Toronto Ontario Line 3 | ?m | ?s
- Thread starter JasonParis
- Start date
MrGoose
Active Member
I'd like to nitpick you here.
The Highway 407 station was designed with a Highway 407 transitway in mind. It is currently the terminal point of many GO busses headed out west to exotic places like Guelph and Waterloo.
If you look at the plans for the 407 station, they even mention it.
slapped_chicken
New Member
Same. Light metro would have been perfect for Eglinton and -more reasonable- for Sheppard. Eglinton could have continued as a continuous light metro to STC, replacing Line 3. I think we just juggle types of technology too much and we use it inappropriately by design or by corridor placement. The only line in delivery right now that seems to be 100% appropriate for its technology is Finch West; I couldn't think of anything better for that corridor.
And if money was no object, I would love to see the Toronto Rockets on this line. My first subway ride ever as a little kid was on a Toronto Rocket on Line 1, and I still used it every weekday for school/work pre-covid. It got me interested in transit planning pretty early! So, when Ford killed RL and replaced it with OL, that was a major "bruh" moment. But I realized it's important to keep an open mind to change and be a little optimistic - if we really milk the capacity out of this line with new technologies and a mind for the future, then maybe it can perform just as good, or even better than our 2 existing big subway lines.
However we still don't know enough about this line yet, I think. So it's okay for people to be wanting the old RL, since it's something we are really familiar with; we know what we'd be getting. So ig people see comfort in that old plan.
LOL
Getting lost and dancing aimlessly in the vast cornfields of Guelph is pretty magical, it truly is an exotic place~
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
The situation on Eglinton West really pisses me off. If we were going to tunnel the central section and the Western section, the Scarbrough segment should've been tunneled too and utilizing light metro.
If both the western and eastern segments were going to be on the surface, with a central tunnel, light rail would make perfect sense. The current status quo of the tunnelled central and western segment, with a relatively short surface section in the east forcing this line to utilize lower capacity low-floor trams is the absolute worse case scenario. We get all the limitations of trams (lower capacity, heavier weight, etc...), with absolutely none of the benefits (lower build costs, etc...). I'm tired of politicians playing SimCity 2000 with our city.
And The Ontario Line is just a continuation of politicians playing SimCity with our city and our money. We had a perfectly decent (not perfect, but decent) plan that would've served Toronto fine for decades to come. We threw that away for another decent, but technically flawed plan, that's going to take just as long, if not longer, to deliver. Why? Was it because there was some pressing technical need? Was it because the Relief Line plans couldn't be refined and improved? No. It's because Doug couldn't help resist from keeping his grimy fingerprints off another transit plan, just like every other politician before him.
Toronto really needs to just develop a plan and stick to it. But these politicians can't resist screwing around with everything, and we all suffer as a result of it.
micheal_can
Senior Member
ARG1
Senior Member
OL serves more people, goes way further, and has more connections to other lines for a far lower cost/km ratio. Its not like we're getting something similar for the same money but with worse capacity.
Bureaucromancer
Active Member
Barring a rework of Transport Canada regs for through running with RER I tend to think the ideal is to end at Dundas West, with stations at King/Queen/Roncesvalles and (roughly) Roncesvalles and Howard Park.
H4F33Z
Active Member
Here's what I've come up with:
The space constraints in the western extension makes tunneling the best bet. Just after Stockyards, the line can elevate to the Kitchener Corridor and potentially have a station at Rogers Road, and then connect with Mount Dennis.
Bureaucromancer
Active Member
The only real argument I have with that is that the old DRL option of a surface or elevated ROW on the west side of Parkside Dr seems worth consideration. It would keep the line above ground to roughly High Park Loop, and could then follow the path of Howard Park and Morrow Ave to get back east to Dundas and the rail corridor. I suspect this route would be meaningfully cheaper than tunneling even if forced to go cut and cover through High Park.
Tuck
Active Member
Would probably add a stop at Jameson and and add another stop of two along ronsy. Right now it seems to skip most of the west side of downtown.
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
It's not so much the technical details about the OL that's bugging me, it's they way they've went about it. The government blew up a perfectly fine plan, to chase a shiny new plan. This is behaviour is a precisely what has been plaguing transit development in Toronto for the past 50 years. There is very little the OL is achieving that couldn't be achieved by the original DRL plans, with additional refinement or funding.
This matters because this move puts the entire development of the DRL/OL project at risk. Rather than having the DRL funded and under construction more or less now (give or take a year), we're now at the point where the project will not reach financial close until at least late 2022 (after the next election), which puts the entire project at risk of being killed.
Furthermore, given the annual cost escalations we've seen in the price of transit infrastructure construction, this move from DRL to OL (which delays the start of construction) risks increasing costs by hundreds of millions or potentially billions of dollars. This puts the project at further risk of cancelation or scope reduction. The original OL pricing estimate has almost certainly been rendered invalid by now (nevermind that early stage estimates are rarely accurate)
As I said in my previous post, I'm sick of politicians throwing out old plans to chase shiny new plans. This screwing with plans is generating, at best, suboptimal, delayed and needlessly expensive results, as we've seen with the ECLRT and OL, or, at worst, outright cancelations. I don't care how well-intentioned they are, this madness needs to stop. Pick a plan and stick with it.
The DRL never should have been cancelled to chase the OL. If they wanted a longer route, they could've funded a longer route. If they wanted a slightly different alignment, we could've explored a different alignment. But throwing out $150 Million and years worth of planning and development to chase a shiny new plan, putting the entire DRL/OL project at greater risk, was the absolute worst decision they could've made. But now that we're stuck with the OL, I just pray that the next government will be more wise with their handling of the project. Refine identified deficiencies in the OL project proposal, but don't cancel it. Pick a plan and stick with it
Last edited:
Towered
Senior Member
sacred
Active Member
By the time those are in place, we'll need subways in Orangeville
afransen
Senior Member
BRTs should be and are being rolled out in parallel.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
Has happened before. When they were designing Toronto's first rapid transit line, Yonge Street (Line 1), in the 1940's, they thought that the next rapid line would be the Queen streetcar-subway. Instead, their attention switched to Bloor Street and Danforth Avenue, in the 1950's. The ridership transfers at Bloor Station was getting higher, so they changed plans, to a Bloor-Danforth (Line 2), and even interline with three different lines. Wonder what "new" lines there would have been if they kept the three lines back then? Changes con
From link.