Toronto Ontario Line 3 | ?m | ?s

[steveintoronto]

Considering the superlatives already dished out for that unknown plan, certainly. It might just be a loose hinge in his jaw.

AoD

Oh my aching kidneys! If you look closely, the strings from the puppet master have actually got caught behind his ears. Every time it's yanked, his jaw comes unhinged.

 

[Islington Express Bus]

I thought that no matter what we had to build a new carhouse for the DRL, that there isnt room in the greenwood or other yards.

We would have built a new yard for line 2 in Etobicoke near Kipling which would have freed up Greenwood for RL trains.

 

[cplchanb]

I definitely think so, not only for immediate relief, but as an investment for combining it with a Relief Line as an express by-pass and continued use of the present infrastructure for DD coaches, which would not fit into the usual diameter tunnels. DD and diesel locos would continue to run down to Union in peak, RER EMUs which would share the double tracked RoW north of Don Mills up to Steeles would go underground in tunnel in Don Mills, and down to Pape and south. North of Steeles, since the RH line is CN track, an option would be to use elevated guideways to service Markham/York Region.

This is critical! Time and again, the University Loop has proved invaluable in getting in/out of the core when one leg is down for whatever reason.

I see another redundancy in combining the RH line and Relief Line in a similar way. The alternate leg can't completely replace the blocked one, but it can provide a workable solution when needed.

I really do hope one day they will consider building a station on Eglinton. Its just a huge opportunity wasted at the moment regardless of the technical challenges.

 

[steveintoronto]

We would have built a new yard for line 2 in Etobicoke near Kipling which would have freed up Greenwood for RL trains.

Steve Munro has 'daylighted' that fantasy. The Kipling yard, not funded to be built, no funding available, is one bridge too far in a chain of events needed to happen. Best let sleeping dogs lie. The idea to not connect to any of the subway is a good one in many respects. Every time a shuffle is needed on the subway, it eats up valuable money. The problem isn't with the subway, it's expectations of it doing the impossible.

By-pass it completely, and leave it to function for what it was originally intended. And then there's the problems of interrupting what overtaxed capacity there is just to 'improve it'. Extending the Yonge line to RH is a dreadful idea, even when alternate capacity is provided elsewhere.

 

[hw621]

Besides all these speculations, is there a timeline for the government or Metrolinx to unveal their plan?

 

[Edward Skira]

I suspect we will hear more on April 11 when the Ontario budget is announced.

 

[WislaHD]

He simply said when he saw the plan his jaw dropped. Not that it was the technology that made his jaw drop.

His jaw dropped when he probably saw the North extension of the line being possible with the savings from the DRL being separate from the rest of the subway system; because it meant the DRL became a transit line for north of Toronto, where his voter base lies.

This is an important point, because it isn't just the province that thinks this way.

Metrolinx too is a regional agency with a regional focus. The transit needs of Toronto are not their priority. Whatever plan they've concocted that made Premier Drug's jaw drop might reflect those set of priorities.

 

[hw621]

^Toronto is part of the region too. Maybe their priority should be regional INTEGRATION. And maybe we should stop this 416 vs. 905 confrontation. Transit is about moving people across the region, not about who is getting better.

 

[MisterF]

I meant make sense in terms of construction and timing lining up with the Yonge extension (And the plan to expand Bloor-Yonge). Though we already know the PC's don't rely on common sense with everything else they've done - so this would fit the bill as a great idea to them!

If I'm interpreting your post correctly, you're proposing a new track along the Yonge line to handle express trains. A Bloor-Yonge expansion and Richmond Hill extension wouldn't make that much simpler. The line has no room for a third or fourth track and neither do the stations. That means that a new tunnel would have to be built and each affected station would have to have a major expansion. To do that along an operating line, especially one as busy and critical as Yonge, would be just as complicated as building a new line altogether. Look how long it's taken them to install a new signalling system; what you're proposing would be much, much more complex. There's a reason that express/local metro lines are so rare outside NYC. It simply makes more sense to build a new line and expand the coverage of the system.

This is an important point, because it isn't just the province that thinks this way.

Metrolinx too is a regional agency with a regional focus. The transit needs of Toronto are not their priority. Whatever plan they've concocted that made Premier Drug's jaw drop might reflect those set of priorities.

To be fair, the TTC and the city itself haven't exactly done a lot for transit in the city core and have been focusing on the suburbs for 50 years. The relief line showed up on MoveOntario 2020 maps before the city started taking it seriously. Metrolinx doing the planning would be, at worst, more of the same.

 

[smallspy]

The point was never capacity. It was compatibility of inter-operation of 'subway' and 'mainline' rolling stock. Speaking of "strawman arguments". Thus a 'standard track gauge' being a pre-requisite. I suggest you read the string before commenting, or at the least, quote me exactly. Add to that the FRA's willingness to allow grant waivers to even without full temporal separation is striking compared to TC. I made that all clear in what I posted, but alas...some see only what they want to, then complain there's either too little or too much information.

Tell me, why would I link to all the US DOT published examples like the San Diego Trolley et al as examples of different modes sharing the same tracks? And examples of the London Underground sharing not only tracks, but combining both third and fourth rail supply to do it? And the Paris RER cross mode examples sharing track?

"The Riverline will never, ever come close to meeting the capacity of PATH". You kinda missed it...

And once again, you're twisting yourself around in circles to try and make yourself not appear wrong.

The Riverline is the strawman. It has nothing to do with PATH, which is how the whole crux of your point started. If you can't even get that basic premise of your post correct, why bother continuing?

Dan

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

To be fair, the TTC and the city itself haven't exactly done a lot for transit in the city core and have been focusing on the suburbs for 50 years. The relief line showed up on MoveOntario 2020 maps before the city started taking it seriously. Metrolinx doing the planning would be, at worst, more of the same.

To be fair, the notion of "the city" itself has changed - you went from the old City of Toronto basically self-funding the initial Yonge line to Metro-level decision making to the current City of Toronto. It is focused on the suburbs for a reason - it would be a disservice to ignore the role of political structures and governance in this.

AoD

 

[WislaHD]

^Toronto is part of the region too. Maybe their priority should be regional INTEGRATION. And maybe we should stop this 416 vs. 905 confrontation. Transit is about moving people across the region, not about who is getting better.

Call me a sceptic.

We know if TTC was uploaded, the first thing that would be cut were all the local bus routes that provide Toronto with a high level of bus service, in order to "match" the service level of the buses of the 905.

Why wouldn't the same hold true for planning of rapid transit? The first thing to be cut will be local stops on proposed rapid transit routes. We don't need a stop at Sherbourne or River Street, nobody from the greater Toronto region is getting off there.

 

[Leo_Chan]

Call me a sceptic.

We know if TTC was uploaded, the first thing that would be cut were all the local bus routes that provide Toronto with a high level of bus service, in order to "match" the service level of the buses of the 905.

Why wouldn't the same hold true for planning of rapid transit? The first thing to be cut will be local stops on proposed rapid transit routes. We don't need a stop at Sherbourne or River Street, nobody from the greater Toronto region is getting off there.

I think what you’re saying is that the Relief Line should be a RER-like service, where it only connects to major transit interchanges and destinations, similar to IF the Richmond Hill GO was made RER (15 min two way all day), had stops at Bloor and Eglinton, and had TTC fares?

I guess this makes sense from a regional perspective, but it does make me wonder: If the Relief Line was built 50 years ago, would we be debating about an Express Relief Line vs second local subway line through downtown now?

 

[WislaHD]

I think what you’re saying is that the Relief Line should be a RER-like service, where it only connects to major transit interchanges and destinations, similar to IF the Richmond Hill GO was made RER (15 min two way all day), had stops at Bloor and Eglinton, and had TTC fares?

There are certainly international examples we could look to (I am sure steve will be happy to pull up for us) where RER-like service turns into rapid-transit like stop-spacing when it approaches the downtown core, with stops every 800m-1km rather than every 2-3km. I am sure in situations where double-tracking is available, there are even express services that upon reaching the downtown core, by-passes all stations until they reach their Union-equivalent.

But I have a few thoughts on that.

First, stations are the most costly item in these transit mega-projects, especially when they are underground. I believe that those local stations would be cut for efficiencies, especially once Ford takes a look at the ridership numbers for a stop like Sherbourne and questions what's the point? After all, the downtown elites under Mayor John Tory thought that a 6km stop-spacing was appropriate for Scarborough, did they not?

Second, I doubt we have the foresight in this city/province to future-proof with a double-tracked line. Plus we are in efficiency-finding mode. This is an even easier item to cut than the local stations.

Third, even if the service accomplished the above with local and express stops, what would the frequency be like? Every 15 minutes as is generally considered as best-practice frequency for RER? The Relief Line as proposed was going to have 3-minute frequencies to meet the PPHD demands.

I guess this makes sense from a regional perspective, but it does make me wonder: If the Relief Line was built 50 years ago, would we be debating about an Express Relief Line vs second local subway line through downtown now?

We could answer that by looking at what is happening on the west. Remember, we already build a "Relief Line". It is called the University-Spadina Line.

I think that had we built the Relief Line 50 years, we would be looking towards investing in GO-RER within Toronto now. As evidenced by the demand of some neighbourhoods (like Weston) that aren't well serviced by subway lines, there is potential within the 416 for greater commuter rail integration.

But first, we need to build the necessary capacity on the Yonge Line (to enable the Richmond Hill extension), to intercept our trunk arterial bus routes on the east-end of the city in order to greatly reduce commuter times for Scarborough and North York residents, and to build a workable alternative to the Yonge Line to provide essential network redundancy.

 

[nfitz]

Steve Munro has 'daylighted' that fantasy. The Kipling yard, not funded to be built, no funding available, is one bridge too far in a chain of events needed to happen.

What Steve Munro 'daylighted' is that the start finish dates for the two projects (and others) don't line up in relatively inaccessible TTC documents on which nothing actually bears. The DRL is also unfunded. A request for funding for the DRL could includes money for yards and rolling stock, etc.