kEiThZ
Superstar
This. Using the number of stops to see a particular mode is rather simplistic. Should be considering the effect of that infrastructure on travel times.
|
|
|
- Thread starter denfromoakvillemilton
- Start date
This. Using the number of stops to see a particular mode is rather simplistic. Should be considering the effect of that infrastructure on travel times.
My bet is that the Eglinton West portion of SmartTrack will be dropped pretty early on in the discussion. It just doesn't make much sense, and I don't think Tory would be that attached to one segment of his plan, especially if 90% of his plan remains intact.
The biggest change I would like to see SmartTrack have is to run in a downtown tunnel instead of through Union. That would effectively make it the DRL, especially if a realignment of the Richmond Hill line through Eglinton & Don Mills, Thorncliffe Park, and Donlands/Pape is included as well.
Realistically, having the city pay for (or pay for part of) the tunnel from Parkdale to Eglinton & Don Mills (same route as the "traditional" TTC DRL), and having the Province pay for the upgrades to the rail corridors as per the GO RER scheme, I think is the optimal solution. It allows the DRL to have it's branches extend much further into the suburbs than a TTC subway ever could with that amount of money, which in turn maximizes the relief potential of the DRL.
Doing it that way (combining SmartTrack with the DRL) also alleviates the capacity crunch at Union, and reserves Union capacity for just the longer 905-centric GO RER routes, and the longer exurban GO routes.
The biggest change I would like to see SmartTrack have is to run in a downtown tunnel instead of through Union. That would effectively make it the DRL, especially if a realignment of the Richmond Hill line through Eglinton & Don Mills, Thorncliffe Park, and Donlands/Pape is included as well.
Realistically, having the city pay for (or pay for part of) the tunnel from Parkdale to Eglinton & Don Mills (same route as the "traditional" TTC DRL), and having the Province pay for the upgrades to the rail corridors as per the GO RER scheme, I think is the optimal solution. It allows the DRL to have it's branches extend much further into the suburbs than a TTC subway ever could with that amount of money, which in turn maximizes the relief potential of the DRL.
Doing it that way (combining SmartTrack with the DRL) also alleviates the capacity crunch at Union, and reserves Union capacity for just the longer 905-centric GO RER routes, and the longer exurban GO routes.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
And there is frankly more to be gained politically running by the NW portion of the line to Rexdale instead of along Eglinton, which can be served just as easily with an ECLRT connected to GO RER anyways (and incidentally, that will pull the transit rug under the core of FN). Like your idea of a downtown tunnel instead of using the Union Station alignment as well.
AoD
Very true on the political gain. It's also a path of much lower resistance than Eglinton West, because the tracks are already there (or will be very shortly).
And yes, I think combining SmartTrack and the DRL will stave off a lot of the criticism that SmartTrack is going to push the DRL onto the sidelines. Combining the two is really the optimal solution, IMO. It would also give Tory the chance to put all of those revenue tools that he was touting for SmartTrack into effect for the tunnel portion, since the rail corridor sections are all being upgraded by the Province as part of the GO RER plan anyway, and thus don't need any municipal funding.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Bingo - and he can obfusticate the cost of the buried downtown portion to the city by claiming it is the city's contribution to this whole project.
AoD
ssiguy2
Senior Member
Yes, a tunnel down Queen {not King!} will eventually be needed especially if the Smart Tracks program is expanded to include the Don Mills and Lakeshore West corridors...........Union will simply be beyond it's capacity.
Again this is what Melbourne/Sydney/Berlin/BART do with their suburban rail networks. When you have many lines merging into just one station not only does that station become too heavily burdened but you are not catching the other areas in the core of the city. A tunnel with with a few stops downtown ie Bathurst/Spadina/University/Yonge/Sherbourne will greatly relieve Union, serve as a DRL, serve the CityPLace/Liberty Village corridor but also greatly relieve the 2 busiest streetcar lines....King and Queen.
Again this is another benefit of Smart Tracks, these things can be phased in over time where, unlike a convention DRL, where it's all or nothing and TTC riders have to wait 10 years to see any improvements.
Again this is what Melbourne/Sydney/Berlin/BART do with their suburban rail networks. When you have many lines merging into just one station not only does that station become too heavily burdened but you are not catching the other areas in the core of the city. A tunnel with with a few stops downtown ie Bathurst/Spadina/University/Yonge/Sherbourne will greatly relieve Union, serve as a DRL, serve the CityPLace/Liberty Village corridor but also greatly relieve the 2 busiest streetcar lines....King and Queen.
Again this is another benefit of Smart Tracks, these things can be phased in over time where, unlike a convention DRL, where it's all or nothing and TTC riders have to wait 10 years to see any improvements.
Great point. A $6 billion municipal investment on a line from Parkdale to the Science Centre may draw the ire of suburbanites, but a $6 billion municipal investment that has branches reaching to pretty much all areas of the city, would have much greater appeal. More politically feasible, and a larger reach which means higher ridership.
Disagree on Queen, but I agree with the rest of that statement. King has a much larger densification capacity than Queen. Queen is a lot like Bloor, in that densification along the corridor is pretty minimal.
Yup, very true. They can start SmartTrack off by running into Union while the tunnel is being built, and then switch its operations over to the tunnel, and in turn beef up 905 service to take advantage of that 'vacated' capacity.
Last edited:
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Actually considering the line will have to go through downtown, I am not sure if your notion of phasing would be that beneficial - either way, tunnelling and building stations in the core will be the component that takes up the most time.
AoD
44 North
Senior Member
Where abouts should the eastern portal - and where it merge with DRL-RH tunnel - be located? And would the western half of ST be a standalone line, or would it resurface again in the west?
The eastern portal would be around Gerrard Square, where the RH line would continue in a tunnel northbound, and the other branches would use the Lakeshore East line. In the west, what I see is most of the branches surfacing in the rail corridor between King and Queen around Dufferin, with one branch of the tunnel continuing west under King and surfacing around the Humber Bay, and joining the Lakeshore West line there.
The configuration that I have is 4 branches on each side. In the west the terminus points would be: Oakville, Square One, 407-Hurontario, and Woodbridge. In the east the terminus points would be: Pickering, Richmond Hill Centre, Unionville, and Scarborough Centre.
nfitz
Superstar
That might be fine for a provincial project. But John Tory is promising $billions of dollars in Toronto taxpayer money on something that primarily benefits people commuting to Mississauga?
Massive fail.
Extend the LRT, that makes more sense, and costs relatively little ($467 million in 2010$ to Renforth). And instead either stop the RER in Mount Dennis, or instead run it to Weston, Etobicoke North, Malton (and beyond if Metrolinx wants).
nfitz
Superstar
If it can be as rapid as LRT, and not impacted by traffic congestion. Yes, it probably is. Isn't that EXACTLY what David Peterson proposed for this line back in the mid-1980s? Boy, if we'd have been running dedicated BRT from Renforth to Eglinton West all these years, as originally proposed, imagine all the time people would have not wasted stuck on Eglinton.
kEiThZ
Superstar
I don't know what the solution is (vis-Ã -vis Toronto taxpayers). But the mentality that we shouldn't care about those commuters has to end. When a Mississauga commuter drives, they slow down my commute. When they use transit, they may take a seat I'd get. Their commuting and travel patterns have consequences on me as a TTC user and Toronto motorist.
That said, I fail to see how Smart Track "primarily benefits people commuting to Mississauga".
And I will concur with you that the LRT makes much more sense for Eg West.
Last edited:
salsa
Senior Member
Exactly. And lets not pretend that no Torontonians commute to work outside their city.
Dan416
Senior Member
I'm not enamoured with SmartTrack, but I think the petty, narrow view taken by all the different players (all the cities, Regions, transit agencies) has hampered transit in the GTA for far too long. It's something I had hoped Metrolinx could reign in (and the GTTA before it). Sadly, we're nowhere near the right level of coordination. There's so many models, both in Canada and overseas that we could follow here, but we don't. It's so frustrating. Why do we have to be so parochial and not do what's best for the greater good?