Toronto Ontario Line 3 | ?m | ?s

I don't follow. You said the western piece of ST provides relief while the east needs both ST and a relief subway line?

Or let's take a step back and realize that we shouldn't be building subways through outer suburbia and focus them on where it makes sense. ST is for the suburbs. Relief line (DOWNTOWN relief line) is meant for the dense inner city.

Is it not funny we are sending a relief subway line, a BD extension and ST within a few kms of each other? Next to suburban tract housing? Explain...
 
Filip said:
That's only if you take the line to Sheppard. Otherwise a BD to BD "U" has more ridership on the west. Not to mention much higher station usage because of the right type of density for subway construction. Maybe a fair comparison would be to take the western leg up to Weston and Rexdale?
Click to expand...
Are you trying to tell me that no one transfers at St. George onto the Bloor Line? Are you trying to tell me that there wouldn't be a lot more people using Bloor-Yonge station if Line 1 didn't terminate at Union like it used to?

The entire premise of the relief line, is to relieve Bloor-Yonge station and the overcrowded Yonge line; which the University line does very effectively.

Compare option 1 (DRL from University to Pape) and 2A (DRL from Dundas West to Pape). In option 1, the Yonge line is reduced by 4,700 and the University line is reduced by 1,000. However, in option 2a, the Yonge line is only relieved by an additional 100 riders (though the University line is reduced by a total of 4,000 riders).

I'm also concerned, that if we go with SmartTrack, that the SmartTrack station locations overlap with the DRL locations too much in the west; we can't build both in the west (though in the east with SmartTrack, we do need both).

There is a much stronger case for a DRL in the east, than the west, both with and without SmartTrack.
 
nfitz said:
They built a relief line in the west in the 1950s/1960s - the University line. Surely it's the east that's been short-changed all these years! I'm not sure how building a western leg of the line would relieve Yonge-Bloor.
Click to expand...
Coming from abroad, I have to say, I find it regularly hilarious that the only North-South subway lines in the downtown were built were built about 600 meters away from each other. Without some weird historical Toronto perspective, transit here is generally rather baffling.
 
How do they overlap? The rail corridor runs up too quickly. DRL is meant to go to Roncesvalles and up, not along the rail corridor.

Looking at a map it's about the same as what would happen to the east end with a DRL and ST. I don't follow.
 
Filip said:
How do they overlap?
Click to expand...
Both share stations at Dundas West. Both share stations near King/Dufferin. Both share a station near Spadina. What the DRL gives you, is subway down Ronvesvalles. I'm not convinced we need a subway down Roncesvalles.

What makes more sense, assuming SmartTrack is built, is to extend the DRL to terminate at the SmartTrack station on King, just east of Dufferin.

In the ultimate future, does it make sense to have 2 lines heading north through Dundas West, or leave the possibility that the DRL heads further west towards Etobicoke and Port Credit.
 
nfitz said:
Both share stations at Dundas West. Both share stations near King/Dufferin. Both share a station near Spadina. What the DRL gives you, is subway down Ronvesvalles. I'm not convinced we need a subway down Roncesvalles.

What makes more sense, assuming SmartTrack is built, is to extend the DRL to terminate at the SmartTrack station on King, just east of Dufferin.
Click to expand...

You're still not making sense. Show me why ST and DRL are required in the East and not in the West and I'll back off. I'm looking at maps of both.. They follow the same general alignment, interchange with existing lines within a few kms of each other, one has the added value of going further up into exurbia where a lot of the existing transit ridership for Yonge comes from.

ST negates the need for a DRL to go anywhere north of Bloor. However, ST cannot negate the need for a granular subway line along Queen or King, with stops every 500-600m (like with Bloor) to provide for local and east/west downtown travel.

An ideal DRL Phase 1 would be Pape, down to Queen and along Queen to Roncesvalles. No need for the hook to BD.
 
Filip said:
I can't believe that I'm the subway fanboy advocating for a surface route, but the relief line was never ever meant to run up to Sheppard. It was meant as a local relief line to the downtown streetcar network which hasn't been able to breathe normally since I came to Canada.
Click to expand...
I want relief from crowded streetcars just as much as you do, but if you're going to claim that the relief line was ever meant primarily to relieve surface transit downtown, then you need to cite your sources. Because certainly as long as I've seen it discussed, it was to relieve the Yonge subway line and Bloor-Yonge station. If your primary goal is to speed up surface transit downtown, there are much better and cheaper ways to do that -- for example, the long-discussed King Street transit mall and the Waterfront West LRT.

(Which is not to say that there will never be a need for a Relief Line West, but given limited funds, it should certainly be phased after the part that will provide relief to Yonge.)

Filip said:
How do they overlap? The rail corridor runs up too quickly. DRL is meant to go to Roncesvalles and up, not along the rail corridor.
Click to expand...
Where are the trip generators? It's not like we have people travelling east through High Park who would benefit from a subway under Roncesvalles. They're either coming from Bloor and points north, in which case Dundas West is a fine transfer point, or the waterfront, in which case the WWLRT would be much more appropriate. There's nowhere near enough local density near Roncesvalles to support a subway. And I say this as a person who lives in Roncesvalles.
 
Just look at the ridership numbers, and the relief on Bloor-Yonge station.

Though we need to wait a couple of weeks, before they release the new ridership numbers for the DRL with and without SmartTrack.

I'm not saying that we shouldn't build a subway to King/Bathurst; I keep advocating that the DRL should have 2 additional stops west of University in Phase 1 - but that's an additional 1.5 km of subway, rather than 6.5 km! It's that final 5 km I don't think should be in Phase 1.
 
Ok I'll repeat myself until it sinks in. THERE IS NO NEED FOR A DRL NORTH OF BLOOR WHEN SMARTTRACK IS BEING IMPLEMENTED.

Prove to me, via figures, research, etc (which Metrolinx hasn't done since ST was proposed) that both are required. They're not. If you build ST, a DRL north of Bloor is a massive waste of money. You are literally duplicating functionality (if it's Yonge relief), the funniest is that you're really shooting yourself in the foot because Yonge relief is required from the massive exurban ridership from Markham/Richmond Hill. If you take ST to Markham, then goodbye half the problems with Yonge.
 
Filip said:
Ok I'll repeat myself until it sinks in. THERE IS NO NEED FOR A DRL NORTH OF BLOOR WHEN SMARTTRACK IS BEING IMPLEMENTED.
Click to expand...
That's not what the city's transit planners have been saying:
SmartTrack would reduce demand on the Yonge subway line south of Bloor Station, but only with the more-frequent option for SmartTrack service. The projected drop in subway riding with SmartTrack every 15 minutes is less than three per cent, well within the likely range of error in the model. With five minute SmartTrack headways, the Yonge demand goes down by an estimated 17 per cent. City Planners are quite clear on one topic—the continued need for a Relief Line separate from SmartTrack. Even with the most frequent SmartTrack service, the projected subway ridership is higher than today’s loads, and close to the theoretical limit even with a new signal system and more frequent subway service.
Click to expand...
via http://torontoist.com/2016/01/analyzing-smarttracks-demand/
 
Filip said:
Ok I'll repeat myself until it sinks in. THERE IS NO NEED FOR A DRL NORTH OF BLOOR WHEN SMARTTRACK IS BEING IMPLEMENTED.
Click to expand...
I haven't seen anyone discuss a DLR north of Bloor; and I haven't even been discussing a DRL north of Danforth. I'm simply countering your comment that you'll "vociferously oppose a DRL without a western component" and your assertion that the University line "isn't really doing much relieving" of Bloor-Yonge station and the Yonge line.
 
And I will continue to vociferously oppose it, because I am sick and tired of multi-billion dollar projects being kicked around for one particular piece of the city, while my $15MM loop keeps getting pushed out due to budgets and I have to wait 15 mins in morning traffic to get from Park Lawn to the Humber River, because fuck you - Scarborough, or Weston, that's why.

I'm not sure if this city has gone fucking nuts lately, but I think it's almost disgusting that we are discussing projects worth over $10bn that really, run almost parallel to each other, and somehow manage to convince ourselves that 'both' are needed, and one of those options is a fucking tunneled subway down Don Mills (lmfao). And you used to laugh at me for pushing completing the Sheppard subway! Keep the subway where it has the most bang for the most buck (in terms of city building, connectivity, ridership, new ridership, route density, etc), not Yonge 'relief' which really is the sad result of our region not knowing how to operate regional rail, and will be rectified by 2024. You don't need to fix that problem by spending $5bn running the line up Don Mills. You fix it by investing in regional rail, which negates the need to send subways that far out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rbt
Filip said:
Ok I'll repeat myself until it sinks in. THERE IS NO NEED FOR A DRL NORTH OF BLOOR WHEN SMARTTRACK IS BEING IMPLEMENTED.

Prove to me, via figures, research, etc (which Metrolinx hasn't done since ST was proposed) that both are required. They're not. If you build ST, a DRL north of Bloor is a massive waste of money. You are literally duplicating functionality (if it's Yonge relief), the funniest is that you're really shooting yourself in the foot because Yonge relief is required from the massive exurban ridership from Markham/Richmond Hill. If you take ST to Markham, then goodbye half the problems with Yonge.
Click to expand...

That's if ST reaches it's target go 5 min frequencies, which it won't.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top