Transit City Plan

[EnviroTO]

Bloor rebuild is now slated to be about $200M (Union Station type upgrade to the lower level).

That upgrade provides an eastbound Bloor line platform. The master plan for the major upgrade proposed for Yonge-Bloor included that platform in addition to a new westbound Bloor platform and a new centre platform on the Yonge line. This new proposal is cheap because it doesn't do half of what the other proposal does (although considering it gets one of the three platforms built is not a complete waste). Does the bigger capacity problem exist on the Bloor line or the Yonge line? I am pretty sure the Yonge line is the issue so the only way to reduce dwell time in the station is to (a) get people on and off quicker which requires more open doors which a platform on both sides achieves, (b) reduce the risk of people and debris getting on the track so trains can enter and exit the station safely at full speed which requires platform doors, and (c) running the system like clockwork with a train arriving on time and automated doors closing on time which requires ATC.

 

[MisterF]

Wanted. Necessary means something different.

Judging by the Metrolinx ridership projections, the DRL fills the biggest unmet demand for transportation in the GTA by far. If that doesn't qualify it as necessary then I don't know what would.

 

[Rainforest]

If the DRL uses light rail, then it's two arms could be DON MILLS and JANE. If the DRL uses heavy rail, then it'll just terminate at the BLOOR-DANFORTH or EGLINTON.

The projected peak demand on DRL is 17,000 pphpd, that falls into the heavy rail range.

If DRL was built with light rail, it would need 4-car or 5-car trains to handle the demand. Such trains could not travel up Don Mills or Jane in the street median, and would have to terminate at Eglinton anyway.

 

[Electrify]

If Eglinton and the SRT become one line, then two things will happen: The Danforth line will lose a significant amount of ridership, and a relief line for Yonge will be needed more than ever. Essentially the Eglinton line will act like a relief line for the Danforth line, meanwihile the Yonge line will see insane levels well north of Bloor.

With that said, would it be possible to short-turn some trains at Eglinton to address this issue? They could put displays on the side of the trains to let passengers know not to board if travelling north of Eglinton.

 

[Asterix]

With that said, would it be possible to short-turn some trains at Eglinton to address this issue? They could put displays on the side of the trains to let passengers know not to board if travelling north of Eglinton.

If they are going to short turn trains at Eglinton, that would mean reducing service north of Eglinton as they are already maxing service south of Eglinton. Given trains are already overloaded well before Eglinton, that proposal makes no sense.

 

[M II A II R II K]

On Sheppard it doesn't have to be just condos. It could be 4-6 storey streetscapes with Bistros and cafe's and retail. Also many more sidestreets could be added with townhouses built along them.

 

[Asterix]

On Sheppard it doesn't have to be just condos. It could be 4-6 storey streetscapes with Bistros and cafe's and retail. Also many more sidestreets could be added with townhouses built along them.

What would be the tax revenue from those developments?

What incentive would there be for developers to pay a premium (ie the extra tax and charges) to build there rather than other more in-demand locations (Portlands, Liberty Village, heck, even Yonge and Sheppard has a couple open corners)?

Would there be more interest from developers and potential residents/corporate tenants with the proposed subway with greater distance between stations vs the previously planned surface LRT (ie many having a longer walk to transit)?

 

[GraphicMatt]

Yep. One of the big questions to ask is how much extra land value does a subway add versus an LRT, and is the difference enough to justify the difference in construction and operating costs.

 

[rbt]

Judging by the Metrolinx ridership projections, the DRL fills the biggest unmet demand for transportation in the GTA by far. If that doesn't qualify it as necessary then I don't know what would.

Making King, Queen, and Dundas transit only streets between Broadview and Dufferin would also likely have a substantial impact in ridership and huge decreases in travel time.


We want the DRL because we are not willing to take lanes away from cars (for better or worse -- this is certainly the expensive approach).


I do believe we should build the DRL. I do not think we should fool ourselves about the fact we would be building 6 lanes of roadway at a cost of $6B or more.

 

[jje1000]

They could create density by building a bunch of cheap towers filled with public housing. That's a strategy with a proven track record.

But Ford says he doesn't like public housing! They're icky!

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

If Ford is going to do this, he better go the whole way.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

.

 

[Electrify]

If they are going to short turn trains at Eglinton, that would mean reducing service north of Eglinton as they are already maxing service south of Eglinton. Given trains are already overloaded well before Eglinton, that proposal makes no sense.

A slight reduction of service north of Eglinton so that those getting on in between Eglinton and Bloor CAN get on seems like a fair trade off.

 

[Asterix]

A slight reduction of service north of Eglinton so that those getting on in between Eglinton and Bloor CAN get on seems like a fair trade off.

Say capacity on the line with full service is 25,000 per hour. Since there are already times when passengers are left on the platform at Eglinton or further north, demand is therefore > 25,000 per hour north of Eglinton.

What you are suggesting is reducing the capacity of the stretch north of Eglinton, which will only make demand there >> capacity instead of just > capacity.

You still won't be moving more than 25,000 per hour on the line in to Bloor station.

There are only two ways to address the problem of demand > capacity: increase capacity (bigger trains, running more trains (requires ATC) or adding an extra line (like the DRL), or decrease demand.

You are proposing to reduce capacity.

That makes sense how?

 

[Electrify]

Say capacity on the line with full service is 25,000 per hour. Since there are already times when passengers are left on the platform at Eglinton or further north, demand is therefore > 25,000 per hour north of Eglinton.

What you are suggesting is reducing the capacity of the stretch north of Eglinton, which will only make demand there >> capacity instead of just > capacity.

You still won't be moving more than 25,000 per hour on the line in to Bloor station.

There are only two ways to address the problem of demand > capacity: increase capacity (bigger trains, running more trains (requires ATC) or adding an extra line (like the DRL), or decrease demand.

You are proposing to reduce capacity.

That makes sense how?

With the stops north of Eglinton, there is at least a number of people getting off the train to make room for new passengers. At the secondary stops south of Eglinton (Davisville, Summerhill, and Rosedale) this is not the case.