Toronto Ontario Line 3 | ?m | ?s
- Thread starter JasonParis
- Start date
Allandale25
Senior Member
Just wanted to comment on the Executive Committee hearing and the discussion around a 4th track being installed for "GO RER" (now called "Expansion"). Some residents even referred to it as the "GO RER track". I'm not sure if staff mentioned this during the meeting or the media picked up on it in their coverage, but as noted in the GO Construction thread, Metrolinx paused pursing the addition of the 4th track and has left it up to the GO Expansion RFP bidders. I think my memory is correct based on this Steve Munro post:
stevemunro.ca
So I assume that the Ontario Line above-ground tracks in the Riverdale area won't occupy the space where the 4th track might be built one day. It doesn't change the concern from some residents. I'm just pointing it out because the local Councillor and some residents made it sound as though the 4th track is about to be constructed.
Metrolinx Shifts Responsibility for Improvements to Future 3P
In the comment thread on the article about GO Transit Service Changes, two readers asked about the status of expansion projects that were supposed to be “in the works” – the addition of…
stevemunro.ca
So I assume that the Ontario Line above-ground tracks in the Riverdale area won't occupy the space where the 4th track might be built one day. It doesn't change the concern from some residents. I'm just pointing it out because the local Councillor and some residents made it sound as though the 4th track is about to be constructed.
syn
Senior Member
Good question.
The entire city/region is in need of better transit. That includes Etobicoke and of course Scarborough.
The biggest difference between the two is size, and therefore political impact. Scarborough, due to it's population, has a lot of sway.
Scarborough requires a lot of investment, there's no doubt about that. Unfortunately Scarborough residents are being pandered to with a specific mode of transit (subways) even if it doesn't really address the main issues.
A decade of the Ford's and other levels of government telling them they 'deserve' subways hasn't helped.
The west on the other hand, aside from being generally conservative in terms of voting (at least big portions of Etobicoke are) isn't being pandered to in the same way. That's why the Finch LRT is being looked forward to, instead of being seen as an insult.
If it weren't for political interference, Scarborough would have a brand new line ready right now. The Scarborough LRT, their own small version of an Ontario Line. At this point we could be discussing expansion of that line, or a Sheppard Subway extension to STC (or the Eglinton East LRT). Instead nothing has been done, and the focus continues to be on Scarborough expansion, with absolutely no results as of yet.
I think the politicians like it that way.
Last edited:
Allandale25
Senior Member
An observation someone made on twitter.
robmausser
Senior Member
Im not defending the Eglinton spur as it was the dumbest part of Smarttrack, but, the plan was to tunnel and have the turn be a large tunneled curve that would emerge onto Eglinton. Never an above ground sharp turn like they are proposing.
It proved to be extremely expensive though, and thats why they switched back to the Eglinton LRT, which makes so much more sense.
Hopkins123
Senior Member
Great idea!
If those in Scarborough have the problem with RT and transfers, they can move.
Well done, you've solved all transit problems!
You are still under the misconception... disillusionment that I am opposed to the Scarborough RT/LRT because it operates outdoors; when I've stated countless times that the Glenn Murray alignment circa 2013 was a proposal I would agree wholehearted with if it meant reduced construction costs and could preserve the existing transit terminal at SC that is already central to the entire area whereas McCowan/Triton is a bit of a walk.
The problem has always been the asinine transferring at Kennedy when through-route trips are doable. Get your facts straight!
Streety McCarface
Senior Member
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure the same could be said about the Yonge line at Finch, where about half the people aren't going to a Steeles Station or Beyond, and the vast majority of people are not going into Richmond Hill. Hypothetically if the line was cut off at Islington, half the riders wouldn't be taking the train to Kipling (length difference and grade arguments aside). I get the point, but I'm just not sure it's entirely a fair argument, especially since a lot of Kennedy bus routes might better serve their respective communities if they were relocated to a Lawrence East or a Brimley stop, and especially considering all the better arguments against a Line 2 extension.
sixrings
Senior Member
That's his point. If you don't like the transfer... MOVE!!!
Coolstar
Senior Member
syn
Senior Member
robmausser
Senior Member
Id say that it doesnt even matter how many rail technologies you have (to a point, obviously yes if you had 100 different technologies it will be a problem, quit hyperbolizing), whats more important is if those rail technologies are off-the-shelf and used around the world.
San Fran will have a harder time with BART than a city with 5 different technologies and trains that are used around the world.
Customization is a way bigger problem than fragmentation.
Having off the shelf LRT and Metro in whatever shape the Ontario Line takes will be better for Toronto than the current Toronto having the Mark 1 RT and custom CLRV/ALRVs
Streety McCarface
Senior Member
Every technology is fundamentally different:
1. The subway is at the Toronto gauge with a specific width.
2. The RT is at Standard Guage (I believe) with LIMs, so the track is completely different
3. The streetcar network runs at the TTC gauge
4. The LRT lines run with the Standard Gauge
5. GO Transit utilizes the standard gauge and adheres to TCs heavy rail guidelines
6. The Ontario line would be basically a narrower subway with standard gauge.
As you can see, there's is an overlap of 3 particular types of trains: Heavy Rail Regional Rail, Subway/Metro, and Light Rail Vehicles. While one could argue that the SRT has its place as an ICTS, you could still make the argument that the line it serves could be more easily run with Light Rail or subway. We already have standards for subways in this city, use them. Stop trying to make every single new line unique, it makes systematic compatibility a lot harder in the long term.
The TTC gauge isn't that different from the Standard gauge, as a result, rolling stock procurement costs aren't actually that different, if at all different. No subway train model for any city is "Off the shelf" by any means. Every system's track geometry is different, every line supplied voltage is different, a lot of track gauges are different, top speed requirements are different, seating layouts and platform heights are different, power collection systems are different, signalling systems are different, Tunnel geometry is different, door requirements are different, HVAC requirements are different, etc etc etc. The only real way you can save money on rolling stock is to purchase a lot of it at once. When you have many different lines with different technologies, you cannot purchase any significant amount of rolling stock at a given time, you cant interoperate them between lines (like when a fleet has a major problem), and training for mechanics, drivers, cleaners, etc is different. It just adds costs.
The costs may be justified if the OL was to have much less ridership than existing lines, but it's not. It's literally acting as a partial replacement of the Yonge line. There is no reason to change technologies for this line.
M II A II R II K
Senior Member
With this line Gerrard Square could end up looking and be as busy as Dundas Square and Pape looking like Yonge St.
Allandale25
Senior Member
Post published 4 hours ago.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
Post published 4 hours ago.
Does not need to be underground because the provincial politicians don't live in those affected neighbourhoods.