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

[cplchanb]

ML or the ont govt should post reference videos of the skytrain vs the surrounding dwellings to these activists. That would give them an objective view and analysis on the noise on whether itd be "unbearable".
I'd bet that with the money saved from not going underground they can buy out anyone who persists to dissent and still save more than underground.

 

[vic]

It's pretty loud between Keele and Dundas West because of the all the switches that the trains crash over. Straight, well-maintained, welded track with no switches would probably not add tooooo much noise.

Edit to add: The worst would be if they end up with screeching trains on those corners....

Side note: On a recent trip, I was somewhat amazed how quiet the MARTA trains in Atlanta are compared to the TTC subway. Not sure what they do differently.....

 

[Hopkins123]

Louder than the diesel GO train they chose to live next? Louder than the ‭138‬ meter long, 20yr T1 train running on old tracks? *Facepalm*

The length of 2km does mean it affects more people. But Vancouver's Skytrain stays above ground for longer on many sections and they aren't having that many problems. (I do admit there were recent complaints there about noise on old tracks though)
The High Park Station track is about 9 meters away from the nearest house. The T1 trains here come 30 seconds less frequently than the rush hour Ontario Line trains will in rush hour at peak capacity decades after opening...
View attachment 211234

If residents near High Park, Rosedale and Old Mill (3 affluent neighbourhoods) can tolerate elevated subways, it shouldn't be a problem in the West Don Lands and Riverdale. If one does not like it, they can move to be frank.

 

[blu_in_green]

Can anyone help me understand why all this focus is being put on the east end of the city when the west end is already far more dense with more people to move? The west end of the green line is already far more densely travelled than east of Broadview (I used to commute during rush hour westbound from Vic Park station and just recently switched over to riding east bound from the west. The difference in rush hour density is notable).

Putting an extension out out past Exhibition to the lakefront/Etobicoke area would seem to tap into more people now and even more land suitable for development than going between Cosburn and Science Centre.

I'm also struggling to understand why they aren't putting more junction points to existing stations like King/Bathurst with the GO line in the area?

Forgive me if these are dumb questions; I know I'm a newb, just trying to understand the concept here.

 

[PDPVPB]

ML or the ont govt should post reference videos of the skytrain vs the surrounding dwellings to these activists. That would give them an objective view and analysis on the noise on whether itd be "unbearable".
I'd bet that with the money saved from not going underground they can buy out anyone who persists to dissent and still save more than underground.

If residents near High Park, Rosedale and Old Mill (3 affluent neighbourhoods) can tolerate elevated subways, it shouldn't be a problem in the West Don Lands and Riverdale. If one does not like it, they can move to be frank.

Except that expanded RER + VIA + 45/90s frequency Ontario Line will not at all be equivalent to what High Park / Rosedale / Old Mill residents or Skytrain neighbours are dealing with.
There's discussion about 6 lanes of train traffic (vs. 3 current). Find a video of that (with comparable frequency) and post it to make an apples to apples assessment.

 

[sixrings]

Can anyone help me understand why all this focus is being put on the east end of the city when the west end is already far more dense with more people to move? The west end of the green line is already far more densely travelled than east of Broadview (I used to commute during rush hour westbound from Vic Park station and just recently switched over to riding east bound from the west. The difference in rush hour density is notable).

Putting an extension out out past Exhibition to the lakefront/Etobicoke area would seem to tap into more people now and even more land suitable for development than going between Cosburn and Science Centre.

I'm also struggling to understand why they aren't putting more junction points to existing stations like King/Bathurst with the GO line in the area?

Forgive me if these are dumb questions; I know I'm a newb, just trying to understand the concept here.

When I ask why all the transit seems to be in the east I am met with comments like the UPX an GO are doing an adequate job in the West. When I point out that RER could then serve the east I am told that it won't work because it won't be at TTC fares. I agree that the OL or DRL needs to get to dufferin and bloor or Dundas west. I don't know how anyone thinks HBS is going to work without more frequent transit. The answer you are looking for is that yonge is overloaded and that is our number one priority of relieving. But the west is quickly getting over capacity as well. Money is the real sticking point and we waste money on projects that get us out to STC vs the West.

 

[marcus_a_j]

Can anyone help me understand why all this focus is being put on the east end of the city when the west end is already far more dense with more people to move? The west end of the green line is already far more densely travelled than east of Broadview (I used to commute during rush hour westbound from Vic Park station and just recently switched over to riding east bound from the west. The difference in rush hour density is notable).

Putting an extension out out past Exhibition to the lakefront/Etobicoke area would seem to tap into more people now and even more land suitable for development than going between Cosburn and Science Centre.

I'm also struggling to understand why they aren't putting more junction points to existing stations like King/Bathurst with the GO line in the area?

Forgive me if these are dumb questions; I know I'm a newb, just trying to understand the concept here.

The west has a relief line, it's the University-Spadina branch of Line 1. UP Express is another option for the west end. Also, prior to the Ontario Line being announced, it was generally assumed that the Relief Line would continue west and north and connect to Line 2 possibly around Dundas West. The focus and priority has been on the east because Yonge-Bloor station is at capacity with transfers.

 

[sixrings]

Amazing that everyone wants to point UPX as a west solution but very few of those same people advocate for adding stops to it to make it more useful to more people.

 

[NoahB]

Except that expanded RER + VIA + 45/90s frequency Ontario Line will not at all be equivalent to what High Park / Rosedale / Old Mill residents or Skytrain neighbours are dealing with.
There's discussion about 6 lanes of train traffic (vs. 3 current). Find a video of that (with comparable frequency) and post it to make an apples to apples assessment.

Check London and Paris...?

 

[TheTigerMaster]

If I knew for a fact that the proposal as it stands would result in true relief for Line 1 and good service for surrounding neighbourhoods - without this "90 second headway" nonsense - then I would support it. I even prefer the new route it takes east of Yonge to the city's old plan. I'm more concerned that the public is being kept in the dark so that we don't see that this is a vitally important infrastructure project being half-assed.

There will always be people complaining about elevated lines, but we need a good reason to counter them first.

The City came out last night and said for a fact that the Yonge Line will remain over capacity, even with the Ontario Line.

The only thing that would get the Yonge Line below capacity is extending the OL north the Sheppard. But it’s doubtful that the OL has the capacity to even support such an extension, given Metrolinx’s moronic design parameters

The OL absolutely cannot be built without adequate capacity, otherwise in approximately 10 years we’re going to be discussing how we’re going to relieve the Yonge Line when our underbuilt OL has no capacity to do so.

On that note, before approving any OL funding, I feel like the City needs to undertake a ridership analysis for the extension to Sheppard, so we understand precisely how much capacity the OL needs. A lot has changed since the Yonge Relief Network Study five years ago; Toronto is growing significantly faster than expected.

The YRNS predicted peak hour ridership of 20k pphpd on the DRL extended to Sheppard in 2031 (12 years from now). Given population changes, I wouldn’t be surprised if that would be 25k pphpd if evaluated today. After a decade in operation, it might be closer to 30k pphpd in 2041.

City Staff really need to hammer this point home, because residents and politicians will be oblivious to it. The Ontario Line will not relieve the Yonge Subway. It doesn’t not even have the capacity to accommodate future extensions to relieve the Yonge Subway, without itself going over capacity. A decision to build the Ontario Line (as proposed) is a decision to permanently handicap our ability to expand the network. It’s better to delay the implementation of the DRL by a few years, than permanently leaving us with an ineffective solution. We have one chance to get this right

 

[blu_in_green]

The answer you are looking for is that yonge is overloaded and that is our number one priority of relieving. But the west is quickly getting over capacity as well. Money is the real sticking point and we waste money on projects that get us out to STC vs the West.

I guess the Relief Line is trying to create a loop between Pape and Queen, it just seems to me like traffic east and around Pape is a lot lighter than traffic between Duffern and St George (as a hypothetical alternative relief line) or between Sheppard and Bloor.

When I think about best "bang for the buck" relief to Yonge, I think of getting people from the north onto the west side of line 1 as a route into the core south of line 2.

Exhibition station and Science Centre on the other hand seem to be creating new "spokes" tied to an overloaded hub (Yonge/Bloor), when we could be designing a series of loops connecting the extremities of the system with multiple routing options for travellers (a la Tokyo). A relatively painless start could be connecting Sheppard with Yorkdale. If Dundas West is connected to the OL or some of the more northern stations, that would accomplish a similar feat, but with a lot more distance to travel (and thus infrastructure to build).

 

[sixrings]

I guess the Relief Line is trying to create a loop between Pape and Queen, it just seems to me like traffic east and around Pape is a lot lighter than traffic between Duffern and St George (as a hypothetical alternative relief line) or between Sheppard and Bloor.

When I think about best "bang for the buck" relief to Yonge, I think of getting people from the north onto the west side of line 1 as a route into the core south of line 2.

Exhibition station and Science Centre on the other hand seem to be creating new "spokes" tied to an overloaded hub (Yonge/Bloor), when we could be designing a series of loops connecting the extremities of the system with multiple routing options for travellers (a la Tokyo). A relatively painless start could be connecting Sheppard with Yorkdale. If Dundas West is connected to the OL or some of the more northern stations, that would accomplish a similar feat, but with a lot more distance to travel (and thus infrastructure to build).

I guess in terms of downtown, where there is density, we wait until were busting at the seems to build anything half decent (OL) and then in the burbs, where there are parking lots and fields, we build subways (Vaughan/STC) to spur development and to satisfy some suburban self esteem problems caused by not having subways.

 

[syn]

Louder than the diesel GO train they chose to live next? Louder than the ‭138‬ meter long, 20yr T1 train running on old tracks? *Facepalm*

The length of 2km does mean it affects more people. But Vancouver's Skytrain stays above ground for longer on many sections and they aren't having that many problems. (I do admit there were recent complaints there about noise on old tracks though)

GO Trains don't pass by every 90 seconds.

The High Park Station track is about 9 meters away from the nearest house. The T1 trains here come 30 seconds less frequently than the rush hour Ontario Line trains will in rush hour at peak capacity decades after opening...
View attachment 211234

This section is only 330m.

The OL's downtown above ground section is much longer, and is running through some areas slated for much greater densification than High Park will ever get.

Local concerns are understandable. Why wouldn't they have concerns, especially when their premier and his family spent the last 10 decades telling anyone who'd listen that real transit = underground transit?

I can understand if you feel it would be wrong to bury this line based on noise concerns alone - but I don't think anyone here is suggesting that. It's the issue of capacity, for both the TTC and GO.

 

[syn]

If residents near High Park, Rosedale and Old Mill (3 affluent neighbourhoods) can tolerate elevated subways, it shouldn't be a problem in the West Don Lands and Riverdale. If one does not like it, they can move to be frank.

Great idea!

If those in Scarborough have the problem with RT and transfers, they can move.

Well done, you've solved all transit problems!

 

[syn]

ML or the ont govt should post reference videos of the skytrain vs the surrounding dwellings to these activists. That would give them an objective view and analysis on the noise on whether itd be "unbearable".
I'd bet that with the money saved from not going underground they can buy out anyone who persists to dissent and still save more than underground.

It's interesting that you continue to focus on the noise issue when people have pointed out a much greater and legitimate problem - the lack of capacity this line will have with this particular design and the light rail vehicles they want to use, along with the reduction of GO capacity in the future.