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

[LowerBay]

More brilliant ideas. Extend the DRL north of the Danforth? Sure, that way it can become crowded by the time it reaches B-D to standing-room only levels, just like Spadina-University and St. George.

The University line and St. George were both viable alternatives to Bloor-Yonge before the Spadina line came along and overcrowded both the line and the station. In the 70s, you could go west to St. George and board an empty train and get a seat -- not anymore.

If the B-D transferees won't get seats at Pape because the line runs further north, there is less incentive to use the route to get downtown. Comfort counts.

Had University not been extended north, we wouldn't even be having this discussion. Spadina would have gone down to Queen on its own via Grace -- that was the original plan. Also, the dispatch signals on B-D (what they call Intermediate Point Headway Control) essentially solved the wye problem 20 years too late.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

Surely that would fully relieve only the southernmost part of the Yonge line. Overcrowding north of Eglinton (as alleged) wouldn't be much affected, unless you ran it really, really far north of Danforth.

I wasn't talking about relieving Yonge north of Bloor, let alone north of Eglinton, but since you mention it, it would divert large numbers of people from Yonge. Yonge is getting very busy north of Sheppard, even before the extension north of Finch...the DRL needs to run north of Danforth, at the absolute minimum to Eglinton (really, that'd just be the first phase), and ideally, to Finch.

But Yonge is busier south of Bloor and the DRL needs to run north of Danforth to deal with this properly. A DRL that ends at the Danforth line would divert many people from the Yonge & Bloor interchange, but only if it continued north of Danforth would you start diverting people completely off of the Yonge line *and* the Bloor line. Many people would take the Don Mills line straight downtown, keeping them off both Yonge and/or Bloor altogether. If the DRL ran far enough up Don Mills, not only would you intercept E/W route riders like on Finch or York Mills, keeping them off Yonge, you'd steal rides away from routes like Victoria Park, rides that would have been made on the Danforth line.

 

[EnviroTO]

It would not make sense for two reasons. First of all, it wouldn't divert a significant number of people going downtown away from Yonge-Bloor station, which is a serious issue right now. Secondly, even Steve Munro recognizes that demand on the DRL route is too high for LRT.

How many of the people transferring at Bloor-Yonge from Yonge line are destined for Bloor-Danforth line stations excluding Jane, Kennedy, and Pape and without plans to transfer to a bus or the SRT? A Queen subway which doesn't curve up to the Bloor-Danforth could act as a connection to all the same north-south routes the Bloor-Danforth line serves and the Pape and Jane buses plus the SRT are significant Bloor-Danforth feeders which would become evenly distributed to the Queen subway line with the Jane LRT, Don Mills LRT, and SRT extended south to meet it.

 

[Second_in_pie]

No intention to single you out, but this post happens to be similar to many others pertaining to station spacing. I disagree with the idea of creating super express lines that only have local stops 600-800m apart. Under this model, too few people have access to express trains, while local stops in general are a little farther apart than they have to be.

The most ideal express stop spacing in Toronto is 2km apart in order to match concession roads. This is also far enough apart to allow the train to reach full speed and stay at full speed for minutes at a time. Local stops should be 500m apart like they are downtown to really open up access to all neighbourhoods along the line. The DRL needs express tracks because few areas are as ripe for subway development, but the line still has to be fast. I'd argue that if you're going to build 3 tracks, just make it 4 because it will probably be required by the time the line is finished anyway.

I'm not so sure 4 would be needed that much, but I get your point. I think the express track is needed though, as it would provide a lot of relief, but I'm not sure if it's really needed outside of peak hours.

And also, I don't think that spacing similar to that on the YUS south of bloor is actually the best thing. In general, I think the best stop spacing is that on the Bloor-Danforth, which is generally every 600-800 meters.

More brilliant ideas. Extend the DRL north of the Danforth? Sure, that way it can become crowded by the time it reaches B-D to standing-room only levels, just like Spadina-University and St. George.

Seriously? Sure if you extend the DRL north of Danforth, the precious B-D passengers will have to stand during rush hour. But it will divert more riders off of Yonge and B-D, like Scarberian said. All in all, providing better (and much needed service) is more important than giving a seat to Danforth passengers, which it sounds like you are since you're so concerned.

The University line and St. George were both viable alternatives to Bloor-Yonge before the Spadina line came along and overcrowded both the line and the station. In the 70s, you could go west to St. George and board an empty train and get a seat -- not anymore.

That would only have been the University line. If you went to the Yonge line before the Spadina extension and did that during rush hour, would you have gotten a seat? I don't think so. The answer should be obvious, I'm not sure why you posted that.

If the B-D transferees won't get seats at Pape because the line runs further north, there is less incentive to use the route to get downtown. Comfort counts.

People seem to want to take Yonge and University to get downtown, and they definitely don't get seats when they do. The point of a DRL is that it gives people options; those working further south could take the DRL to their offices, while those who work north could take Yonge. Having an empty seat doesn't really matter at all, I'm sorry.

 

[gweed123]

If the B-D transferees won't get seats at Pape because the line runs further north, there is less incentive to use the route to get downtown. Comfort counts.

God forbid there be 4 or 5 hours a day where passengers won't be able to get seats . If you can still get a seat during rush hour, the line isn't doing it's job...

 

[unimaginative2]

I rode the subway in Berlin every day at rush hour for months and not one single time did I fail to get a seat. This notion that a subway line is a "failure" unless you're chikan-level crowded is very exclusive to Toronto.

I'm definitely interested in the idea of express tracks, at least a third track and at least south of Bloor. That said, it's only five stops from Pape to Union, so it's already a pretty express trip, and I don't really think any area would be poorly served.

 

[Second_in_pie]

I rode the subway in Berlin every day at rush hour for months and not one single time did I fail to get a seat. This notion that a subway line is a "failure" unless you're chikan-level crowded is very exclusive to Toronto.

I'm definitely interested in the idea of express tracks, at least a third track and at least south of Bloor. That said, it's only five stops from Pape to Union, so it's already a pretty express trip, and I don't really think any area would be poorly served.

Yes, but Berlin has a lower population density than Toronto and over twice the number of Subways that Toronto does, and that's not even mentioning the S-Bahn.

And yes, only in Toronto is a subway deemed unworthy or a failure unless passengers are packed into it like sardines at rush hour. The Sheppard Line has a rather decent ridership, even though it's a stubway. The TTC and the City call it a total failure and say it should be mothballed as soon as possible.

But of course, if customers are actually packed into a train like sardines during rush hour, something's either going very good or very bad. In the case of our current subway system, it would in fact be very bad. The YUS and B-D are currently maxed out because of poor planning and basically no other option to choose. With a more advanced subway system, sardine-package would probably be considered very good (means we have high ridership.)

Speaking of Berlin, I had to look on wikipedia to figure out that Berlin has over twice the subway as us. Apparently, Berlin has about 400 registered cars per every 1000 people. THAT'S ASTOUNDING! Not just 400 out of every 1000 people take their cars to work, no only 400 out of 1000 people take their cars at all! And they even invented the highway

 

[jwill]

Toronto subways also seem to have less turnover than european systems. Once a seat is taken at Finch, its likely to still be occupied when the train gets south of Bloor. Since Berlin is more of a real network, there is significant turnover at various points along the lines.

 

[GenerationW]

Okay, I had a brief chat with Mr. Giambrone at the Eglinton open house Wednesday night. Unfortunately, I was on three hours sleep so I sounded grumpy and more confrontational than I would have liked (I humbly apologize), and some of the points I wanted to make were forgotten until after I left, but it was what it was. Anyway, here is what I got out of it, to the best of my memory.

Sheppard & Eglinton LRTs: Funded and will go ahead.

St Clair ROW: He acted like it was the smoothest operation in TTC history ("you were just going by what you read", as if the media has been lying all this time), and seemed rather proud to say that it will open as scheduled. For a second there, I thought he was going to do take out a fiddle and do a Nero.

Yonge extension: Currently without funding, and he all but said that if it were up to him, it won't get built. He has no interest in it, and instead of people making that long a trip from Richmond Hill to Union, they should be taking GO Transit (which conveniently overlooks the fact that so many people get off before Union, but whatever).

Spadina extension: Obviously this project will be completed. However, he made no mention that people traveling from Highway 7 to Union should also take GO, but whatever.

Finch LRT: Sounded confident that it will be built, and will go east of Yonge, south on Don Mills to the subway, AND will keep going down to Eglinton. I got the impression that he thinks this is a done deal.

Jane LRT: Will go ahead.

Finally, to get us back on the thread topic......

DRL: Is only interested in this once all of the above are taken care of, and only the eastern part of the DRL (up to Eglinton at best) seemed to peak his interest. However (and this is the best part), he said it might end up being an LRT. Then my heart stopped.

Having never met him before, I'm not sure if this guy is really on the level, or if he's just arrogant and was trying to snow me. But I think I can safely make one conclusion: For those who want a few more subways, a lot more subways, or nothing but subways, the current powers-that-be (at least in Toronto) want no subways. It appears to me that Giambrone came back from backpacking in Europe, saw LRTs everywhere, and now has conquered Toronto with LRTs.

Someone please cheer me up.

 

[superman]

DRL: Is only interested in this once all of the above are taken care of, and only the eastern part of the DRL (up to Eglinton at best) seemed to peak his interest. However (and this is the best part), he said it might end up being an LRT. Then my heart stopped.

Having never met him before, I'm not sure if this guy is really on the level, or if he's just arrogant and was trying to snow me. But I think I can safely make one conclusion: For those who want a few more subways, a lot more subways, or nothing but subways, the current powers-that-be (at least in Toronto) want no subways. It appears to me that Giambrone came back from backpacking in Europe, saw LRTs everywhere, and now has conquered Toronto with LRTs.

Someone please cheer me up.

I don't get why people don't get the fundamental difference between LRT as Toronto runs it (at grade, stopping at lights) and Subways/grade seperated LRTs. Our at grade LRTs are great for going short distances like a bus with more capacity, it should not be considered as a replacement for subways which is for longer trips.

The DRL's point is to serve people who are taking those longer trips, and if it gets built as an LRT I really doubt it'll relieve anything, people would just take the faster route.

Of course if it was grade separated LRT, which basically a subway or an ICTS, then i have no problem.

 

[Voltz]

DRL: Is only interested in this once all of the above are taken care of, and only the eastern part of the DRL (up to Eglinton at best) seemed to peak his interest. However (and this is the best part), he said it might end up being an LRT. Then my heart stopped.

I'll take that to mean 'all options will be considered', rather than arbitrarily selecting a mode without justification or study, as happened with the Spadina extension.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

I'll take that to mean 'all options will be considered', rather than arbitrarily selecting a mode without justification or study, as happened with the Spadina extension.

A Spadina subway extension requires an extension of the Spadina subway line...nothing arbitrary about it, no modes to select. Either the subway is extended, or the subway is not extended, in which case a totally different transit line can be built beyond the subway line.

Now, something like Eglinton of the DRL, there's an actual opportunity to select a mode.

 

[unimaginative2]

I'll take that to mean 'all options will be considered', rather than arbitrarily selecting a mode without justification or study, as happened with the Spadina extension.

Yeah, when it's a subway project, all options must be considered rather than arbitrarily selecting a mode. When it's an LRT project, we must go so far as to change the law on environmental assessments so that other modes don't have to be considered.

 

[gweed123]

Yeah, when it's a subway project, all options must be considered rather than arbitrarily selecting a mode. When it's an LRT project, we must go so far as to change the law on environmental assessments so that other modes don't have to be considered.

Why follow the planning process to determine the ideal solution when you can find A solution, and retool the process to fit it? (or to exclude all other solutions). It makes answering questions at a town hall a lot easier to handle, haha.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

Yeah, when it's a subway project, all options must be considered rather than arbitrarily selecting a mode. When it's an LRT project, we must go so far as to change the law on environmental assessments so that other modes don't have to be considered.

Also, the official plan must be rewritten as needed to accommodate LRT projects.