Toronto Ontario Line 3 | ?m | ?s

innsertnamehere said:
you could always walk through the path to get to the other, it can't be much longer of a walk than it is at spadina station currently.
Click to expand...

and enter and exit stations and pay twice? unless you make a huge paid area.

Queen to King is about 400m, I doublt the walkway at Spadina is that long.
Why not just extend the red line to meet the blue line somewhere on King East.
 
innsertnamehere said:
I'm picturing something more like this, but it is an interesting idea..

2drl_zps69459231.jpg
Click to expand...

??!?!?!

What a bizarre route idea.

If you really absolutely had to serve Exhibition, wouldn't it be easier to just build a small branch from the Western DRL somewhere between Bathurst and Dufferin?

And what's with the Exhibition-as-a-terminal idea? Apparently this is Metrolinx's preference? What an absurd idea. The place is a frozen parking lot most of the year. Why on earth would we route a DRL there as opposed to Dundas West?
 
I'm not really saying it is my supported vision for the line, I support the line running from Dundas west to pape via king street, but I was just exploring an earlier comment made in a visual format. The two line idea is why I was focusing on, not the exhibition place terminal. The dual alignment theory allows for queen, which Is really the correct street for the DRL to run on west of Spadina to be served, and king which is the correct street for the DRL to Run on east of Spadina.
 
innsertnamehere said:
I'm not really saying it is my supported vision for the line, I support the line running from Dundas west to pape via king street, but I was just exploring an earlier comment made in a visual format. The two line idea is why I was focusing on, not the exhibition place terminal. The dual alignment theory allows for queen, which Is really the correct street for the DRL to run on west of Spadina to be served, and king which is the correct street for the DRL to Run on east of Spadina.
Click to expand...

then what not direct the west part of the DRL south to King after Spadina? The lines don't have to follow the street grid.
It will save money. Osgood and Queen station don't have to be a transfer point, and we certainly do not need another line between University and Yonge when there is already one on King 300M away.
 
The Lakeshore route would be one local route there anyway, and if they're too cheap to add another line like Queen they can just S-Bahn the Lakeshore route which would split into 3 going north and eastward.
 
^I think Metrolinx's idea for a second downtown railway station is incredibly stupid. Most cities that actually value regional rail transit are desperately trying to centralize their operations into one main station. Cities like Berlin, London and Paris have spent hundreds of millions - billions, even - on trying to merge railway operations into one or a handful of central railway stations to maximize transfer opportunities. Here we have a perfectly good central railway station in the most central location in the city, and these clowns want to build a second railway station at great cost in a less efficient location, reducing the desirability of the GO network as a whole? This might be the stupidest transit planning idea made in Toronto, and that's saying a lot.
 
Hipster Duck said:
^I think Metrolinx's idea for a second downtown railway station is incredibly stupid. Most cities that actually value regional rail transit are desperately trying to centralize their operations into one main station. Cities like Berlin, London and Paris have spent hundreds of millions - billions, even - on trying to merge railway operations into one or a handful of central railway stations to maximize transfer opportunities. Here we have a perfectly good central railway station in the most central location in the city, and these clowns want to build a second railway station at great cost in a less efficient location, reducing the desirability of the GO network as a whole? This might be the stupidest transit planning idea made in Toronto, and that's saying a lot.
Click to expand...
They'll just dump Stouffville, Rich Hill and Barrie on that place, if it reopens. That will piss off those folks greatly. Even NYC has been trying to connect GCT and Penn for some time.
 
it would likely take milton, Kitchener, and barrie if it opens, maybe even just milton and barrie.

and honestly, I agree. if they must build a second station, I think they should tunnel a 7-8 km line underground and build a new one where the greyhound/megabus bus terminal currently is, presuming it has since moved into the 45 bay office tower's base like rumoured.
 
Genuine question:

Would it make any sense to have the western leg of a DRL hit Billy Bishop airport (the mainland terminal obviously)? Potential stops at say, Union Station 2 (Spadina/Front), BB Airport, Liberty Village/Exhibition Place?

Or crazy idea?
 
Last edited:
Hipster Duck said:
^I think Metrolinx's idea for a second downtown railway station is incredibly stupid.
Click to expand...
Maybe that's the point though.

If I recall correctly, the last study carried forward 2 options. One was the new "Bathurst yard" station at Spadina/Front, and the second were the tunnels under the existing Lakeshore line, to build a new station underneath the existing platforms.

The second option is much more expensive ... so if they do a study to compare the options, the first option has to be really bad, in order for the second option to be chosen. And it is.
 
Hipster Duck said:
^I think Metrolinx's idea for a second downtown railway station is incredibly stupid. Most cities that actually value regional rail transit are desperately trying to centralize their operations into one main station. Cities like Berlin, London and Paris have spent hundreds of millions - billions, even - on trying to merge railway operations into one or a handful of central railway stations to maximize transfer opportunities. Here we have a perfectly good central railway station in the most central location in the city, and these clowns want to build a second railway station at great cost in a less efficient location, reducing the desirability of the GO network as a whole? This might be the stupidest transit planning idea made in Toronto, and that's saying a lot.
Click to expand...

The number one priority is to determine how a frequent service GO network would work. When possible, lines should be paired up (between east and west) so that they do not terminate at Union - this improves the efficiency of Union Station. For the lines with no pair (since there are more lines in the west than the east), the lines should go one stop beyond Union (i.e. Portlands) so that the terminal station is not the busiest one. If a new station is required, it should be within easy walking transfer distance of Union - either Wellington and Bay area or Bay and Lakeshore.

After this, the route for the DRL can be determined. The DRL could have stops on several of the GO lines to improve connectivity and relieve some passengers from Union.

It seems transit planning in Toronto is all backwards. We build the streetcars and LRT first, instead of building the high capacity transit first and the lessor routes last.
 
Your thought process on how to build transit is all backwards. You Build the LRT first to build ridership in the area, and replace it with rapid transit 40-50 years after it is finished as demand warrants it. Our downtown streetcars have had over 100 years to build ridership, and now is at the "middle ridership" level of rapid transit, when rapid transit should be built at the "low level" of usage. (I.E. the university line south of St. Clair) because of this delay, ridership demands has far outstripped service capability, and capital expenditure on rapid transit is even more urgent.



As for future GO setups, an underground tunnel directly below union would probably work best.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top