44 North
Senior Member
That would make sense. Possibly as a limited service spur like seen in other cities (say, Philadelphia's Broad Street line). I do have my reservations about how realistic it would be to bring the DRL south of Lake Shore. Both because it would be difficult constructing a tunnel through that toxic saturated infill - but also because it’d create too circuitous a route.
Maybe at the very least label a streetcar line as a ‘spur’ of the DRL, and have it run grade-separated (or mostly) through the Port Lands...similar to the setup of Boston’s Ashmont-Mattapan branch of its Red Line. If the DRL were to somehow use Light Rail – or even streetcars – have a branch similar to their Green Line; thus offering a transferless ride into downtown.
All things considered though, I think streetcars are the most we can hope for. I’d like them to be as grade-separated as possible, but am expecting traffic lights and intersections every hundred metres. Frankly the only part of Doug’s “backroom vision” for the waterfront that I supported somewhat was the use of an elevated line through there. I’d wager that, track-for-track, it could be built for less than QQEast and Cherry lines.
Okay, right. I figured QQE would be built in one go from Union to Cherry, but I guess Parliament is the foreseeable terminus. And you’re correct that going under the railway berm wouldn’t be cheap. As it stands a Parliament-Union QQE is what, +$300M? I’m not sure how much this berm underpass would cost, but I’m guessing the total Union-Cherry streetcar will be $400M – which is an insane amount of money. Add in the vehicles and inflation and we’re looking at over half a billion. Many cities can build an entire rapid transit line for such money.
It’s definitely hard to get a straight answer on timelines, because much of this has fallen off the radar. I’m aware that in Aug Byford bypassed City Hall in asking higher levels of gov’t for funding a complete Waterfront West and East Bayfront (QQE) line, and that private developers/stakeholders are pushing very hard to get this through.
As for anything south on Cherry and into the Port Lands, I don’t think any timeline is reliable. Even with the recent accelerated Port Lands studies, things seem to be morphing all the time, and any transit financing is unheard of. But thanks for clarifying that lift bridges can work for streetcars - although such infrastructure would only compound the cost and complexity.
Perhaps the scope of this post makes it belong in the Port Lands or QQE threads, but all seem to be off people’s radar. Frankly I’d love for this area to be like Boston, San Fran, or Philadelphia - with various rail modes connecting to subway stations and tree-lined grade-separated ROWs. But at the same time I feel like we’re trying to fit a costly square peg into a round hole...only to end up with slow transit that ends up diverting funds from, say, a DRL. And considering the amount of development and cross streets planned, this line will be less Transit City and more Spadina in terms of speed.
Although it doesn’t offer the same level of high density linear development like a streetcar line, I figure an elevated ‘light’ line along QQE to the Port Lands could be built for less money overall – while offering real rapid transit and higher speeds.
Good stuff, seems you have the insider knowledge. You mentioned "streetcar as transit first". Were there options for rapid transit?...or maybe I'll check this report you mentioned. Perhaps WaterfrontTO should somehow take control of all area transit planning, building, and financing?
Last edited:
