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

Of course we can. We've had a Transit City mayor (also the Spadina subway mayor and put forward a number of rejected requests for Sheppard money), a Sheppard Subway mayor, and now a SmartTrack mayor.

Montreal's Pink Line mayor has already killed off ready-for-funding proposals (Blue Line extension for example) and will in all likely-hood be an abandoned proposal in 4 years.

Throwing out everything in progress and making a new plan is the problem, not the solution.

This. I don't think that the Mayor is supposed to be able to have the power to say that their electoral campaign napkin map is now the city's top priority, since now there is that arms-length provincial agency (the ARTM) which is supposed to be in charge of that. So we will see if the Pink line goes anywhere. A couple years ago the city's top priority was a few streetcar lines and LRT on Pie-IX, ten years later we don't have anything to show for it except a couple half-finished bus lanes.

It's interesting because it's very similar to the DRL in concept: a diagonal shortcut subway into downtown to relieve their most congested line, which also serves some transit-poor areas in the north east.

The first two-thirds of the line is underground. The rest of in the surface. The $6 Billion price is still ridiculous though.

I don't see how the line could go on the surface, though, if it is going to share facilities and rolling stock with the rest of the metro, which is rubber-tyred and can't run on the surface in the winter. Although it could be an orphan technology line like the SRT. Or maybe it could share facilities with the REM and use ICTS.

Montrealer here.

The proposed pink line would use automated light metro technology like the REM and the Canada Line.

When was it mentioned that it would be ICTS? I don't recall details about technology choice being mentioned.

I honestly find it mind boggling that any newly built metro system in a first world country wouldn't be automated.

Phase 1 between Montreal-Nord and downtown would be completely underground and would be inspired by Barcelona's L9, which was built using a single 12m diameter TBM.

Phase 2 between downtown and Lachine would be mostly at grade, using the Canadian Pacific ROW, which would mean lower costs than expanding the green or blue line.
Somehow I don't think that particular construction methods were envisioned by Projet Montreal: at this point the line is mostly conceptual.

As for the extension to Lachine: I thought that CP and CN were absolutely intransigent about sharing their ROW, which is why the REM is tunneling 3 km in a loop around the airport instead of going 500m south in a pre-built station to reach the nearest railway (the CP ROW).

There is extra room due to the Turcot construction for a line that was meant to go to the airport, but that is next to the CN ROW, not the CP ROW.
 
Last edited:
When was it mentioned that it would be ICTS? I don't recall details about technology choice being mentioned.

I hope not. There’s nothing worse than politicians prescribing a particular transit technology to solve an issue.

(Okay, there are probably a few things that are worse in the world, but this is easily in the top 17 worst things)
 
Montrealer here.

The proposed pink line would use automated light metro technology like the REM and the Canada Line.

Phase 1 between Montreal-Nord and downtown would be completely underground and would be inspired by Barcelona's L9, which was built using a single 12m diameter TBM.

Phase 2 between downtown and Lachine would be mostly at grade, using the Canadian Pacific ROW, which would mean lower costs than expanding the green or blue line.


Thanks for the links. Oh man what a fun read. Even if they're not built at all, between REM and this (possible) Barcelona Line 9-like "Pink Line", things seem very hopeful for affordable, dynamic subway-building in Montreal.
 
So why wouldn't this work in Toronto?
As we know in Toronto context, the tunneling portion is actually the cheap part in subway construction.

So this is actually a very interesting method of subway construction. It would not work for terminus/hub stations (like STC is planned to be) though. They need to be larger facilities.
 
As we know in Toronto context, the tunneling portion is actually the cheap part in subway construction.

So this is actually a very interesting method of subway construction. It would not work for terminus/hub stations (like STC is planned to be) though. They need to be larger facilities.

Station construction is the expensive part. Each station costs around $200 Million in Toronto (likely more).

Another expensive cost is the emergency exits, which the Barcelona method seemingly negates the need for nearly completely.
 
So why wouldn't this work in Toronto?

The double-stack tunnel was considered with Eglinton. Unfortunately, soil studies showed most buildings along the route would have issues staying upright without reinforcement. Simply put, the soil requires a large buffer space between the tunnel and other structures to adequately support both.

2 tunnels fits easier because the smaller diameter requires less buffer space.

IIRC, Eglinton looked at a ~13m diameter tunnel.
 
When was it mentioned that it would be ICTS? I don't recall details about technology choice being mentioned.

It was mentioned when Projet Montreal held a press conference to announce their proposal.:

"The pink line would be fully automated"

"having the trains outside [tunnels] would require to have cars rolling on rails. It would be less costly than the Metro's rubber tires. Trains and stations could be climate controlled"

Somehow I don't think that particular construction methods were envisioned by Projet Montreal: at this point the line is mostly conceptual.

That particular construction method was a key part of their proposal, to refute claims that a new metro line would be too expensive. Projet Montreal worked in collaboration with people at the Polytechnique's Mobilité Chair to elaborate and validate their proposal.

As for the extension to Lachine: I thought that CP and CN were absolutely intransigent about sharing their ROW, which is why the REM is tunneling 3 km in a loop around the airport instead of going 500m south in a pre-built station to reach the nearest railway (the CP ROW).

CDPQ Infra acquired the rail viaduct between the Pointe-St-Charles yards and Central Station from the CN as part of their REM project. Projet Montreal is hopeful that a similar deal could be struck with CP to acquirer the passenger-only Westmount sub between Lucien Lallier station and Lachine.

Even if they're not built at all, between REM and this (possible) Barcelona Line 9-like "Pink Line", things seem very hopeful

The REM is a done deal. It's a matter of days (not weeks) before the construction and operation contracts are awarded. Construction is expected to start by the end of the year.
 
Last edited:
The double-stack tunnel was considered with Eglinton. Unfortunately, soil studies showed most buildings along the route would have issues staying upright without reinforcement. Simply put, the soil requires a large buffer space between the tunnel and other structures to adequately support both.

2 tunnels fits easier because the smaller diameter requires less buffer space.

IIRC, Eglinton looked at a ~13m diameter tunnel.

I wonder if Montreal’s new mayor has considered such technicalities. Was her proposal at all vetted by people in the industry? I’d anticipate Montreal might have similar issues with single-bore tunnels as Toronto does.
 
I wonder if Montreal’s new mayor has considered such technicalities. Was her proposal at all vetted by people in the industry?

She said that the first step was getting elected, then afterwards studies would be done to assess the feasibility of the proposal.

I suppose her plan is to mandate the ARTM to commission studies after she puts her people on the ARTM's board.
 
Toronto will be using single bore tunnels on the Scarborough Subway, remember. Wouldn't be surprised to see it on the DRL either, to minimize cut and cover construction.
 
CDPQ Infra acquired the rail viaduct between the Pointe-St-Charles yards and Central Station from the CN as part of their REM project. Projet Montreal is hopeful that a similar deal could be struck with CP to acquirer the passenger-only Westmount sub between Lucien Lallier station and Lachine.

Thank you for the links! And I never realized there was a separate passenger-only sub from Lachine to Lucien L'Allier, I would see the freight trains pass by at Dorval AMT station and assumed they used the whole length of it, or at least most of it. If they could buy that section from CP, that would be incredible, since there are way more people (and jobs) above the St. Jacques bluffs. Much more useful than putting light rail in the Turcot corridor.
 
Is it likely that the new DRL stations (not Osgoode, Queen, Pape) are going to have “magnificent” stations? It would seem likely with the TYSSE and the SSE’s large stations, that the TTC will continue the trend?

IMO, regular downtown stations but with better passenger flow (large hallways and no outside fare gate platform changes) should be more then adequate for a line that mostly has end to end (Relief Line South) riders.
 

Back
Top