Toronto's Transit Network Plan

[Forgotten]

A more persuasive post would have been explaining why you agree with Steve Munro rather than just quoting him. I've often wondered why people take his word as gospel. There's nothing special about his opinion. Sure he's well informed, but at the end of the day he's just a guy with a blog.

In any case, not competing directly with RER (which is what Smarttrack is, let's face it) is exactly what a new subway line should be designed to do. Subways are supposed to be about serving highly dense parts of the city that can't be served by existing rail corridors, and that's what a Queen alignment does well.


Every single person? There are many thousands of people who live, work, and play north of Queen Street. There's more to downtown than the financial district.

There are many thousands more people who live, work, and play far south of Queen St. Ye olde axiom: The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, exists for a reason. It's because it's the right thing to do.

Not necessarily - we aren't talking about building a subway in greenfield - redevelopment along Queen is pretty much a given given the proposals in the pipeline. I wouldn't be surprised if any of the proposed downtown alignments aren't all that different past Don River. Better to focus on where to put the stations I think.

AoD

On the other side your choices are having stations at the St. Lawrence Market/Courts/George Brown and Distillery/George Brown residence/YMCA/No Frills (groceries!) and a couple million sqft of office space vs stations outside of homeless shelters and a boarded up dive bar and convenience store.

SmartTack and the above is why people like Tory need to not stick their nose where it don't belong and stay out of transit.

 

[Tewder]

.

Why not both? [...] There's no real reason a line can move around a little to serve key trip generators.

Makes sense to me. I would add:

Someone already mentioned that a Queen alignment would actually tunnel under Adelaide? If so, why wouldn't an 'Adelaide' line have stops on both King and Queen? At least at the busier nodes? Subway lines in NYC or Paris often have long tunnels/walks to the exits and entrances. A single line that serves both King and Queen would seem to be a no-brainer. Borrowing from Northern Light, the line could veer closer to King or Queen depending on where the greater demand is.

Also, I don't understand why we are prioritizing just the eastern stretch. Wouldn't it make sense in terms of securing commitments and funding to complete the entire east/west 'relief' line? I imagine this would save production costs and disruption, and we're already looking at a distant time line. By the time the eastern stretch is done the western stretch will be an issue. We should be pushing for as much as possible now given that they are finally acknowledging the importance of this line.

 

[Translude15]

Also, I don't understand why we are prioritizing just the eastern stretch. Wouldn't it make sense in terms of securing commitments and funding to complete the entire east/west 'relief' line? I imagine this would save production costs and disruption, and we're already looking at a distant time line. By the time the eastern stretch is done the western stretch will be an issue. We should be pushing for as much as possible now given that they are finally acknowledging the importance of this line.

Not that a western DRL extension isn't important (I'd build the first phase to Spadina or Bathurst even), it's just that in addition to serving the burgeoning downtown population, relieving the Yonge Line is of more importance considering how over capacity it is.

 

[Tewder]

Wouldn't a relief line in its entirety do just that? This combined with smart track and RER etc?

Also, one major issue that discourages commuters from switching from car to transit is that there is no convenient way to get around downtown once there. Commuters aren't just 'a to b' travellers. They often need to go to c and d once at b.... 'ah heck i'll just take the car'. In most large, transit-oriented cities the opposite is true in that it is more of a hassle to take a car when getting around. We need to tip things in the favour of transit so that we get a change of culture/mind-set. This is for the entire region as well as the city.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Don't forget that the Spadina leg of Line 1 will relieve some pressure off western commuters , especially once it gets to Highway 7.

Don't know about how much a UPX 15 minute headway service from Weston and Bloor would relieve. Especially if it runs express to Union and you use PRESTO. We'll see after March 9th.

 

[Filip]

The relief needed in the west has nothing to do with subways, but the overburdened, unreliable and congested surface network.

 

[Translude15]

Wouldn't a relief line in its entirety do just that? This combined with smart track and RER etc?

Also, one major issue that discourages commuters from switching from car to transit is that there is no convenient way to get around downtown once there. Commuters aren't just 'a to b' travellers. They often need to go to c and d once at b.... 'ah heck i'll just take the car'. In most large, transit-oriented cities the opposite is true in that it is more of a hassle to take a car when getting around. We need to tip things in the favour of transit so that we get a change of culture/mind-set. This is for the entire region as well as the city.

The capacity issues on Line 1 aren't derived from Western downtowners but those from the East and North of Yonge-Bloor. Reduced fares on UPX, implementation of GO RER and the King Street transit corridor will help alleviate surface transit capacity issues there for the time being.

Obviously it would be nice to have a fully built out DRL into the West but funding should be allocated for its construction up to Sheppard or even Finch first.

 

[BurlOak]

In discussion of Queen vs King aligment, I see what I think of as an omission.
Why not both?
....

Or you can just setting for Queen in the east, and dive south at University or Spadina and then follow King to the western terminus of the line.

This highlights another huge problem. You cannot plan a DRL to Bay when you haven't decided where it will be Bathurst.

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

It's true that they aren't fundamentally different, but if they're so close together, wouldn't the economic benefits for Queen also apply to King? I mean, if Queen is easily reachable for people living on King, then presumably King is equally as reachable for people living on Queen, no?

They are not the same though.

They found that tunneling under King is much more expensive than under Queen. There are a lot more utility conflicts. Richmond or Wellington aren't better than King in that regard either, before someone suggests it.

 

[MisterF]

I haven't gone through the studies in much detail, but are ridership figures given for RER/Smarttrack with the different RL alignments? For example, if the Queen route has lower ridership than the King route, are RER/Smarttrack ridership figures given based on different RL routes? It seems to me that the RER ridership would be lower with a subway line right next to it but higher with a subway on Queen. The King streetcar/LRT will obviously have higher ridership with a Queen subway, especially if it has its own right of way. So with a Queen subway alignment you have more people spread out among more transit lines.

There are many thousands more people who live, work, and play far south of Queen St. Ye olde axiom: The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, exists for a reason. It's because it's the right thing to do.

I don't know if Star Trek counts as an old axiom. In any case the many will be well served by a combination of RER and and a subway on Queen. Not to mention a King LRT. Putting the RL a bit farther from the existing rail lines means that more people will have access to rapid transit than if you put them close together.

Smarttrack is, for all intents and purposes, GO RER with a few extra bells and whistles. I was making the same argument before Tory's election campaign, so as far as I'm concerned Smarttrack coming out of the blue is a red herring. The bottom line is that the financial district can be served with frequent electrified rail service with integrated fares at the south end, and an east-west subway at the north end. The only reason that Smarttrack isn't considered to have 5 minute service is because it's still being studied separately from the rest of the GO network. Add all the lines together and they'll combine for 5 minute service. My prediction remains that Smarttrack will simply get rolled into the larger RER system.

 

[Forgotten]

They are not the same though.

They found that tunneling under King is much more expensive than under Queen. There are a lot more utility conflicts. Richmond or Wellington aren't better than King in that regard either, before someone suggests it.

The city says difference is $400MM. Your workaround? Waste scarce taxpayer money to put it in the worst place then fix it by building a PATH tunnel that will cost $300MM. That makes sense to some people I'm sure.

It's about time folks stop giving the used car salesman Tory any more airtime. Stop treating his ideas as if they're serious. You're drinking his (Neptis shill?) koolaid if you think his fantasy train scheme will work.

Even in Tory's wildest dreams his idea isn't a replacement for a subway. Not in Scarborough. Not in downtown. There's not going to be stations every 800m and in the end folks aren't going to walk 1km-1.5km to get to their offices from the station, they're going to drive.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Wonder if those who don't want tunneling under Queen Street is because of the stories about noise from the TBM's digging under Eglinton. Ditto for those under King Street.

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

The city says difference is $400MM. Your workaround? Waste scarce taxpayer money to put it in the worst place then fix it by building a PATH tunnel that will cost $300MM. That makes sense to some people I'm sure.

I consider the PATH tunnel something that needs to be built anyway. If we can save costs on tunneling and extend the PATH network I call it a win.

P.S. You can lay off the ad hominem vs. Tory, it doesn't help explain his or City Planning's motivations.

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

Why are people so opposed to tunneling under Queen if the King Streetcar is converted into a transit mall with it's own ROW?

The King Streetcar's capacity would be greatly increased, it's operationality and comfort would be night-and-day compared to today.

City Planning themselves found that there is little difference in terms of benefits between King vs Queen street corridor. Both score very highly, practically equally high.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

This highlights another huge problem. You cannot plan a DRL to Bay when you haven't decided where it will be Bathurst.

Of course you can - you are not going to hit every spot you want with one line - don't force it and delay projects when you couldn't deal with one peripheral issue that isn't even remotely critical.

AoD