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

At the moment, I'm personally probably 60/40 in favour of Queen over King. And one of the leading reasons for this isn't so much about transit planning or city-building, but rather the spreading of investments. King I feel is too close to:
  • waterfront transit corridor: - QQWest; the underfunded, disregarded, and tricky East Bayfront streetcar b/n Union and Parliament or Cherry loop; and whatever the F is supposed to be done with WWLRT on Bremner.
  • USRC: and any potential stations we could see plonked in (as per Mlinx's 50 shortlist, ST, and the general RER plans), dubious as much of those seem.
  • East Gardiner plans: and the major improvements to the street network that will come about with that plan
These are major investments in one small area, and I feel using King for a DRL would (from a political and investment standpoint) make the expenditure seem a tad overkill. Queen on the otherhand kinda fills a void for transit improvements between the lake and Bloor. In a perfect world though, it would be great to see the DRL and a short 3km tunnel for the 501, 505, or 506 across the core.
 
To solve the dilemma they should build both a King and Queen St. line each. Would also solve the delay issue with the new streetcars as well.
 
M II A II R II K said:
Then let's hope that Queen St. would still be Queen St. after they build it. And not replaced with random gentrification.
Click to expand...

Gentrification hasn't destroyed the character of the Bloor-Danforth, whatever little amount of that has even happened in all these decades apart from around High Park. When stations like Chester, with no feeder routes, can have 7000+ alightings daily it gives me hope that people would be willing to walk from far north of a Queen subway (as far as from Dundas) to bolster its ridership levels. Hardly anyone is going to walk from Dundas to King on average to access a King DRL.

That's where I think the disconnect in this argument lies. I was given grief for suggesting the dozen or so apartment buildings surrounding Sheppard and Birchmount justified extending the subway there; yet on here some people are making similar rationales for reaching Liberty Village with a subway, when GO RER and Waterfront LRT along a proposed Front Street extension can cover the same ground. Because apart from Liberty Village, there's not much else outside of the Financial District that a Queen alignment couldn't handle just as well, if not better.
 
Hopkins123 said:
Gentrification hasn't destroyed the character of the Bloor-Danforth, whatever little amount of that has even happened in all these decades apart from around High Park. When stations like Chester, with no feeder routes, can have 7000+ alightings daily it gives me hope that people would be willing to walk from far north of a Queen subway (as far as from Dundas) to bolster its ridership levels. Hardly anyone is going to walk from Dundas to King on average to access a King DRL.

That's where I think the disconnect in this argument lies. I was given grief for suggesting the dozen or so apartment buildings surrounding Sheppard and Birchmount justified extending the subway there; yet on here some people are making similar rationales for reaching Liberty Village with a subway, when GO RER and Waterfront LRT along a proposed Front Street extension can cover the same ground. Because apart from Liberty Village, there's not much else outside of the Financial District that a Queen alignment couldn't handle just as well, if not better.
Click to expand...

That is a bit of a false equivalence, no?

Take a look at Toronto's density map:

torontoavgdensity4ro0-gif.37923


All of Queen Street has several times more density than Sheppard and Birchmount. It's not as if we're debating building a subway along a dense route or one that is significantly less so. Both routes will run among the highest density areas in the city and both will have tremendous potential.
 
TheTigerMaster said:
All of Queen Street has several times more density than Sheppard and Birchmount. It's not as if we're debating building a subway along a dense route or one that is significantly less so. Both routes will run among the highest density areas in the city and both will have tremendous potential.
Click to expand...

The density is definitely there, absolutely. And, the potential value to connect to South Etobicoke offers ridership potential beyond the needs of that immediate corridor.

The dilemma for Queen Street is whether taking streetcars off, and letting developers do their thing, would change the quality of the street. I suspect that is going to happen anyways. We may still like it, but it will be quite a change. As noted, King is walkable but nowhere near as charming.

Sic transit transit, I guess.

- Paul
 
I note that on the density map Sheppard has the same (or higher) density as Lakeshore Etobicoke, and it has more people since people=density x area.
 
BurlOak said:
I note that on the density map Sheppard has the same (or higher) density as Lakeshore Etobicoke, and it has more people since people=density x area.
Click to expand...
That map is from 2006. There were barely any condos in Lakeshore Etobicoke 10 years ago. I bet that section would be red now.
 
TheTigerMaster said:
That is a bit of a false equivalence, no?

Take a look at Toronto's density map:

torontoavgdensity4ro0-gif.37923


All of Queen Street has several times more density than Sheppard and Birchmount. It's not as if we're debating building a subway along a dense route or one that is significantly less so. Both routes will run among the highest density areas in the city and both will have tremendous potential.
Click to expand...

This map is 10 years old. Wait until the 2016 census comes out.
 
nfitz said:
Wow, looking at the density around Eglinton/Brimely/Danforth, then whoever proposed not having a station here has their heads up their asses.
Click to expand...

I had a hard time finding Scarborough City Centre. Tell me again why we need a subway up there? If anything Sheppard in Scarborough looks like a better bet.
 
It's in the middle of an industrial park which means no "base level" densities from low rise housing, it's only condo towers.

Also, it's more about the bus transfers than the walk in passengers.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top