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

denfromoakvillemilton said:
This is the underlying issue with the OL. They could have kept the TTC route and still have gone to Exhibition/Liberty Village, for example.
Click to expand...
The nice thing about OL being a different tech is it sets that precedent. A route with TTC stock almost certainly would not be automated (making platform screen doors less likely too) and the weaker performance of the TTC Subway spec would likely not allow an alignment that is doing this much vertical and horizontal weaving (which is fine because it's making a lot of connections!)
 
superelevation said:
The nice thing about OL being a different tech is it sets that precedent. A route with TTC stock almost certainly would not be automated (making platform screen doors less likely too) and the weaker performance of the TTC Subway spec would likely not allow an alignment that is doing this much vertical and horizontal weaving (which is fine because it's making a lot of connections!)
Click to expand...
And we can *finally* start using modern international standard solutions and stop using our weird 70 year old standards with wacky gauge and electrification
 
Councillor Wong-Tam' s latest community update expresses some unhappiness w/Mx over information-sharing.

See below:

1648635963338.png
 
Northern Light said:
Councillor Wong-Tam' s latest community update expresses some unhappiness w/Mx over information-sharing.

See below:

View attachment 388841
Click to expand...
Why should the public be involved in station design at all. it would only increase cost and delay to the project.
The less public involvement in transit projects the better things are i.e. cheaper and faster construction.
Look at the Montreal REM L'est for why you shouldn't get the public involve at all, they just make demands which only increase cost and time.
 
Obsidian said:
Why should the public be involved in station design at all. it would only increase cost and delay to the project.

The less public involvement in transit projects the better things are ie cheaper and faster construction.
Click to expand...
Seems a bit undemocratic. People are going to be the ones using (and paying for) the subway, we should have some say.
 
DirectionNorth said:
Seems a bit undemocratic. People are going to be the ones using (and paying for) the subway, we should have some say.
Click to expand...
that say only means more cost and delay however.

for example one reason we seem to be only using TBMs is because it is "less disruptive" but if we used much reduce cost, which would have possible made it easier to go with a longer line to begin with with make the entire line underground.

Public involvement in my option always makes these transit project worst by adding cost, time and produces a reduce project because of said costs
 
superelevation said:
The nice thing about OL being a different tech is it sets that precedent. A route with TTC stock almost certainly would not be automated (making platform screen doors less likely too) and the weaker performance of the TTC Subway spec would likely not allow an alignment that is doing this much vertical and horizontal weaving (which is fine because it's making a lot of connections!)
Click to expand...
so a few things about the ttc automation
1. the union is the one holding up driverless trains, once atc is installed on the entire line 1 network, there really isnt a reason why we need operators in the trains,
2. platform screen doors were planed for the TYSSE but were left out due to cost i believe
 
Obsidian said:
that say only means more cost and delay however.

for example one reason we seem to be only using TBMs is because it is "less disruptive" but if we used much reduce cost, which would have possible made it easier to go with a longer line to begin with with make the entire line underground.

Public involvement in my option always makes these transit project worst by adding cost, time and produces a reduce project because of said costs
Click to expand...

The distinction of note here is that Mx was working w/the 'Working Group' and attended the meeting and declined to provide information they had.

Its not even a matter of affording input per se, if the people who you are agreeing to provide input to aren't even told the basic facts.
 
Last edited:
AlvinofDiaspar said:
The rendered design look fine as it is - the problem is that it is just a conceptual rendering with little bearing to the actual design.

AoD
Click to expand...

For the above reason, I don't consider the issue of any complaint about the design/concept render the important thing here.

The important thing was their choosing not to share that render with a group they promised to consult on the design, when they had the render in hand and its public release was imminent.

It speaks to why Mx is distrusted by many.

Their instinct is towards needless secrecy.
 
Last edited:
superelevation said:
The nice thing about OL being a different tech is it sets that precedent. A route with TTC stock almost certainly would not be automated (making platform screen doors less likely too) and the weaker performance of the TTC Subway spec would likely not allow an alignment that is doing this much vertical and horizontal weaving (which is fine because it's making a lot of connections!)
Click to expand...
Well because the alignment they chose is much tighter than the previous one because they have to connect with their East Harbour station. Again, they could have not gone through Riverdale. Also, this would be great if only the Yonge Line was TTC gauge. I would be all for retracking but that costs a lot of money.
 
superelevation said:
The nice thing about OL being a different tech is it sets that precedent. A route with TTC stock almost certainly would not be automated (making platform screen doors less likely too) and the weaker performance of the TTC Subway spec would likely not allow an alignment that is doing this much vertical and horizontal weaving (which is fine because it's making a lot of connections!)
Click to expand...

What makes it weaker?
 
Obsidian said:
Why should the public be involved in station design at all. it would only increase cost and delay to the project.
The less public involvement in transit projects the better things are i.e. cheaper and faster construction.
Look at the Montreal REM L'est for why you shouldn't get the public involve at all, they just make demands which only increase cost and time.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top