Spadina Rapid Transit Line (Speculative)

[BurlOak]

How about an underground Transit City line where the interchange station is located in that long corridor to connect with both lines 1 and 2 at either ends. And interchange with the new Rail Deck Park station as well

Building an LRT under the existing LRT seems like a huge cost more no real benefit (many would consider it a downgrade - as it would no doubt lose stops.

I'd like to get closer to downtown than Spadina as well. I tried to retain the existing Spadina Station, but reducing the curvature to veer more slowly away from Spadina and meet up with Hoskin. This would create a station in the heart of U of T. It would then curve through Queen Park and down Elizabeth. At City Hall, it makes a slight jog to York St.

Remember, the purpose here is just to allow for the Yonge-Bloor interline to return. This is a 4.5km extension which (basically) does not lose any destinations for those who came down from Yorkdale ways.

1. Spadina Station would be a bit of a long transfer - but with the moving sidewalk restored it will hopefully be accepted.
2. Heart House Station would nicely serve U of T better than any existing stop does.
3. College Station could connect to Queens Park and Sick Kids.
4. City Hall Station would be at Dundas and just north of the towers.
5. Queen Station would be mostly south of Queen - with connection to the Ontario Line.
6. King Station would be mostly south of King. (some type of pedestrian tunnel, and/or PATH signing would connect this new line to the current University Line).
7. Union Station would basically under the tracks, maybe skewed a bit south, and would slightly more convenient to reach ACC and SkyDome.

Other routes still exist, including the Ontario Line across Queen and the Parliament-King-Dufferin Line (which came from Scarborough and heads off to Albion. I'm also leaving Bay Street open for future use - the Waterfront LRT coming up, and/or some type of Yonge Relief)

 

[M II A II R II K]

More time not moving than actually moving time lapse.

 

[Hopkins123]

To further the discussion, here's an out there idea. Decouple the Spadina Line from Yonge-University and have it continue south along Spdina Ave, effectively replacing the 510 streetcar route, but do it in such a manor that Spadina Stn becomes a tri-interchange with YU alignment being placed on a new axis west of St George Stn, such that it it occurs in between the Bloor-Danforth platforms and the existing Spadina (North) platform for the Spadina Line (i.e. where the long walkway between lines exist today). This would minimize walking times to get between the three lines. I envision it like this, with a little Ontario Line future planning and retcon for good measure:

 

[NotAToy]

If any Spadina Line was built, what would happen to the 510 Spadina streetcar and the 45000 people who use it daily? Presumably we can't have stop spacing like we have now. I know this is to relive pressure on the Yonge Line, but what about the people who use Spadina Line 1 to get downtown? Or the billions of dollars spent on this line that would be better spent on an SSE, DRL or a Eglinton West, when we have a functional 510 (not Line 1) already?

 

[Hopkins123]

If any Spadina Line was built, what would happen to the 510 Spadina streetcar and the 45000 people who use it daily? Presumably we can't have stop spacing like we have now. I know this is to relive pressure on the Yonge Line, but what about the people who use Spadina Line 1 to get downtown? Or the billions of dollars spent on this line that would be better spent on an SSE, DRL or a Eglinton West, when we have a functional 510 (not Line 1) already?

I think you mean 55,000 daily users.

That's on par with the Sheppard subway. And like the YouTube video Mark posted illustrates, the 510 is notoriously slow stopping at every light en route and overcrowded. If it wasn't already in it's own ROW, it'd easily be a candidate for a heavy rail upgrade.

No stops would be lost either, except Sussex which itself is only 200m north of Harbord, presuming exits on either end of the platforms.

Harbord = Harbord and Willcocks
Kensington = College and Nassau
Chinatown = Dundas and Sullivan
SoHo = Queen and Richmond
King West/Fashion = King and Front
Entertainment = Bremner

And we can think of this more as an infill line, presumptively built after all other subways on the books are completed.

 

[BurlOak]

To further the discussion, here's an out there idea. Decouple the Spadina Line from Yonge-University and have it continue south along Spdina Ave, effectively replacing the 510 streetcar route, but do it in such a manor that Spadina Stn becomes a tri-interchange with YU alignment being placed on a new axis west of St George Stn, such that it it occurs in between the Bloor-Danforth platforms and the existing Spadina (North) platform for the Spadina Line (i.e. where the long walkway between lines exist today). This would minimize walking times to get between the three lines. I envision it like this, with a little Ontario Line future planning and retcon for good measure:

Do I understand correctly?
Spadina Station would connect the Orange, Yellow and Green Lines. From a Yellow Line perspective, Spadina is a terminal station.
This would not add any relief to the Yonge-Bloor station then. Overall, the proposal provides slightly better service to the Sport Entertainment area, but otherwise, likely each Spadina stop is more inconvenient than the University Avenue equivalent - which riders would now have to access via a transfer.

I believe the only way anything could become of this was if the Yonge-Bloor Station improvement money was used to de-couple the Spadina leg. Two things would have to be proven.

1. The return to interline would produce more Y-B relief than that actual planned station improvements. My gut feeling is that it would - because every rider on the system would have to (at worst) pass on one train and they could get to any destination on the legacy lines (Yonge, University, Bloor, Danforth) without transfer.
2. This de-coupling could be done within a similar budget as the Y-B station improvements. Those were pegged at $1.1B, so maybe in the $1.5B budget would be close enough. If I say it's 4.5km of track required @150M/km, and 6 stations (with no bus bays) @150M/km, it would work out to close to the budget.
3. The route would have to not be that inconvenient to the riders coming down the Spadina leg (which may be over 20k ppdph). That is where I think a route between the "U" is required - down either Bay or Elizabeth/York - where it would arguably be more convenient that the current routing.

 

[M II A II R II K]

And the King and Spadina routes gets more riders than the Sheppard line, and if there were a subway on Spadina the ridership would be even higher .

 

[micheal_can]

I am trying to figure out what the issue is.

If it about the streetcars not to be stuck waiting for the intersection to clear, then stick crossing arms on either side like they do for the LRTs in Edmonton and Calgary. As the train comes to the station, the gates come down. There by,, there is no issue with signal priority as the lights can be green, but it is illegal to go around crossings with the arms down.

If it is to convert it to LRT, I am confused what is lacking except for signal priority/crossing arms.

If it is to put a subway underneath and abandon the current line, I would say that is very short sighted. The streetcar lines on Yonge and Bloor should be put back in. It might provide some relief to the lower sections.

 

[BurlOak]

I am trying to figure out what the issue is.

If it about the streetcars not to be stuck waiting for the intersection to clear, then stick crossing arms on either side like they do for the LRTs in Edmonton and Calgary. As the train comes to the station, the gates come down. There by,, there is no issue with signal priority as the lights can be green, but it is illegal to go around crossings with the arms down.

If it is to convert it to LRT, I am confused what is lacking except for signal priority/crossing arms.

If it is to put a subway underneath and abandon the current line, I would say that is very short sighted. The streetcar lines on Yonge and Bloor should be put back in. It might provide some relief to the lower sections.

I believe @Hopkins123 and I are coming at this from different angles.

I think his/her view is (I hoping I'm not putting words in his/her mouth) that Spadina is getting too full for the current LRT style streetcar and the route warrants a subway. I am not certain if the intent would be to abandon the Spadina LRT streetcar, or keep it running after the subway is completed.

My view is to decouple Spadina so that the Yonge and Bloor Lines can be interlined (as was done in the late 1960's) - as a means of relieving Yonge-Bloor Station. I am dubious as to whether the (over) $1B proposed for the Y-B station improvements will accomplish much, and propose using the money to decouple Spadina and allow the interlining to happen. With modern signalling, interlining could become more successful.
To decouple, I want to avoid Spadina, since it already has a reasonable transit option, plus it would not be acceptable as a route for those coming down from Eglinton West, Yorkdale or York U who expect to be deposited closer to the downtown core. I suggest trying to move this Spadina leg eastward to be inside the U - maybe down Elizabeth and York Streets.

 

[micheal_can]

I believe @Hopkins123 and I are coming at this from different angles.

My view is to decouple Spadina so that the Yonge and Bloor Lines can be interlined (as was done in the late 1960's) - as a means of relieving Yonge-Bloor Station. I am dubious as to whether the (over) $1B proposed for the Y-B station improvements will accomplish much, and propose using the money to decouple Spadina and allow the interlining to happen. With modern signalling, interlining could become more successful.
To decouple, I want to avoid Spadina, since it already has a reasonable transit option, plus it would not be acceptable as a route for those coming down from Eglinton West, Yorkdale or York U who expect to be deposited closer to the downtown core. I suggest trying to move this Spadina leg eastward to be inside the U - maybe down Elizabeth and York Streets.

Why did interlining not work back when it was tried? What new things would fix those problems?

 

[BurlOak]

Why did interlining not work back when it was tried? What new things would fix those problems?

I understand signalling was a problem - trains having to cross wye at right time - something that ATC would improve.
Minor complaint at Bay Station no knowing which platform next train is on - something simple electronic signs could fix.
There was plenty of capacity at Y-B for transfers, so why bother looking for a solution - something that doesn't exist now.

 

[ViveleCanada]

Why did interlining not work back when it was tried? What new things would fix those problems?

To be frank, it seems to mainly come down to the TTC not wanting to interline operations in the first place and also St George and Bay were not optimized for cross platform transfers. The interlining service originated from the Metropolitan Toronto Planning Board, but the TTC argued that it would be a nightmare to operate. To explain the problems better here are a few points of reference:
Red Line - Keele to Woodbine
Blue Line - Keele to Eglinton
Green Line - Eglinton to Woodbine
The biggest problems was the wye between St George and Bay which was prone to slowdowns and delays along with the fact that the signalling system wasn't capable of dealing with such a coordinated ballet. They resolved some of the issues such as letting whatever train that got to the wye first to just go ahead. There was also the funky platform layout at St. George and Bay stations where passengers would wait on the stairwells to figure out when the next train was arriving. This was because, at St George, the Red line operated on one floor and the Blue line operated on the other floor. So if you wanted to go westbound from St. George you had two platforms to choose from which were on different levels. The same was the problem for passengers going eastbound at Bay station. They minimized the issue later into the trial period by adding arrows that would light up to indicate which platform the next train will arrive at. There was also a problem of controlling operating costs since all the headways on the system had to stay the same despite the Bloor-Danforth portion seeing much lower demand than the Yonge portion. However, a lot issues were resolved or substantially minimized throughout the course of the 6 month trial.

Had the TTC twisted the tunnels at St George and Bay stations to resemble what you see at Lionel-Groulx station in Montréal, the customer issues at those stations would have been non-existent (you can probably easily solve this issue today with functioning TV monitors as well). Operating costs wise, both the Yonge and Bloor-Danforth lines are currently running at such similar frequencies that the headway issue wouldn't be an issue today. ATC will probably resolve the mess at the wye and make it easier to operate the system during meltdowns or other interruptions. Sydney, Melbourne and Chicago all operate much more complicated loop systems with their trains/metros so I'm sure interlining is still operationally feasible. If anything, they can hire consultants from those cities to help them reintroduce interlining. As it stands, the only issues that are stopping a reintroduction of interlining is the fact that: the Spadina branch would need to terminate somewhere else, Line 2 must be refitted for ATC and the fact that the TTC is too incompetent at the moment to seriously look into this. Referring back to M. Levy's book, they seemed annoyed by the fact that St. George and Bloor-Yonge were poorly designed interchange stations from the get-go which seems strange given that the TTC seemed hell-bent on getting rid of interlining the first chance they got. This is where I find Montréal's metro to be superior than Toronto's, the interchanges at both Lionel-Groulx and Berri-Uqam are much more spacious and better laid out. Both St George and Bloor-Yonge have such narrow platforms that I feel like a simple nudge would fling me onto the tracks. Compare this to Lionel Groulx's island platform where the STM can slap in a convenience store right in the centre of the platform and still have plenty of room on either side.

 

[NotAToy]

I think you mean 55,000 daily users.

That's on par with the Sheppard subway. And like the YouTube video Mark posted illustrates, the 510 is notoriously slow stopping at every light en route and overcrowded. If it wasn't already in it's own ROW, it'd easily be a candidate for a heavy rail upgrade.

No stops would be lost either, except Sussex which itself is only 200m north of Harbord, presuming exits on either end of the platforms.

And we can think of this more as an infill line, presumptively built after all other subways on the books are completed.

The TTC itself says 40000. Look it up on their website.

While I agree that the 510 could be faster, I think that money spent on Spadina other than small 510 upgrades is better spent on the Ontario Line/RL.

If it is to be built after other lines, it will never get built because Toronto.

 

[BurlOak]

To be frank, it seems to mainly come down to the TTC not wanting to interline operations in the first place and also St George and Bay were not optimized for cross platform transfers. The interlining service originated from the Metropolitan Toronto Planning Board, but the TTC argued that it would be a nightmare to operate. To explain the problems better here are a few points of reference:
Red Line - Keele to Woodbine
Blue Line - Keele to Eglinton
Green Line - Eglinton to Woodbine

A picture is worth 1000 words.

The biggest problems was the wye between St George and Bay which was prone to slowdowns and delays along with the fact that the signalling system wasn't capable of dealing with such a coordinated ballet. They resolved some of the issues such as letting whatever train that got to the wye first to just go ahead. There was also the funky platform layout at St. George and Bay stations where passengers would wait on the stairwells to figure out when the next train was arriving. This was because, at St George, the Red line operated on one floor and the Blue line operated on the other floor. So if you wanted to go westbound from St. George you had two platforms to choose from which were on different levels. The same was the problem for passengers going eastbound at Bay station.

A couple of images show this nicely.
https://transit.toronto.on.ca/images/subway-5104-04.gif
http://carto.metro.free.fr/cartes/metro-tram-toronto/index.php?station=Spadina

Had the TTC twisted the tunnels at St George and Bay stations to resemble what you see at Lionel-Groulx station in Montréal, the customer issues at those stations would have been non-existent (you can probably easily solve this issue today with functioning TV monitors as well).

Looking at the diagram, it looks like that Lionel Groulx layout would have been possible without much extra work - too late for that now though. Agree with modern signage, this won't be a big issue now.

Operating costs wise, both the Yonge and Bloor-Danforth lines are currently running at such similar frequencies that the headway issue wouldn't be an issue today. ATC will probably resolve the mess at the wye and make it easier to operate the system during meltdowns or other interruptions. Sydney, Melbourne and Chicago all operate much more complicated loop systems with their trains/metros so I'm sure interlining is still operationally feasible. If anything, they can hire consultants from those cities to help them reintroduce interlining.

Agree

As it stands, the only issues that are stopping a reintroduction of interlining is the fact that: the Spadina branch would need to terminate somewhere else, Line 2 must be refitted for ATC and the fact that the TTC is too incompetent at the moment to seriously look into this. Referring back to M. Levy's book, they seemed annoyed by the fact that St. George and Bloor-Yonge were poorly designed interchange stations from the get-go which seems strange given that the TTC seemed hell-bent on getting rid of interlining the first chance they got. This is where I find Montréal's metro to be superior than Toronto's, the interchanges at both Lionel-Groulx and Berri-Uqam are much more spacious and better laid out. Both St George and Bloor-Yonge have such narrow platforms that I feel like a simple nudge would fling me onto the tracks. Compare this to Lionel Groulx's island platform where the STM can slap in a convenience store right in the centre of the platform and still have plenty of room on either side.

By the time we get around to decoupling the Spadina leg, ATC would be implemented on both the Yonge and Bloor lines.
Wider platforms at Y-B would be nice, but again it's a bit late to fix this.
With the $1.1B they are planning on spending, there would be no widening of the Yonge Line platform.

 

[BurlOak]

Why did interlining not work back when it was tried? What new things would fix those problems?

I suspect you already had a good idea of the answer. Any follow-up comments?