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

44 North said:
I think everyone wants a large number of stations. But many might be too focused on past Queen Subway / DRL plans which usually (or entirely) involved a bridge to cross the valley - this allowed for a higher number of stations. The DRL of the 21st C will be 100% underground through the south end of downtown, and it will be deep. Years back I recall reading an adage that every metre of station depth costs $1M. I wouldn't be surprised if it's double or triple that now. If we tunnel through bedrock to cross the valley, stations at Queen/River and Queen/Broadview would be +30m deep. That's a lot to spend, particularly for a 500m stop spacing. Mixed-face tunneling could be done at a shallower depth, but I doubt it will be here. The Lower Don is a vital corridor: rail, highway, expressway, gas, water, sewage, hydro, confined volatile river, flood protection...I can't see a shallow tunnel happening. I believe it will be either a station at River St, or one at Broadview Ave. But not both.
Click to expand...
That might explain why it is Sherbourne&Cherry rather than Jarvis&Parliament&River.

It is a shame, I would've liked to see Bloor-Danforth stop-spacing west of the Don River. I hope the possibility for infill stations are studied.
 
Cost may be one factor -- the stops for the Relief Line will all be underground stations, and so the average cost per stop will be much higher than for the ECLRT, which has many of its stops on the surface.
 
Tulse said:
Cost may be one factor -- the stops for the Relief Line will all be underground stations, and so the average cost per stop will be much higher than for the ECLRT, which has many of its stops on the surface.
Click to expand...
What makes the DRL's underground stations prohibitively expensive compared to underground ECLRT stop-spacing?

We hear time and time again that underground LRT is a 'waste' of money because underground LRT stations are not much cheaper than underground subway stations.
 
Tulse said:
Cost may be one factor -- the stops for the Relief Line will all be underground stations, and so the average cost per stop will be much higher than for the ECLRT, which has many of its stops on the surface.
Click to expand...

But Tiger Master's point was that even when looking at Eglinton's underground part alone, the spacing is similar to Bloor.
 
WislaHD said:
What makes the DRL's underground stations prohibitively expensive compared to underground ECLRT stop-spacing?
Click to expand...
My point was that the ECLRT would be vastly more expensive, or have much wider stop spacing, if all its stops were underground stations. It can have the spacing of stops that it does because only a portion of the stops require underground stations.
 
44 North said:
Yeah, I don't see a problem with the streetcar staying so as to maintain quality local service. Originally when I thought we'd see closer stop spacing for a RL, I believed it might be a good idea to eliminate a streetcar route (so as to free-up vehicles for other routes). But when looking at the proposed corridors, there's no green dots for stations between Front/Cherry and Gerrard/Pape (with Option D), or Sherbourne/Queen and Gerrard/Pape (with Option B). That's a sizable gap. Nor is there a green dot for a station at Queen/Broadview, which would be a good intermediary locale for a station.
.
Click to expand...
There isn't a green dot for Queen & Broadview, but the dot is yellow (which is the next highest on their scale).

Corridor B with stations at Osgoode, Yonge, Sherbourne, Cherry, Broadview, Gerrard, and Danforth would provide average spacing of 971m, which I personally think is kind of crap. I agree with Alvin that I would prefer more stations, as this is a subway, and not an express train. Another 1 - 2 stations would still provide a competitive route to staying on and transferring at Yonge & Bloor.

I also that they should seriously consider adding another station to the west at Spadina. I'm assuming that they will be tunneling for tail tracks in that direction anyway, yes?
 
wopchop said:
I would seriously consider adding another station to the west at Spadina. I'm assuming that they will be tunneling for tail tracks in that direction anyway, yes?
Click to expand...
I'm sure there will be, and in any case the explicit plan is to allow for further westward expansion, to join up with the west side of the BD line somewhere.
 
Tulse said:
I'm sure there will be, and in any case the explicit plan is to allow for further westward expansion, to join up with the west side of the BD line somewhere.
Click to expand...
Right ... so they are tunneling west of University and digging for the TBM extraction site. Seems like with the disruption caused, they should consider a station as part of Phase 1
 
TheTigerMaster said:
Why is it that the ECLRT can have Bloor-Danforth-like spacing, but the Relief Line can't?
Click to expand...

It doesn't make much sense, does it? Some of those stations will be so seldom used that they should be boarded up before they even open. Hundreds of $Millions spent just so a handful of local residents can get service on one of the world's costliest transit projects... it's a headscratcher.

wopchop said:
I also that they should seriously consider adding another station to the west at Spadina. I'm assuming that they will be tunneling for tail tracks in that direction anyway, yes?
Click to expand...

Just one? :) Yeah, I think they should get this thing all the way across and back up to Dundas West or wherever in one go. No 'phases' or piecemeal. All one needs to do is look at InsertName's development maps to see that the future growth will be there to support it.
 
Last edited:
44 North said:
It doesn't make much sense, does it? Some of those stations will be so seldom used that they should be boarded up before they even open. Hundreds of $Millions spent just so a handful of local residents can get service on one of the world's costliest transit projects... it's a headscratcher.
Click to expand...

It is a good thing that Eglinton wasn't planned as an express line then.

---

The real headscratcher is no station at Spadina (or even Bathurst) in phase 1.

On that note, what are people's thoughts on a station at John street? I've seen it proposed on some people's maps but I've always excluded it on mine. I suppose it would serve more people than many other stations, reduce congestion at Osgoode/St. Andrew, and is pretty justifiable is given Bloor-Danforth stop-spacing. It would raise costs of the line significantly on the other hand, and make commuting one stop longer for many people transferring at Dundas West (which becomes a non-issue if the the western leg goes to Sunnyside rather than Bloor).
 
44 North said:
Just one? :) Yeah, I think they should get this thing all the way across and back up to Dundas West or wherever in one go. No 'phases' or piecemeal. All one needs to do is look at InsertName's development maps to see that the future growth will be there to support it.
Click to expand...
Well, yeah. That would be ideal. Doesn't seem likely at this point, though.
 
44 North said:
I think they should get this thing all the way across and back up to Dundas West or wherever in one go. No 'phases' or piecemeal. All one needs to do is look at InsertName's development maps to see that the future growth will be there to support it.
Click to expand...
That would be hugely expensive.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top