afransen
Senior Member
What modeling has been done for OL North?.. and also modeling done for Ontario Line north showed Victoria Park would have higher ridership then a don mills alignment..
What modeling has been done for OL North?.. and also modeling done for Ontario Line north showed Victoria Park would have higher ridership then a don mills alignment..
I think they're referring to the RL North studies. Which did include both Don Mills and Vic Park alignments north of Science Centre station as options.What modeling has been done for OL North?
I think this is a fair point from a user perspective, but from a planning POV going underground with the OL again adds costs/complexity that defeats the benefits of its elevation. Some alternatives:The stops at Lawrence and York Mills can be above ground. The interchange at Sheppard could be underground to help simplify the transfer since Don Mills Station is quite deep underground.
Sure but at the same time we shouldn't just ignore the user experience or else it just convinces people to not use if its to inconvenient. We should learn from the past and that includes not building another Spadina style interchange. We are already kinda doing this with the interchange at Osgoode Station, and sure the line is pretty deep underground there but as has been discussed in this very thread the interchange could be even better.I think this is a fair point from a user perspective, but from a planning POV going underground with the OL again adds costs/complexity that defeats the benefits of its elevation. Some alternatives:
A) keep things as simple as possible with an (ironically) complex interchange with higher-speed elevators ala Spanish stations.
B) If Line 4 is so deep that (A) is impractical, then there must be room for a short cut and cover tunnel above Don Mills’ Station box. The tail tracks still ought to emerge elevated again north of Sheppard.
C) (B) or any other underground configuration is best if it interfaces with Line 4 directly; that is, converting it to standard gauge/OL “light” automated metro with interlining being entertained.
The point is, under no circumstances can we compromise the ease of extensions baked into the OL at a Sheppard interchange or elsewhere. To do so is to to not learn from Toronto’s mistakes and misses the forest for this one tree.
Of course. I think the point here is that the chosen design is going to be a balancing act between accessibility, further extensions, and if/how Line 4 affects things.Sure but at the same time we shouldn't just ignore the user experience or else it just convinces people to not use if its to inconvenient. We should learn from the past and that includes not building another Spadina style interchange. We are already kinda doing this with the interchange at Osgoode Station, and sure the line is pretty deep underground there but as has been discussed in this very thread the interchange could be even better.
?I always find it funny that extensions are planned to end at L4 instead of going just a little further and connecting to the huge Seneca campus, if only our costs were lower . . .
I am not even sure whether there is enough clerance for extension north of Science Center station, or how could the track change from elevated to underground.een talking about 40
It's always been planned for an extension. I'm not sure the design though - I wouldn't think it would be heading underground again for quite sometime. Perhaps not even until Pearson Airport.I am not even sure whether there is enough clerance for extension north of Science Center station, or how could the track change from elevated to underground.
I am not sure the western segment beyond Exhibition Station. For the eastern segment, let say if it stay elevated, then how could it interface with Don Mill Station, how could it have alignment in Don Valley Village, and how could it route to Richmond Hill center. It does not have to be all underground, but I see at some point it needs to go underground to solve those issues.It's always been planned for an extension. I'm not sure the design though - I wouldn't think it would be heading underground again for quite sometime. Perhaps not even until Pearson Airport.
Follow Don Mills until the 407, where it goes to RHC? To and from there It doesn’t need to go underground at all, not even to Pearson or Kipling. Now, for going west of Exhibition, it may be a different story, but if the goal is to simply get to Kipling and nothing between, it’s doable. If the OL took the LSW corridor and was elevated over the industrious Queensway or Kipling to Kipling Station, then all it takes is the 427 to keep going to Pearson from there.I am not sure the western segment beyond Exhibition Station. For the eastern segment, let say if it stay elevated, then how could it interface with Don Mill Station, how could it have alignment in Don Valley Village, and how could it route to Richmond Hill center. It does not have to be all underground, but I see at some point it needs to go underground to solve those issues.
I've not seen any alignment for the west extension. Only the "east" extension to Kipling via 407 and Pearson.I am not sure the western segment beyond Exhibition Station. For the eastern segment, let say if it stay elevated, then how could it interface with Don Mill Station, how could it have alignment in Don Valley Village, and how could it route to Richmond Hill center. It does not have to be all underground, but I see at some point it needs to go underground to solve those issues.
At Don Mills and Eglinton, the connection is a little easier because the elevated Ontario Line is offset from the road and directly above the Eglinton line. At Don Mills on Sheppard, the existing station is north of Sheppard and east of Don Mills. I can't see any way of building a vertical connection that doesn't have at least two sets of elevators and a horizontal path. That's why I think moving the connection point to Victoria Park and new purpose-built transfer station is a better option.