News   Nov 01, 2024
 2.2K     14 
News   Nov 01, 2024
 2.6K     3 
News   Nov 01, 2024
 790     0 

Downtown Rapid Transit Expansion Study

Optimal solution should be...


  • Total voters
    253
So, uh, is the Downtown Rapid Transit line the DRL? Or is it something else? I'm confused.

It's weird that I've never seen this thread before.
The thread is about the the TTC's Downtown Rapid Transit Expansion Study that started last spring, and is looking at new rapid transit options downtown, including a potential DRL-like subway, and how to optimise this in relation to the current streetcar and GO network, including the option of adding GO stations.

See http://www3.ttc.ca/About_the_TTC/Projects_and_initiatives/Downtown_Rapid_Transit_Expansion_Study
 
Presumably it would need a new yard; I'd think where they are currently planning the LRV yard.

And I'd think that if it was heavy-rail, there would be a connection somewhere ... presumably Eglinton West, as that's what they were planning in the 1990s.

Could they store Eglinton trains in Wilson yard in that case? It looks huge, and in addition, there is some vacant land between Allen Rd and the existing subway tracks.
 
The LRT lines will use a Proof of Purchase fare system, so they will be full of people who haven't paid their fare. Once these fare evaders get inside a fare-paid zone, there is no way of catching them anymore. So fare control areas (and people to run them) would be required for interchanges between Subway and LRT lines. Converting Eglinton and DRL to subway would vastly simplify the transfers at Pape, Eglinton and Eglinton West by negating the need for new fare control zones. These transfer stations would be cheaper to build and operate, as well as more convenient for travelers.

Whoa, a lot of assumptions. Here's another: the system will be using electronic fares by the time any LRT lines enter service so none of this really matters.
 
Could they store Eglinton trains in Wilson yard in that case? It looks huge, and in addition, there is some vacant land between Allen Rd and the existing subway tracks.
Wilson would have to be expanded to handle trains for the Yonge extension. It would also have to be expanded to handle Eglinton. It's a possibility. It's all fantasy really as there's no sign that the RT will be derailed.
 
Whoa, a lot of assumptions. Here's another: the system will be using electronic fares by the time any LRT lines enter service so none of this really matters.

I don't think it's a big assumption that they will be using POP because the TTC clearly stated that they would use it, and neither of the other two fare options are viable. Fare-paid zoned Pay As You Enter (subway style) would require that stops have fare barriers. Possible for underground LRT stops, but not likely for surface stops. On board PAYE (bus style) would be possible, but would make loading extremely slow, given the size of the LRVs.

As for electronic fare collection, I don't see how that affects anything at all. In the end, you need something to stop people from getting on vehicles for free, whether it be a barrier that checks you've paid, or a person who randomly checks people's fares.
 
In October, the price of a barrel oil was going around $83. Before Christmas, it had gone over $91 (Christmas Eve in London the price for Brent crude oil touched $94.54 before retreating a bit). That translates into higher prices for gasoline and diesel oil at the pumps. It also means there will be a bigger demand for more transit services and bicycle lanes, as people try to find alternative means of transport (despite what the Ford brothers say).

That also means a larger demand for a Downtown Rapid Transit sooner if not later, in addition to other rapid transit lines as well around Toronto. I just hope the TTC study includes information on outside fuel markets as part of their discussions.

While the streetcars in the downtown do run on electricity, the buses could be facing price increases in their fuel supplies.
 
I really don't understand why anyone would be betting on gas carrying us through. There's no way for the future to not move away from it, and the sooner we do it, the better it is for everyone and the smoother the transition.

Switching over to electrified railways, metros, LRT, and trolley busses for almost the entire city is a good idea. Perhaps switching to hydrogen fuel or electric power in our busses could be a good idea. As a taxpayer, I'd gladly pay for all that infrastructure. I'll benefit a ton from it now and in the future, my children will, and the planet will. I don't get why people can't rationalize that.
 
Meanwhile...

Beijing (pop. 22,000,000) opened five new suburban subway and light rail lines.

From news.xinhuanet.com:

Beijing opened five new suburban subway and light rail lines Thursday as it moves to tackle the city's chronic traffic congestion problem through the development of its rapid mass transit network.

The five new lines -- Fangshan Line, Changping Line, the first phase of the No. 15 Line, Yizhuang Line and Daxing Line -- have a combined length of 108 kilometers, bringing the total length of metro in the Chinese capital to 336 kilometers.

The new lines bring the total number of metro lines in the city to 14.

The new lines cost nearly 61 billion yuan (about 9.2 billion U.S. dollars) to build.

Beijing's metro network now hauls 5.02 million passengers per day.

"The opening of the five new lines strengthens links between Beijing's downtown area and the suburban districts of Changping, Shunyi, Fangshan, Daxing and Yizhuang. The new lines will help citizens travel around the city with convenience," said Li Xiaosong, deputy director of the Beijing Municipal Committee of Communications.

TRAFFIC WOES

Massive traffic jams have long been a headache for Beijing, a city of 20 million people and 4.8 million vehicles. This year, an average 2,000 new cars hit the city's streets every day.

A week ago, authorities in Beijing announced they will slash new car registrations to ease traffic gridlock. Next year, the city will allow only 240,000 vehicles to be registered, about two-thirds less than this year.

Moreover, Beijing municipal government agencies and public institutions were ordered not to increase the size of their motor vehicle fleets over the next five years.

Other measures include higher parking fees in the city's central areas, stricter traffic rules for cars registered outside Beijing.

One other measure is an odd-even license plate number system that allows cars to be driven every other day in rush hour in some congested areas.

Officials have acknowledged the restrictions will not automatically solve the city's traffic woes.

"China is urbanizing quickly. Road construction cannot ease traffic congestion," Li said.

"Developing public transport, especially rapid rail transit, is an important move for Beijing and other cities, to ease traffic congestion and improve urban functionality," she said.

Beijing is building more subway lines. The number of lines in the city will reach 19 by 2015. Then, their combined length will total 561 kilometers. By 2020, the total subway length will increase to 1,000 kilometers, she said.

URBAN EXPANSION

The five newly-opened metro lines are expected not only to ease traffic congestion in downtown Beijing but also to boost economic and social development of the once rural, backward suburban areas.

Lured by the travel conveniences brought by the new lines, many young white-collars, who could not afford an apartment in inner city due to skyrocketing prices, have turned to those suburban districts to settle.

Along with the construction of new metro lines, municipal authorities have stepped up the building of new shopping malls, hospitals and schools in those suburban districts, hoping to turn them into satellite cities.

"It is getting more and more convenient to live in the suburban districts," said citizen Chen Bangbao in Daxing.

In addition, Beijing officials have said authorities are considering extending the city's metro lines to some towns in neighboring Hebei Province.

Nationwide, the country's metro construction is in full swing as about 30 cities have been building or designing a total of more than 110 metro lines this year, including Shanghai, Hangzhou, Xi'an and Chongqing.

Meanwhile, city-to-city metro lines, such as the Shanghai-to-Kunshan and Guangzhou-to-Foshan connections, have created a new kind of urban dynamism.

"That is a new breakthrough in China's metro construction for different cities to be connected by metro lines," said Prof. Sun Zhang, from the Institute of Railway and Urban Rail Transit at the Shanghai-based Tongji University.

"That is also an attempt to break the barriers caused by administrative divisions," he said.

Of course, compared with Toronto's population at 2,500,000, Beijing has 10x the population, so we should divide any of Beijing's numbers by 10. Note that Beijing uses heavy rail and light rail as synonyms for rapid transit.
 
Meanwhile...

Beijing (pop. 22,000,000) opened five new suburban subway and light rail lines.

From news.xinhuanet.com:



Of course, compared with Toronto's population at 2,500,000, Beijing has 10x the population, so we should divide any of Beijing's numbers by 10. Note that Beijing uses heavy rail and light rail as synonyms for rapid transit.
But they can pay the workers cheaper since there is a lack of human rights so price per km could be so low paying 2 dollars a day or hour
 
China's standard of living is lower, so of course costs are lower. But at the same time, they're not building transit with slave labour or something. I'm sure they get paid fair wages for China.
 
China's standard of living is lower, so of course costs are lower. But at the same time, they're not building transit with slave labour or something. I'm sure they get paid fair wages for China.
But, at the same time, the government will have less funds per capita to build transit like this, which matters a lot for materials.

And given this seems to be a highly federalized and even just high profile project, I'd expect workers to have more than fair wages and generally good construction standards.

Also, comparing Beijing to the GTA (the golden horseshoe may be a better analogue,) the GTA has only 1/4 of the population, not 1/10.
 
paring Beijing to the GTA (the golden horseshoe may be a better analogue,) the GTA has only 1/4 of the population, not 1/10.

I understand your point here, but I would argue that the GTA population of 6 million is the relevant comparison, so you would be right when you say 1/4. However, Beijing is organized as a circle, around which crawl multiple and growing ring roads. It looks a lot more like Calgary than Toronto. The latter is constrained by the lake, and the horseshoe is a small band of people with a tiny hub (Hamilton), not worthy of subway expansion (maybe eventually, though, but for now GO seems the best option. The GTA is a half circle with some wart-like offshoots like brampton and Mississauga, with long arms (Oshawa, niagara, etc.). In any event, Beijing's "Hamilton" is Tianjin, another sprawling metropolis of 12 million!

Actually, Toronto's urban form is very conducive to rapid transit, given its tendency to generate multiple centres (North York, Scarborough, etc.), and in the future the city could use subway connections to all of these as a strategic asset. In the meantime, it is downtown that needs the subway most.
 
Last edited:
I understand your point here, but I would argue that the GTA population of 6 million is the relevant comparison, so you would be right when you say 1/4. However, Beijing is organized as a circle, around which crawl multiple and growing ring roads. It looks a lot more like Calgary than Toronto. The latter is constrained by the lake, and the horseshoe is a small band of people with a tiny hub (Hamilton), not worthy of subway expansion (maybe eventually, though, but for now GO seems the best option. The GTA is a half circle with some wart-like offshoots like brampton and Mississauga, with long arms (Oshawa, niagara, etc.). In any event, Beijing's "Hamilton" is Tianjin, another sprawling metropolis of 12 million!

Actually, Toronto's urban form is very conducive to rapid transit, given its tendency to generate multiple centres (North York, Scarborough, etc.), and in the future the city could use subway connections to all of these as a strategic asset. In the meantime, it is downtown that needs the subway most.
The GTA's six million is still a number to work with. Given that population for Toronto and using Beijing as an analogue (and remember, Beijing's subway's going to keep growing at a breakneck pace and that Toronto's population will be growing significantly in the future too,) we'd need about twice as much subway as we currently do to compare.
And also Hamilton's half as far from Toronto as Tanjin, while Tanjin has about 10x the area of Hamilton. I get the idea, but there are some differences.

And yes, Toronto definitely has tonnes of opportunities for transit. And who knows what the future could hold? Toronto's population could double in 50 years.
 
The GTA's six million is still a number to work with. Given that population for Toronto and using Beijing as an analogue (and remember, Beijing's subway's going to keep growing at a breakneck pace and that Toronto's population will be growing significantly in the future too,) we'd need about twice as much subway as we currently do to compare.
And also Hamilton's half as far from Toronto as Tanjin, while Tanjin has about 10x the area of Hamilton. I get the idea, but there are some differences.

And yes, Toronto definitely has tonnes of opportunities for transit. And who knows what the future could hold? Toronto's population could double in 50 years.

But what's 'Toronto' you mean the GTA ( or even the GGTA) - I think were very much heading toward decentralization - we're seeing it more and more - with nodes in MCC - Markham / VCC / NYCC / ... with a lot of people actually 'working' in Markham / VCC (or at least it seems that way in the future).

At the same time people will still want to live downtown and the like - I think outbound traffic is going to increase greatly - inbound traffic will increase as well but to a lesser extent. In other words - transit policies must change as while it seems Union can serve as a hub it can't all be about inbound trips in the AM / outbound trips in the PM. I'm not even sure Union will work as a hub in the long term as we may not need a hub.

There are many arguments for it but I don't like de-centralization and it's unfortunate were moving in that direction but that seems to be our future.
 
Couldn't find the DRL specific thread, so I'm posting here.
Metrolinx has a report for their next board meeting about the Union Station/DRL studies.

The conclusion from the Union Station demand study seems to be that the only way to meet 2031 demand levels is a second main station. Option 4B (slide 11) would end the Georgetown and Barrie lines at Bathurst and have a DRL from Pape through Bathurst to Exhibition. If it gets more support for DRL this is great - although I don't think the Queen St routing they show is ideal.
 

Back
Top