Toronto Ontario Line 3 | ?m | ?s

Interesting. On the Relief Line webpage they have the sub-alignments given. We went from Corridors A,B,C,D to B, to B1, to EQ. Bringing it down to Eastern/Broadview probably boosts its ridership significantly over B1. And anyone know when Mlinx will release the next phase of YRNS...supposed to be this Spring?
 
Holy crap,I really can't imagine how different Pape and Gerrard would look if this was to actually happen. The massive No Frills/plaza currently swallowing part of that area is not very pleasing for just walking around. If they did build an extension on Simpson Road, after demolishing the plaza, that would be huge change for the area. I wonder if the city would rebuild that old elevated walkway that currently crossed that railway and connects to a nearby apt building. It's really not fast to climb, since its a wrap-around rampway.
 
salsa said:
Based on the last two slides posted above, looks like the planners are ditching the idea of having just a singe interchange station at city hall.
Click to expand...

Did Staff ever explicitly say that there'd be a single interchange station for Yonge and University Lines? I seem to recall one interchange station, only for Yonge Line, with an exit at Nathan Phillips, which is essentially what they've recommended here (with the addition of an University Station)
 
Does mined station mean that they will be bored like St. Patrick and Queens Park? Also, how is it going straight on Richmond at Power, but by Parliament its running on Queen?
 
GenerationLee said:
Holy crap,I really can't imagine how different Pape and Gerrard would look if this was to actually happen. The massive No Frills/plaza currently swallowing part of that area is not very pleasing for just walking around. If they did build an extension on Simpson Road, after demolishing the plaza, that would be huge change for the area. I wonder if the city would rebuild that old elevated walkway that currently crossed that railway and connects to a nearby apt building. It's really not fast to climb, since its a wrap-around rampway.
Click to expand...

This Simpson extension on the No Frills plaza property would be right about where I saw a drilling operation a couple weeks ago. Interesting stuff. Probably won't be long until we see a development proposal.

Kitsune said:
Does mined station mean that they will be bored like St. Patrick and Queens Park? Also, how is it going straight on Richmond at Power, but by Parliament its running on Queen?
Click to expand...

Yep. Small opening on the surface (relatively), then mined out. Very optimal in a high-density built environment.

And I'm also very much wondering how it's doing that jig from Eastern to Queen. Not following a public right-of-way will require substantial subsurface property rights from every single landowner above that stretch. Also the Don crossing seems to have it running below the north end of the flood protection landform (which I thought was deemed not optimal).

EQ.jpg
 

Attachments

  • EQ.jpg
    EQ.jpg
    102.2 KB · Views: 5,947
And I noticed something else - the proposed distance from end of Osgoode to the end of Yonge is 266 metres, which would beat the current record of 300 betbetwen Osgoode and St. Andrew.
 
A few comments on this:

1) Overall, I like the alignment. Still not a huge fan of using Queen, but it's pretty well done.

2) The direct connection to the Cherry ROW is a big deal. In the previous iterations, I was strongly suggesting an extension of the ROW, either surface or tunnelled, to connect to the DRL station around Queen & Parliament. Now that it's even south of King & Parliament, that "gap" no longer exists. This will take a huge load off the QQE ROW, as Portlands and Distillery-bound traffic will be split between QQE and Cherry.

3) The only thing I don't like is both downtown stations facing 'into' the loop instead of 'out'. IMO, coverage would be much better if they had both stations with ends at Yonge and University respectively, but extending out towards Victoria and St. Patrick. Everything inside of the loop is already very well connected by the PATH network, but extending the stations boxes outwards from the loop effectively extends the walking radii of both Queen and Osgoode stations. Looking towards an eventual westward extension, having Osgoode extending to St. Patrick puts having a Spadina station between Spadina and Peter a real possibility, which effectively makes the entire stretch of Queen between University and Spadina easily walkable to the nearest station.
 
We keep hearing how if they'd realised how busy Yonge-Bloor was, they'd have centred the newer platform on Bloor under the Yonge for better flow. And we hear how they are moving the current Eglinton platforms on Yonge to centre them with the new LRT.

So how come these new stations on Queen are not centred over the existing Osgoode and Yonge stations? They'll both be busy transfer points. Perhaps busier than Eglinton.

Kitsune said:
And I noticed something else - the proposed distance from end of Osgoode to the end of Yonge is 266 metres, which would beat the current record of 300 betbetwen Osgoode and St. Andrew.
Click to expand...
What's the distance from the end of the east platform at Bay to the west platform at Bloor? It's only about 230 metres from door to door - but I'm not sure from platform to platform.
 
gweed123 said:
A few comments on this:

1) Overall, I like the alignment. Still not a huge fan of using Queen, but it's pretty well done.

2) The direct connection to the Cherry ROW is a big deal. In the previous iterations, I was strongly suggesting an extension of the ROW, either surface or tunnelled, to connect to the DRL station around Queen & Parliament. Now that it's even south of King & Parliament, that "gap" no longer exists. This will take a huge load off the QQE ROW, as Portlands and Distillery-bound traffic will be split between QQE and Cherry.

3) The only thing I don't like is both downtown stations facing 'into' the loop instead of 'out'. IMO, coverage would be much better if they had both stations with ends at Yonge and University respectively, but extending out towards Victoria and St. Patrick. Everything inside of the loop is already very well connected by the PATH network, but extending the stations boxes outwards from the loop effectively extends the walking radii of both Queen and Osgoode stations. Looking towards an eventual westward extension, having Osgoode extending to St. Patrick puts having a Spadina station between Spadina and Peter a real possibility, which effectively makes the entire stretch of Queen between University and Spadina easily walkable to the nearest station.
Click to expand...

Agreed with the facing out of the loop giving more options including connecting to spadina. But also the opportunity to expand the path system easy and west.

It doesn't look like they are taking to opportunity to build any streetcar loops within any of these stations (ie like broadview) which is a bit disappointing as it would help regulate service and the integrated stations are much easier to use (and often warmer).

Have they decided if they will be using middle or outside platforms for the stations and if there will be tail tracks for reversing operations and spares, or if they will just go with the Kipling style alternating platforms?
 
It's done right in most regards but still favours a single station at Sherbourne over two stops at the busier and more densely populated Parliament and Jarvis Streets. Hopefully this can be rectified in time.
 
salsa said:
Based on the last two slides posted above, looks like the planners are ditching the idea of having just a singe interchange station at city hall.
Click to expand...

One would think they would position the "Osgoode" station west of University such that the westernmost exit can be at McCaul St, immediately adjacent to many popular attractions such as OCAD and MuchMusic. But I digress.

Here's hoping the DRL moves from the planning stage to fruition quickly.
 
TheTigerMaster said:
Did Staff ever explicitly say that there'd be a single interchange station for Yonge and University Lines? I seem to recall one interchange station, only for Yonge Line, with an exit at Nathan Phillips, which is essentially what they've recommended here (with the addition of an University Station)
Click to expand...

Yes, in the February-March round of consultations, "City Hall" station was the proposal. It would have had walkways to Queen and Osgoode stations. I hammered away at them at three of the consultations, telling them that everywhere else they were saying "network, network, network" in regards to this huge proposed buildout of new transit, but when it comes to actually making for easy transfers, they were shooting themselves in the foot here. I emphasized that true network planning meant that City Hall station should not only be seen as a way to get Scarberians to the core, but also a way for those getting on the line at stations like Pape & Queen to make an easy transfer at Osgoode if, for example, they wanted to get to Yorkdale Mall. City Hall station just was not planned with network usefulness in mind. I also labeled it the City Hall vanity station, which I think got them to look more critically at their reasons for locating it right there, and told them that a station under Queen running from Yonge to Bay could have a west entrance at the southeast corner of Nathan Phillips Square, effectively acting as City Hall station without killing quick transfers from the Relief Line to the Yonge Line.

I'm not saying I was the only voice that called for what's come out in this update, but I am feeling right now that they heard what I was saying.

More responses coming below.

42
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top