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

WislaHD said:
We can have a Spanish Solution at King or a Spanish Solution at Queen and Yonge depending on which alignment the DRL chooses. I don't think the University line will require Spanish Solutions.

I wish we had enough space to build a Spanish Solution at Yonge and Eglinton. With the Crosstown being built and Eglinton Station being pushed further north, this is the ideal time to build a Spanish Solution. The station platforms in the relocated Eglinton will be the same width as the present one, which is significantly shorter width than Bloor-Yonge. I am worried that without a Spanish Solution the small platforms simply will not be able to handle the peak hour demands especially as ridership on the Crosstown increases and more walk-in traffic is generated from nearby condos.

It is a real shame that it would be prohibitively expensive to build a Spanish Solution at Bloor and Yonge as well. Besides Eglinton, that would be the one station that could really benefit from having a Spanish Solution.

Drinnk up. :D
Click to expand...

Are you trying to kill me man!?

Anyways I hope that in the future, it won't to too cost prohivitibe to install The Solution that Shall Not Be Named at Eglinton-Yonge.
 
nfitz said:
If you don't want the jokes, why not use simple accessible language like "third platform" rather than bafflegarb.
Click to expand...

because

4vy0E6R.jpg
 
WislaHD said:
We can have a Spanish Solution at King or a Spanish Solution at Queen and Yonge depending on which alignment the DRL chooses. I don't think the University line will require Spanish Solutions.

I wish we had enough space to build a Spanish Solution at Yonge and Eglinton. With the Crosstown being built and Eglinton Station being pushed further north, this is the ideal time to build a Spanish Solution. The station platforms in the relocated Eglinton will be the same width as the present one, which is significantly shorter width than Bloor-Yonge. I am worried that without a Spanish Solution the small platforms simply will not be able to handle the peak hour demands especially as ridership on the Crosstown increases and more walk-in traffic is generated from nearby condos.

It is a real shame that it would be prohibitively expensive to build a Spanish Solution at Bloor and Yonge as well. Besides Eglinton, that would be the one station that could really benefit from having a Spanish Solution.

Drinnk up. :D
Click to expand...

I don't think Eglinton needs a SE European solution. What would work is a 300m long platform on Yonge with the Eglinton line passing roughly over the middle of this. The northbound train stops at the southern portion of the platform and the southbound train stops at the northern part of the platform. This helps separate the passengers - reducing crowding.
 
BurlOak said:
I don't think Eglinton needs a SE European solution. What would work is a 300m long platform on Yonge with the Eglinton line passing roughly over the middle of this. The northbound train stops at the southern portion of the platform and the southbound train stops at the northern part of the platform. This helps separate the passengers - reducing crowding.
Click to expand...

This can work!

I still dread the eventual days of transit delays. The Crosstown is going to be dumping that many more passengers into the station and the platform widths are really tiny.
 
Looking at the map... if it does go Pape-Gerrard, Queen-Broadview, and Cherry st the diagonal would not be that difficult. Its all low rise houses north of Queen and appears to be one low level warehouse south of queen.
 
Quickly skimming though the report, the Pape/Queen and Pape/King alignments are clearly the best two options. It's really tough to determine which one of the two are superior, but right now I'm very slightly leaning towards Pape/Queen with a connection to Unilever. Of course, we'll need to wait for a more extensive report with ridership forecasts, costs, pedestrian experience (etc...) before making a decision.

Regarding the first disadvantage of the Pape/Queen alignment:

Future western extension along Queen Street would provide less access to high density areas such as Liberty Village - See more at: http://reliefline.ca/current-work/potential-corridors/corridor-b#sthash.ujtePcqL.dpuf
Click to expand...

Between Queen/University and King/Spadina, we're very fortunate to have a narrow strip of lands that have smaller buildings, with presumably shallower basements. This means that it might be feasible to have the station dip south from Queen/University to King/Spadina.

If that corridor is not feasible, there is also the area between Queen/Spadina and Bathurst/King available, which appears to not yet have many high-rises there.

If we evaluate these options now, and change our building regulations accordingly, we could save these corridors for the future western extension.
 
Last edited:
CapitalSeven said:
There is a page up now with four basic corridor options. No big surprises. http://reliefline.ca/current-work/potential-corridors
Click to expand...

Sounds like "Corridor B - Pape to Queen/Richmond" offers the most positives and fewest negatives. Besides with SmartTrack already paralleling Front St/Esplanade/the GO tracks; does the DRL really have to directly serve Liberty Village, East Bayfront and the Portlands as well? Seems kind of redundant when we have the opportunity to serve inner-city neighbourhoods better.
 
TheTigerMaster said:
Between Queen/University and King/Spadina, we're very fortunate to have a narrow strip of lands that have smaller buildings, with presumably shallower basements. This means that it might be feasible to have the station dip south from Queen/University to King/Spadina.

If that corridor is not feasible, there is also the area between Queen/Spadina and Bathurst/King available, which appears to not yet have many high-rises there.

If we evaluate these options now, and change our building regulations accordingly, we could save these corridors for the future western extension.
Click to expand...

Liberty Village is serviced by GO-RER and SmartTrack in the future. WWLRT won't be too far away either.

I think it is much desirable for the subway to Trinity-Bellwoods and West Queen West.
 
CapitalSeven said:
There is a page up now with four basic corridor options. No big surprises. http://reliefline.ca/current-work/potential-corridors
Click to expand...

This is pretty cool. And I'd say there are quite a bit of surprises. One being the Broadview alignment (with a solid case for a Broadview B/D intercept made a few days ago). But the other being geotechnical info - which is something that was glossed over for many years. I haven't had the time to fully look these over, but this is surprising indeed.
 
WislaHD said:
Liberty Village is serviced by GO-RER and SmartTrack in the future. WWLRT won't be too far away either.

I think it is much desirable for the subway to Trinity-Bellwoods and West Queen West.
Click to expand...

Bingo!

I just whipped this map up for scrutiny:

 
I think at this stage what's on the site is just going to confirm what everyone thought to begin with. I read the same maps and came away still thinking Pape/Wellington was the best alignment. You can't go along Queen "with a connection to Unilever" in any practical way - it's a third of a mile away.

I still think an alignment further south has more advantages. The big increases in density are along and south of Front. That band has little in the way of east/west local transit, and RER is not going to do it much good. Queen already has transit - putting the subway there means you have two lines in a low-rise zone and none in a high-rise zone, or you get rid of the streetcars, and then have to build more subway stations, which will put pressure on to tear down the old fabric all along the street.

A southern subway line would leave the existing lines in place and add a subway linking Gerrard Square, Unilever, West Don Lands, Distillery, St. Lawrence Market, the financial core, new developments south of Front, the convention centre zone, City Place, Liberty Village, and the Exhibition.
 
I would suggest separating both the Yonge and University-Spadina lines separated at Union, I believe this would be the best solution to solve the relief line problem.
Under this proposal, trains operating on University-Spadina line continue east up Front St to King/Jarvis serving St Lawrence market, then continue east along King (potentially a station at Parliament) until it meets Queen, then continue east on Queen until it reaches the GO line with a station near Broadview, then have it follow the GO line and proposed SmartTrack until Gerrard Square, then head north to serve Pape. Looking at the relief line site, it can cover atleast 3/4 of the potential corridors in the Downtown core. Also the author and engineer Levy proposed this in his book. http://levyrapidtransit.ca/19-1-the-concept/#.VXkeqVIxJko

I am aware, that this will be expensive, but it has it benefits and its worth exploring. The current "U" shape at Union is too small and as a result it slows subway service on the Y-U-S line. Also, I don't like the idea of creating too many transit "hubs" in one small area unless necessary.
 
CapitalSeven said:
I think at this stage what's on the site is just going to confirm what everyone thought to begin with. I read the same maps and came away still thinking Pape/Wellington was the best alignment. You can't go along Queen "with a connection to Unilever" in any practical way - it's a third of a mile away.

I still think an alignment further south has more advantages. The big increases in density are along and south of Front. That band has little in the way of east/west local transit, and RER is not going to do it much good. Queen already has transit - putting the subway there means you have two lines in a low-rise zone and none in a high-rise zone, or you get rid of the streetcars, and then have to build more subway stations, which will put pressure on to tear down the old fabric all along the street.

A southern subway line would leave the existing lines in place and add a subway linking Gerrard Square, Unilever, West Don Lands, Distillery, St. Lawrence Market, the financial core, new developments south of Front, the convention centre zone, City Place, Liberty Village, and the Exhibition.
Click to expand...

Southern subway alignment wouldn't hit the Exhibition Grounds and Liberty Village can be well served by GO-RER/SmartTrack.

If we take a King/Wellington alignment, then the line should shoot up to Queen after Bathurst for a station at Trinity-Bellwoods.

I made this map a year ago but it is still what I envision. Just replace the Adelaide alignment in the core with King.

xBwEYWL.png


WWLRT is also re-aligned along Lakeshore so it can serve Ontario Place, Exhibition Grounds and BMO field directly and not compete with other modes of transit in Liberty Village.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top