News   Aug 11, 2020
 149     0 
News   Aug 10, 2020
 328     0 
News   Aug 10, 2020
 1K     1 

Ontario Line (was Relief Line South, in Design)

anb

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 17, 2020
Messages
70
Reaction score
39
I swear this provincial government is playing games. By 2027, what do they expect bloor-yonge to become? a cake walk all of a sudden? it definitely won’t be a matter of time before st george and spadina becomes at an overcapacity level as well. And now they wanna cancel it, delay it and keep it away for another decade perhaps? This also means the yonge extension won’t happen until whenever this thing finishes which even then will take another 7-10 years. Why does this even happen to us

This is something they should’ve prioritized IMMEDIATELY. Forget the finch west lrt for now. Forget the hurontario lrt. They at least have buses that can run back and forth without any trouble for now. Why is this even a debate or a ‘consideration’ to even talk about. Just look at bloor-yonge at rush hour (normally) and enough is said for the points to be valid
 

LeanMeanMemeMachine

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 11, 2020
Messages
25
Reaction score
43
I swear this provincial government is playing games. By 2027, what do they expect bloor-yonge to become? a cake walk all of a sudden? it definitely won’t be a matter of time before st george and spadina becomes at an overcapacity level as well. And now they wanna cancel it, delay it and keep it away for another decade perhaps? This also means the yonge extension won’t happen until whenever this thing finishes which even then will take another 7-10 years. Why does this even happen to us

This is something they should’ve prioritized IMMEDIATELY. Forget the finch west lrt for now. Forget the hurontario lrt. They at least have buses that can run back and forth without any trouble for now. Why is this even a debate or a ‘consideration’ to even talk about. Just look at bloor-yonge at rush hour (normally) and enough is said for the points to be valid
Finch West and Hurontario are both under construction now (Hurontario having begun removals of the medians along its route), and thus don't require many planning resources to go ahead. While we don't quite know the exact timelines Metrolinx currently has planned, since the RFQ for the Northern section is being deferred to 2022. Having the entire line open by 2027 was going to be an ambitious target from the get-go, and we're going to have to see if Metrolinx and whatever consortia they choose to build the line can get it done by then (spoiler alert: they probably can't), but from the looks of things, a lot more priority is being put on this project than say, the Eglinton Crosstown West extension because that's a much less urgent project. Finch West and Hurontario are more than shovel ready (they actually have shovels in the ground) and are thus going forward. The entire rationale for the Finch West LRT (and the Hurontario LRT iirc) was because the bus lines were overcapacity and couldn't keep up with the ridership on their respective bus lines without problems. If the Ontario Line, by some miracle, does open in 2027 (or even 2028 for that matter) then great, Yonge gets some relief sooner and by a larger amount than it would've with the Relief Line.
 

ssiguy2

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 3, 2010
Messages
3,092
Reaction score
799
How about stacking two tracks at different levels like the Expo line in Downtown Vancouver?
Whether it's technically possible for this project I don't know but using Vancouver has an analogy is not a valid one.

The stacking tunnels for the Expo already existed as they were an old underground rail line. This is also part of the reason why Vancouver went with SkyTrain technology. Yes, they wanted something novel for Expo86 as it was a 'transportation themed" event but it was also pragmatic. The existing stacked tunnels were not wide enough to use traditional subway trains so they got ALRT by default. The tunnels were also part of the reason why they didn't go with automated LRT trains as the tunnels are also fairly shallow and would have required extensive upgrades to accomodate the overhead catenary connections.
 

Haydenpoon

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 5, 2020
Messages
112
Reaction score
141
Whether it's technically possible for this project I don't know but using Vancouver has an analogy is not a valid one.

The stacking tunnels for the Expo already existed as they were an old underground rail line. This is also part of the reason why Vancouver went with SkyTrain technology. Yes, they wanted something novel for Expo86 as it was a 'transportation themed" event but it was also pragmatic. The existing stacked tunnels were not wide enough to use traditional subway trains so they got ALRT by default. The tunnels were also part of the reason why they didn't go with automated LRT trains as the tunnels are also fairly shallow and would have required extensive upgrades to accomodate the overhead catenary connections.
Since the Ontario line will need new tunnels, the tunnels will definitely match the size of the trains, regardless of technology.
 

NoahB

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jun 10, 2019
Messages
131
Reaction score
317
To clarify the article: The Ontario Gov and City of Toronto already agreed in principle that the Ontario Line will be using the 3B the Feds gave the City for the Relief Line South. The article is about the applications for the Scarborough and Eglington extensions. It is unclear if the Prov will be sending an application for the Ontario Line on top of the existing 3B. (That's assuming they will send them eventually and not continue to ask for special treatment)
 

syn

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 26, 2007
Messages
4,451
Reaction score
2,018
I hadn't noticed this blog:

The upside of Ontario Line’s upside – How Metrolinx experts are looking to design a Toronto subway that isn’t just confined to dark tunnels

"The earlier Relief Line South proposal featured very deep tunnels — 38 metres below ground — in order to get under the Don River to the vicinity of East Harbour, adding four and a half minutes of escalator time to each transfer. That’s more than enough time to miss your connection. Studies have projected this would have reduced ridership by 15 per cent."

I'm curious to see the studies that the need for escalators would reduce ridership by 15%. Seems highly questionable.

Thank goodness the Ontario Line will save people from dark tunnels!

Will the people of Scarborough be spared the terror of darkness and never-ending escalator rides?!?!
 

ARG1

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 28, 2020
Messages
95
Reaction score
206
I hadn't noticed this blog:

The upside of Ontario Line’s upside – How Metrolinx experts are looking to design a Toronto subway that isn’t just confined to dark tunnels

"The earlier Relief Line South proposal featured very deep tunnels — 38 metres below ground — in order to get under the Don River to the vicinity of East Harbour, adding four and a half minutes of escalator time to each transfer. That’s more than enough time to miss your connection. Studies have projected this would have reduced ridership by 15 per cent."

I'm curious to see the studies that the need for escalators would reduce ridership by 15%. Seems highly questionable.

Thank goodness the Ontario Line will save people from dark tunnels!

Will the people of Scarborough be spared the terror of darkness and never-ending escalator rides?!?!
Regardless of whether or not it would reduce ridership by 15%, wouldn't you at least agree that only having to cross the platform at East Harbour to change to the relief line is a lot more convenient than going down a long escalator?
 

Johnny Au

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
6,343
Reaction score
1,416
Location
Near the North York, York, & Old Toronto tripoint
I hadn't noticed this blog:

The upside of Ontario Line’s upside – How Metrolinx experts are looking to design a Toronto subway that isn’t just confined to dark tunnels

"The earlier Relief Line South proposal featured very deep tunnels — 38 metres below ground — in order to get under the Don River to the vicinity of East Harbour, adding four and a half minutes of escalator time to each transfer. That’s more than enough time to miss your connection. Studies have projected this would have reduced ridership by 15 per cent."

I'm curious to see the studies that the need for escalators would reduce ridership by 15%. Seems highly questionable.

Thank goodness the Ontario Line will save people from dark tunnels!

Will the people of Scarborough be spared the terror of darkness and never-ending escalator rides?!?!
At least those tunnels are shallower than Arsenalna station in the Kyiv Metro:


It is the deepest subway station in the world at 105.5 metres below the surface vertically.
 

syn

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 26, 2007
Messages
4,451
Reaction score
2,018
Regardless of whether or not it would reduce ridership by 15%, wouldn't you at least agree that only having to cross the platform at East Harbour to change to the relief line is a lot more convenient than going down a long escalator?
Sure. That's certainly one great aspect of the plan.

Unfortunately it doesn't make up for the much lower capacity this line will have in comparison to standard subway line, and the potential impact it could have on GO expansion.

It's quite troubling how manipulative these propaganda blog posts are, especially when they use unsubstantiated statistics.
 

pman

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
1,615
Reaction score
1,140
The conclusion that deep tunnels would reduce ridership by 15% certainly isn’t consistent with my extensive experience of London’s Central and Piccadilly lines, which are really deep in Zone 1, or of some of Sydney’s CBD train stations. For that matter, the one week I took the Moscow Metro it seemed really well used in spite of being so deep. It would be nice to see reporting of some measure of uncertainty regarding ML’s surprising assertion, in addition to the point estimate. I mean, I know Toronto does lots of things differently from other, more functional cities, so sure why not add subway depth to the list. I also know the MTA generally uses shallow tunnels but I did say functional. It’s possible that the international ridership experience of deep tunnelled systems is irrelevant. But all the same, ML’s ridership assertion needs further scrutiny.
 

smallspy

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 27, 2009
Messages
4,084
Reaction score
3,416
The stacking tunnels for the Expo already existed as they were an old underground rail line. This is also part of the reason why Vancouver went with SkyTrain technology. Yes, they wanted something novel for Expo86 as it was a 'transportation themed" event but it was also pragmatic. The existing stacked tunnels were not wide enough to use traditional subway trains so they got ALRT by default. The tunnels were also part of the reason why they didn't go with automated LRT trains as the tunnels are also fairly shallow and would have required extensive upgrades to accomodate the overhead catenary connections.
The use of the Dunsmuir Tunnel had nothing whatsoever to do with the selection of the ICTS system for Vancouver's Skytrain. The tunnel could have easily been adapted to just about any type of rolling stock, provided it used third rail for power - even the TTC's own subway design.

The use of ICTS was due to nothing more than the good salesmanship of UTDC.

Dan
 

rbt

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 25, 2007
Messages
6,495
Reaction score
2,049
The conclusion that deep tunnels would reduce ridership by 15% certainly isn’t consistent with my extensive experience of London’s Central and Piccadilly lines,...
Those lines aren't getting transfers from an elevated GO line less than a 7 minute trip from Union Station, which has an alternative connection (Yonge Line) available.
 

Top