Neutrino
Senior Member
Bloor-Yonge has needed relief since the late 80s, no? I don't know about the rest of the line.
Fantasy or not, these kind of built in redundancies to the network would be nice. Especially since we are playing with the same rolling stock here in Toronto.
This is why I am moderately supportive of Sheppard West extension, despite low projected ridership. (Access to Wilson Yard is another excellent reason)
I think there was a discussion in the RLS thread about this and someone suggested that the put the wye on the north side because of the elevation.The design of the transfer/terminal stations and the transfer tracks to get trains for the Relief Line to and from the Greenwood yards, are such that should work (IE. Bloor viaduct) prevent through service on Line 2, ALL downtown bound passengers would have to walk to and from Line 2's Pape Station to the Relief Line's Danforth Station to get downtown. With a different design, Line 2 trains could continue down the Relief Line (as a "tripper"), in such a situation where passengers can't continue any further than Broadview Station, like theses days.
Bloor-Yonge has needed relief since the late 80s, no? I don't know about the rest of the line.
Bloor-Yonge has needed relief since the late 80s, no? I don't know about the rest of the line.
Well, RLN has the secondary function of reducing transfer volumes onto Line 2. I understand Line 2 to Line 1 transfers are the biggest problem, but the reserve volume is also very large and it's still relevant.
That’s exactly what’s being proposed. Did you forget what thread you’re on? The only reason why it doesn’t go all the way at once is that is being proposed, planned, designed, built, and opened in phases.So...by this logic, wouldn't it actually make even more sense to extend the Relief Line further north into Markham or connect with the Sheppard Subway? Think about it, with more coverage, it takes more riders away from the Yonge Subway, thereby reducing the number of commuters transferring from line 1 to Line 2 at Bloor-Yonge, and shifting them over to Pape-Danforth?
I don't really support RLN going into Markham/York Region because transit service to that area should be in the form of regional rail and BRT for connections to the outer 416.
And it lends itself yet again to a *Metro* type of vehicle to run underground in tunnel downtown, and above grade in the north. Mainline compatible, an RER variant, and able to stone two birds with one kill. More if York Region cares to expand it.The elevated aspect is one reason I think *maybe* it might be wise to go with a narrower train profile. Not by much, but slimming down the trains would also mean slimming down an above-grade guideway - thus making it slightly more palatable. Say, parts of Don Mills, maybe Leslie, maybe Woodbine, maybe Sheppard East if it veered that way. Generally in more suburban areas where the road widths are massive.
Maybe when the Relief Line reaches Sheppard (Consumers Road Station?), it splits into two branches. Branch B continues north under Victoria Park Avenue to the sprawl of Markham, while Branch B follows the "old" Line 4 Sheppard to Yonge-Sheppard Station and further west to Sheppard West Station.
My mistake, I thought @Neutrino was arguing against an extension. It's been a long day.That’s exactly what’s being proposed. Did you forget what thread you’re on? The only reason why it doesn’t go all the way at once is that is being proposed, planned, designed, built, and opened in phases.
I'm not sure this constitutes "metro" but moreso rapid transit since the proposal has it running as an elevated rather than along the Richmond Hill Line. New York city basically does the same thing on almost all its lines.And it lends itself yet again to a *Metro* type of vehicle to run underground in tunnel downtown, and above grade in the north. Mainline compatible, an RER variant, and able to stone two birds with one kill. More if York Region cares to expand it.