Toronto Ontario Line 3 | ?m | ?s

[crs1026]

Alot.
What yard is this? Something in the east end?

CP Railway yard east of McCowan north of the 401. It's a single tunnelling campaign northwards from the STC to Sheppard. That's only a couple hundred million dollars. One could add a station at Sheppard, and then above ground into the yard. While CP retains use of the yard on the edges, the track in the middle (the old hump bowl) has been pulled up.

If nothing else, it would derail Mr DeB's plan to bend Line 2 back along Sheppard. Eventually, a station at Finch/Markham would be an attractive end point for Line 2. Oh, and it would serve an extended Sheppard subway too.....not trying to fan that debate but there are plenty of signs that may happen anyways, thanks to Scarboro's politicians, and if so that line will need a yard eventually.

- Paul

 

[TheTigerMaster]

If I were running the TTC, I'd fight this proposal to the death. Operationally, that's an awful long dead-head from Wilson, and it causes trains which are not in service to be interleaved into a tightly packed section of track on the busiest in-service line. Another line at that.

The Relief Line is expected to need only eight trainsets. It's really hard to justify building a whole new yard for that. A reasonable compromise would be to store four trains on the Relief Line tail tracks (two trains each at Danforth and Osgoode) for overnight storage. The remaining four trains could be stored at Greenwood for maintenance. This would displace four of the Line 2 trains currently stored at Greenwood to Wilson (or elsewhere on the network), since Greenwood is full. Or as WK suggested, we could make the Relief Line tail tracks even longer and store more trains there, which would further reduce the need for deadheading.

City Planning's desire is to have the Relief Line Long extension under construction within 14 years, where there will be ample space for proper yards. Who knows if the funding will actually materialize, but if it really is under construction so soon, they'll be a relatively short period of time (~10 years) where the Relief Line doesn't have its own yard.

Secondly - experts here are going on about the cost of deep tunnels and building under built-up portions of the city. This proposal requires at least one (south to east) and maybe two (south to west) ninety degree turns 20 metres under the surface at Osgoode.

There are no plans for the Relief Line and Line 1 to physically connect anywhere. The connection point to the rest of the network would be at Pape and Danforth.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Another storage option is in the vicinity of Kipling Station. There is a lot of unused land along the tracks near Kipling for train storage. We'd have no problems storing four or eight trains there.

 

[TransitBart]

The Relief Line is expected to need only eight trainsets.

We may not be talking about the same thing here, but I thought we were talking about the RELIEF line for Line 1. I am thinking "Big J". I am not sure how much 'relief' to Line 1 or its 750,000 riders eight trainsets are going to provide. The headways will be 10 minutes with eight trains running on that length.

Aside: I am simply assuming that the assinine phased building and short-line approach which provides relief to Bloor-Yonge by building Osgoode to Pape only is dead. A big-J goes from Don Mills to at least Osgoode and if we're really smart, we'll figure out what the heck to do with all the people that the new (Barrie Line) GO station is going to dump at Spadina and Front (before they have to hoof it back on foot to wherever), before the thing heads west and north back to Dundas West.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

We may not be talking about the same thing here, but I thought we were talking about the RELIEF line for Line 1. I am thinking "Big J". I am not sure how much 'relief' to Line 1 or its 750,000 riders eight trainsets are going to provide. The headways will be 10 minutes with eight trains running on that length.

Aha, we weren't talking about the same thing. I was talking about the Relief Line Short. You're talking about Relief Line Long (big J)

 

[smallspy]

Another storage option is in the vicinity of Kipling Station. There is a lot of unused land along the tracks near Kipling for train storage. We'd have no problems storing four or eight trains there.

The TTC's long-term plans are to convert the parking lots to the north of the station into another yard. That's been the plan since the extension to Kipling was being conceived in the 1970s.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[crs1026]

Dan, do you mean that itty bitty lot just west of the tail track and south of the roadway, or something more substantial?

There's a lot of development encroaching on that land....including the new bus terminal. I'm wondering what's left for the TTC, and how many trains it could hold. And how that meshes with plans to pretty up that area.

- Paul

 

[44 North]

CP Railway yard east of McCowan north of the 401. It's a single tunnelling campaign northwards from the STC to Sheppard. That's only a couple hundred million dollars. One could add a station at Sheppard, and then above ground into the yard. While CP retains use of the yard on the edges, the track in the middle (the old hump bowl) has been pulled up.

If nothing else, it would derail Mr DeB's plan to bend Line 2 back along Sheppard. Eventually, a station at Finch/Markham would be an attractive end point for Line 2. Oh, and it would serve an extended Sheppard subway too.....not trying to fan that debate but there are plenty of signs that may happen anyways, thanks to Scarboro's politicians, and if so that line will need a yard eventually.

- Paul

Oh I see. When I first read your post I thought you were talking about the CP sidings by Redway Millwood area, which is roughly where I think an RL facility could be located. Not sure how long these things take to plan/procure, but if the Thorncliffe area was deemed acceptable maybe Line 2 trains could be held there as well.

 

[smallspy]

Dan, do you mean that itty bitty lot just west of the tail track and south of the roadway, or something more substantial?

- Paul

No - Subway Crescent, and the entirety of the TTC parking lots (including the kiss-and-ride) located immediately north-west of the station are all owned by the TTC to allow for a subway yard in the future.

Of course, now that I think about it, that seems to be less likely if the interregional bus terminal is going to be located on those lands....

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[gweed123]

No - Subway Crescent, and the entirety of the TTC parking lots (including the kiss-and-ride) located immediately north-west of the station are all owned by the TTC to allow for a subway yard in the future.

Of course, now that I think about it, that seems to be less likely if the interregional bus terminal is going to be located on those lands....

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

There's also the Obico Yard, which was just recently purchased by Metrolinx. Using the North Toronto Yard as a subway yard is an interesting proposition as well.

And I had actually never considered selling the Greenwood Yard for redevelopment as a method to fund a subway extension. What about shifting Bloor-Danforth's operations to Obico, and then rebuilding Greenwood to have the entire subway yard below grade for the DRL, and then selling the air rights for condo or office development? That way you still get a centrally located yard, but it also generates some income. The DRL would enter the yard from the south or the west, and Bloor-Danforth would enter the yard from the north, as it currently does.

 

[steveintoronto]

What about shifting Bloor-Danforth's operations to Obico, and then rebuilding Greenwood to have the entire subway yard below grade for the DRL, and then selling the air rights for condo or office development?

Just leave Greenwood pretty much as it is, and build above it. If more yard space needed, double deck it when development goes up above it. Stone three birds with one kill.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Just leave Greenwood pretty much as it is, and build above it. If more yard space needed, double deck it when development goes up above it. Stone three birds with one kill.

That kind of development works in economic sense in some cities (like Hong Kong, where it is the default) - not sure if a yard smack in the middle of an "established neighbourhood" would be a good sell for a significant amount of density. Davisville might be more likely.

AoD

 

[steveintoronto]

That kind of development works in economic sense in some cities (like Hong Kong, where it is the default) - not sure if a yard smack in the middle of an "established neighbourhood" would be a good sell for a significant amount of density. Davisville might be more likely.

AoD

Footprint stays the same, other than a partial second storey above the first for greater capacity, development could rise above that. As it is, the leads into the yard from the subway are split level (three on two levels with the fourth not used) as it sits in the cleft of the ridge (Old Lake Iroquois shorline) that bisects Toronto.

 

[44 North]

Footprint stays the same, other than a partial second storey above the first for greater capacity, development could rise above that. As it is, the leads into the yard from the subway are split level (three on two levels with the fourth not used) as it sits in the cleft of the ridge (Old Lake Iroquois shorline) that bisects Toronto.

Wicked, I love aerial images like this. The yard definitely is massive. Not sure about making a bilevel yard, but it'd be interesting to know whether there's value in developing atop. Towns surrounding midrises, more or less a car free high-density nook within a neighbourhood. Could be interesting.

 

[TransitBart]

Toronto's Hudson Yards...