News   Jul 15, 2024
Sculptural Pre-Cast Panels Now Adorning ANX near Dupont Station
 759     3 
News   Jul 15, 2024
Resubmitted Agincourt Condo Proposal Bumps Height, Reduces Parking
 910     1 
News   Jul 15, 2024
News Roundup for July 15, 2024
 636     0 

2014 Municipal Election: Toronto Transit Plans

Rainforest said:
Union station capacity is likely the main issue. In order to relief the core subway system, a new RER tunnel through downtown is likely needed.

The rail corridor width through East Toronto is another concern. Two more issues are the grade separation of Scarborough Junction, and the width of Uxbridge sub corridor south of Eglinton.
Click to expand...

Hopefully with the Metrolinx Relief Study underway and the accelerated capacity crunch at Union with the implementation of GO RER, they will come to the logical conclusion that building the DRL as part of the GO RER network (in essence routing SmartTrack through a downtown tunnel instead of through Union) makes more sense than building the DRL as part of the TTC network. The TTC study however will undoubtedly conclude that the DRL needs to be (surprise!) a TTC subway.

Building the DRL as a GO RER line, or as the local component of the GO RER network, kills 2 birds with one stone: it provides the subway relief that is needed (both by offering a convenient transfer point for subway passengers, and by offering new suburban branches to allow Toronto passengers to avoid the TTC subway network entirely), and it eases the Union capacity crunch by routing a significant percentage of the total RER trains through a downtown tunnel instead of through Union, while still providing the same network capacity to the CBD.
 
innsertnamehere said:
the only difference "smart track" may require presuming that the Eglinton portion is dropped is large trains on the Stouffville corridor. Traditionally they may have used 3 car trains but they may need 6 car trains now.
Click to expand...

Why would Stouffville require 6 car trains with Smarttrack? Smarttrack calls for 15 minute frequencies, which is the same as GO RER's planned frequencies.
 
yes, but increased demand from the city of Toronto with integrated TTC fares would mean you would need more capacity than a reduced / integrated fare model that might otherwise occur.
 
innsertnamehere said:
yes, but increased demand from the city of Toronto with integrated TTC fares would mean you would need more capacity than a reduced / integrated fare model that might otherwise occur.
Click to expand...

Good point. And longer trains would reduce the frequency crunch further down the line when it joins the Lakeshore line. Once it gets to the USRC it shouldn't be a problem because of the plethora of tracks, but between Scarborough Junction and the Don River it could be an issue if you have frequencies that are too high.
 
I think you will eventually find that traditional 905 GO service will remain at Union and they will build a separate tunnel exclusively for a Smart Track -like system, for example under Queen.


The really good news is that it would seem that Queen's Park, Metrolinx, City Hall, and most importantly Torontonians, will all actually agree on what kind of system needs to get built. That would be a first in a very long time. Metrolinx really can't say much of anything until the civic elections are over as backing something like a GO RER would be seen as backing the very similar Smart Track which could rightfully be seen as meddling in municipal politics.

When Tory gets elected everyone will basically be on the same page and systems could come on line much faster and a true vision of GTHA transit could be implemented instead of individual lines that don't connect and geared more towards political interests than moving Torontonians.
 
Big bucks can be spent, but in places where it's worth it, unlike sparsely trafficked suburban lines that only feed into the already existing system. There should also be a short Downtown Interceptor line through Dundas in the core that connects with Gerrard Square. Those people going to Ryerson, U of T, Dundas Square, the Eaton Centre, the bus station, all of the hospitals, and even Chinatown can be served by such a line which would bypass crowding into Union station as well as avoiding Line 1 altogether. Which would also serve people coming from other directions to use such a line to avoid Line 1 as well.
 
M II A II R II K said:
Big bucks can be spent, but in places where it's worth it, unlike sparsely trafficked suburban lines that only feed into the already existing system. There should also be a short Downtown Interceptor line through Dundas in the core that connects with Gerrard Square. Those people going to Ryerson, U of T, Dundas Square, the Eaton Centre, the bus station, all of the hospitals, and even Chinatown can be served by such a line which would bypass crowding into Union station as well as avoiding Line 1 altogether. Which would also serve people coming from other directions to use such a line to avoid Line 1 as well.
Click to expand...

Would you still build the Relief Line (Pape to Univerity) if what you suggested was also built?

I like what you suggest, but the DTRES hints that the Relief Line would still be necessary with this setup (they target different travel patterns), so I'm not sure if it's worth spending the money on building two downtown subways.
 
Not to beat a dead horse, but I wonder what the likelihood of triple-tracking the Stouffville Line would be? I realize that standard GO service and RER could share the same track and that certain runs could could simply head farther north, but I'm still trying to wrap my head around how more stops and longer trips will be sold to most existing riders, for whom Union, and to a much lesser extent Kennedy, are the only destinations that matter. Riders still bitterly remember when the Stouffville Line used to stop at Danforth and Scarborough and trips would be crowded and mostly full of Lakeshore folks. Even adding 10 minutes to a trip is a big deal when it might become much, much faster to drive outside of rush hour. And during rush hour, the trains are already crammed, so I can't even imagine what the crowds will be line on a combined TTC/GO service. As was said above, GO is an express service for 905ers. I don't think RER can be both local transit and regional rail effectively without some kind of express service element for those in more distant areas.
 
you can't triple track stouffville without expropriation. the corridor is only wide enough for 2 tracks.

Now of course when the RT is ripped out you would have space for 3 tracks along there, and I have a feeling Metrolinx may eventually do that to allow for express trains on the stouffville line. North of Ellesmere however its essentially impossible to triple track the corridor without large expropriation and reconstruction of the 401, 407, and CN freight bypass underpasses.
 
Given the amount being spent elsewhere in the GTA, I would think that expropriation and the widening of underpasses wouldn't be out of the question. Interesting point about the RT though; that would be a significant amount of passing track.
 
The cost would be far beyond the benefits for a third track to unionville, a rough guesstimate at cost would probably be in the 800-1 billion range, which simply doesn't make sense in a cost-benefits analysis.
 
innsertnamehere said:
you can't triple track stouffville without expropriation. the corridor is only wide enough for 2 tracks.

Now of course when the RT is ripped out you would have space for 3 tracks along there, and I have a feeling Metrolinx may eventually do that to allow for express trains on the stouffville line. North of Ellesmere however its essentially impossible to triple track the corridor without large expropriation and reconstruction of the 401, 407, and CN freight bypass underpasses.
Click to expand...

North of Ellesmere is less of a problem IMO; they can run frequent service from Ellesmere to Union, and a less frequent service north of Ellesmere. Unionville trains can run express in the south, stopping only at Ellesmere and Kennedy before Union.

However, will this kind of combined service fit south of Eglinton? The Scarborough Junction, the Uxbridge corridor width just before the junction, and the width of combined Uxbridge / Lakehore E route to Union are all in question.
 
North of Ellesmere is less of a problem IMO; they can run frequent service from Ellesmere to Union, and a less frequent service north of Ellesmere. Unionville trains can run express in the south, stopping only at Ellesmere and Kennedy before Union.

However, will this kind of combined service fit south of Eglinton? The Scarborough Junction, the Uxbridge corridor width just before the junction, and the width of combined Uxbridge / Lakehore E route to Union are all in question.
Click to expand...

Interesting, thanks.

If Tory/Toronto wants to use the corridor for local transit, maybe new stations can be phased in as the track is widened moving east and then north. I agree that widening that section of Lakeshore E is probably also necessary.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top