Toronto Ontario Line 3 | ?m | ?s

WislaHD said:
Don Mills has rather low immediate surrounding density, but massive development potential (especially with a subway) and humongous feeder route ridership. Plus the additional benefit of intercepting ridership that is otherwise bound for the over-capacity Yonge subway. Just so we are clear why Don Mills is priority.

Just because feeder routes contribute substantially more to ridership than local density doesn't mean that density should be discounted. Density is a good predicator of transit-amiable local population, transit-friendly built form, and aligns with our goals of city building.
Click to expand...

A Don Mills line will have good ridership, no doubts about that.

Generally speaking, local density shouldn't be discounted, but the modern way of transit planing places too much emphasis on local density and sometimes that has negative impact on the transit network as a whole. IMO, the balance should be restored.

First of all, the majority of subway riders use local feeder routes for a part of their trip, and this situation will persist. Interests of the majority should be taken into account.

Secondly, Toronto already has multiple transit-friendly locations that are under-used. Presumably such spots can be filled in the future, but there is no immediate shortage of them. That means, even when transit-oriented development happens near a new transit line, only a fraction of it can be attributed to the new line itself; the rest probably gets shifted from another transit-friendly location where it would have happened anyway.

That means:

- OK to design Eglinton West LRT with wide stop spacing to provide a faster connection to the airport and its employment cluster.

- OK to place a section of the Relief line in the 404 corridor if it results in substantial cost savings and allows to push the line further north. I would stay under Don Mills up to at least Lawrence, but would evaluate all options north of Lawrence (Don Mills, 404 corridor, Vic Park, or the Bala sub / RH GO corridor).

- If the Sheppard subway is absorbed into a cross-town mini-subway or LRT line, OK to place some of that line in the 401 corridor. I am thinking of the sections west of Dufferin, or perhaps only west of Jane up to the airport, as well as east of UTSC up to one of the Lakeshore East GO stations.

- OK not to add Willowdale station on the Sheppard line, if the locals are not eager to get it. It saves money that can be used elsewhere, and results in a slightly shorter travel times for the existing riders.
 
44 North said:
Something seems up with that map, like things aren't shown in the right location. Someone else made an interactive density map, and I think it does a much better job of showing where Thorncliffe and Flemingdon actually are located.

View attachment 102395
Click to expand...

The issue with the attached map is that if we take the title at its word, it's only counting populations within 800m of existing rapid transit stops. The map is useful maybe if you're looking for opportunities for densification; but it's not at all informative for transit planning.
 
Last edited:
Many of the low density areas along the Relief Line would likely be redeveloped for medium and heavy density. It would be better is commercial usage could be encouraged, most likely around Queen & Broadview, Eastern & Broadview, King & Sumach, and around the Science Centre Station when extended north.
 
I'm curious about Don Mills Station. Metrolinx still claims that Sheppard LRT is still being planned. If that's the case, they should have the DRL curve and merge at Don Mills with the Sheppard Line. If not, then it would be safe to assume they have plans for an eastern extension.

:oops: Tired of seeing that Spanish Solution at Sheppard-Yonge not being used...lol
 
Cobra said:
I'm curious about Don Mills Station. Metrolinx still claims that Sheppard LRT is still being planned. If that's the case, they should have the DRL curve and merge at Don Mills with the Sheppard Line. If not, then it would be safe to assume they have plans for an eastern extension.

:oops: Tired of seeing that Spanish Solution at Sheppard-Yonge not being used...lol
Click to expand...
Not enough trains are in demand, so currently unnecessary.
 
Assuming that Relief Line gets built between Don Mills to Dundas West (let's use that as it could be Dufferin, Keele or Dundas West), what would be the total length of the line in km?
 
Cobra said:
I'm curious about Don Mills Station. Metrolinx still claims that Sheppard LRT is still being planned. If that's the case, they should have the DRL curve and merge at Don Mills with the Sheppard Line. If not, then it would be safe to assume they have plans for an eastern extension.
Click to expand...
Seriously though, what do we do with Relief Line North if Sheppard were to be extended to (at least) Victoria Park?

It no longer makes sense to have Sheppard bus riders transfer to the subway for one stop to transfer to the DRL.

If Sheppard is extended, then the utility of the Don Mills - Sheppard hub is scaled back greatly. I would turn the DRL onto the Bala Sub/RH-GO corridor after Lawrence in this instance, and replace RH-GO with DRL extension to Richmond Hill.
 
Since I had free time at work, I took a look at this list and sorted the chart by “system length” to compare ourselves with the rest of the world.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_metro_systems
I wanted to see where we were today and how fast we would climb the ladder if everything went according to plan by 2031.

(The Federal budget will be very enlightening in that regard)

*Ranking is approximate

Today - Toronto Subway and RT
  • 68.3 km with 69 stations
  • 58th position, right behind Montreal at 57th
  • Notable networks we beat: Rome (60km), Buenos Aires (61.3km), Kiev 67.6 (km)
2017 York-Spadina Extension
  • 8.6 km and 6 extra stations
  • Toronto Subway will have 76.9km and 75 stations
  • 54th position, edging Montreal by 7.7km
  • Notable networks we beat: Bucarest (69.3km), Dubai (74.6km)
2021 Line 5 Eglinton Crosstown
  • 19 km and 25 stations
  • Toronto Subway will have 95.9km and around 100 stations
  • 40th position, passing Vancouver and becoming Canada’s largest network
  • Notable networks we beat: Sao Paulo (78.4km)
2021 Finch West
  • 11km and 19 stations
  • Toronto Subway will have 106.9km and around 119 stations
  • 37th position
  • Notable networks we beat: Milan (101km), Santiago (103km), Stockholm (105.7km), Munich (103.1km)
2023 as of July 2016 Crosstown West
  • Approximately (12.2 km)
  • Toronto Subway would have approximately 118km
  • 32nd position
  • Notable networks we beat: Saint-Petersburg (113.2km)
2026 Scarborough extension
  • With the replacement of the RT (6.4km and 6 stations)with a tunnel (6.2 km and 1 station), we lose 0.2km
  • Toronto Subway would have approximately 117km
  • Retains 32nd position
2031 Relief Line Long
  • Potentially 27 km if the termini station is Keele
  • Toronto Subway would have approximately 144km
  • Climbing to 29th position
  • Notable networks we beat: Kuala Lumpur (123.1 km), Taipei Metro (131.1km), Teheran Metro with (135km)
Planned
  • Crosstown East - Unfunded
  • Waterfront LRT- Unfunded
  • Jane LRT- Unfunded
  • Richmond Hill Extension- Unfunded
Proposed/being studied
  • Sheppard Subway Extension – Sheppard Corridor
  • Bloor-Danforth extension past Kipling

Like we say in French: "Quand on se regarde, on se désole, quand on se compare, on se console"
-It's upsetting to look at ourselves but it's comforting to compare ourselves to others
 
Last edited:
Eglinton is NOT, under any stretch of the imagination, a subway line. Subway/Metro is 100% grade separated. Eglinton should be a subway but that doesn't change the fact it's not. As for Finch LRT, it is not rapid transit. You cannot get a rapid transit service going down the middle of a street, stopping for lights & left-hand turns, stops every 300 meters, and with no rail crossings. It has never been accomplished anywhere on the planet. Better capacity, more comfortable , more reliable, and quicker...........yes to all those things which is great but that doesn't make it rapid transit.
 
Cobra said:
Like we say in French: "Quand on se regarde, on se désole, quand on se compare, on se console"
-It's upsetting to look at ourselves but it's comforting to compare ourselves to others
Click to expand...

That assumes that a) those comparators aren't moving as well b) that they are necessarily rapidly growing at a rate like we are (Munich??). In any case, length makes less sense to brag about than utility.

AoD
 
As for the DRL, I think it would be a dire mistake to use 3rd rail instead of catenary subway so the system can be easily expanded making use of current GO and RER corridors once it heads north of Eglinton and west of roughly Liberty Village. Still be 100% subway but also be used as a relief for RER downtown.
 
I agree with your Sheppard assesment. As for the drl I'd like it to hit finch so perhaps one day we could have a crosstown finch lrt line. That would probably upset a lot of scarboroughsince it's second rate but not me who used to use the Finch bus religiously.
WislaHD said:
Seriously though, what do we do with Relief Line North if Sheppard were to be extended to (at least) Victoria Park?

It no longer makes sense to have Sheppard bus riders transfer to the subway for one stop to transfer to the DRL.

If Sheppard is extended, then the utility of the Don Mills - Sheppard hub is scaled back greatly. I would turn the DRL onto the Bala Sub/RH-GO corridor after Lawrence in this instance, and replace RH-GO with DRL extension to Richmond Hill.
Click to expand...
 
ssiguy2 said:
Eglinton is NOT, under any stretch of the imagination, a subway line. Subway/Metro is 100% grade separated. Eglinton should be a subway but that doesn't change the fact it's not. As for Finch LRT, it is not rapid transit. You cannot get a rapid transit service going down the middle of a street, stopping for lights & left-hand turns, stops every 300 meters, and with no rail crossings. It has never been accomplished anywhere on the planet. Better capacity, more comfortable , more reliable, and quicker...........yes to all those things which is great but that doesn't make it rapid transit.
Click to expand...

shhh... you're going to anger the LRT supporters who claims that LRT at grade is still rapid transit. I gave up arguing on that front. :D

But to be fair:
  • Stop pacing is supposed to be way higher than 300m
  • Priority signals is supposed to be part of the line (wishful thinking)
  • Rail crossing like in LA would have made sense, but Transit City supporters will say that L.A are idiots and that we know best...as usual. Even Metrolinx doesn't think so, hence grade separating stops on Crosstown West to speed it up.
Until we're proven otherwise (I guarantee we will), it counts as rapid transit.
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
That assumes that a) those comparators aren't moving as well b) that they are necessarily rapidly growing at a rate like we are (Munich??). In any case, length makes less sense to brag about than utility.

AoD
Click to expand...

You're right. Munich is planning huge expansions. Toronto is basically trying to catch up (joining the 21st century, really). The challenge will be to see if we'll still keep building subways past all those projects post Relief Line. The Infrastructure bank will be a huge facilitator to accomplish that but who am I kidding, that's assuming we stop electing people who draw lines on kleenex
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top