Toronto Ontario Line 3 | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx

Towered said:
A whole block of buildings on the south side of Queen west of Spadina is fenced off with green mesh - I’m assuming it’s for OL station construction.
Click to expand...

Yes. That’s the old TD Bank on the southwest corner along with a few other commercial buildings along Queen. They were vacated last autumn.
 
Towered said:
A whole block of buildings on the south side of Queen west of Spadina is fenced off with green mesh - I’m assuming it’s for OL station construction.
Click to expand...

6xadze.jpeg
 
... they should also see if they can squeeze an entrance to the subway directly from the streetcar platforms .. although yes I acknowledge the platforms are maybe too skinny for that.
 
Kitsune said:
... they should also see if they can squeeze an entrance to the subway directly from the streetcar platforms .. although yes I acknowledge the platforms are maybe too skinny for that.
Click to expand...
Not possible if they require accessibility for all. If we had double-ended streetcars, with doors on both sides, we could have use a centre platform with escalators and elevators available.
 
It would save pedestrian death/injuries to move the streetcar ROW from the centre of the avenue westwards to where the southbound traffic lanes are currently. Even if we couldn’t do it for the length of Spadina, it would really help through Chinatown. It would also help with transfers to the OL as the sidewalk is narrow on the SW corner of Queen/Spadina on from of the to-be station.
 
MovingBlock said:
Thanks for the response, though my thought was more toward the design of the OL right-of-way. A less constraining loading gauge could be useful when designing the alignment at difficult locations compared to using TTC loading gauge.
Click to expand...
Especially once dynamic motion of the carbody is factored in, you're likely only going to see a savings of maybe a foot per track.

I can't see any locations along the ROW being so tight as to require two feet - 2 tracks worth - making any substantial difference.

Dan
 
smallspy said:
So what if Metrolinx is a different entity? Isn't the point of transit to move people around, not build up their own little castles?


Interface does not equal interline. It means things like having physical track connections. It means having power feeds from common locations, and on a common network. It means sharing maintenance facilities and fleets. The list goes on.


That is your opinion. It is not shared by many.


This is bunk. If the TTC lines were not suitable for expansion, then how did we ever get the subway past Union and Eglinton? Or even outside of the old City of Toronto?

You're damn right that there are a different scope of interests at play. And many of them have their own self-interest in mind, not the greater good.


What tech are you talking about?

You realize that the whole "light metro" thing is nothing more than some slick marketing wank, right? The cars are not substantially smaller than our existing subway cars, and are bigger than what passes for a subway car elsewhere in the world. The capacity of the line will rival the existing subway lines. Nothing of the Ontario Line is being built "lighter" than the current network. It can't be.

Medium capacity is covered by LRT, which is being built elsewhere and where appropriate.


The whole tunnelled versus elevated debate is something totally different, and is not exclusive to the Ontario Line.

The TTC was using lighter tech to mitigate spending - the LRTs. The Ontario Line is not lighter tech.

Dan
Click to expand...
I think both our arguments have been thoroughly examined at this point, so I don’t think drawing it out much more is worth the effort. I’ll cap my side by saying that I do think the Ontario Line’s tech is lighter and will provide meaningful benefits into the future compared to if we chose to build it more akin to the existing TTC.

I agree with you on the capacity point; the OL itself will not be medium capacity, but shorter trains are associated with it more often than not, and the higher capacity is coming from higher frequency. Smaller stations are just cheaper than big ones, hence my cost argument. This line is going to Eglinton now, not just Pape.

I know you have later posts in this thread, but I figured I would respond to just your direct response for now. I’m being optimistic by suggesting the OL’s differences will be better; it’s a risk to not go the conventional TTC route from Metrolinx. The ability for this to pay off is up to the execution.
 
blacksquirrels said:
View attachment 460792
Click to expand...

How bout' we ban left turns at this intersection. Not only will we speed up the busy streetcars, but we can also use the space claimed from the left turn lanes on Spadina to create wider streetcar platforms with amenities and widened pedestrian infrastructure in this area to handle the passenger levels.

Oh, but we won't do that because drivers take priority, of course.
 
sunnyside said:
I think both our arguments have been thoroughly examined at this point, so I don’t think drawing it out much more is worth the effort. I’ll cap my side by saying that I do think the Ontario Line’s tech is lighter and will provide meaningful benefits into the future compared to if we chose to build it more akin to the existing TTC.
Click to expand...
So I guess herein lies the rub.

You're willing to believe what the marketers and trumpeters are telling you.

Do a bit more research. Look into what is getting built elsewhere. Look at their various specs. The reality is quite a bit different than the bill of goods they're providing you.

Dan
 
smallspy said:
And the problem is that doing so will not allow them to take into account any of the efficiencies possible of a bigger system... If there are any delays with the rolling stock deliveries, or defects that result in all of the trains being pulled out of service, there is no potential to borrow rolling stock from the other divisions.
Click to expand...

For this to happen, the exact same signaling system needs to be used on all lines, or trains have to be fitted for the signaling system on every line. In the case of the TTC's legacy signaling, which doesn't require a lot of train-based equipment, the fitting that equipment on a train meant for a CBTC line may make sense. When you have two lines using different CBTC signaling systems, whose train-based systems are expensive, fitting the train-based equipment for second CBTC system as a contingency is extremely expensive.

If the TTC does not select Alstom Urbalis CBTC for the resignalling of Line 2, it will not be possible to move trains between lines 1 and 2 unless the trains are dual-fitted. The increased flexibility may not be worth the cost of vendor lock-in or the cost of dual-fitting. Industry practice for operations with CBTC is to have separate fleets for different lines unless there is interlining.

smallspy said:
So I guess herein lies the rub.

You're willing to believe what the marketers and trumpeters are telling you.

Do a bit more research. Look into what is getting built elsewhere. Look at their various specs. The reality is quite a bit different than the bill of goods they're providing you.

Dan
Click to expand...

Are there specific projects you think are relevant to this discussion? Most new subway systems (possibly with the exception of India) have much smaller loading gauges and shorter trains than legacy TTC lines. Overhead electrification is also very popular in many parts of the world, including in systems in Spain, Italy, India, China, South Korea and Japan.
 
Last edited:
smallspy said:
So I guess herein lies the rub.

You're willing to believe what the marketers and trumpeters are telling you.

Do a bit more research. Look into what is getting built elsewhere. Look at their various specs. The reality is quite a bit different than the bill of goods they're providing you.

Dan
Click to expand...
Well, I would say to an extent the specs have allowed the line to go to Exhibition and Eglinton instead of Osgoode-Pape, so I’m inclined to drink the kool-aid just a little bit. I will research this more as I’m not fully versed in the technicals if you can give some direction. What specs/cases do you have in mind?
 
sunnyside said:
Well, I would say to an extent the specs have allowed the line to go to Exhibition and Eglinton instead of Osgoode-Pape, so I’m inclined to drink the kool-aid just a little bit.
Click to expand...
Did they? What was stopping them from running a regular TTC subway car to Exhibition and Eglinton?
 
  • Like
Reactions: max
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top