"Downtown Core Line" - Possible Alignments?

[JasonParis]

Here's some alignemt porn (available at the Facebook site) or by clicking the links below.

These are Karl Junkin's and represent his prefered alignment(s).

• East (Riverdale/Leslieville area) alignment options
• Karl's preference for the East
• Downtown Core alignment options
• Karl's preference for the Core
• Possible Alternate

 

[andomano]

I think is is necessary.
It seems that subway stop spacing is at least *750m[edit] everywhere else except Toronto and Montreal. The streetcars have stops at almost every intersection. It would then make sense for the streetcars to do the job they were designed to do by funnelling local traffic and let a subway do the job its supposed to do by transporting people over longer distances. Rapid transit needs to be called so for a reason.

Yes, but using a streetcar would be overkill. Using a bus alike Yonge, would be better due to reduce cost in the vehicles and infrastructure (ie no overhead wires or rails needed). Plus, the hybrid buses would be beneficial due to the stop and go traffic.

let a subway do the job its supposed to do by transporting people over longer distances.

The purpose of a subway is to move large amounts of people at a high frequency. Distance (and therefore time) is only a priority where 4-track systems are used, but this reverts back to capacity and frequency.

 

[dunkalunk]

Its not overkill if the system and the infrastructure is already there. The idea wouldn't be to replace the downtown streetcars, but to improve it service by helping to remove the demand from it. The main reasons why I would rather see less stations is because of the system of rails that already exists in the corridor that would already provide local service. Also, station building is expensive compared with the construction of the actual corridor

I'm going to post this link titled: The Endless Waltz: Subways, light rail and station placement for anyone who missed it as it is definitely worthwhile read and relevant to the DRL scenario.

I don't want to turn this thread into an argument about whether or not a DRL with any sort of spacing would remove demand for streetcars. Personally, I think it would help improve the streetcar system (assuming proper transit priority lighting comes to pass) but this is a discussion best kept for another place.

 

[kEiThZ]

One option for Queen would be to build a Transit City style subway. Use underground LRT. That's much cheaper and more adequate for Queen where there's much more local ridership. The subway could then still be reserved for commuters coming in, and be located further south.

 

[Darren B]

Still in favour of Queen

I just walked past George Brown's St James campus this evening and I saw alot of potential ridership there. There are 4 campuses between King to the south, Queen to the North, Jarvis to the West and Sherbourne to the East. Students are captive riders who must ride public transit to get to where they have to go for cheap. Thats why the TTC wants to extend a subway to York U.

I think students are a sign of potential ridership more so then condo residents along lakeshore or the portlands who may opt out from using public transit as they can afford to use their own personal vehicles parked in their condos.

 

[Chuck]

Yes, foundations pose a slight problem, enough of one that it's obvious that my map would never work. Either way, I'd like for the DRL to intersect the downtown subway lines along Dundas. It's the most evenly used subway station south of Bloor throughout the week, and has major trip generators like the Eaton Centre and Ryerson.

 

[kEiThZ]

I just walked past George Brown's St James campus this evening and I saw alot of potential ridership there. There are 4 campuses between King to the south, Queen to the North, Jarvis to the West and Sherbourne to the East. Students are captive riders who must ride public transit to get to where they have to go for cheap. Thats why the TTC wants to extend a subway to York U.

I think students are a sign of potential ridership more so then condo residents along lakeshore or the portlands who may opt out from using public transit as they can afford to use their own personal vehicles parked in their condos.

Sure students are heavy users of the TTC. However, the number of students at GB still does not equal the number of residents in condos (present and future) south of Front. Moreover, it's a ridiculous notion that most residents who live anywhere south of bloor will use their cars for every trip, and are less dependent on the TTC than students. Given the cost of parking spots in the new developments (sometimes upto 30 000), it's highly likely that an increasing portion of residents in the core probably won't even own a vehicle, let alone drive anywhere occassionally. I am willing to bet that its' the residents who live in the core who use the TTC more than 10 times a week (ie to and from work) whereas, most students are simply commuters into the core.

 

[Darren B]

Sure students are heavy users of the TTC. However, the number of students at GB still does not equal the number of residents in condos (present and future) south of Front. Moreover, it's a ridiculous notion that most residents who live anywhere south of bloor will use their cars for every trip, and are less dependent on the TTC than students. Given the cost of parking spots in the new developments (sometimes upto 30 000), it's highly likely that an increasing portion of residents in the core probably won't even own a vehicle, let alone drive anywhere occassionally. I am willing to bet that its' the residents who live in the core who use the TTC more than 10 times a week (ie to and from work) whereas, most students are simply commuters into the core.

I was referring more so to percentages of overall students who drive to school compared to overall employees who live in condos in the core and drive to work. I did not say 'that most residents who live anywhere south of bloor will use their cars for every trip'. So my point was that students are more captive TTC users relatively speaking when compared to condo dwelling full-time employees.

I also disagree about the ownership levels of cars. Most condos are built with parking lots, as its huge selling feature both initially and for resale.

 

[Disparishun]

I also disagree about the ownership levels of cars. Most condos are built with parking lots, as its huge selling feature both initially and for resale.

I thought that most condos were built with parking lots because that is the law. If so, the presence or absence of parking lots is not a very good index as to the transportation habits of their residents.

 

[Darren B]

I thought that most condos were built with parking lots because that is the law. If so, the presence or absence of parking lots is not a very good index as to the transportation habits of their residents.

Thats true, but my point was more reflective of one's group discretionary spending compared to the other's group. It a not huge issue either, as both groups make up only a fraction of potential ridership.

 

[kEiThZ]

I was referring more so to percentages of overall students who drive to school compared to overall employees who live in condos in the core and drive to work. I did not say 'that most residents who live anywhere south of bloor will use their cars for every trip'. So my point was that students are more captive TTC users relatively speaking when compared to condo dwelling full-time employees.

1) Percentages matter very little when you are talking about vastly different populations sizes.

2) I would dispute your assertion that most students are a captive audience for the TTC. Most students probably take the TTC twice a day. To school and from school. The rest of the time they are somewhere in the suburbs using mommy's civic or daddy's corolla. Don't believe me? Just look up how many students live in res at any of the downtown colleges/universities. Toronto post-secondary institutions are largely commuter schools. The proportion of students who stay on and off campus remains lower than the proportion of students who still live at home....and mostly in the suburbs. At least that was the case when I was in school, at the start of the decade. I can only imagine, given the current economy that it's more so today. Laslty, students who live near campus tend to walk which reduces their need for TTC service further.

I also disagree about the ownership levels of cars. Most condos are built with parking lots, as its huge selling feature both initially and for resale.

The city mandates a minimum number of parking spots for development that's why those lots are there. Just like how many businesses have parking lots downtown. Aside, from that your premise is flawed. Just because they have cars does not mean they don't patronize the TTC. Recently, I asked a work counterpart from London why he had a car. He replied, " To get out of London." Yet he uses the Tube for virtually all his other affairs. Our Lakeshore residents, I suspect, are no different. Or for that matter, any resident south of Bloor. Using a car downtown is challenging at best (traffic, lights, parking fees, etc.). I can't imagine that anyone would live downtown and not rely more on the TTC than their car.

 

[W. K. Lis]

I find it interesting that the original Bloor-Danforth-University-Yonge alignment was 3 lines: Bloor-University-Yonge, Danforth-University-Yonge using the lower level of the Bay station, and Bloor-Danforth.

It was originally done so passengers didn't have to transfer at Yonge, but stay on to use University to get downtown. Didn't catch on, passengers still transferred at Yonge.
Wonder what would have happened if we had kept those lines.
The Spadina extension would have been made it a real mess.

 

[cacruden]

It seems that subway stop spacing is at least *750m[edit] everywhere else except Toronto and Montreal. The streetcars have stops at almost every intersection. It would then make sense for the streetcars to do the job they were designed to do by funnelling local traffic and let a subway do the job its supposed to do by transporting people over longer distances. Rapid transit needs to be called so for a reason.

This type of thinking is an indicator how lazy and fat we have become.... if someone cannot walk 400m (max) to the nearest stop.... then they are not likely going to take public transit.....

 

[kEiThZ]

This type of thinking is an indicator how lazy and fat we have become.... if someone cannot walk 400m (max) to the nearest stop.... then they are not likely going to take public transit.....

Or perhaps an indicator that our aging population has mobility challenges....

 

[cacruden]

I find it interesting that the original Bloor-Danforth-University-Yonge alignment was 3 lines: Bloor-University-Yonge, Danforth-University-Yonge using the lower level of the Bay station, and Bloor-Danforth.

It was originally done so passengers didn't have to transfer at Yonge, but stay on to use University to get downtown. Didn't catch on, passengers still transferred at Yonge.
Wonder what would have happened if we had kept those lines.

If I remember right, it was not that it did not catch on, it was that it was more problematic maintenance wise - the switching was causing efficiency and maintenance problems on the whole network.