News   Jul 12, 2024
 1.1K     0 
News   Jul 12, 2024
 998     1 
News   Jul 12, 2024
 371     0 

"Downtown Core Line" - Possible Alignments?

What is your prefere alignment for a new E/W subway through Downtown


  • Total voters
    231
It's not just the financial district today. The city has huge plans for employment centres in the Bayfront, Don Lands, and other emerging neighbourhoods in the western end of the core (like Liberty Village). These need to be accessible for commuters too.

I don't what the exact solution is, but I would venture a guess that it won't be Queen. It'll be something further south that can at least pass within walking distance of many of these neighbourhoods.
 
My Vote...

My Vote goes to Queen!

Reasoning?

a) Density
b) Current Road Congestion (poor, poor streetcars... riding one along Queen, esp through the Entertainment District, sure gives the Streetcar a bad name)
c) Not too close, and not too far, from Bloor Line and the CN Rail Corridor

I would have the Queen Line follow the 'U' turn from Queen Stn to Union, with only 1 Stop (@ Union) and then back up the 'U' to Osgoode Stn, then west along Queen.

Check out my ideas on GoogleMaps: http://maps.google.ca/maps/ms?hl=en...d=115978337128192551626.00046b87383d75ae7f708
 
Ronces-King-Wellington-Front-Rail-Pape?

All streetcars would continue to operate as usual. Where the streetcars and subway overlap, (On Roncesvalles and King) Streetcars would provide local service while the subway would provide express. The Queen's Quay streetcar would connect to the King Streetcar via a dedicated right of way following The rail corridor, crossing over at Dunn Ave. The Queens Quay ROW would continue towards the portlands and would connect to the DRL at Cherry Street.
 
Last edited:
If it's the Dowtown Core Line maybe Queen would qualify. However, it's the Downtown Relief Line than whatever relieves Yonge-Bloor should determine the alignment.

From that perspective it seems less obvious to me how a subway on Queen would provide relief to Yonge-Bloor. Remember, every politician is proposing this as an alternative to funding a station rebuild of Yonge-Bloor. Since most of the ridership on southern YUS loop is concentrated below King. If that's where the ridership is, than it would make sense for the subway to be there.

The second important consideration is not what ridership is today. It's what it'll be a decade from now after the Bayfront and Don Lands are developed (or are being developed). Sure, there's a lot of regeneration areas off Queen but many of those would be served just as well with a subway along King or Wellington. But a subway along Queen does nothing for the hundreds of thousands of residents that are will be living along places like Liberty Village, the Don Lands, Bayfront, Cityplace, etc.

These two considerations to me would seem to work against Queen. First, it leads to tension between the need for a local service (which would mean more stations) as opposed to a quick subway line for commuters. The slower it is, the fewer riders it'll divert from Yonge-Bloor. Ditto for the further away it is from the commuters' final destinations. We don't want to spend billions on the DRL and then be forced to spend another billion rebuilding Yonge-Bloor anyway simply because it didn't attract enough riders. The second consideration only seems to make the case for Queen worse as well. Whil there's some development along Queen, it pales in comparison to what is in the pipeline for those waterfront neighbourhoods. That means the disparity in transit needs, transit use and ridership between the " South of Front" and the Queen street crowds is only going to get worse.

I agree with the end conclusion, however the way the premises are ordered I think is backwards. It isn't "relieve Y-B" first, and "provide access to new developments" second, it's reversed. If all we wanted to do was relieve Y-B, then 4 tracking the Yonge line would be the best option. But that's not what we want. We want to give new areas (both existing built-up areas with potential for densification, and new areas to be developed) access to rapid transit, while at the same time connecting this new line with existing transit routes to provide relief to several key locations in the existing downtown network. Remember, not only will this line relieve Y-B, it will also relieve St. George, and the College, Dundas, Queen, and King streetcar lines.

With respect to the Queen thing: Queen should have an LRT, not a subway. The nature of the neighbourhood (mid-rise, mixed-use, etc), as well as the needs of the neighbourhood (closer station stops for easier access), make it much more akin to LRT than HRT. Having said that, the DRL needs to be in place before the Queen line, otherwise Queen will be baring the brunt of the DRL load, for which it wasn't designed.
 
My Vote goes to Queen!

Reasoning?

a) Density
b) Current Road Congestion (poor, poor streetcars... riding one along Queen, esp through the Entertainment District, sure gives the Streetcar a bad name)
c) Not too close, and not too far, from Bloor Line and the CN Rail Corridor

a) What density? Most of Queen is rather low density in comparison to streets like Front or Wellington or the waterfront.
b) Current road congestion will be significantly alleviated with the induction of the new streetcars. Beyond that, we don't need a multi-billion dollar subway to fix congestion. Simply re-designing the streetcar cracks could achieve the desired effect. For example, St. Clair style ROW would work just fine.
c) Not too far from the Bloor line means you are wasting money duplicating service. And it means you won't divert that many riders from Yonge-Bloor, the whole point of the project in the first place. As for not being too far from the CN Rail corridor...you can't be serious? It's way too far. And it gets even further away on the fringes of the core, making travel to/from current and future priority areas like Liberty Village, Bayfront, Don Lands, etc. more difficult.

I would have the Queen Line follow the 'U' turn from Queen Stn to Union, with only 1 Stop (@ Union) and then back up the 'U' to Osgoode Stn, then west along Queen.

Check out my ideas on GoogleMaps: http://maps.google.ca/maps/ms?hl=en...d=115978337128192551626.00046b87383d75ae7f708

I think real world practicality (cost, impact on operational considerations like speed, etc.) would exclude putting a kink like that in a line. Furthermore, most passengers are not necessarily destined for Union station. They are more likely travelling to destinations along Front or Wellington and could be better served by a subway dropping them off along that route, closer to their destination.
 
Last edited:
Ronces-King-Wellington-Front-Rail-Pape?

All streetcars would continue to operate as usual. Where the streetcars and subway overlap, (On Roncesvalles and King) Streetcars would provide local service while the subway would provide express. The Queen's Quay streetcar would connect to the King Streetcar via a dedicated right of way following The rail corridor, crossing over at Dunn Ave. The Queens Quay ROW would continue towards the portlands and would connect to the DRL at Cherry Street.

Bang on. Except I would use the rail corridor in the West instead of Roncesvalles. The opportunities for densification/brownfield development along the rail corridor far exceed Roncesvalles. Plus it will be a lot cheaper to build. Everything from Wellington and the rail corridor eastward is perfect though.
 
Ronces-King-Wellington-Front-Rail-Pape?

All streetcars would continue to operate as usual. Where the streetcars and subway overlap, (On Roncesvalles and King) Streetcars would provide local service while the subway would provide express. The Queen's Quay streetcar would connect to the King Streetcar via a dedicated right of way following The rail corridor, crossing over at Dunn Ave. The Queens Quay ROW would continue towards the portlands and would connect to the DRL at Cherry Street.

Great plan. Something close to what I would envision for the core.
 
a) What density? Most of Queen is rather low density in comparison to streets like Front or Wellington or the waterfront.
b) Current road congestion will be significantly alleviated with the induction of the new streetcars. Beyond that, we don't need a multi-billion dollar subway to fix congestion. Simply re-designing the streetcar cracks could achieve the desired effect. For example, St. Clair style ROW would work just fine.
c) Not too far from the Bloor line means you are wasting money duplicating service. And it means you won't divert that many riders from Yonge-Bloor, the whole point of the project in the first place. As for not being too far from the CN Rail corridor...you can't be serious? It's way too far. And it gets even further away on the fringes of the core, making travel to/from current and future priority areas like Liberty Village, Bayfront, Don Lands, etc. more difficult.



I think real world practicality (cost, impact on operational considerations like speed, etc.) would exclude putting a kink like that in a line. Furthermore, most passengers are not necessarily destined for Union station. They are more likely travelling to destinations along Front or Wellington and could be better served by a subway dropping them off along that route, closer to their destination.

Good Feedback, thanks :)

Now, I'm admittedly NOT a Toronto resident; but more of a 'Weekend' resident as my partner lives in Torotno and I have spent the better part of the last 3-4 years in and out of Toronto (on avg, about 2-3 days/week in your awesome City).

My 'Queen Line' would also double as the 'Downtown Relief' line, which is why it connects to the Bloor & Danforth Lines in their respective areas.

I would argue that Queen, especially West, is very dense with population (maybe not tall buildings)--kinda like Montreal's Plateau, which I believe is Canada's most dense neighbourhood despite lacking any really tall residential buildings.
Also, it would serve the West Donlands/Corktown/Distillery areas which is just waiting to explode with population. Maybe not directly, but very close to. Hell, why not have the 'Queen Line' dip down a bit to serve the area better, then come back up? A lil compromise?
The Queens Quay/Lakeshore East strip could be serviced by the Malvern-Kingston Rd LRT.

I would also argue, as a Union Station Commuter/Anti-Commuter (meaning travelling to Hamilton from Toronto in the AM... terrible idea, ps!) that commuters who get off at Union do indeed work in other parts of Toronto, not just the Downtown Core. So a stop @ Union would be necessary for two reasons;
i) Would give Commuters who work outside of the Core a chance to access the rest of the City, while not having to deal with the shoulder-to-shoulder BS (if you can even get on) we deal with now in the Central 'U';
ii) Would act as a general Downtown Relief Line, easing pedestrian/commuter-congestion at stations like Yonge/Bloor & St George (which is the whole reason for a DRL, no?)

If people want a Line along along the CN corridor, they can use the Lakeshore West LRT or Queens Quay/Lakeshore East LRT (in theory).

Edit: ALSO
b) Current road congestion will be significantly alleviated with the induction of the new streetcars. Beyond that, we don't need a multi-billion dollar subway to fix congestion. Simply re-designing the streetcar cracks could achieve the desired effect. For example, St. Clair style ROW would work just fine..

I'm not sure if vehicular congestion is the only problem in this area... infact on Fri night, while I was taking the Queen Streetcar, the driver had to get out of the streetcar about 3 times to get PEDESTRIANS out of the way. (not to mention the laying-of-the-horn the whole route).
If the Streetcar has ROW, that doesn't stop people from walking across it... especially in Parkdale where people are, well, let's just say a lil less 'obedient' or 'cognizant'of what's going on around them.
 
Last edited:
b) Current road congestion will be significantly alleviated with the induction of the new streetcars. Beyond that, we don't need a multi-billion dollar subway to fix congestion. Simply re-designing the streetcar cracks could achieve the desired effect. For example, St. Clair style ROW would work just fine.
*Totally agrees*

I think the best route for the DRL (as I've said before many times) is to tunnel down Pape, then go straight onto the rail corridor. Follow the rail corridor, then turn north to Wellington at Sherbourne. Have a station just west of Jarvis, then one at Yonge to link with King Station, one just west of bay to connect with Union, then one around University to connect with St. Andrew.
Then, it'd head south back to the rail corridor and continue until it hits Exhibition Station. There'd be a station at Spadina, to connect easily with the Skydome, Bathurst, and around Starachan. Then, turn north to get a station just south of Dufferin and Liberty, and a station around Jameston, pretty close to King. Or maybe just at King and Jameston. Then a station at Queen and Roncesvales, Howard Park, then Dundas West.
 
The reason why I chose Roncesvalles over the rail corridor was for the potential of an intermodal transit facility on that corner which would potentially connect the Following:
-GO Lakeshore Line
-501, 504, 508 streetcars
-Lakeshore West LRT (new Track from Exhibition to the Queensway)
-Possible Greyhound/GO bus stop (low cost stop on shoulder of the Gardiner making use of the existing pedestrian overpass)
-and of course the DRL

Placing a stop here would also provide hearty incentive to build on top of the TTC yard.
 
The reason why I chose Roncesvalles over the rail corridor was for the potential of an intermodal transit facility on that corner which would potentially connect the Following:
-GO Lakeshore Line
-501, 504, 508 streetcars
-Lakeshore West LRT (new Track from Exhibition to the Queensway)
-Possible Greyhound/GO bus stop (low cost stop on shoulder of the Gardiner making use of the existing pedestrian overpass)
-and of course the DRL

Placing a stop here would also provide hearty incentive to build on top of the TTC yard.

While I see the merits in putting a transit hub there, I really don't think that the added cost of tunnelling that much of the line is worth it. Using the rail corridor, the line will still intersect the King, Queen, Dundas, and College streetcars (just at different points).

That area per Transit City will already be a fairly significant hub (extension of the Waterfront West LRT, new terminus of the Queen streetcar, connection to the King streetcar). I personally think a bigger emphasis should be placed on a transit node at Dundas West. There may be condos along Bloor directly between the subway station and the GO station, but the land directly north of it is a parking lot. It would be a perfect opportunity to build a new underground streetcar loop (à la Union or Spadina) between the new DRL platform, current Dundas West platform, and GO platform. Turn Dundas West into something similar to Islington (even more so because of the GO).

While it would be nice to have a subway at the Queensway and Roncesvalles, I really don't think the extra tunnelling costs justify it. Also, putting it along the rail ROW opens up the possibility to 4 track the Western DRL in the future (using GO as the express), as per my fantasy map, which has been posted earlier.

Also, much more redevelopment potential along the rail corridor. Roncesvalles won't change much if a subway is put in there (neither will Queen for that matter, they're both very stable streets).
 
Here's the thing, most of the popular DRL alignment proposals out there seem to all make one critical flaw that makes it difficult for me to support them: how they seem to totally neglect the innercity/ downtown core. Apart from the CBD, all seem to just fringe the periphery (Wellington, Front, CNR). These alignments while cheaper and slightly faster, do next to nothing to alleviate the preexisting major streetcar routes through the downtown (501, 502, 503, 504, 505, 506, 508).

An innercity aligned subway would do far more for the preexisting customer base and provide real relief to the Bloor-Yonge interchange, as well the 510 Spadina Car and other routes used to get into and around the innercity. How does it aid highly trafficked neighbourhoods such as Chinatown, Queen West, Little Italy or Cabbagetown by placing the new subway line through newer waterfront communities where high-yielding ridership hasn't been tested and thus isn't guaranteed? For reference, most of the Sheppard Line's ridership comes from long-haul commuters transferring on rather than via local condominium residential use. Places like East Bayfront, West Don Lands and Liberty Village will have so many new streetcar routes soon-to-be running through them, that a subway line on top of that isn't necessary or warranted. The innercity needs the relief more.

So what if Toronto took a page from Montreal and utilized deeper tunnel-bores to build the DRL instead? If this were done and and expropriation could be kept to a minimum it would be possible to construct the following Downtown Relief Line, which I think everyone would appreciate:

MapArtimage.jpg


As you can see it leaves open the possibility to build a true and not piecemeal Queen Line in the future, if warranted, meaning that all of downtown Toronto would win out via this deal. I open to any suggestions and critiquing on the map, and I'm actually considering submitting a formal petition to City Hall (with UT's blessing I hope).
 
Subways should be built based on where the existing demand lies. If they also happen to run through an area that can be redeveloped, that's a bonus - not a requirement. The DRL should run along Queen so that it can offer 100,000 existing streetcar riders a quicker way into the city. The Bloor Line is a huge success and is integral to Bloor West and the Danforth Avenues, even though neither have seen much new development over the past 40 years.

Travel time savings could be achieved by building only 1 stop between Bloor and Queen, and maybe even considering express trains in a double level tunnel. In both cases, stick to the bare minimum code requirements, and avoid grand stations at all cost!
 
Subways should be built based on where the existing demand lies. If they also happen to run through an area that can be redeveloped, that's a bonus - not a requirement. The DRL should run along Queen so that it can offer 100,000 existing streetcar riders a quicker way into the city. The Bloor Line is a huge success and is integral to Bloor West and the Danforth Avenues, even though neither have seen much new development over the past 40 years.

Travel time savings could be achieved by building only 1 stop between Bloor and Queen, and maybe even considering express trains in a double level tunnel. In both cases, stick to the bare minimum code requirements, and avoid grand stations at all cost!

I'm not totally against a Queen Subway. But I think a Queen Subway is a completely different issue than the DRL. I think they need to disentangled. If we built our subway as a network, then we wouldn't have this problem and we could serve all the different needs that there are without compromising like I think would happen here if we tried to serve a million different needs with one line.
 

Back
Top