Should Transit City be cancelled? A re-prioritization of how to allocate the funding.

[Fresh Start]

Would that not lead to serious noise problems? at least with current TTC subway stock.

Are the existing elevated portions of the subway considered too noisy (between High Park and Runnymede, Royal York and Islington, crossing the 401)?

 

[Voltz]

What's subway dense...Wilson?...Warden? I don't think people realize how large Seneca College is. There's also huge redevelopments on the way at Lawrence and Steeles. And this doesn't even include the real 'relief' - intercepting bus riders on routes like Finch East or York Mills before they get to Yonge.

The only way to get a large number of people off the Yonge line is to run the DRL up Don Mills to Finch, where buses on Finch, McNicoll, Steeles, Leslie, Woodbine, Viva Green etc., can all easily pour into an ideal terminus.

Are you trying to relieve the Yonge line or replace it? I'd say that bringing the DRL up to Eglinton, which actually has a realistic chance of happening, will divert a significant number of people, particularly from the BD subway, as well as the Eglinton, Lawrence and Don Mills routes.

 

[Second_in_pie]

^^ I remember my dad was looking at some houses up next one of the raised portions between High park and Runneymede. House prices were a bit lower (not hugely) but the ROW was literally right over the backyard, which I don't think is going to happen in any of the possible scenarios. Through the Richview corridor, it'd be trenched, meaning the sound can only dissipate through the top which'd basically go straight into the sky.
Along Eglinton East, the most likely scenario is either a straight cut 'n cover or raised guideway. Either option would be quite far away from any houses or residencies. On Don Mills, the most obvious solution would be a raised guideway in the middle of the road for most of the stretch, which might create some noise to neighbors, but Don Mills is a 6 lane arterial (possibly 7.)
Elevated guideways are definitely the worst, but I think with newer tracks (along with newer and better track building techniques) and new trains, the biggest problem would be at stations, which are covered and at major intersections anyways. If we were asking for a raised subway through Queen West or something, it could be a big problem, but noise from alternate building techniques is certainly not a good reason to choose vastly more expensive techniques when they make absolutely no sense for the corridor.
And kettal, it seems like you're either genuinely interested (and not attacking subways,) or are desperately finding excuses to make subways as expensive as possible. If it's the first, I think I should have answered some of your concerns. If it's the second, could you just give up?

 

[Darwinkgo]

Why put elevated track in the middle of the road? On one side saves you big time in station costs. If the noise from HRT rolling stock is too loud, use different rolling stock, or even LIM like SRT.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

York Mills is hardly subway worthy. York Mills only gets 27k riders for the TTC. Assuming 100% of that is from the York Mills bus, and 75% of them decided switching to a DRL-north would be practical (i.e. all of them working in the CBD), the resulting station would be in Warden range. If diversion really was the name of the game, it would be way more practical to simply divert buses down Don Mills or the DVP to a terminal at Don Mills/Eglinton. Using the DVP that would be more or less the same travel time as switching to RT of some sort, at a fraction of the cost.

For bus routes North of Sheppard, we are better basing our transit off of the Sheppard subway and whatever we plan for Finch-Sheppard Corridor. And, once again, it would be more efficient to divert buses down the DVP either strait into the CBD or some kind of Don Mills/Eglinton terminal than to build 8km of rapid transit.

There isn't another city in the world that would stop a transit line at Eglinton along a corridor like Don Mills. Relief isn't the only reason to continue to Finch - Don Mills is lined with jobs, schools, stores, and dozens of towers, and transit use along Don Mills would increase enormously with the DRL, probably over 100% in the medium term.

A station at York Mills could very well be the 'weak link' in the chain (depending on how many mid-block stops are added) but when the weak link could still have like 20,000 riders a day...

Having multiple routes with frequencies of a few minutes run overlapping on the highway for 2-10+km, only to have them end up on up on the subway, anyway, is horribly inefficient. Between highway widenings and paying bus drivers to sit on the DVP, you could build a lot of DRL up Don Mills, especially if whoever it is at the TTC with a tunnel fetish that's dictating construction these days is removed from power.

This relief mission is being way overstated. Yes, Yonge is approaching its design parameters. That doesn't mean we have to build a subway to Finch to fix it. Intercepting the Eglinton East, Lawrence East, Don Mills, Leslie, Flemingdon Park and maybe York Mills buses at an Eglinton/Don Mills terminal, while also intercepting the Bloor Line and a few streetcar routes, would provide adequate relief for the foreseeable future. Especially in conjunction with planned improvements on Yonge line headways and train size.

Actually, it does mean we need to be moving these people on other lines, and a DRL up Don Mills is an ideal solution. Even if Yonge trains ran every 10 seconds, that may preempt waits to get on the trains, but all it does at the other end is aggravate crowding at places like staircases.

Relief is not being overstated since the DRL is being considered solely because of relief. The goal is to ensure that it gets built with more than relief in mind, and running it up Don Mills just happens to maximize both relief and benefits for riders and neighbourhoods.

Are you trying to relieve the Yonge line or replace it? I'd say that bringing the DRL up to Eglinton, which actually has a realistic chance of happening, will divert a significant number of people, particularly from the BD subway, as well as the Eglinton, Lawrence and Don Mills routes.

Every rider diverted off Yonge will probably be replaced by a new one...a longer DRL is a better DRL. The DRL can't be extended to Seneca without running to Don Mills & Eglinton first, though. The whole thing would not open in one phase, anyway...build it to Danforth now, build it to Eglinton later, build it to Finch after that.

 

[Whoaccio]

There isn't another city in the world that would stop a transit line at Eglinton along a corridor like Don Mills. Relief isn't the only reason to continue to Finch - Don Mills is lined with jobs, schools, stores, and dozens of towers, and transit use along Don Mills would increase enormously with the DRL, probably over 100% in the medium term.

The beginning logic is perilously close to the "Europe builds LRT, we should build LRT" thought process that characterizes the LRT fetishists. I can't personally think of any City engaged in putting rapid transit along a route with a peak point demand not exceeding 5,000 pph/pd, but even if there were that shouldn't matter. We know that subways have certain costs and require certain riderships to be feasible. There is no evidence suggesting that Don Mills north of Eglinton fits this requirement, arbitrary claims that demand will "increase enormously... probably over 100%" being meaningless.

Having multiple routes with frequencies of a few minutes run overlapping on the highway for 2-10+km, only to have them end up on up on the subway, anyway, is horribly inefficient. Between highway widenings and paying bus drivers to sit on the DVP, you could build a lot of DRL up Don Mills, especially if whoever it is at the TTC with a tunnel fetish that's dictating construction these days is removed from power.

At the very minimum (200m/km...) building some kind of rapid transit between Eglinton and Yorkmills (4km) you are looking at 800m$. That sum of money for 20 odd thousand bus riders to save two or three minutes is idiotic.

I, personally, don't think it is worth bothering to try to "divert" routes like York Mills in the first place, so am not exactly salivating at the potential of rerouting some 95 buses down Don Mills. If you have some overriding goal of making sure nobody takes the Yonge subway though, it is simply more cost effective to have existing buses drive an extra five minutes as opposed to spending what would most likely round to a billion dollars to intercept them 4km earlier.

Actually, it does mean we need to be moving these people on other lines, and a DRL up Don Mills is an ideal solution. Even if Yonge trains ran every 10 seconds, that may preempt waits to get on the trains, but all it does at the other end is aggravate crowding at places like staircases.

Relief is not being overstated since the DRL is being considered solely because of relief. The goal is to ensure that it gets built with more than relief in mind, and running it up Don Mills just happens to maximize both relief and benefits for riders and neighbourhoods.

You are being disingenuous. Nobody, anywhere in the history of Toronto, has claimed it is necessary for a prospective DRL to provide relief by traveling to Finch. As Voltz remarked, that isn't "relief" but simply replacement. The original DRL proposal was solely to provide relief to Yonge/Bloor by diverting riders from the Bloor Line. Eglinton is a natural extension as the route is relatively close to downtown and conveniently intercepts high volume bus routes (Eglinton, Leslie, Don Mills, Lawrence, Flemindon) in a fairly dense area.

The next major corridors, Sheppard & Finch, are over 6km away from here over an area of decidedly non-subway density, and are already well served by rapid transit (the Sheppard subway) and Highway 401.

"Relief" isn't limitless thing. We only need a specific, finite, amount of it for the foreseeable future. Beyond that point, we are simply overbuilding. There is no difference between building a 50 bay bus terminal and building a subway to Finch simply to fill some undefined need for "relief." Both are wastes of money in that they provide unneeded capacity. Between intercepting Y/Bloor riders, Eglinton East, Leslie, Lawrence East, Flemingdon Park and Don Mills riders and capacity improvements along Yonge, I see no reason why we would need yet more relief. Or how that relief would be best provided by spending a few billion dollars to intercept the York Mills busroute.

 

[Voltz]

Every rider diverted off Yonge will probably be replaced by a new one...a longer DRL is a better DRL. The DRL can't be extended to Seneca without running to Don Mills & Eglinton first, though. The whole thing would not open in one phase, anyway...build it to Danforth now, build it to Eglinton later, build it to Finch after that.

I do agree with building to Finch, eventually, but it would be so far off as to not warrant much in the way of planning for now.

 

[Darwinkgo]

I do agree with building to Finch, eventually, but it would be so far off as to not warrant much in the way of planning for now.

Well, you should actually do a reasonably full EA, and then pass corridor protection measures at city council. If the city mandates large enough setbacks, proactively relocated utilities when doing maintenance and saved optimal station sites from development the line could end up costing much much less.

 

[Second_in_pie]

^^ Agree. I don't think that a Finch DRL should be coming within 20 years, but it never hurts to plan.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

The beginning logic is perilously close to the "Europe builds LRT, we should build LRT" thought process that characterizes the LRT fetishists.

This coming from someone perilously close to a bus fetishist.

No one has said the DRL must go to Finch to provide relief but it's common knowledge that a longer DRL = more relief. Yes, we do need additional lines to replace Yonge...this is also common knowledge. Both lines will be crowded, though...the number of total rides we're dealing with *will* increase substantially whether you believe it or not. Yonge & Bloor will still be overcrowded if the only riders you remove are those going from westbound Danforth to southbound Yonge (and vice versa). Taking the DRL up to Eglinton will remove some riders totally off Yonge but taking it to Finch would move a lot more, as well as vastly improve transit along an undeniably dense and busy corridor. I know that actual concern for riders and travel times isn't as popular on this forum as debates over how to spend $X.YB, though, or laments that any line not moving riders at its theoretical capacity is a waste of money.

 

[Whoaccio]

Sure, in some fantasy world more subways = better. I've got no objection to that. In a real world where capital is finite and mobile, we have to prioritize projects based on some kind of cost/benefit analysis. At a rudimentary level, the idea that we need a subway to "relieve" crowded stations like York Mills seems visibly flawed. Don/Eg works because it intercepts a large number of bus passengers in a dense neighborhood and has a convenient route downtown. Anything even potentially worthwhile to the North is separated by 6-7km of mid-rate suburbs and all ready served by rapid transit and a highway.

Maybe in 2060 we should look into building something more substantive along Don Mills north of Eglinton, until then there are better priorities (which, I should add, may have nothing to do with transit).

 

[scarberiankhatru]

I do agree with building to Finch, eventually, but it would be so far off as to not warrant much in the way of planning for now.

We're too busy planning lines out to raccoon country to bother with actually useful lines like a longer DRL, but now is precisely when we need to be planning it.

At a rudimentary level, the idea that we need a subway to "relieve" crowded stations like York Mills seems visibly flawed.

You're just missing the point. It's the entire Yonge line that needs relief, not just Y&B station, or not just York Mills station, particularly since so many riders who use Yonge are dumped onto by feeder buses and end up transferring to B/D or walking through PATH or whatever after they get off. Serendipitously, this relief can be built along a very dense and busy corridor and preempt a billion dollar LRT line. Two birds, one stone. In the real world, we can't afford not to build useful subway projects...capital is too limited to waste on building LRT or BRT where a short subway extension is better.

Don/Eg works because it intercepts a large number of bus passengers in a dense neighborhood and has a convenient route downtown. Anything even potentially worthwhile to the North is separated by 6-7km of mid-rate suburbs and all ready served by rapid transit and a highway.

There's scarcely a spot in the entire city more perfectly suited for a station than Don Mills & Lawrence. No, Don Mills & York Mills is not Kowloon, but it's not a little slice of Pickering Town Line in the heart of the city, either. How is a longer line on Don Mills inconvenient for anybody?

By your reasoning, we don't need the DRL at all because of the DVP/Gardiner combo alongside already existing rapid transit.

 

[nfitz]

We're too busy planning lines out to raccoon country to bother with actually useful lines like a longer DRL, but now is precisely when we need to be planning it.

Raccoon country? Just what part of Toronto doesn't have raccoons - there are many near the existing subway lines.

 

[Disparishun]

In terms of bang for buck and relieving the Yonge line, wouldn't it be tremendously cheaper to LRT-ize the GO RH line with near-subway-like frequencies and stops somewhere downtown and at interconnecting Eglinton, Sheppard, Finch lines?

I realize that you probably wouldn't get a Bloor stop, which is clearly important, but you'd get a whole lot else -- and without the costs of tunnelling or very much buying of expropriated land. (There'd be some of the latter, but only to relocate poorly-positioned GO stations.)

It would not replace the DRL, no doubt, but it would certainly greatly reduce the need to build the DRL very far at far higher cost -- wouldn't it?

 

[leopetr]

In terms of bang for buck and relieving the Yonge line, wouldn't it be tremendously cheaper to LRT-ize the GO RH line with near-subway-like frequencies and stops somewhere downtown and at interconnecting Eglinton, Sheppard, Finch lines?

I realize that you probably wouldn't get a Bloor stop, which is clearly important, but you'd get a whole lot else -- and without the costs of tunnelling or very much buying of expropriated land. (There'd be some of the latter, but only to relocate poorly-positioned GO stations.)

It would not replace the DRL, no doubt, but it would certainly greatly reduce the need to build the DRL very far at far higher cost -- wouldn't it?

Yup. Frequent service, or even all-day service, on the Richmond Hill line would do a lot to relieve the Yonge line. There's an existing stop at Langstaff, right by Viva's Richmond Hill Centre terminal. This is an excellent point to divert commuters heading downtown.

One prereq is grade separation for the Doncaster Diamond, which is scheduled for study in 2012-2013. I'd prioritize it more, personally.

BTW, Steve Munro has been saying the same thing about the Richmond Hill line for years.