News   Jul 10, 2020
 283     0 
News   Jul 10, 2020
 271     0 
News   Jul 10, 2020
 525     1 

Ontario Line (was Relief Line South, in Design)

Aplus23

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 22, 2018
Messages
79
Reaction score
113
Ino these answers are somewhere within these 980+ pages but let's start this over for a simple transit rider like myself. Here are just some of my observations

Just from what I notice is, Yonge/Bloor station gets really really busy. Dangerously crowded at times.

From Yonge/Bloor going east on line 2, a lot of travellers get off between Yonge/Bloor n Pape stations.

Line 1 heading north from Yonge/Bloor is a really long trip. There's a lot of stops outside of stations going on on that line compared to line 2 imo. Those newer big trains are amazing tho, feels like they can hold more passengers?
.
So I guess my questions are, does this Ontario line we are going with solve any of those problems?

What problems is any relief line suppose to solve ??

.and why does line 1 have so many interruptions?
 

Tommy521

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 8, 2019
Messages
26
Reaction score
101
Location
Ontario
Line 1 heading north from Yonge/Bloor is a really long trip. There's a lot of stops outside of stations going on on that line compared to line 2 imo. Those newer big trains are amazing tho, feels like they can hold more passengers?
The Toronto Rocket cars do have a larger capacity than the T1 cars currently run on the Bloor-Danforth line.

Just from what I notice is, Yonge/Bloor station gets really really busy. Dangerously crowded at times.
From Yonge/Bloor going east on line 2, a lot of travellers get off between Yonge/Bloor n Pape stations.
This is one of the major reasons for the original conception of a relief line. The 'purpose' of the Relief Line North and Relief Line South that was being worked on before the Ontario Line was to allow people from downtown to head east from Pape station on Line 2 without needing to transfer at Bloor-Yonge station. This would in theory reduce how busy Bloor-Yonge station would be, as some percentage heading east would instead take the Relief Line.

The Ontario Line at surface level is also supposed to solve a similar problem, but markedly has a longer alignment and more interchange stations with the GO train lines. This line in theory will still allow the transfer of people from downtown to east from Pape station on Line 2. From this thread there appears to be a lot of pushback on the Ontario Line, but it is important to not mistake this as being against transit in this corridor as a whole, but usually is due to disagreeing with one of the major decisions the new Ontario Line has changed from the older Relief Line South design.

What problems is any relief line suppose to solve ??
The main concern with the OL (in my opinion) is that the line is not going to use the same subway cars as either Line 2 or Line 1 (ie not the Toronto Rocket or the T1 cars). They would have a smaller capacity than the other subway lines, and may be more akin to the Eglinton Crosstown line. Allegedly the overall line capacity will be the same despite smaller cars by having more frequent trains, but this needs to be proven possible during the design phase. It will be interesting to see how this proceeds.

There also seems to be some opposition to the Ontario Line's focus on GO interchanges, which may be viewed as relieving the GO lines more than the original conception which focused in relieving Bloor-Yonge station. This may be a major disconnect for a lot of people and could be the reason you're asking "what problem is any relief line supposed to solve". It is difficult to say at this point whether adding relief to GO will also help with Line 2, whether GO Regional Express Rail is required to effectively reduce Line 2 congestion, and whether smaller trainsets are going to help in both the near-term and the far-term based on projected population growth.

A 'relief line' is usually pitched to relieve some kind of congestion on other lines in a transit system. Our main concern should always be if the new line will adequately reduce congestion. As it stands many people here do not believe the Ontario Line is adequate, for a variety of reasons.

and why does line 1 have so many interruptions?
Not really my area of expertise, perhaps someone else could shed some light on this :p
 

H4F33Z

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 11, 2019
Messages
175
Reaction score
242
Location
Thorncliffe Park
The sad truth of this project, is that if the Ontario Line actually opens, we'll lose the Relief Line Subway. Basically, we'll always want to extend the existing subway lines (Sheppard, Yonge, Danforth), but we won't have any new lines. The Relief Line was supposed to be the last subway line. I'm not saying that light metro or LRT is bad, but I think we need infrustructure that will play the role of carrying thousands of people and last for generations. I'm just sad that we won't see more subway lines in Toronto for the rest of eternity.
 

asher__jo

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 5, 2018
Messages
223
Reaction score
257
The sad truth of this project, is that if the Ontario Line actually opens, we'll lose the Relief Line Subway. Basically, we'll always want to extend the existing subway lines (Sheppard, Yonge, Danforth), but we won't have any new lines. The Relief Line was supposed to be the last subway line. I'm not saying that light metro or LRT is bad, but I think we need infrustructure that will play the role of carrying thousands of people and last for generations. I'm just sad that we won't see more subway lines in Toronto for the rest of eternity.
The last subway line? Toronto's rapid growth will demand many more subways
 

junctionist

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
8,568
Reaction score
1,800
Location
The Junction, Toronto
The sad truth of this project, is that if the Ontario Line actually opens, we'll lose the Relief Line Subway. Basically, we'll always want to extend the existing subway lines (Sheppard, Yonge, Danforth), but we won't have any new lines. The Relief Line was supposed to be the last subway line. I'm not saying that light metro or LRT is bad, but I think we need infrustructure that will play the role of carrying thousands of people and last for generations. I'm just sad that we won't see more subway lines in Toronto for the rest of eternity.
Isn't the Ontario Line going to be another subway line? I haven't heard that they're going for an Eglinton LRT-like "pre-metro" solution. They're cutting down on the size of the trains and the amount of tunnelling to save on costs. The entire Montreal Metro uses smaller trains, and significant parts of NYC's subway are built above ground outside of Manhattan.
 

micheal_can

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 24, 2016
Messages
1,906
Reaction score
1,142
How about psubway line, as in pseudo subway?
You could say "I'm taking the P line"
Then you could pretend there are 14 other psubway lines!
EC should have been a subway.

In reality, Transit City was the city's way to try to get something. All those lines should be a subway.

Did they learn nothing from the Bloor line?
 

WislaHD

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 21, 2013
Messages
8,442
Reaction score
5,944
Location
Midtown Toronto
How about psubway line, as in pseudo subway?
You could say "I'm taking the P line"
Then you could pretend there are 14 other psubway lines!
Eglinton Crosstown is literally underground, grade-separated, and has the stop spacing of a rapid transit line as opposed to a streetcar line.

The fact that it is an LRT with less capacity is not relevant for that distinction.
 

Aplus23

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 22, 2018
Messages
79
Reaction score
113
Eglinton Crosstown is literally underground, grade-separated, and has the stop spacing of a rapid transit line as opposed to a streetcar line.

The fact that it is an LRT with less capacity is not relevant for that distinction.
Yeah it if it's grade separated, then really it's just semantics of what you're calling the line no? Because it may stop at a stop light for 9 or 10 stops doesn't mean much to me
 

44 North

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 8, 2010
Messages
3,354
Reaction score
1,659
Location
Ward 28
If it has a curbed median and is stopping at traffic lights I believe the common term used is grade-segregated, not grade-separated. Also Metrolinx calls Crosstown an LRT and doesn't consider it a subway line. Doesn't seem like a simple semantics thing, rather an attempt to classify different forms of transit. Might not be on a level of Linnaeus, but clearly there's some thought and approach to giving titles to things.
 

W. K. Lis

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
16,937
Reaction score
5,642
Location
Toronto, ON, CAN, Terra, Sol, Milky Way
If it has a curbed median and is stopping at traffic lights I believe the common term used is grade-segregated, not grade-separated. Also Metrolinx calls Crosstown an LRT and doesn't consider it a subway line. Doesn't seem like a simple semantics thing, rather an attempt to classify different forms of transit. Might not be on a level of Linnaeus, but clearly there's some thought and approach to giving titles to things.
Boston calls its Green Line a "subway", even if it uses light rail vehicles these days. When it opened in September 1897, it used the streetcars in those days.

See link.

 

Top