Toronto Ontario Line 3 | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx

allengeorge said:
I would be surprised to see the Sheppard line extended in the next 4 years. I know @Northern Light has said work is being done behind the scenes, so that’s where I’m most likely to be proven wrong.
Click to expand...

High level planning is under way; however, an EA is not imminent, no Business Case has been done either, at standard Mx pace if they were authorized to go ahead w/those in the fall, it would still be 2025 before a tender process was even initiated, and that would probably take a year to close.

So I don't think construction will be underway between now and 2026; though you might see the ball start rollling in slow motion.
 
yes - Metrolinx's focus right now is getting the initial 4 subway projects off the ground. I imagine Sheppard will see more movement later on as those projects see their procurement processes close out.

I expect by 2026 we'll have seen an EA and business case completed, if the line isn't actually in construction by then.
 
M II A II R II K said:
Next they'll propose a Ford Line, subway of course.
Click to expand...

From Michael's House to Doug's House.

The trains will all look like Black Escalades; and Hash will be decriminalized on that line only!

LOL
 
More Ontario Line early works will cause the demolition of the CP Leaside Station. In its post-war heyday, the station was quite striking. But in its final years as an office for CP Communication and CP Police, it was renovated beyond recognition.

Leaside_CPR_Station_r-3374.jpg


 
ShonTron said:
More Ontario Line early works will cause the demolition of the CP Leaside Station. In its post-war heyday, the station was quite striking. But in its final years as an office for CP Communication and CP Police, it was renovated beyond recognition.

<snip>
Click to expand...
Beautiful building. I love the mixing of different kinds of masonry.

I went to Google Maps to see what it looks like today, and yeesh! It looks like a school portable! Nothing of value lost here.
 
Mystic Point said:
Toronto has a distaste for large public projects. The Ontario Line will never happen.
Click to expand...
Solid troll post.
syn said:
They weren't planning for the immediate future 50 years ago. It was something to implement ahead of time. The Yonge Line has essentially been at capacity for quite a while. Overcrowding (before COVID) was a serious issue.

We should've had a relief line up and running decades ago. Planners knew this long before that.
Click to expand...
We would have easily had some form of a relief line by now if downtown was ever interested. From 1983 to 2010, it was rejection after rejection after rejection.

Planners can only do so much.
smallspy said:
The former Leaside Yard is the large swath of land adjacent to the CP mainline, roughly centered on the Overlea overpass.

It seems to me that the ideal situation for almost all aggrieved parties - not just those from Thorncliffe Park - would have been for Metrolinx to buy the entirety of the lands, pay to realign the CP mainline to the north of the property, and then use the remaining to allow for both the maintenance facility for the Ontario Line and layover storage for GO trains.

I'm not certain that they've ever acknowledged it as an option.

Dan
Click to expand...
Maybe it was pursued but CP tried to soak Metrolinx.
M II A II R II K said:
When will they come up with actual names for the Bathurst and Spadina stations.
Click to expand...
Urban Toronto Station 1, Urban Toronto Station 2......
 
GenerationW said:
We would have easily had some form of a relief line by now if downtown was ever interested. From 1983 to 2010, it was rejection after rejection after rejection.

Planners can only do so much.
Click to expand...

Of course - that's where funding and support is required.

The DRL was in the Network 2011 plan. I don't think the city cancelled it.
 
innsertnamehere said:
The DRL In the Network 2011 plan was Skytrain technology and was planned to run along the rail corridor with an elevated station directly in front of Union Station, from what I recall. Probably for the best it didn't happen.
Click to expand...
I don't think it was meant to use SkyTrain technology, but if people today don't like the Ontario Line, I don't even know where to begin with the 80s DRL plan. Even more aggressive use of the LSE corridor, and running elevated in front of Union Station. Furthermore instead of better distributing passengers more equally throughout the core of Toronto, it further made problematic the inevitable Union Centricity of our network that was arising due to the growth of the GO Network. It probably would've been fine for the 80s, but with 20/20 hindsight, it almost certainly would've been problematic long term.
 
ARG1 said:
I don't think it was meant to use SkyTrain technology, ...
Click to expand...

Agreed. ICTS was considered technically problematic, with any commitment to that technology to be deferred until after Scarborough RT opened and proved itself. ICTS based possibilities didn't get past the "wouldn't it be neat" stage.

ICTS was explicitly rejected for Sheppard and Eglinton lines (same group of projects) due to questionable reliability. The DRL in Network 2011 wasn't really designed far enough to force a decision. GO ALRT, also ICTS in the same time period, got further along than that potential DRL design.
 
ARG1 said:
I don't think it was meant to use SkyTrain technology, but if people today don't like the Ontario Line, I don't even know where to begin with the 80s DRL plan. Even more aggressive use of the LSE corridor, and running elevated in front of Union Station. Furthermore instead of better distributing passengers more equally throughout the core of Toronto, it further made problematic the inevitable Union Centricity of our network that was arising due to the growth of the GO Network. It probably would've been fine for the 80s, but with 20/20 hindsight, it almost certainly would've been problematic long term.
Click to expand...

That elevated option was rejected in the report. What was chosen was Pape underground, Front/Wellington underground.

rbt said:
Agreed. ICTS was considered technically problematic, with any commitment to that technology to be deferred until after Scarborough RT opened and proved itself. ICTS based possibilities didn't get past the "wouldn't it be neat" stage.

ICTS was explicitly rejected for Sheppard and Eglinton lines (same group of projects) due to questionable reliability. The DRL in Network 2011 wasn't really designed far enough to force a decision. GO ALRT, also ICTS in the same time period, got further along than that potential DRL design.
Click to expand...

Not sure about this. ICTS and subway were both shortlisted, with only small geometry changes required to switch between options. Any perceived issues with ICTS were more related to its capacity. Interestingly even in the last City RLS report a few years ago ICTS was also shortlisted.
 
  • Like
Reactions: syn
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top