News   Apr 17, 2024
Sustainability Month: The Combined Power of Bike + Subway + RER
 984     0 
News   Apr 17, 2024
Daniels' OMG2 Offers EV Charging at Brampton Condo Homes
 321     0 
News   Apr 17, 2024
Canada Lands Company Advances Downsview Lands Transformation
 1.9K     1 

GO Transit: 50 Possible Sites for new Stations

Allandale25 said:
So would Metrolinx have to expropriate the spur walking/cycling trail from the City? Would the rail-over-rail grade separation and construction of the spur even have been included in the overall RER budget? Or, would that be hard to tell because the RER budget wasn't broken down by line?
Click to expand...

No as the Richmond Hill line is not part of RER.
 
Allandale25 said:
So would Metrolinx have to expropriate the spur walking/cycling trail from the City? Would the rail-over-rail grade separation and construction of the spur even have been included in the overall RER budget? Or, would that be hard to tell because the RER budget wasn't broken down by line?
Click to expand...

Not sure how the transaction would work between the City and Metrolinx re: the Leaside Spur. Perhaps the City could sell it for $1, or work out a deal where Metrolinx builds a station in exchange for acquiring it. But re: RER, as noted it's not planned for the RH line's near future. However, if it's decided to reroute the line onto the Don Branch/Leaside Spur (and have a rail/rail grade-separation at the Midtown corridor), I personally think it would be wise to compliment this investment with upgrades to RER sooner rather than later. The realignment would make the line much more useful and faster than the existing meandering, station-deprived, flood-prone route.

But regardless, even w/out RER it's without question ridership would increase substantially with a realignment. Under the current plans for upgrades to the existing RH route, it's believed ridership will jump from 4,800 am peak between Union and RH (2009) to 8,700 between Union and Bloomington (2031). However with new stations between Oriole and Union, and an 8min reduction in travel time by keeping out of the valley, this 2031 projection should be much higher. How high? Hopefully we'll find out if Metrolinx decides to pursue it. One thing I'd be interested in is to what effect diversion onto the Leaside Spur/Don Branch would have on ridership projections for Yonge North and DRL Long. With proper fare integration, it could be quite substantial.

In case you were interested, here are some cost numbers from a 1986 study. Today these numbers would probably be much higher than the existing capital investment planned for the RH line (i.e - $856M to 2031 for new tracks, signalling, fleet, and extension to Bloomington).

Implementation of the full 10 and 20-min. service levels on the Combined CN/CP route requires a new mainline track6 on the Don Branch of the CP Belleville Subdivision from near downtown to the point where it joins the major CP line just west of Millwood Road in Leaside. Two new mainline tracks for co mmuter service are re quired from there through the Leaside industrial area, to a point just north of Eglinton Avenue where they would join the CN Leaside Branch by a proposed rail/rail grade separation at "Donlands". One new mainline track is required on the CN Leaside Branch through Don Mills, and on to Richmond Hill via the CN Bala Subdivision. The upgrading for full service would provide for railway operations fully grade-separated from all other forms of traffic over the entire route7, and its construction would have long term environmental impacts which are thought to be acceptable. New or relocated stations can feasibly be established on the route at several major cross streets, so as to connect with bus routes operating in all commuter rail ridership "catchment" areas of interest; also, it is thought marginally feasible to include an inter-connection at the Bloor-Danforth subway should ridership forecasts justify that station.

6 A long and expensive ($13 million) new viaduct to carry the second mainline track over the Bayview Avenue Extension, the CN Rail Bala Subdivision and the Don River near the “Brickworks" in the Don Valley is required only forthe full 10-min. service level​

7 Excepting a minimal number of private level crossings and the public one at Langstaff Road north of Thornhill.​

Use of this shorter (by 2 miles) route through Don Mills and Leaside would reduce trip time between Highway 401 and Union Station by 6 to 8 minutes, a 25% to 35% reduction as compared to continued use of the present all-CN Bala Subdivision route. However, there is a potential problem in the Leaside industrial area where the property required for the proposed Leslie Street Extension overlaps that necessary for implementation of this Combined CN/CP commuter rail route; studies need to be undertaken with a view to defining how these two proposals may be made compatible with one another.
Click to expand...

RH-realignment-costs-1986.jpg
 

Attachments

  • RH-realignment-costs-1986.jpg
    RH-realignment-costs-1986.jpg
    42.3 KB · Views: 954
I really think you'd end up tunnelling it up Don Mills (with stations at Eglinton and Lawrence), maybe double tunneling with a Don Mills subway, and then punching it back out onto the rail ROW just west of Don Mills.

If you were to do that, it begs the question of whether you NEED a relief subway all the way to Sheppard....take care of the Line 2 offtake with a southern relief line, and then take care of the north-of-bloor on an upgraded Richmond Hill line.
 
The City of Toronto owns the Leaside Spur alignment specifically to allow for the rail to be reinstalled there in the future, if necessary. They've kept it zoned as a Transportation Corridor for that reason.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.
 
smallspy said:
The City of Toronto owns the Leaside Spur alignment specifically to allow for the rail to be reinstalled there in the future, if necessary. They've kept it zoned as a Transportation Corridor for that reason.
Click to expand...

jcam said:
Looks like it's zone 'O' for Open Space, but 'O' space can be used for "Park, Public Utility or Transportation Use'. Interesting.
Click to expand...

Excellent catches you guys.
 
MTown said:
Yus! Resurrect Parkadale Station. I won't live here anymore but I called it a while ago and I need to see it done.
Click to expand...
Parkdale has so much potential to be a hub with the Queen, King, and Roncy Streetcars all meeting there. A go station seems so natural.
 
smallspy said:
The City of Toronto owns the Leaside Spur alignment specifically to allow for the rail to be reinstalled there in the future, if necessary. They've kept it zoned as a Transportation Corridor for that reason.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.
Click to expand...

Very interesting. So we could see a Barrie line sale from the City to GO?

Or would there be people at City Hall who can't see the big picture and try and stop this transaction? (rhetorical question)

Even better if the city decides to re-lay tracks there would be few non-frivolous legal arguments to the residents who live near the tracks. Their real estate agent/lawyer should have informed them of this fact and the risk that it could be converted back into a working corridor.
 
I don't imagine that a DRL would replace both the 501 and 504 lines.....personally I would argue for keeping the 501 and putting the DRL closer to King Street. I believe 504 has the heavier ridership now. King would be the better streetcar-free auto corridor, too.

Personally I think that the streetcar adds greatly to Queen's current ambience - yes it's a painfully slow route, and the streetcar is a form of traffic control, but that's the charm. At the same time, I wonder if the character of Queen can survive the development that is already coming.

- Paul
 
DonValleyRainbow said:
You guys keep referencing a Queen streetcar connecting at the Parkdale (Sunnyside) hub. Why not an extended DRL (assuming it will go along Queen)?
Click to expand...

That's a pretty big assumption though. I'd venture to say that it's more likely to be under King, in which case a station at Queen & Dufferin would be advisable. There are so many interconnected pieces that still haven't fallen into place yet, that it's difficult to plan for connections at this point. Once SmartTrack & RER integration get ironed out, I think it'll be a lot easier to make judgements on how important a Parkdale station will be.
 
gweed123 said:
That's a pretty big assumption though. I'd venture to say that it's more likely to be under King, in which case a station at Queen & Dufferin would be advisable. There are so many interconnected pieces that still haven't fallen into place yet, that it's difficult to plan for connections at this point. Once SmartTrack & RER integration get ironed out, I think it'll be a lot easier to make judgements on how important a Parkdale station will be.
Click to expand...
I'd think that it wouldn't matter if a Queen or a King alignment were selected for a Sunnyside station near the intersection of Roncesvalle and Queen/King.
 
nfitz said:
I'd think that it wouldn't matter if a Queen or a King alignment were selected for a Sunnyside station near the intersection of Roncesvalle and Queen/King.
Click to expand...

You're right. I misinterpreted "Parkdale" as meaning Queen & Dufferin. Yes, a station at Sunnyside/Roncesvalles would work, regardless of what option was chosen for the DRL.
 
The old Parkdale station was at Jameson and Springhurst, but closed in 1911 with the opening of Sunnyside station at Queen and King. What killed Sunnyside (in the 1970s) is that GO chose not to stop there.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top