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

[Midtown Urbanist]

How about psubway line, as in pseudo subway?
You could say "I'm taking the P line"
Then you could pretend there are 14 other psubway lines!

Eglinton Crosstown is literally underground, grade-separated, and has the stop spacing of a rapid transit line as opposed to a streetcar line.

The fact that it is an LRT with less capacity is not relevant for that distinction.

 

[Aplus23]

Eglinton Crosstown is literally underground, grade-separated, and has the stop spacing of a rapid transit line as opposed to a streetcar line.

The fact that it is an LRT with less capacity is not relevant for that distinction.

Yeah it if it's grade separated, then really it's just semantics of what you're calling the line no? Because it may stop at a stop light for 9 or 10 stops doesn't mean much to me

 

[44 North]

If it has a curbed median and is stopping at traffic lights I believe the common term used is grade-segregated, not grade-separated. Also Metrolinx calls Crosstown an LRT and doesn't consider it a subway line. Doesn't seem like a simple semantics thing, rather an attempt to classify different forms of transit. Might not be on a level of Linnaeus, but clearly there's some thought and approach to giving titles to things.

 

[W. K. Lis]

If it has a curbed median and is stopping at traffic lights I believe the common term used is grade-segregated, not grade-separated. Also Metrolinx calls Crosstown an LRT and doesn't consider it a subway line. Doesn't seem like a simple semantics thing, rather an attempt to classify different forms of transit. Might not be on a level of Linnaeus, but clearly there's some thought and approach to giving titles to things.

Boston calls its Green Line a "subway", even if it uses light rail vehicles these days. When it opened in September 1897, it used the streetcars in those days.

See link.

 

[MisterF]

Isn't the Ontario Line going to be another subway line? I haven't heard that they're going for an Eglinton LRT-like "pre-metro" solution. They're cutting down on the size of the trains and the amount of tunnelling to save on costs. The entire Montreal Metro uses smaller trains, and significant parts of NYC's subway are built above ground outside of Manhattan.

Which makes it all the more mind boggling that the Scarborough and Eglinton West extensions are going to be primarily underground. Billions down the drain for nothing. We should be avoiding tunnels wherever possible outside the dense central part of the city.

 

[salsa]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1242840504120860672

 

[asher__jo]

Which makes it all the more mind boggling that the Scarborough and Eglinton West extensions are going to be primarily underground. Billions down the drain for nothing. We should be avoiding tunnels wherever possible outside the dense central part of the city.

I've seen no indication that the Crosstown line east will be underground.

 

[MisterF]

I've seen no indication that the Crosstown line east will be underground.

True, but my comment was about the Eglinton West extension. It could be designed in a way that it has no interference from car traffic but still minimizes expensive tunnels. That's is how must cities do it and how much of our own subway was built from the 60s to the 80s.

 

[Hopkins123]

True, but my comment was about the Eglinton West extension. It could be designed in a way that it has no interference from car traffic but still minimizes expensive tunnels. That's is how must cities do it and how much of our own subway was built from the 60s to the 80s.

The entire section from just of Jane to just west of Scarlett Rd, and west of Martin Grove to the airport will be either elevated or trenched. Eglinton/Islington may also be an elevated station. That's over half of the alignment.

Where everyone is getting this idea that it's a full-blown subway is being blown out of proportion. Only at Royal York due to the Humber tributary, Kipling because of the higher densities and Martin Grove because of the unsafe nature of that intersection for pedestrians are being proposed as underground stations.

 

[W. K. Lis]

The entire section from just of Jane to just west of Scarlett Rd, and west of Martin Grove to the airport will be either elevated or trenched. Eglinton/Islington may also be an elevated station. That's over half of the alignment.

Where everyone is getting this idea that it's a full-blown subway is being blown out of proportion. Only at Royal York due to the Humber tributary, Kipling because of the higher densities and Martin Grove because of the unsafe nature of that intersection for pedestrians are being proposed as underground stations.

Eglinton Flats at Jane Street is a floodplain. Cannot be trenched or put underground. See link.

 

[Streety McCarface]

Isn't the Ontario Line going to be another subway line? I haven't heard that they're going for an Eglinton LRT-like "pre-metro" solution. They're cutting down on the size of the trains and the amount of tunnelling to save on costs. The entire Montreal Metro uses smaller trains, and significant parts of NYC's subway are built above ground outside of Manhattan.

It's not a "TTC Standard Subway Line", which it absolutely should be. I'd still consider it a subway even if we're using FM solutions for our rapid transit needs downtown

Also the relief line is downtown, the equivalent of where manhattan is. If anywhere should be tunneled, it's there.

In fact, I am more than happy to label the Eglinton Crosstown as a subway.

The section between Mt. Dennis and Laird, perhaps Science center can be considered a subway. The rest? Not so.

Eglinton Crosstown is literally underground, grade-separated, and has the stop spacing of a rapid transit line as opposed to a streetcar line.

The fact that it is an LRT with less capacity is not relevant for that distinction.

No along the surface section.

The 100% Low floor vehicle part also causes confusion.

Boston calls its Green Line a "subway", even if it uses light rail vehicles these days. When it opened in September 1897, it used the streetcars in those days.

See link.

Boston considers it a rapid transit line, in the same way it considers the mattapan line "rapid transit," and the silver line bus service "rapid transit"

The underground section is a subway. The aboveground section? Absolutely not.

 

[Hopkins123]

Eglinton Flats at Jane Street is a floodplain. Cannot be trenched or put underground. See link.

The trenched part of my comment is implicitly in regards the section between Martin Grove and Renforth. I'm well aware that around Jane will be elevated.

 

[asher__jo]

True, but my comment was about the Eglinton West extension. It could be designed in a way that it has no interference from car traffic but still minimizes expensive tunnels. That's is how must cities do it and how much of our own subway was built from the 60s to the 80s.

I definitely agree with the sentiment that tunneling Eglinton West is grossly overbuilding. The TTC flavouring surface made sense for improving the street presence like it will for the Golden Mile.

 

[The REAL]

This whole OL project is just a disaster waiting to happen. The fact that Doug thinks he can have this done by 2027 is impossible by Toronto standards, and we haven't even seen a SINGLE station, train, or elevated bridge design yet!. I'm just waiting for Doug to finally say that he messed up AGAIN on his little pet project that he thinks Toronto needs.

 

[north-of-anything]

This whole OL project is just a disaster waiting to happen. The fact that Doug thinks he can have this done by 2027 is impossible by Toronto standards, and we haven't even seen a SINGLE station, train, or elevated bridge design yet!. I'm just waiting for Doug to finally say that he messed up AGAIN on his little pet project that he thinks Toronto needs.

We know...