Toronto Ontario Line 3 | ?m | ?s

gweed123 said:
I honestly don't see why people advocate for spending billions on shoe-horning a subway into a rail corridor that is already going to be featuring subway-level service. It's a complete waste. Just because there's no fare integration now doesn't justify spending billions running parallel services so each agency can keep their fiefdoms.

The DRL alignment shouldn't be a "path of least resistance" alignment. It should be put where the people are. For the N-S western leg, that means using either Dufferin, Lansdowne, Roncesvalles, or Parkside/Keele.

And re UPX: Just because there's insufficient service on the GTS corridor now doesn't mean that UPX should be modified in order to provide that service. The best option is to "fill out" the GO service that's supposed to be there, so that UPX can perform the function it was intended to: a downtown-to-airport express train.
Click to expand...

The advantage of Parkside is it would be less costly, although with TTC insistence on tunneling (i.e. Vaughan), I am not sure it would be a huge savings. Also, I don't know if its a selling feature that no station is needed between Queen and Bloor. A Keele interchange is likely easier than most in the west as well. Going up Keele allows several options, including Keele at the way, switch to Jane, or go to Rexdale.

Dufferin does have the density though. My imaginary Scarborough to Exhibition line would serve King West allowing the DRL to curve north sooner.
DRL.jpg
 

Attachments

  • DRL.jpg
    DRL.jpg
    459.9 KB · Views: 352
If you want New York level infrastructure that will serve the long-term needs of our rapidly growing city, including long-term goals such as naturalization of the Don, reconnection of the city to the lake, improved transit capacity and connections, and optimum value for the Rail Deck Park, my plan hits all the notes in the most affordable way, with the least political fallout. For those who shit their pants at the mention of an underground expressway, I can tell you that the tunneled highways in Boston are so discrete, you forget they exist.
 
Conventional solutions won't solve complex problems.. No wonder we're spinning our wheels on transit, no pun intended...
 
TheTigerMaster said:
From the Front Page:
New York's Second Avenue Gets Relief: Toronto Still Waiting
Click to expand...
Soon enough, our Line 1 would be the busiest subway line in North America if the Second Avenue Subway succeeds in relieving the Lexington line (and the MTA should build another line along 79th (or 80th or 81st) Street linking the AMNH and the Met with Queens; it could be nicknamed "Met line" if it were to link the Metropolitan Museum of Art with Citi Field).
 
Johnny Au said:
Soon enough, our Line 1 would be the busiest subway line in North America if the Second Avenue Subway succeeds in relieving the Lexington line (and the MTA should build another line along 79th (or 80th or 81st) Street linking the AMNH and the Met with Queens; it could be nicknamed "Met line" if it were to link the Metropolitan Museum of Art with Citi Field).
Click to expand...

Doubtful that it would be the busiest, since the Second Ave Subway is really just going to be a relief line for the Upper East Side itself. The Lexington Subway is packed to the gills before it even hits the Upper East Side (much like how the Yonge Subway is packed before it even hits Bloor). Also, it's a 4-track subway, so it's unlikely that a 2-track subway in Toronto will have a higher ridership. But yes, the Yonge Subway is already up there for sure.
 
gweed123 said:
Also, it's a 4-track subway, so it's unlikely that a 2-track subway in Toronto will have a higher ridership.
Click to expand...

We could start planning the yellow diamond Yonge Express line but since funding relief line is still an issue, perhaps not. Stations under Richmond Hill, Steeles, Finch, York Mills, Lawrence, Eglinton, St. Clair, Bloor, Queen (to intersect with the relief line) and Union.

Gonna' take some coin.
 
I would appreciate an article that went more in depth on the issue of high subway costs in North America. I've yet to see a good explanation about why subway construction is so expensive here. Nevertheless, I hope our engineers take note.
 
TheTigerMaster said:
I would appreciate an article that went more in depth on the issue of high subway costs in North America. I've yet to see a good explanation about why subway construction is so expensive here. Nevertheless, I hope our engineers take note.
Click to expand...

I think the Vox article in the previous post does a pretty good job of that, no?

Also, Oliver Moore pointed out this morning that the new NYC line will feature rush hour service only ever 6 minutes, which is bananas.

TTC's rush hour service frequencies are excellent, and it's one reason why my TTC commute is much more enjoyable than my NYC MTA commute was.
 
TheTigerMaster said:
I would appreciate an article that went more in depth on the issue of high subway costs in North America. I've yet to see a good explanation about why subway construction is so expensive here. Nevertheless, I hope our engineers take note.
Click to expand...

Society has lost its way. Toronto built most of it's subway system within a couple of decades, at a time when our economy was smaller. Today we are paying over $3 billion for a 1 stop subway in the suburbs, and there is no money available for absolutely critical transit projects such as DRL. New York built one of the most extensive subway systems in the world many years ago, but since then very little progress has been made because it costs $billions for a single kilometer of new subway.

People can make up excuses all they want ("we are not like communist China" or whatever), but this is insanity. At this rate, Toronto and New York will become a living hell if they don't bring down construction costs and start rapidly building more transit to serve the growing population.
 
Last edited:
salsa said:
Society has lost its way.
Click to expand...
Jane Jacobs?

It appears that before a politician would make up their minds and engineers would be trusted to build it. There was little time to discuss things with the public, since the government knew best. Before you knew it, construction had begun and progress was seen so no other politician would be able to, or dare to cancel it.

Now, look at a design team for any project. Most of the effort revolves around public discussions, PICs, EAs. There is more concern for some damn minnows, mussels or grass than there is for the end user, or the taxpayer. All these people exist to slow the project down. It is lucrative for them to extend the consultation as much as possible since these people contribute nothing to the end product, and they need to make their money in the discussion phase.

Make the mandate to build a line in 5 years for $300M/km and ignore all else. It is still possible, but we need to cut out the frills that kill progress.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top