Toronto Ontario Line 3 | ?m | ?s

ksun said:
All I am saying is this has to be faster and can't work like the typical stop every 200 meter streetcars that take ever to get anywhere. If that's the plan, I am afraid people will still use Yonge/Bloor to go downtown, which makes this line redundant.
Click to expand...
Running surface transit down Parliament, and along Queen (or King) even without letting people on or off at stops) is faster than taking the subway in rush hour?

On Parliament??
 
nfitz said:
Running surface transit down Parliament, and along Queen (or King) even without letting people on or off at stops) is faster than taking the subway in rush hour?

On Parliament??
Click to expand...

with ROW and only one stop, I don't see why not?
Taking the subway involves a transfer, climbing up and downtown, getting in and out of the subway stations. Even a streetcar ride costs 5 minutes more, many will still prefer it because 1) one fewer transfer 2) you are not in a dark tunnel seeing nothing with bad air.
 
denfromoakvillemilton said:
I like the loop idea. Would remove some riders from the lower loop, I would take that. You think it would do better tied to Bathurst instead or no?
Click to expand...

Bathurst may be tough because there isn't a ROW there right now. Spadina already has one, and is pretty much up to LRT standards already, at least for downtown operations.

WislaHD said:
I like it! This is better than a simple Parliament LRT as it connects with riders to the west. Better and more regular transit would help promote further densification east of the downtown core as well.

I take it that Queen is underground through the core? What would the cost of that be?
Click to expand...

Thanks! And yes the Queen LRT would be underground from roughly Simcoe to just past Victoria. Principally this is for easy connection to the subways. As for cost, I'd imagine it would be around $400-$500 million, principally because of the portals and the transfers at existing stations. Putting it on the surface would be less expensive, but I don't think it would be nearly as effective. The rest of Queen would become a dedicated pedestrian, cyclist, and transit ROW.

And yes, I think integrating the Parliament LRT into a larger "belt" system (thank you to whoever suggested that term, I was trying to think of one that would work, but couldn't come up with much. That one is much better!) increases the effectiveness of such a line dramatically.
 
ksun said:
with ROW and only one stop, I don't see why not?
Taking the subway involves a transfer, climbing up and downtown, getting in and out of the subway stations. Even a streetcar ride costs 5 minutes more, many will still prefer it because 1) one fewer transfer 2) you are not in a dark tunnel seeing nothing with bad air.
Click to expand...
How does changing to a streetcar at Castle Frank not require a transfer and climbing up? How is there one fewer transfer?

I'm sure that someone who works at Parliament and Shuter would love it .... oh wait, it doesn't stop, does it.
 
ksun said:
of course there are red lights. Doesn't mean a streetcar should stop every time there is traffic light.
1) it still often takes less time to wait for a red light than picking up passengers.
2) sometimes the lights are green.

All I am saying is this has to be faster and can't work like the typical stop every 200 meter streetcars that take ever to get anywhere. If that's the plan, I am afraid people will still use Yonge/Bloor to go downtown, which makes this line redundant.
Click to expand...

For the Works (Road) Department, a transit vehicle is just one vehicle. They are more concerned about the number of vehicles than about the number of actual people in those vehicles.
 
nfitz said:
How does changing to a streetcar at Castle Frank not require a transfer and climbing up? How is there one fewer transfer?

I'm sure that someone who works at Parliament and Shuter would love it .... oh wait, it doesn't stop, does it.
Click to expand...

shutter to dundas is like three minutes walk. (I said one stop at dundas).
 
Utilizing the lower deck of the bridge crossing Rosedale Valley for an LRT piqued my interest in how a DRL would cross the Lower Don valley. A bit OT, but is there an overall consensus on how this is to be done?
-How deep would it have to be to go under the river at, say, Queen?
-Is it even possible/realistic to tunnel below the river?
-Where can a bridge be a realistic possibility?

Although it doesn't follow the general alignment, a NE-SW viaduct through Riverdale Parks East/West seems like a perfect opportunity. No private expropriation is needed; A small amount of parkland is lost between portals on the east and west sides; Little opportunity for NIMBY backlash; And perhaps a portion of the Metrolinx-owned Bala Sub ROW can be built overtop of. West of the valley the DRL can follow River to King, and east it can interchange with Broadview possibly.

Perhaps this topic belongs in the fantasy maps section, but I believe the valley crossing section of the DRL to be a major point in dictating its path.
 
Curious, why does it HAVE to cross DVP? And if so why not just use the bridge on queen?
 
ksun said:
Curious, why does it HAVE to cross DVP? And if so why not just use the bridge on queen?
Click to expand...

Is this to me? I'm just wondering the feasibility of going over or under the Don River (and I guess DVP, Bayview, GO Richmond Hill corridor as well). For the majority of DRL alignments the line passes this stretch...there's only really two options: a) over the river, or b) or under the river.

I can't imagine a heavy rail subway line sharing the Queen Street bridge. And where would the portals be?

Edit: This is what I mean. The only area where a non-tunneled DRL can pass above-grade over the valley and Lower Don (without massive and costly expropriation).
DRL_riverdale-viaduct-option_2.jpg
 

Attachments

  • DRL_riverdale-viaduct-option_2.jpg
    DRL_riverdale-viaduct-option_2.jpg
    121.6 KB · Views: 733
Last edited:
44 North said:
I can't imagine a heavy rail subway line sharing the Queen Street bridge. And where would the portals be?
Click to expand...
Ksun isn't advocating a heavy-rail subway. He's advocating running a streetcar DRL along Parliament, on the surface, that would go all the way to King or Queen with only a single stop at Dundas (well, it would stop at other red light, but you wouldn't be able to get on or off), that then turns onto King (or Queen) to downtown ... presumably without any stopping there either.
 
nfitz said:
Ksun isn't advocating a heavy-rail subway. He's advocating running a streetcar DRL along Parliament, on the surface, that would go all the way to King or Queen with only a single stop at Dundas (well, it would stop at other red light, but you wouldn't be able to get on or off), that then turns onto King (or Queen) to downtown ... presumably without any stopping there either.
Click to expand...

This is about a different scenario from the parliament lrt discussed earlier.
This one assuming reaching Eglinton would have 5 stops between Eglinton and queen before turning for a max of 2 stops between DVP and yonge.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top