Toronto Ontario Line 3 | ?m | ?s

If I'm imagining the location correctly, exiting into the Bay store would surely be a nightmare. Pretty much becomes a tight department store that's crowded even when it's not crowded. I wonder if there's any possibility of a sub-PATH 'relief line' in this location - west of Yonge, between Queen and King. In other words a new pedestrian tunnel that's optimized for high volumes express between Queen and King. Perhaps with a couple stretches of walkaltor.
 
44 North said:
If I'm imagining the location correctly, exiting into the Bay store would surely be a nightmare. Pretty much becomes a tight department store that's crowded even when it's not crowded. I wonder if there's any possibility of a sub-PATH 'relief line' in this location - west of Yonge, between Queen and King. In other words a new pedestrian tunnel that's optimized for high volumes express between Queen and King. Perhaps with a couple stretches of walkaltor.
Click to expand...
Downtown's own 1-Stop Express SubPATH.
 
^Toronto would see at best 3-4 games. 0% chance the Relief Line will even be in construction by then with the way we're going about the line today. At best, the whole world will see how pathetic our transit system is with chronic delays making the fans late to all of their matches. Let's just hope the Exhibition GO project is ready by then, I think that's the only realistic thing we could expect to be complete by then.
 
Assuming a certain premier elect doesn't cancel everything, RER is set to be done by 2025. That will help a lot and will be more useful to BMO than the first phase of the DRL. With 10 games being held in 3 cities in Canada, I can't see this affecting the DRL at all.
 
MisterF said:
Assuming a certain premier elect doesn't cancel everything, RER is set to be done by 2025. That will help a lot and will be more useful to BMO than the first phase of the DRL. With 10 games being held in 3 cities in Canada, I can't see this affecting the DRL at all.
Click to expand...
Agreed with provisos. Unless there's a massive reorganization of ML and a large infusion of capital though, either directly or P3, I can't see 2025 being completion date for a lot of planned RER, let alone the Relief Line.

I agree with the views of not 'dumping' crush-loads into the PATH system. It's highly disorienting for many, myself included, who avoid PATH at every opportunity. Bad enough the TTC was co-opted into dumping passengers into the Eaton Centre instead of onto the street. Or the Yonge/Bloor station into the God awful disorienting passage under the (Bay?) store. Both street and mall options should be available.
 
steveintoronto said:
I agree with the views of not 'dumping' crush-loads into the PATH system. It's highly disorienting for many, myself included, who avoid PATH at every opportunity. Bad enough the TTC was co-opted into dumping passengers into the Eaton Centre instead of onto the street. Or the Yonge/Bloor station into the God awful disorienting passage under the (Bay?) store. Both street and mall options should be available.
Click to expand...

You are in the minority if you look at stations with both street and PATH entrances. St Andrew is a good example. There are lots of street entrances but the vast majority of people walk through the PATH. And even a greater majority if you exclude those that are transferring to the streetcar.

The TTC is suppose to deliver people to destinations and the PATH and/or mall access points gives them that option with less stairs.
 
muller877 said:
You are in the minority if you look at stations with both street and PATH entrances. St Andrew is a good example. There are lots of street entrances but the vast majority of people walk through the PATH. And even a greater majority if you exclude those that are transferring to the streetcar.

The TTC is suppose to deliver people to destinations and the PATH and/or mall access points gives them that option with less stairs.
Click to expand...
To transfer to surface transit?

Addendum: Here's my question answered from a different vector, but illustrating my point, albeit this will be on Yonge:

Unorthodox Tips for Riding the TTC
If you are on the street at Yonge and Queen, and you want to ride northbound, the best way to enter the subway is through the CIBC building on the southeast corner of the intersection, which does not have a noticeable TTC sign. If you take the obvious entrance through the Eaton Centre you have to take a detour under the tracks to get to the northbound platform.
Click to expand...
http://ttcrider.ca/tips.php
 
Last edited:
How is Elon Musk building an underground transit line from Chicago’s downtown to the airport for $1B, entirely privately funded with $0.00 cost to the city?

How is his boring tech so much cheaper than existing technology. And better question: why are we not using it?

Elon Musk’s Boring Company approved to build high-speed transit between downtown Chicago and O’Hare Airport

https://www.theverge.com/2018/6/13/17462496/elon-musk-boring-company-approved-tunnel-chicago
 
MetroMan said:
How is his boring tech so much cheaper than existing technology. And better question: why are we not using it?
Click to expand...

We likely will be. My understanding is the company he bought was working on (and had patents for) continuous boring.

Normally boring was done in stages. They plow ahead for a bit then stop to install concrete liner (which is time consuming), and do inspections/maintenance on the cutter head. They were working on a way to install liners simultaneous to the forward push with the cutter head. That increases the rate of progress by something like 50%.

That said, Crosstown boring was $300M per tunnel. $1B would have purchased ~35km of tunnel on that project and we ditched the TBMs specifically because it wouldn't be cost effective using them again due to anticipated TBM efficiency improvements.

The expensive bits are emergency exits, stations, and similar. Those costs scale with train capacity (the number of people exiting in an emergency). Emergency infrastructure required for 16 people are negligible (install onboard oxygen masks be done with it). Theoretical crush capacity is 1900/hour; actual ridership will be much lower.

It looks like he's also avoiding all the electrical, signalling, and other equipment in the tunnels by making the vehicle self-sufficient (a mid-sized Tesla bus in permanent Autopilot mode) and charging at end points.
 
Last edited:
rbt said:
We likely will be. My understanding is the company he bought was working on (and had patents for) continuous boring.

Normally boring was done in stages. They plow ahead for a bit then stop to install concrete liner (which is time consuming), and do inspections/maintenance on the cutter head. They were working on a way to install liners simultaneous to the forward push with the cutter head. That increases the rate of progress by something like 50%.
Click to expand...

That's how it worked with shields, but with modern TBMs the cutterhead only stops for maintenance and cutter changeouts - maybe once every day to once a week, depending on the geology and aggressiveness of the cutters.. The installation of the tunnel liner sections is done continuously and independently of the operation of the cutterhead and waste removal systems.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top