Ontario Line | ?m | ?s

[AlxOptimism]

However, once it is settled that OL runs to the Exhibiton (far south), getting it back to the north of Bloor is a nontrivial task. Need to make a tricky transition from westbound at-surface to northbound tunneled, and then cover some distance in the tunnel.

That's a thought. I have always seen the logical place for OL to go as up Jane or Dufferin, but perhaps you're not wrong. That being said, where does OL go from Exhibition?

DRL West was always going to go up towards B-D. However, there's no logical route north of Exhibition for it to follow.

In a perfect world it should definitely run elevated on Parkside to meet BD at Keele.
This would save a LOT of money not to mention make for a sleek transfer to the 2. It also avoid compromising capacity for future service on GO.

Of course if it runs in the median, NIMBY's will lose their mind... and if it runs on the west side more than a few trees would end up as casualties (hard sell)

Alternatives would definitely be Swansea to Jane or on Roncesvalles.

 

[Allandale25]

Osgoode tree update from @Steve Munro

Metrolinx Vandals And Osgoode Hall

Earlier this year, after considerable debate about the future of the trees in the park at Osgoode Hall, Metrolinx agreed to the City undertaking a study of alternative designs for the new Ontario L…

stevemunro.ca

Now, Metrolinx has advised the Law Society of Ontario that tree clearing will begin on December 5, 2022. This is in direct contravention of the agreement Metrolinx made with the City, the Law Society and other community groups.

 

[W. K. Lis]

In a perfect world it should definitely run elevated on Parkside to meet BD at Keele.
This would save a LOT of money not to mention make for a sleek transfer to the 2. It also avoid compromising capacity for future service on GO.

Of course if it runs in the median, NIMBY's will lose their mind... and if it runs on the west side more than a few trees would end up as casualties (hard sell)

Alternatives would definitely be Swansea to Jane or on Roncesvalles.

There was a "rapid transit" (AKA Belt Line Railway) line up Swansea in 1894. Didn't last.

From link.

 

[seanlucat]

imo, the most logical routing for an extension west of exhibition is up dufferin to the CP corridor and galleria redevelopment. then go at grade using the CP corridor west until Jane and go elevated up Jane to reach eglinton. anyway lets not fill this thread up with fantasies of a western OL extension when there's already a thread for it here : ontario-line-extension-west-of-ontario-place-speculation.29469 - sl

 

[mdriver]

I think everyone can agree that stopping at the Exhibition is far from ideal, as it actually serves the least amount of residents

 

[T3G]

In a perfect world it should definitely run elevated on Parkside to meet BD at Keele.
This would save a LOT of money not to mention make for a sleek transfer to the 2. It also avoid compromising capacity for future service on GO.

Of course if it runs in the median, NIMBY's will lose their mind... and if it runs on the west side more than a few trees would end up as casualties (hard sell)

Alternatives would definitely be Swansea to Jane or on Roncesvalles.

I am not a fan of superfluous tunneling when cheaper options exist, but you have to be extremely careful when it comes to running elevated rail lines. What steps can be taken to ensure the streets below don't become inhospitable wastelands like Lake Shore underneath the Gardiner? Toronto already has a track record with these things, and it is dreadful.

Even in New York, which is the capital of the Els, the streets below are pretty bleak and unimpressive unless the bridge is unusually high up, such as at 125 St and Broadway. https://www.google.ca/maps/@40.8158...4!1szrbghAoHyAgQ43tZPT3uNQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Parkside being a chiefly residential street (albeit a congested hole), I can't imagine anyone would appreciate it very much, and I can't say I blame them. In this case, I would think tunneling would be the most logical solution.

Apropos of nothing, I hope the truly dreadful "Ontario Line" moniker is dropped before the service opens, lest we get some special interest group from somewhere in the middle of nowhere claiming to be entitled to a subway right into downtown.

 

[APTA-2048]

Apropos of nothing, I hope the truly dreadful "Ontario Line" moniker is dropped before the service opens, lest we get some special interest group from somewhere in the middle of nowhere claiming to be entitled to a subway right into downtown.

I was thinking about that the other day. The name doesn’t make sense in the context of rapid transit in the city.

And of course the trains are blue.

 

[Rainforest]

I was thinking about that the other day. The name doesn’t make sense in the context of rapid transit in the city.

And of course the trains are blue.

Should repaint the trains every 4 years, to reflect the vote distribution in the latest provincial elections results 42% blue, 34% red, 16% orange, 8% green or something like.

 

[Rainforest]

That's a thought. I have always seen the logical place for OL to go as up Jane or Dufferin, but perhaps you're not wrong. That being said, where does OL go from Exhibition?

I see a couple of options. The first is a line down Queensway. This is fairly straight, but there's perhaps less room to put another rail corridor south of High Park. A logical extension would be to build Waterfront West LRT, then connect a median LRT down Queensway to that (or the 507. Your choice).

There are 2 variations of the Waterfront West LRT concept. One is Bremner LRT, and that one seems to be dead. The other is just connecting the Roncesvalles interchange to the Exhibition loop and using the existing QQ streetcar tracks to get to Union. That one is pretty much doable, but the operation will be slow. A one-way trip just between Union and the Exhibition takes ~ 25 min, and that may be fine for the QQ locals, but won't be appealing at all for the riders coming from Etobicoke.

Therefore, my preference is some kind of a combo. OL extended westward to Park Lawn or just to Sunnyside, where it connects to the streetcar route. Thus everyone boarding the streetcar in Etobicoke or near the west side of Humber Bay and travelling to downtown, will be able to transfer to OL at Park Lawn / Sunnyside and zoom to downtown on OL. Those travelling between the points along Lakeshore West / Queensway / Queen West will continue to use the streetcar just as they do today.

As a bonus, OL would provide easy access to the southern part of High Park from downtown and the east side.

DRL West was always going to go up towards B-D. However, there's no logical route north of Exhibition for it to follow.

We could permanently terminate it at Exhibition but that leaves extra capacity through downtown. One thought could be to turn it up Roncesvalles, and have the KING car terminate at the carhouse. It would go towards the Junction and perhaps terminate at Eglinton (after connecting to the 512). This would mean that to get from B-D to the 504, you'd need an extra transfer. Don't know if that's worth it, and I don't even want to see the pitchforks aimed at me for that proposal.

That should be doable, but will be tunneled rather than elevated, and therefore more costly. Could consider Roncesvalles, Parkside, or maybe Dufferin.

The extra transfer from B-D to the 504 wouldn't be a big deal. OL will run suffficiently close to many of the 504 stops, and a lot of riders will just use OL instead of the 504 if OL connects to BD in the west.

That being said, fare integration between GO and TTC would make life easier for Humber Bay Shores residents sooner rather than later. We should be aiming to service denser areas with higher capacity transit, and any OL extension westwards would take decades - I don't see it coming before 2040.

I have to disagree with the last statement, "any OL extension westwards would take decades". Any major extension would take decades indeed. But adding a few km inside the existing rail corridor, without any tunneling, can probably be done in 2-3 years if the decision is made. And it won't cost a lot.

 

[Undead]

I am not a fan of superfluous tunneling when cheaper options exist, but you have to be extremely careful when it comes to running elevated rail lines. What steps can be taken to ensure the streets below don't become inhospitable wastelands like Lake Shore underneath the Gardiner? Toronto already has a track record with these things, and it is dreadful.

Even in New York, which is the capital of the Els, the streets below are pretty bleak and unimpressive unless the bridge is unusually high up, such as at 125 St and Broadway. https://www.google.ca/maps/@40.8158...4!1szrbghAoHyAgQ43tZPT3uNQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Parkside being a chiefly residential street (albeit a congested hole), I can't imagine anyone would appreciate it very much, and I can't say I blame them. In this case, I would think tunneling would be the most logical solution.

Apropos of nothing, I hope the truly dreadful "Ontario Line" moniker is dropped before the service opens, lest we get some special interest group from somewhere in the middle of nowhere claiming to be entitled to a subway right into downtown.

New York (and Chicago) are not appropriate comparables when considering modern elevated rail. Think Vancouver Skytrain, not NY. The Skytrain is perfectly acceptable and actually less intrusive than the 6-7 lane arterials we have all over the place.

 

[AlxOptimism]

New York (and Chicago) are not appropriate comparables when considering modern elevated rail. Think Vancouver Skytrain, not NY. The Skytrain is perfectly acceptable and actually less intrusive than the 6-7 lane arterials we have all over the place.

The Evergreen extension in Coquitlam runs down the median of a road somewhat wider than Parkside. It's quite nice.

Parkside being a chiefly residential street (albeit a congested hole), I can't imagine anyone would appreciate it very much, and I can't say I blame them. In this case, I would think tunneling would be the most logical solution.

imo, the most logical routing for an extension west of exhibition is up dufferin to the CP corridor and galleria redevelopment. then go at grade using the CP corridor west until Jane and go elevated up Jane to reach eglinton. anyway lets not fill this thread up with fantasies of a western OL extension when there's already a thread for it

Yea no I understand that it would be a hard ask on Parkside, especially as setbacks are quite minimal. Houses almost directly front the street at points.
You could eat 2 lanes and place the line in the western lanes (to save trees) with space for a bike-lane but that's also probably not a no go.
That said it would probably be a good spot to launch a TBM at say Parkside & Garden as that stretch is quite treeless.

Anyway I'll refrain from anymore speculation because there is a thread for that

 

[T3G]

I don't think SkyTrain is an appropriate comparison, either. There appear to be precious few locations along the network where the guideway actually runs directly above a street - where the line runs directly along a street, it appears to favour running along the side of the streets (all of which seem to be considerably wider than Parkside, and in some cases are commercial or industrial rather than residential). I have been unable to find any location where the SkyTrain ROW is *directly above the lanes* in the way the Gardiner is, and that's the only way you would get an elevated rail line on Parkside unless you either place it along the eastern edge of High Park, or demolish all the homes facing Parkside - which would create, in another way, the problem of the street becoming an inhospitable wasteland.

The arterial comparison is a straw man. Just because elevated rail lines are disruptive doesn't mean stroads aren't, also. I'm obviously all for expanding transit, but let's also make sure we don't bulldoze everything in the city worth looking at in the process.

 

[Undead]

Elevated is not disruptive when done well. Granted that applies more in suburban areas rather than downtown/near downtown with narrow streets.

 

[felix123]

When the Liberals left power, we had some digging underway on the Crosstown Line 5, and some serious hope that Finch West Line 6 would start soon.

There's now 6 province-led rapid transit lines under construction, 2 more about to begin construction (the Line 1 extension on Yonge, and the Hamilton LRT), and now 2 more that should be under construction by the next election (Line 4 extension to McCowan and the Line 5 extension from Renforth to Pearson). As part of the deal with Toronto we have also got Toronto (far too slowly), taking the lead on 3 other huge projects; the Bloor-Yonge station rebuild has started advanced work, the Waterfront West streetcar extension (where they are going to have to drop near a $billion to rebuild Union and Queens Quay stations) and Waterfront Toronto has started advanced work, and the Eglinton East (formerly the Scarborough Malvern) LRT. Perhaps that's 4, as the latter includes work on Sheppard that was originally going to be part of the Sheppard East LRT.

And we have serious money for the five GO RER projects (which weren't fully funded under the Liberals), and commitment by the feds about a sixth RER project (Milton line).

That's 15 major RT/RER projects. 18 including the city projects. Variants of all were certainly promised at some point by the Liberals ... but delivery dates had slipped well over a decade, despite being continuously in power.

Finch West reached financial close at the end of the last Liberal term, YUSSE had recently been completed.
Many of the projects you're crediting to the current provincial government are still unfunded, or were cancelled by them in their hyper-partisan tear-everything-down phase, only to be resurrected with a later completion date, i.e. the Hamilton LRT.
Credit where it's due, but seriously, OL to Pearson? Let's hope so, but a fair comparison would be limited to funded and under-construction projects.

It will make a huge difference - at least for those near downtown. Crossing from the east side to Exhibition, or getting from downtown to either is a pain currently, and is going to be MUCH quicker. And for the huge community up in Thorncliffe Park and Flemingdon Park, it's a game changer. And the planned OL extension to Pearson will finally give some serious region-wide rapid-transit options that isn't downtown focused - inadvertently perhaps resurrecting the PCs 1970s and early 1980s ALRT proposals for the northern section.

Before I lived downtown, I used to live near "Gerrones" so the Carlaw OL station would have been great for me then. I don't doubt that the OL will have a major positive impact for many outside of the city, and with a station opening just 2 blocks from where I live, it will be useful to me too. But my point remains that it will hardly create the RT network that Toronto needs in its core, first and foremost, and that we should be working on this before an extension to Sheppard.

To reiterate my point, everyone is glad the OL is finally happening but our city's transit needs stable funding and a true non-partisan planning authority.

 

[11th]

Finch West reached financial close at the end of the last Liberal term, YUSSE had recently been completed.
Many of the projects you're crediting to the current provincial government are still unfunded, or were cancelled by them in their hyper-partisan tear-everything-down phase, only to be resurrected with a later completion date, i.e. the Hamilton LRT.
Credit where it's due, but seriously, OL to Pearson? Let's hope so, but a fair comparison would be limited to funded and under-construction projects.


Before I lived downtown, I used to live near "Gerrones" so the Carlaw OL station would have been great for me then. I don't doubt that the OL will have a major positive impact for many outside of the city, and with a station opening just 2 blocks from where I live, it will be useful to me too. But my point remains that it will hardly create the RT network that Toronto needs in its core, first and foremost, and that we should be working on this before an extension to Sheppard.

To reiterate my point, everyone is glad the OL is finally happening but our city's transit needs stable funding and a true non-partisan planning authority.

Out of curiosity, who would be on a non-partisan planning authority? Do they get appointed? Who are they accounted to?