Downtown Rapid Transit Expansion Study

[Jonny5]

the Queen/Yonge streetcar/subway station is already built.

It's a 60 year old roughed-in (meaning 95% incomplete) underground streetcar stop that has been partly re-purposed as a pedestrian walkway.
It's existence should (and will) have no impact on deciding where to route any DRL subway.

 

[M II A II R II K]

A Queen Subway would work if i dipped down to Wellington and Bay with only an underground walkway to the surrounding stations. So it can have a stop at Jarvis, Wellington, and then Osgoode.

 

[sixrings]

the walk from Queen and Bay to the financial buildings is about the same if not shorter then from Union to the financial buildings. Obviously it varries from each building. I dont understand why Queen would not be at the tops of more peoples lists. From queen you could access both whats north such as dundas square and the hospitals as well you could access the buildings south toward union. A lot of people currently get into union via Go and then take the subway north to Dundas, this would help this. As well it would give people two options of destinations downtown versus a king or union alignment which basically would drop you off at the same spot. Diversity should be a plus..

 

[M II A II R II K]

And Queen can support short range rapid transit like the Bloor line and would be a hell of a lot better than the current slow streetcar.

 

[Filip]

If a DRL ever goes down Queen/King, its station in the financial district should be located midway between the Yonge and University lines. Assuming this line goes down Queen; a station would be located near Bay, in front of City Hall, and could have walkways linking it to both Queen and Osgoode stations. That way there's no need to build two, expensive, interchanges in the heart of the city.

 

[sixrings]

If a DRL ever goes down Queen/King, its station in the financial district should be located midway between the Yonge and University lines. Assuming this line goes down Queen; a station would be located near Bay, in front of City Hall, and could have walkways linking it to both Queen and Osgoode stations. That way there's no need to build two, expensive, interchanges in the heart of the city.

I would support that idea.

 

[Markster]

Assuming they could get away with the minimum 200m walk for the transfer (accessibility requirements, etc), the single station idea would be interesting. However, I'd expect it to have a 3 platform setup to handle the load.

 

[Paleo]

It's probably already been mentioned, but the comment that a Queen DRL would be too far from the workers downtown isn't really true. It's only slightly north of the financial district, which isn't exactly a big distance. But there's a lot more to downtown employment than the financial district. There's City Hall, the courts, office buildings on Queen, converted warehouses, College Park, Queen's Park, the hospitals, UofT, Ryerson, government buildings.... All of these employment hubs are quite a hike from Union and would be much better served by a Queen alignment. Let the electrified GO trains serve Union, a new subway should be to the north.

Why wouldn't people just stay on the Bloor line that they're already using and transfer at St. George for half of those places on your list???

 

[dunkalunk]

I'd actually rather have two stations. One between Yonge and Bay and the other between University and Simcoe, although it really depends on what infrastructure already exists. Putting a main transfer point closer to Simcoe would also be a good way of filling out the PATH network between Roy Thompson hall and Union.

 

[MisterF]

Why wouldn't people just stay on the Bloor line that they're already using and transfer at St. George for half of those places on your list???

Because they're not already on the Bloor line. They're in the Beaches or Riverdale or Parkdale. We have to stop thinking of the DRL as something only to relieve existing subway lines. There are countless neighbourhoods south of Bloor that are poorly served by transit and would use the DRL as their main way of getting around. A Queen alignment would serve those areas better than a Union Station alignment. A Queen alignment would bring mass transit to areas that don't already have it, a Union alignment wouldn't. Building a subway along a frequent regional rail line would be wasteful duplication.

Ryerson is at Dundus, Queens Park at Queens Park subway, hospitals at St. Patrick and Queens Park, College Park has College on Yonge line and Queens Park at University, City Hall has Queen on Yonge line and Osgood on University line, and government buildngs have Dundas and College. So these areas are well served already

That's like saying the financial district or Union Station are well served already because they're on the subway. Point is that a Queen alignment would be more useful to more of downtown than a Union alignment.

the walk from Queen and Bay to the financial buildings is about the same if not shorter then from Union to the financial buildings. Obviously it varries from each building. I dont understand why Queen would not be at the tops of more peoples lists. From queen you could access both whats north such as dundas square and the hospitals as well you could access the buildings south toward union. A lot of people currently get into union via Go and then take the subway north to Dundas, this would help this. As well it would give people two options of destinations downtown versus a king or union alignment which basically would drop you off at the same spot. Diversity should be a plus..

Your last point is important. The system should have reduncancy, it should serve more than one area and not have all its lines meet at one spot. That's a big strength of the DRL along Queen.

 

[Hipster Duck]

I'm starting to come around to the Queen alignment too. Originally, my beef with this alignment was that it did away with a central hub (Union Station) that allowed for easier transfer from other modes (GO train, GO bus, future coach, and VIA). However, VIA and coach passengers are a relatively small market, and GO train passengers could transfer to the DRL at Queen west (Parkdale) and Queen East (Degrassi), if those stations were built.

A subway along Queen means that everything downtown from Dupont to Front street - from Woodbine to Roncessvalles - is within 1 kilometre of a subway station. That's equivalent to a 15 minute walk. In other words, the majority of "urban" Toronto would be within walking distance of a rapid transit station.

 

[toraerach]

I wouldn't be opposed to a Queen alignment. As a stand-alone line it looks pretty good. Looking at it from a network perspective, however, I do have some concerns with it.

Firstly, I think it's better for the DRL to intercept the Yonge line too far South rather than too far North. Obviously the alignment chosen must attempt to minimize the amount of transfers on to the YUS altogether in order to fulfill its role as a relief line, but regardless of the route there will be huge amounts of transfers at the Yonge station. If more of those transfers are Northbound in during the morning peak, it would put less pressure on the overwhelmed Southbound Yonge trains (of course, that assumes frequent all-day GO service doesn't cause further capacity constraints).

Secondly, from a surface network perspective, it seems to me that the tracks along King are far more expendable than the tracks along Queen (assuming tracks are ripped up when the DRL opens for service). Queen East and Kingston Rd. could potentially lose their track connections to the rest of the network - as could the new Ashbridges carhouse - unless the TTC wants to waste money maintaining large stretches of non-revenue trackage. Losing the tracks on Queen would also make diversions more difficult on the other East-West routes. A fully built out DRL should cross Queen twice. This means that, even if it doesn't run along Queen, it will improve transit for all the people living on the extremities of the 501. Streetcar riders along Lake Shore, Kingston Rd., and Queen through the Beaches could all transfer to the subway instead of sitting in traffic through Queen's most congested stretches. The central part of Queen should remain all about local traffic.

 

[car4041]

Because they're not already on the Bloor line. They're in the Beaches or Riverdale or Parkdale. We have to stop thinking of the DRL as something only to relieve existing subway lines. There are countless neighbourhoods south of Bloor that are poorly served by transit and would use the DRL as their main way of getting around.

I don't disagree, but the thing is, the whole conception of the DRL *is* something to relieve existing subway lines -- hence the "R" in its name -- so it had better perform the relief function well. I would love to see a new downtown subway, but realistically, that has never been the official justification for the DRL. If it gets built, it will be because the crowding at Bloor-Yonge reaches hazardous levels and no more trains can be squeezed down Yonge. The unfortunate political reality is that this appears to be the only way to justify a new subway downtown -- regardless of how much the King/Queen corridor might deserve a subway on its own merits.

 

[CapitalSeven]

If a DRL ever goes down Queen/King, its station in the financial district should be located midway between the Yonge and University lines.

This is a terrible suggestion. First, you would have 90% of the ridership of the line - potentially over 50,000 people per hour if it is built out in both directions - trying to exit from a single station. That sounds like fun. Second, it would be a three or four minute walk down a tunnel to transfer to the Yonge-University line. The tunnels would have to be huge, and would cost about as much as building a second station. So, why not just build the second station?

 

[11th]

This is a terrible suggestion. First, you would have 90% of the ridership of the line - potentially over 50,000 people per hour if it is built out in both directions - trying to exit from a single station. That sounds like fun.

Union has around 102 000 usage per day, so 50 000 people per hour might be a bit overestimated?

Second, it would be a three or four minute walk down a tunnel to transfer to the Yonge-University line. The tunnels would have to be huge, and would cost about as much as building a second station. So, why not just build the second station?

What percentage of riders would be transfering from that "City Hall" station to Yonge/University line? Wouldn't the majority of them be within walking distance of their destinations (via PATH or surface streets)?