DRL routing. Where would you put it?

[BurlOak]

Looks like it makes a turn from the rail line to Pape - http://drlnow.com/googlemap.html

I measure this as a 55 to 60 degree turn - still a bit easier than a 90 degree turn required if it would run down to Queen or Eastern.

 

[unimaginative2]

K10, the point of regional rail is that there is full fare integration between all modes, so that regardless of which route or mode you take, the fare is the same for a given trip.

 

[gweed123]

Munro criticized certain aspects of the drlnow proposal, but not the part about tunneling a couple of km under the Lakeshore line.

Personally I can't see why anyone would bother talking about DRL as a HRT subway on anything like a Pape to Dundas W routing. The alternative is a full upgrade of GO service between Kennedy, Union, and Pearson. This would cost something like:

- electrification: <$1 billion
- 10 GO-style infill stations: <$300 million
- pedestrian tunnels to TTC at Danforth and Bloor GO: $20 million?
- fare integration (i.e. free transfers to TTC from GO, FOREVER): $600 million

That's, what, 40 km of rapid transit for $2 billion, in place of <7 km you could buy with subway tunnels.

(Note I didn't include any cost for track work on the Georgetown corridor, or improvements at Union, because the solution there is free: kill the ARL! But I guess something should be counted for an extra track or two on the Lakeshore E line to make this work.)

Electrification solves the a lot of the long-haul express traffic, but it doesn't solve the more local demand. The reality is that both the DRL and GO REX are needed, as they serve a different function.

As for the DRL West, I used to be an advocate of the rail corridor, but I've changed my mind on that. There's no point in overlapping a subway route with a regional rail route along the same corridor, even if it's more cost-effective.

Personally, I'd like to see a Union X proposal, with the Yonge line being extended to Exhibition Place and then up Dufferin. That whole swath of land between the current CBD and High Park is going to be a target for some pretty big intensification over the next few decades, even if it isn't in the form of high-rises like City Place.

The DRL/Yonge Extension would serve that development very well, whereas the GO REX line would serve the express suburban commuters, as well as those people transferring from B-D.

 

[nfitz]

1) The Lakeshore East corridor may not be wide enough for the kind of service you are proposing.

Mightn't? VIA wants two tracks for high speed, in the long term. GO probably wants 3-4 long term. And I think it only fits 4 maximum. There's not going to be a DRL in there as well. Are people really suggesting this? I thought that plan died in the 1980s.

Weston isn't much better, between the Kitchener GO line, the Bolton GO line, the ARL, and this being VIA's long-term desire for high-speed to London. Though there's a bit more space. I'm afraid we won't be seeing subways in these rail corridors.

 

[unimaginative2]

We don't need a subway right in the rail corridor since we'll have regional rail. That's why I'm not sure we really need a subway line north of Dundas West. Even in the 1985 study, it was found that the rail corridor east of the Don was not wide enough to accommodate a subway line. Instead, it would have to be elevated on a complex structure. That's why (in addition to issues related to the yard) the Eastern Avenue/Pape route was recommended. That's the route that I would favour for today, to provide a slightly finer grain of service than regional rail, particularly north of Danforth.

 

[rbt]

Mightn't? VIA wants two tracks for high speed, in the long term. GO probably wants 3-4 long term. And I think it only fits 4 maximum. There's not going to be a DRL in there as well. Are people really suggesting this? I thought that plan died in the 1980s.

Agreed it will be tight but it should be possible to combine GOs express service and VIA high speed onto a single pair of tracks with widening at select stations to 5 or 6 tracks (4 platforms).

VIA High Speed will not be above 90mph within GTA limits just for noise. GO Express can run at essentially the same speed.

 

[nfitz]

VIA High Speed will not be above 90mph within GTA limits just for noise. GO Express can run at essentially the same speed.

Not sure why you'd say that. Trains run at twice that in other urban areas. Does an electrified TGV that zips through at 300 km/hr make more noise than a diesel GO Train accelerating out of a station? With that kind of service, they'd be looking for 2 tracks to themselves.

Still, it's hard to see how GO/VIA will share the 4 tracks available. Let alone add subways.

 

[rbt]

Not sure why you'd say that.

VIA and GO already appear to run slower within city limits than outside them (measured by phone GPS*), even on grade separated straight-runs with what appears to be good track. They rarely seem to run at the 90mph limit within Toronto borders. Making a number of assumptions as to why that might be I've got to assume above-ground high-speed within city limits wouldn't be terribly fast.

Does an electrified TGV that zips through at 300 km/hr make more noise than a diesel GO Train accelerating out of a station?

Not terribly certain. Regions with high speed rail, like TGV, have generally shown more concern for the common good than the impacted individual in construction of their projects.

I expect huge pushback from neighbourhoods around the tracks. Weston will obviously demand a stop


I don't think it is politically feasible here.

* West end of Toronto, typically London (VIA) or Oshawa (GO) to Union in the very late evening (one of the last trains in).

Haven't come in from the east by rail in nearly a year.

 

[gweed123]

Transit City - Phase II: A Mix of Regional Rail and Subway extensions (like has been discussed here).

4 Subway Projects (DRL, Sheppard West, North Yonge, South Yonge)

3 REX Projects (Lakeshore, Markham, Brampton). The REX Projects only extend to their 'local route' terminus points in my earlier GO REX map (in the fantasy thread). Reduces cost and provides service on the most needed parts of the lines.

I chose Lakeshore, Markham, and Brampton because those 3 lines are the most useful to transit in Toronto. Metrolinx has already prioritized the Georgetown and Lakeshore corridors for electrification, so I just added the Markham (Stouffville) line to the mix. That line will be a God-sent to Scarborough residents wanting to get downtown.

The DRL arrangement downtown was discussed a few pages back in this thread. Basically a Union X proposal, that way only 2 new stations need to be built downtown, and none directly in the CBD, substantially reducing the cost. Any modifications to King or St. Andrew Stations are going to be very very expensive.

 

[Rainforest]

With fare integration and <10 minute headways, I would surely choose a fast ride on GO from Kennedy to the CBD, over a slow ride on the subway, with a change at a congested Bloor-Yonge station. Has a modelling exercise ever suggested others would not?

Trips from Kennedy to the CBD would certainly migrate to GO with the said fare integration.

However, GO will not be able to divert riders that reach the BD subway anywhere west of Main. Riders from Don Mills, Flemmington, Thorncliffe, and Don Mills Ave heading to the CBD will continue to transfer at Yonge / Bloor.

 

[k10ery]

We don't need a subway right in the rail corridor since we'll have regional rail. That's why I'm not sure we really need a subway line north of Dundas West.

Or south of it. At today's prices, subway passes the cost-benefit test almost nowhere. How is it going to pass when a ready alternative exists in above-ground rail?

 

[CDL.TO]

Above-ground rail is not an alternative if it fails to serve the intermediate stops.

The ARL debate has driven home the point that the line itself doesn't offer any benefit, what matters is the stop locations and fare policy.

Will regional rail in the west end of downtown sufficiently serve West Queen West, Parkdale, College, Roncesvalles, Liberty Village, etc...?

 

[M II A II R II K]

I'm still of the persuasion that a Queen Street alignment would be best with a Lakeshore ALRT service covering the waterfront at the same time.

 

[gweed123]

Above-ground rail is not an alternative if it fails to serve the intermediate stops.

The ARL debate has driven home the point that the line itself doesn't offer any benefit, what matters is the stop locations and fare policy.

Will regional rail in the west end of downtown sufficiently serve West Queen West, Parkdale, College, Roncesvalles, Liberty Village, etc...?

It can. There's no reason why GO REX can't have wider stop spacing in the suburbs, and closer stop spacing in closer to downtown, especially if there's some type of suburban express service operating that can bypass those stations.

For example, Lakeshore stations at Humber Loop, Roncesvalles, Exhibition, City Place. Georgetown (and Milton) stations at Dundas West, Parkdale, City Place.

That covers a lot of people right there. If not directly covered, a short streetcar ride away.

I'm still of the persuasion that a Queen Street alignment would be best with a Lakeshore ALRT service covering the waterfront at the same time.

I don't think so personally. Any service under Queen needs to have more local stop spacing, much like the central stretch of Eglinton or Bloor. An ALRT service would need wider stop spacing.

 

[M II A II R II K]

The local stop spacing on the west side of Queen would be ok, and it's close to downtown anyway. The further stop spacing would be on the east side where it needs to be rapid anyway.

The ALRT can have extra stops downtown such as Skydome, Cityplace, and Fort York, and include a new Roncesvalles station so people can transfer there between the ALRT and the DRL.