Leo_Chan
Senior Member
Now if they introduced a viewable 3D model of many stations that anyone can view online, then that would be cool.
|
|
|
EastYorkTTCFan
Senior Member
I just wish they would actually show details people want to see like for example will the LRT have asperete fare line from the subway sation
Midtown Urbanist
Superstar
What makes you say that? The Relief Line is being built as a subway with ATC. The Yonge Line once ATC is implemented can handle 36,000pphd. The Relief Line if built to Sheppard is only projected to be 19,200 pphd in 2031. That is plenty of room for growth.
If we threw the Relief Line on the RH-GO corridor and sent the trains up to Richmond Hill, there are two things that go in our favour: (1) The Relief Line provides full relief to the Yonge Line by accepting downtown-bound York Region riders, freeing up capacity further down the line; (2) The trip actually will save passengers time compared to the Yonge Line as the Relief Line would have higher operating speeds between Richmond Hill and Pape (and less stations to slow down).
The band-aid solution is upgrading the RH-GO line. That Line is utterly inadequate for handling the passenger volumes needed (not to mention actually out of the way of where the demand is) without very expensive upgrades that would involve a completely new route between Lawrence and Union Station.
Remember, it is not necessarily the technology that is most important but route design. While yes, commuter rail like GO is more adequate for serving the suburbs in general, by putting the Relief Line on the RH-GO corridor with minimal stops, you would allow it to operate at very high speeds, likely the highest in the entire system, between Lawrence and Richmond Hill.
smallspy
Senior Member
Of course, the converse of that is that the preliminary ridership projections for the various routes have the ridership increasing the further away you get from Yonge. The Bala Sub comes back and almost reaches Yonge at Highway 7.
And then there's the fact that there is no established ridership patterns on the Bala Sub - people are simply using it as a bridge route to get from one end to the other. Running the DRL up Don Mills or Victoria Park would not just intercept people heading downtown, but also take advantage of the existing on-line ridership patterns as well.
Dan
Toronto, Ont.
Midtown Urbanist
Superstar
I like to think of it almost reaching Yonge at Highway 7 to be a feature, not a bug. The ridership in York Region is coming down on Yonge Street and it will totally overwhelm the Yonge Line.
A Bala Sub routing would still intercept bus routes at York Mills/Ellesmere, Sheppard East, Finch East and Steeles East, which are heading to the Yonge Line as we speak.
But you do have a point, and that is why my preferred routing is actually up Don Mills (which will provide a cleaner interchange at Sheppard too) and crossing to Leslie and the RH-GO corridor via the Finch Hydro Corridor. ( and turn the rest of the RH-GO corridor south of Finch to Toronto's first cycling super highway.
)
Attachments
micheal_can
Senior Member
For everyone suggesting using the Bala sub for the DRL, stop, just, please stop. It is the mainline in for CN from the west.
That would be akin to suggesting that we turn the 400 into a new LRT.
That would be akin to suggesting that we turn the 400 into a new LRT.
Leo_Chan
Senior Member
This thread is getting a bit off topic, but I agree with you on this. Using the Richmond Hill Line for the Relief Line North has a very low possibility of happening, even though it is identified as a potential corridor on the long list of corridors. At this time, we should wait a few more months or years until they release their short list of corridors to see if they find it attractive.
Midtown Urbanist
Superstar
Unless it was tunnelled.
44 North
Senior Member
Yeah it's a bit annoying. Not to mention it's based on the rather callous and silly assumption that we'll simply shutter a 4km section of long-existing commuter rail, shutter 8km of new track and a brand new station (gormely), and stop work on Bloomington which is quite far along in construction. Sort of gas plant-ish. I get upgrading a commuter rail line to subway standards. Not tossing a rail line aside. This resulting in, what, two subway lines to an outer suburban area all the while we have swaths of the real city dying for major upgrades to transit or SSE getting only one station. Doesn't add up.
steveintoronto
Superstar
For where? Not for *circumventing the load on the present subway it was never designed for*. Anyone thinking extending the present groaning yesterday's subway further out to the nether regions in lieu of regional rail is a good idea is a supporter of Doug Ford. It was never meant to handle that, and it never will as is. Extensions are *exacerbating the very reason touted for the Pape south relief case exists in the first place*. Eglinton Crosstown does the opposite, albeit it too will further load legs of the present subway Line 1. That's something to cater for, and will again max out the present groaning subway infrastructure not designed for serving the regions.
It doesn't "add up" because like many Toronto centric persons, you miss the bigger picture as is being done in many world leading cities.
You *feed* that traffic into the Relief Line tunnel. The whole Bala line *remains*. What is now extant below Don Mills becomes a direct express peak service to Union below Don Mills as it now is and for any other existing heavy rail needs. The DD stock won't fit in a 6.5 metre bore. Single decker emu that runs on standard UIC height 25 kV AC catenary can and does! In Toronto's case, I recommend a slightly larger bore, but Crossrail and other European cities do it in a bore size now standard for later Toronto subway tunnels. Paris even does DD in that size bore! Sydney slightly larger IIRC.
South of Don Mills, the *RER electric single decker stock* a la Crossrail and a number of other European cities, using *off the shelf Bombardier and competitor tried and trued high platform stock* is run in tunnel to the core of Toronto and eventually looped back out the west end to the Georgetown Corridor, relieving the subway, relieving Union Station, and much better serving the core with a direct *one seat* ride to the burbs without even needing to use the subway in any shape or form. The diesel and DD stock continues to run where it now does, and the line north of Don Mills is shared with RER.
This type of mixed stock, alternate destination exists in New York as well as many European and Asian cities. Why it's so abstract to Torontonians is symptomatic of...creating their own conundrums by thinking small.
"Subways, subways, subways". He isn't talking LRT let alone RER in tunnel...He's talking the past.
Last edited:
steveintoronto
Superstar
And it's also the proposed entrance into Union for HFR. Does that then mean that "CN" can no longer use the southern leg of it? (HFR is inevitably going to be electrified, and ML has already made provisions for electrifying the bend into the USRC.)
Does that create a problem too, or does it just feed the reasons to deny examining the possibilities of stoning two or more birds with one kill? It's going to be a bitch getting funding for anything of size as per transit in this province for the next four years. It's well past time to look at doing as many things with what we presently now have and adding to it in ways that satisfies the greater need. Not the just the Pape Entitlement. Unless of course, Toronto wants another 'special tax levy' to pay for it.
Monarch Butterfly
Superstar
The Line 5 Eglinton Crosstown LRT will be an alternative to the Line 2 Bloor-Danforth. While the University-Spadina leg is an alternative to the Yonge leg of the Line 1, any stoppages anywhere on Line 1 could stop all movements on Line 1. Even the Finch West LRT will be alternative for east-west travel, should they go through with its possible extensions.
Leo_Chan
Senior Member
When you say "alternative", do you mean a new primary option, a new secondary option, a new back up option, a new route for redundancy or all of the above?
44 North
Senior Member
To be fair I'm not criticizing a vague notion about using mainline rail for the RL, rather the specific post/fantasy further up the page involving shuttering swaths of mainline rail so as to bring two subway lines to a point in Richmond Hill.
Northern Light
Superstar
Just for clarification, the Bala sub is mainline only north of the York sub (just north of Steeles); south of that point it is now Metrolinx owned, though CN still has running rights, freight usage in that section is pretty low though, as I recall.
Still a goofy routing for an RL though, even on the lower section.
Last edited: