the rail corridor.
North of Danforth (and Bloor), the route was only very vaguely discussed in the study, though in the east end an extension to Eglinton and Don Mills was examined, with intermediate stops at Cosburn and Thorncliffe Park. You could add an extra stop in there at Flemingdon Park, I think. The report considered running the route elevated along Overlea and Don Mills, though that was with Skytrain vehicles rather than the much heavier subway cars. Nevertheless, it should still be possible. It also wasn't able to determine whether the Leaside Bridge could handle the extra weight, or if a new and much more expensive bridge would have to be built.
I also consider extensions north of Eglinton to be quite useful, serving Don Mills in particular and relieving the circuitous Lawrence bus route.
It's been my life-long goal ever since I wrote that article what must be almost a decade ago to revive discussion of the DRL. I've tried every possible way, but I wish you good luck.
A
AlvinofDiaspar
Guest
Notoriety, yes; clout, probably not.
AoD
AoD
U
unimaginative2
Guest
socialwoe, I wrote those articles.
I'd really like to avoid cluttering up this thread. My articles on TT might have a bit more information than I just listed. I'll see if I can do a map, though others are surely better artists than me. I would ask anyone else making one to please follow the recommended route. It's been heavily studied by the TTC, albeit a few years ago, and all-in-all is probably the best way to go.
It's important to note that segments north of BD are definitely for a second phase, otherwise it gets a little ambitious. The segment from Spadina to Danforth (and perhaps even west to the Ex) could be built for about the cost of the Sheppard stubway or the York U line. Its affordability is a big selling point, especially when you consider the comparative areas served.
Another important detail to remember is the original purpose of the Downtown Relief Line: to relieve the Yonge Line and, in particular, Bloor Yonge station. This was in the days (unlike now with the Scarborough RT) when the TTC was willing to spend a little more to get a lot more. Instead of spending hundreds of millions of dollars on a new platform for Yonge station on the Bloor line, they would spend a few hundred million more and get a whole new subway line. The Yonge station expansion is still occasionally bandied about if the subway ever gets back to the kind of congestion it experienced in the mid-80s.
I'd really like to avoid cluttering up this thread. My articles on TT might have a bit more information than I just listed. I'll see if I can do a map, though others are surely better artists than me. I would ask anyone else making one to please follow the recommended route. It's been heavily studied by the TTC, albeit a few years ago, and all-in-all is probably the best way to go.
It's important to note that segments north of BD are definitely for a second phase, otherwise it gets a little ambitious. The segment from Spadina to Danforth (and perhaps even west to the Ex) could be built for about the cost of the Sheppard stubway or the York U line. Its affordability is a big selling point, especially when you consider the comparative areas served.
Another important detail to remember is the original purpose of the Downtown Relief Line: to relieve the Yonge Line and, in particular, Bloor Yonge station. This was in the days (unlike now with the Scarborough RT) when the TTC was willing to spend a little more to get a lot more. Instead of spending hundreds of millions of dollars on a new platform for Yonge station on the Bloor line, they would spend a few hundred million more and get a whole new subway line. The Yonge station expansion is still occasionally bandied about if the subway ever gets back to the kind of congestion it experienced in the mid-80s.
S
scarberiankhatru
Guest
"The one on Transit Toronto isn't great as it doesn't show much north of Bloor, which I think is crucial to this."
If the north of Bloor branches are going to such a big part of your proposal, I'll again stress that the Don Mills line should run up to Finch. The Weston branch is a bit more complicated to map...there's turf wars with the potential Eglinton line (which seems to be on almost every politician's mental fantasy map) to consider, turf wars with the GO line and a possible Blue-22 type line, etc.
If the north of Bloor branches are going to such a big part of your proposal, I'll again stress that the Don Mills line should run up to Finch. The Weston branch is a bit more complicated to map...there's turf wars with the potential Eglinton line (which seems to be on almost every politician's mental fantasy map) to consider, turf wars with the GO line and a possible Blue-22 type line, etc.
R
roch5220
Guest
The "relief" is the portion south of Bloor/Danforth, not the Don Mills line
I know, which is why my first post I stated "the future extensions".
Anyways, if Moscoe's claim that going automated for what, $750MM will increase capacity by 40%, maybe that is the more logical step for the YUL.
Also, the alternative that I've always thought, at the expense of cars, is to put the 504 and 505 street cars on their own ROW. Going north from broadway (new track), squeezing the ROW towards Thorncliffe, until it hits don mills so it can proceed north to eglington and beyond. I know other than Don Mills rd (which has tons of space for a ROW), it would be very difficult to do. I wonder if its possible. Especially the downtown portions. Maybe some of the turns, ie. onto Dundas, would have to tunnelled inorder to ensure ride times and reliability.
S
socialwoe
Guest
there goes the neighbourhood. upcoming forecast of essay filled responses filling pages and pages. though, I can't escape some responsibility.
As if! You didn't seriously think a thread about the DRL could go by and I not reply did you? Glad to see my presence carries some clout and has notoreity around here :evil ! Wow 4 lines, shorest essay in history!
Thank you for all your help folks...I am going to try to write a coherent memo by this weekend, hopefully keeping it to 1000 words or so. Might anyone be able to render a quick map? The one on Transit Toronto isn't great as it doesn't show much north of Bloor, which I think is crucial to this.
I've seen various versions all over the web. TT in fact has articles on north of Bloor extensions.
A
allabootmatt
Guest
I think the North-of-Bloor angle is crucial. Miller has made it pretty clear that the focus of subway expansion will be on the suburbs, so I think the only way to get a real hearing on this is to stress the benefits for suburban areas, which I believe would be greater than those of, say, an Eglinton West line as DRL would provide a one-seat trip downtown. I also want to focus on the airport angle, and on the fact that, even keeping to feasible railway alignments, such a line would serve almost every area of the city presently targeted for large-scale intensification (Donlands, Port, Cityplace, Liberty, Parkdale, Junction etc.)
T
The Burgher of TO
Guest
Does anyone know what happened to the proposal from the Weston community to cancel the Blue-22 route and instead put in a very DRL-like line? That would seem like a huge selling point to me; you get your rapid transit connection to the airport, as well as the Western leg of the DRL all in one go.
D
disparishun
Guest
Regarding Pape/Danforth, Don Mills, and suburban users, respectively. Keep in mind the subway-GO train interconnections -- or something almost resembling it, anyway -- at:
- Leslie and the 401 (Leslie and Old Cummer stations), which is just one Sheppard line stop west of Don Mills station; and
- Main Street station on Danforth (this is, admittedly, kind of a long shot, but thought I'd throw it in there).
Regarding the Yonge Street subway extension thread, which is again admittedly a bit off the DRL topic, I believe the most logical place for it to terminate would be Langstaff, meeting up with the GO train and VIVA stations currently separated by a chain link fence.
The point, I guess, being that any network extension should aim to increase that network's interconnectivity with other existing networks wherever possible -- basic network economics say that interconnection multiplies the value of each connecting network, so it makes sense to seek out routes that involve connecting stops to other transit lines and other transit systems.
- Leslie and the 401 (Leslie and Old Cummer stations), which is just one Sheppard line stop west of Don Mills station; and
- Main Street station on Danforth (this is, admittedly, kind of a long shot, but thought I'd throw it in there).
Regarding the Yonge Street subway extension thread, which is again admittedly a bit off the DRL topic, I believe the most logical place for it to terminate would be Langstaff, meeting up with the GO train and VIVA stations currently separated by a chain link fence.
The point, I guess, being that any network extension should aim to increase that network's interconnectivity with other existing networks wherever possible -- basic network economics say that interconnection multiplies the value of each connecting network, so it makes sense to seek out routes that involve connecting stops to other transit lines and other transit systems.
U
unimaginative2
Guest
If you want to focus on the suburban angle, definitely talk about the Don Mills segment. It's packed with riders in Thorncliffe and Flemingdon Parks. It also serves a bunch of offices and the Science Centre at Don Mills and Eglinton, as well as all the people in Don Mills itself.
Flemingdon Park is, shockingly, a very busy bus route. It would undoubtedly be a very well-used subway station, along with Thorncliffe Park. East York Centre is definitely an area that could use some spark, and a subway would do it. There are far more people along Don Mills than along the Spadina line, so that's a very useful selling point. It would also eliminate the jog on the Lawrence bus route, and dramatically speed trips downtown for people in the east end, since the stops would be significantly less frequent than on the Yonge line.
If automating the line to boost capacity would cost $750 million, and a subway that would provide both relief and a great deal more coverage would cost less than double, wouldn't the subway be the better investment?
Flemingdon Park is, shockingly, a very busy bus route. It would undoubtedly be a very well-used subway station, along with Thorncliffe Park. East York Centre is definitely an area that could use some spark, and a subway would do it. There are far more people along Don Mills than along the Spadina line, so that's a very useful selling point. It would also eliminate the jog on the Lawrence bus route, and dramatically speed trips downtown for people in the east end, since the stops would be significantly less frequent than on the Yonge line.
If automating the line to boost capacity would cost $750 million, and a subway that would provide both relief and a great deal more coverage would cost less than double, wouldn't the subway be the better investment?
S
scarberiankhatru
Guest
Take the map shown in the RTES called "Urban Density by Traffic Zone (2021) and overlay the DRL...it's the most beautiful thing.
B
Brighter Hell
Guest
^I've seen that map, or at least a similar one. It's a perfect match. A DRL is a no-brainer. Matt - were you going to cc the councillors along the route?