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

The Metrolinx presentation cited below is interesting. It would be helpful to see an appendix with some maps and a little more explanation of what some of the schemes entail. I suppose that's coming. The encouraging part is that they seem to have taken a wide-ranging approach and are looking at more than the 3 or 4 obvious, well-rehearsed ideas, to some things that appear back-of-the-envelope or even slightly hair-brained, just to be sure nothing has been overlooked. We're not used to that in official planning in Ontario.
 
With ATC, could they implement a rush hour short turn route with trains reversing north of Bloor on the Yonge Line and north of Spadina on the Spadina line?

If the time to crossover is too long, they could also implement it with shorter trains.
That would help clear platforms since they would enter southbound empty after reversing.

In Vancouver, SkyTrain runs a morning rush hour short turn just south of Broadway Station, to clear the inbound platform with an empty train.
 
diminutive said:
I'm pleased with their shortlist of high performing options, specifically how frequently GO/TTC integration was mentioned. Some specific questions



Was this ever proposed before? I've never heard of such a route.

Also, I guess TTC fare policy is out of ML's hands, but why no mention of congestion management schemes? These reports have the habit of presenting Yonge's congestion as a permanent, predetermined reality which can only be avoided by new services and routes, rather than a messed up pricing structure. We should be inducing more people to take trips outside of peak hour or to alight at stations on the University line rather than Yonge.
Click to expand...

If I looked correctly, 3 of 4 solutions involve GO. Maybe the DRL will not be built at all.
 
officedweller said:
With ATC, could they implement a rush hour short turn route with trains reversing north of Bloor on the Yonge Line and north of Spadina on the Spadina line?

If the time to crossover is too long, they could also implement it with shorter trains.
That would help clear platforms since they would enter southbound empty after reversing.

In Vancouver, SkyTrain runs a morning rush hour short turn just south of Broadway Station, to clear the inbound platform with an empty train.
Click to expand...

I think they already use that, thorough I am not terribly convinced how ATC will address the fundamental issue of boarding time and station overcrowding being the limiting factor.

AoD
 
BurlOak said:
If I looked correctly, 3 of 4 solutions involve GO. Maybe the DRL will not be built at all.
Click to expand...

It seems like using to GO corridors for rapid transit should happen whether the DRL happens or not, since even if the DRL happens it will take forever to build.

GO corridors seem like the most viable way of improving our transit system quickly.

Express bus lines going downtown would provide alternatives to using the subway as well, ex. the Mt Pleasant-Jarvis line.

Hopefully it RER with TTC fares and adding a few stations can provide a way to rapidly expand our rapid transit system without waiting > 15 years.
 
ehlow said:
It seems like using to GO corridors for rapid transit should happen whether the DRL happens or not, since even if the DRL happens it will take forever to build.

GO corridors seem like the most viable way of improving our transit system quickly.

Express bus lines going downtown would provide alternatives to using the subway as well, ex. the Mt Pleasant-Jarvis line.

Hopefully it RER with TTC fares and adding a few stations can provide a way to rapidly expand our rapid transit system without waiting > 15 years.
Click to expand...

But any of these solutions need two distinct things to happen:

1. TTC and Ontario working together (TTC is very protective of their turf)
2. Distance based fares (or else there will be no/little incentive for riders to transfer to/from GO)

I'm not holding my breath that TTC will allow this. I think TTC will want GO Transit to pick up a disproportionate cost (e.g. TTC gets almost all of the cash fare and the province has to pay to move people within Toronto) and this will be a political hot-potato
 
muller877 said:
But any of these solutions need two distinct things to happen:

1. TTC and Ontario working together (TTC is very protective of their turf)
2. Distance based fares (or else there will be no/little incentive for riders to transfer to/from GO)

I'm not holding my breath that TTC will allow this. I think TTC will want GO Transit to pick up a disproportionate cost (e.g. TTC gets almost all of the cash fare and the province has to pay to move people within Toronto) and this will be a political hot-potato
Click to expand...


Ohh boo boo. Remind me how much money Ontario sucks from the City of Toronto that the Toronto never sees reinvested itself. I don't have much sympathy for Ontario if they have yo pay a disproportionate amount. Its the least they could do.
 
diminutive said:
I'm pleased with their shortlist of high performing options, specifically how frequently GO/TTC integration was mentioned.
Click to expand...

Given the track capacity issues at Union, It's my hope that that this will accelerate the priority of electrifying the Lakeshore, Kitchener, and Stouffville rail corridors and construction off the GO tunnel under the rail corridor at Union Station.

USRC-Track-Study_UndergroundOpt1.jpg


I know that the initial proposal for the GO only had designated two tracks for an through-running Lakeshore line, however I envision 4 tracks with an interlined ARL/Stouffville line using the second set of tracks. Local RER service on both lines would use the tunnel while express/rush hour service would use the existing platforms. Running only RER trains into the tunnel means you don't need to build longer platforms to accommodate 12-car trains. ATC in the tunnel would also mean higher headways.
 
Last edited:
diminutive said:
I'm pleased with their shortlist of high performing options, specifically how frequently GO/TTC integration was mentioned. Some specific questions



Was this ever proposed before? I've never heard of such a route.

Also, I guess TTC fare policy is out of ML's hands, but why no mention of congestion management schemes? These reports have the habit of presenting Yonge's congestion as a permanent, predetermined reality which can only be avoided by new services and routes, rather than a messed up pricing structure. We should be inducing more people to take trips outside of peak hour or to alight at stations on the University line rather than Yonge.
Click to expand...

BurlOak said:
If I looked correctly, 3 of 4 solutions involve GO. Maybe the DRL will not be built at all.
Click to expand...

ehlow said:
It seems like using to GO corridors for rapid transit should happen whether the DRL happens or not, since even if the DRL happens it will take forever to build.

GO corridors seem like the most viable way of improving our transit system quickly.

Express bus lines going downtown would provide alternatives to using the subway as well, ex. the Mt Pleasant-Jarvis line.

Hopefully it RER with TTC fares and adding a few stations can provide a way to rapidly expand our rapid transit system without waiting > 15 years.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Diminutive, one of the reason the eastern YUS is busier is that many of the bus routes on major arteries going east stop there. Extend those to the the western YUS for relief.


Also, if today's poll is to be believed, Ford still has a chance. The province can focus on GO expansion, since that will take away much of the DRL's riders.
 
muller877 said:
But any of these solutions need two distinct things to happen:

1. TTC and Ontario working together (TTC is very protective of their turf)
2. Distance based fares (or else there will be no/little incentive for riders to transfer to/from GO)

I'm not holding my breath that TTC will allow this. I think TTC will want GO Transit to pick up a disproportionate cost (e.g. TTC gets almost all of the cash fare and the province has to pay to move people within Toronto) and this will be a political hot-potato
Click to expand...
Keep in mind that the province has complete control over cities. So if push comes to shove, the province could simply force the TTC to play ball. Building an effective, integrated regional transit system is more important than the TTC's empire building.

Of course, the DRL is still needed even if the GO lines are upgraded to RER style service. It serves different areas and travel patterns.
 
innsertnamehere said:
a good idea might be to short turn them at davisville which has 3 platforms..
Click to expand...

That's an interesting idea. Too bad none of the stations on the Spadina line were built with the same configuration. Another option of course would be to open Lower Bay Station to act as the other short-turn station (and would also provide another transfer point). This would have to mean instituting ATC on the Bloor line as well.

PS: I know there are some Lower Bay fantasies on here, most of which involve re-instituting the interlining program. This would be somewhat different, because Lower Bay would be a terminus station, not a thru station.
 
MisterF said:
Keep in mind that the province has complete control over cities. So if push comes to shove, the province could simply force the TTC to play ball. Building an effective, integrated regional transit system is more important than the TTC's empire building.
Click to expand...

Legally it could, I guess, but that would never happen. Queens Park would have nothing to gain from pissing off the City like that, and given how Toronto-centric Wynne's government is why would she risk all of our petty councillors peeing in her cornflakes?

Moreover, while lots of people here were critical of John Tory's surface subway idea for basically taking credit for a Provincial policy, I think this is the exact reason why having the City actively working towards fare and service integration is so important. If, for whatever reason, Toronto wanted to protect its jurisdiction, it would be hard for the Province to do much.

MisterF said:
Of course, the DRL is still needed even if the GO lines are upgraded to RER style service. It serves different areas and travel patterns.
Click to expand...

A lot of them are actually the same riders. Look at the studies. DRL riders are mostly BD riders.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top