[JSF-1]

Where was this Kipling RT planned to go. My in laws moved to square one area in the 80s and swear is was all farm land.

The Etobicoke RT was planned to run from Kipling Station to Pearson with a potential branch line to York University (or Dufferin Street). It would have been built in the hydro corridors in the area and used CLRV cars like the original SRT plan. The ERT never really made it far into planning so we can't say for sure how it would have all turned out in the end. I have a couple of pictures to illustrate this, the first is a map I made which gives you a general overview of the line although once again the plan didn't get far enough along for stations to be narrowed down so this is just my best guess...

 

[micheal_can]

The Etobicoke RT was planned to run from Kipling Station to Pearson with a potential branch line to York University (or Dufferin Street). It would have been built in the hydro corridors in the area and used CLRV cars like the original SRT plan. The ERT never really made it far into planning so we can't say for sure how it would have all turned out in the end. I have a couple of pictures to illustrate this, the first is a map I made which gives you a general overview of the line although once again the plan didn't get far enough along for stations to be narrowed down so this is just my best guess...

View attachment 626634

View attachment 626636

View attachment 626637

Do you have information on what the SRT would have been if extended?

 

[JSF-1]

Do you have information on what the SRT would have been if extended?

The only real extension for the SRT considered was one to Malvern (or Sheppard Ave at the very least). It does appear though that the alignment changed since originally the extension would have used the old Canadian Northern ROW but eventually they abandoned that in favor of following the highland creek and Progress Avenue. Interesting to note in the drawings I'll attach below show that the station at Sheppard would have made it impossible to extend the line to Malvern so I don't know what the play would have been. I am planning on taking a trip to the Toronto Archives later in the year when it is warmer sine I want to remake my SRT video so if I dig up anything new or interesting I'll be sure to share it.

While I cannot corroborate the idea of an extension of the RT downtown, I have seen that at one time the City briefly considered extending the RT along Eglinton Avenue and making the Crosstown an extension of RT. I can't say for sure when those discussions happened but it would have had to have been in around 2006 since that was when the TTC was committed to upgrading the RT to the Mk.II trains and Transit City would have still been in its infancy (it was announced in 2007 right?). It seems at least for a breif period of time the working proposal (or at least the napkin drawing) was for the Crosstown to be an extension of the RT using the new Mk.II trains. Obviously this plan was converted to low floor LRV's alongside the RT and even the idea of unifying the EC and SRT was brought up again this time using LRV's instead of the RT's light metro trains. Obviously this never happened because the subway extension became the preferred solution. The reason the idea of merging the RT and EC into a single line using the RT trains never went anywhere is no doubt due to cost since a light metro version of the EC would have the be grade separated in its entirety either underground or elevated, while LRV's could run down the middle of the street. I will also say I have only seen 1 reference to this idea so I can't say with 100% certainty that this was ever a serious proposal. When I start working on my Crosstown video I'll be sure to keep an eye out for more references to this plan.

(model of the proposed stop at Milner)

 

[micheal_can]

The only real extension for the SRT considered was one to Malvern (or Sheppard Ave at the very least). It does appear though that the alignment changed since originally the extension would have used the old Canadian Northern ROW but eventually they abandoned that in favor of following the highland creek and Progress Avenue. Interesting to note in the drawings I'll attach below show that the station at Sheppard would have made it impossible to extend the line to Malvern so I don't know what the play would have been. I am planning on taking a trip to the Toronto Archives later in the year when it is warmer sine I want to remake my SRT video so if I dig up anything new or interesting I'll be sure to share it.

While I cannot corroborate the idea of an extension of the RT downtown, I have seen that at one time the City briefly considered extending the RT along Eglinton Avenue and making the Crosstown an extension of RT. I can't say for sure when those discussions happened but it would have had to have been in around 2006 since that was when the TTC was committed to upgrading the RT to the Mk.II trains and Transit City would have still been in its infancy (it was announced in 2007 right?). It seems at least for a breif period of time the working proposal (or at least the napkin drawing) was for the Crosstown to be an extension of the RT using the new Mk.II trains. Obviously this plan was converted to low floor LRV's alongside the RT and even the idea of unifying the EC and SRT was brought up again this time using LRV's instead of the RT's light metro trains. Obviously this never happened because the subway extension became the preferred solution. The reason the idea of merging the RT and EC into a single line using the RT trains never went anywhere is no doubt due to cost since a light metro version of the EC would have the be grade separated in its entirety either underground or elevated, while LRV's could run down the middle of the street. I will also say I have only seen 1 reference to this idea so I can't say with 100% certainty that this was ever a serious proposal. When I start working on my Crosstown video I'll be sure to keep an eye out for more references to this plan.

View attachment 626640

View attachment 626639

View attachment 626638

View attachment 626641
(model of the proposed stop at Milner)

Thank you for clarifying this. I must have mistaking it from the existing Relief line discussions.

 

[JSF-1]

Thank you for clarifying this. I must have mistaking it from the existing Relief line discussions.

I think what you might be thinking of was the very brief proposal of an LRT line from Queen Street to Scarborough via the Lake Shore GO Line with a branch to STC via the Canadian Northern ROW and another branch to Morningside Avenue. It came about in the 70's in the aftermath of the Scarborough Expressways cancellation as Metro tried to find ways to make commuting from Scarborough to downtown easier. This idea was quickly discarded since the current (at the time) SRT plan would have served STC and GO Train service along the rest of the corridor was good enough.

(my rough interpretation of what it could have looked like)

 

[afransen]

Dundas isn’t exactly close to MCC. Let’s pretend you do want to take the subway and you live at MCC you are asking people to jump on a lrt that stops at lights. Transfer to a bus that stops at lights and then transfer to a subway. How many stops again are on this route between Hurontario and Kipling?Anyways you’re asking a lot.

BRT is an improvement but there is a reason there are a variety of forms of transit. It’s great to have GO even with it’s limited service but if the cost to get the service all day is the same as a subway then I’d prefer as many transit options as possible. In other words a subway.

If they are going to Kipling, they should use the (upgraded) Milton Line. It is a failure if they are taking an all-stops local service from MCC to Kipling (and beyond).

I'm pretty sure that upgrading Milton Line all the way to Milton GO would cost less than extending Line 2 to MCC, by a fair margin. Perhaps adding frills like a tunneled diversion from the CP corridor to MCC would get it into the same ballpark.

 

[81-717]

since a light metro version of the EC would have the be grade separated in its entirety either underground or elevated, while LRV's could run down the middle of the street.

Why not? Why couldn't light metros run through the existing grade crossings of line 5, assuming the same frequency? As many are quick to point out, the distinction between light metro and light rail can be quite blurred especially in terms of capacity or vehicle weight. Having a 3rd rail doesn't have to be a problem either (see LiRR, MNRR, Chicago, Oslo). The only thing that might be a problem is the reaction rail and what that would look like at crossings.

 

[micheal_can]

I think what you might be thinking of was the very brief proposal of an LRT line from Queen Street to Scarborough via the Lake Shore GO Line with a branch to STC via the Canadian Northern ROW and another branch to Morningside Avenue. It came about in the 70's in the aftermath of the Scarborough Expressways cancellation as Metro tried to find ways to make commuting from Scarborough to downtown easier. This idea was quickly discarded since the current (at the time) SRT plan would have served STC and GO Train service along the rest of the corridor was good enough.

View attachment 626642View attachment 626643
(my rough interpretation of what it could have looked like)

Yes. That was the one. I knew there was something to go downtown. I just could not remember where I saw it. I thought it was the SRT. Interestingly though, the SRT could have been extended down for this.

Thank you for digging this up.

 

[afransen]

And it must be said that the SRT has not been considered a success, and the inane stop spacing on the SSE is one of the many criticisms that have been levied against it.

The limit of the comparison to SRT is that Milton Line obviously doesn't force a linear transfer at Kipling, but allows people to continue on to Union. The transfer at Kipling is useful only if you are going to points in Etobicoke

 

[nfitz]

The Etobicoke RT was planned to run from Kipling Station to Pearson with a potential branch line to York University (or Dufferin Street). It would have been built in the hydro corridors in the area and used CLRV cars like the original SRT plan. The ERT never really made it far into planning so we can't say for sure how it would have all turned out in the end.

I assume that the hypothetical Ontario Line extension the province has mentioned between TTC Kipling and Pearson, would follow this same alignment (or at least the hydro corridor).

These old projects never completely die - they just grow a slightly different head.

 

[turbanplanner]

The Skytrain in Vancouver is the same thing. They have not had to do that.

Could that potentially be due to the climate? when the derailment happened it was partly due to the replacement anchors though I believe several original ones were falling apart.

The fact the TTC didn't have an engineer sign off on using the newer anchors is pretty damning.

 

[micheal_can]

Could that potentially be due to the climate? when the derailment happened it was partly due to the replacement anchors though I believe several original ones were falling apart.

The fact the TTC didn't have an engineer sign off on using the newer anchors is pretty damning.

It entirely could be climate. They rarely get snow or ice. However, the should have been able to figure this out in the 1970s when they built the SRT.

 

[smallspy]

AsI understand it, the SRT was eventually going to be extended to downtown, negating a relief line. That would have been useful. There were even plans to have one out in Etobicoke.

You greatly misunderstood the plan, it seems.

Yes, there was to be one in Etobicoke. And yes, some versions of the Downtown Relief Line called for ICTS equipment to be used.

But the lines were all discrete, and did not connect to each other.

Dan

 

[sixrings]

If they are going to Kipling, they should use the (upgraded) Milton Line. It is a failure if they are taking an all-stops local service from MCC to Kipling (and beyond).

I'm pretty sure that upgrading Milton Line all the way to Milton GO would cost less than extending Line 2 to MCC, by a fair margin. Perhaps adding frills like a tunneled diversion from the CP corridor to MCC would get it into the same ballpark.

Once again i doubt that we will see a Milton Go proposal that makes it to Square one. But if we do and the price is the same then we can have the discussion of which is better. But if one makes it to city centre and the other doesn’t that is a huge sticking point.

I’m also not convinced the freight rail line is going to facilitate this. What a waste if we just end up going in circles trying to make a deal which never materialised.

 

[T3G]

Why not? Why couldn't light metros run through the existing grade crossings of line 5, assuming the same frequency? As many are quick to point out, the distinction between light metro and light rail can be quite blurred especially in terms of capacity or vehicle weight. Having a 3rd rail doesn't have to be a problem either (see LiRR, MNRR, Chicago, Oslo). The only thing that might be a problem is the reaction rail and what that would look like at crossings.

There are only two reasons why a city would have a rapid transit service with a 3rd rail crossing a road at grade: either they do not have the financial means to fully grade separate, or their city planners are members of a death cult. You know as well as I do that people are generally stupid and ignorant and collectively take thousands of actions daily that put themselves, or others, in danger. Let's not make it easier for them.