[M II A II R II K]

Regardless of the DRL route there should also be an additional line like as well:

 

[car4041]

The more and more I think about it, the more it makes sense to de-couple the Yonge and University lines, and send the DRL/University line across Front St, and then up Parliament.

Interesting idea, although I don't see why it needs to be linked with de-coupling the Yonge and University lines -- surely it would be cheaper just to route the DRL along Wellington.

The ease of construction at Castle Frank is a nice benefit, as is the shorter length of tunnel. But like Riverdale Rink Rat said, the tradeoff is that you miss the Distillery and the Don Lands, and north of Bloor there's absolutely nothing until you hit Thorncliffe Park.

I'm not sure about the densification argument. St. James Town is already ultra-dense. Cabbagetown is not going to change. Regent Park is already happening. So it's only the southern end of Parliament where much would change, and I think that's going to happen whether or not a subway is built.

Also, despite the density of the Parliament corridor, I don't think a Parliament DRL would have as much of an impact as a more easterly routing, since Parliament is so close to the core that a lot of those people will be walking, biking, or taking streetcars downtown. A more easterly routing would have less competition from these modes. Similarly, a Parliament DRL seems less likely to divert many riders off the streetcar routes coming in from the east, since there'd be little to no time savings in transferring from streetcar to subway that close to the core.

 

[M II A II R II K]

Beyond Castle Frank it can hook up with the Richmond Hill GO Line and then head east to Cosbourne.

 

[Riverdale Rink Rat]

Beyond Castle Frank it can hook up with the Richmond Hill GO Line and then head east to Cosbourne.

Where? How?

https://maps.google.ca/maps?q=Castl...tle+Frank&hnear=Castle+Frank+Station&t=h&z=15

Below the Viaduct? Then back up to Cosburn? Are you planning a subway or an elevator?

 

[MisterF]

An incident at Union would force the closure of "upwards of three" subway lines? But an incident at Queen would not? Please elaborate.

A similar scenario at a hypothetical Queen-Yonge interchange would impact the DRL and one leg of the YUS line. If the DRL goes through Union and the same thing happens there, it would impact both legs of the YUS, the DRL, the Spadina and Harbourfront streetcars, every GO line, and maybe even the GO buses. Having multiple hubs spread around downtown ensures that an incident at one of them would have a smaller impact than if there's one massive hub.

 

[gweed123]

Except you completely miss a huge opportunity to address all the major densification being put in place south of Pape (the ex-soap plant corporate campus planned by First Gulf, West Don Lands, Distillery District), you miss the opportunity to have a GO transfer station (at Gerrard or the Queen bridge).

South of Pape? Pape runs North-South...

And those neighbourhoods you mention will be served by a combination of the DRL and the East Bayfront LRT. There may be small pockets of densification on the east side of the Don, but nothing compared to the west side.

As for the GO connection, having a subway GO connection at a place where both lines are going to the exact same place (Union) is a bit redundant, isn't it? I'd much rather see a GO-TTC connection exist at Queen with a Queen LRT than a DRL, at least then they're going to different places.

Then, north of Castle Frank, you're stuck. Whereas, north of Pape, you can densify to the DVP at Don Mills and run the line as LRT through to Eglinton, a huge transit opportunity (build out the commercial campus, OSC, the apartments all around the north side of the valley.

No you aren't, you run the line through the Don Valley. Yes, the line would skip Riverdale and the area around Pape north of the Danforth, but that's it. There isn't an extraordinary amount of density along that route (heck, half the route south of Danforth is through a rail corridor with only a couple stops planned).

But it still hits the major pockets of density like Thorncliffe & Flemingdon Parks. Also, crossing the Don from Pape over to Thorncliffe would be a pretty expensive feat. By not having to cross the Don at all, you eliminate that. Building the line at-grade through the Don Valley from Castle Frank to Overlea would be a heck of a lot less expensive than tunnelling from Pape-Danforth, then building a bridge over the Don Valley, and then going back under Overlea.

Interesting idea, although I don't see why it needs to be linked with de-coupling the Yonge and University lines -- surely it would be cheaper just to route the DRL along Wellington.

Any station at the heart of the Financial district will be astronomically expensive to build, given the number of underground considerations that need to be taken into account. By decoupling, you can build a new Union station platform running NE-SW under the eastern end of the Union rail corridor, with an underground connection to both GO and the existing Union via the streetcar loop.

The ease of construction at Castle Frank is a nice benefit, as is the shorter length of tunnel. But like Riverdale Rink Rat said, the tradeoff is that you miss the Distillery and the Don Lands, and north of Bloor there's absolutely nothing until you hit Thorncliffe Park.

I just suggested the Front St alignment because it's the most direct route, but there's nothing stopping the line from dipping south and then using the Esplanade to Parliament. In fact, since most of that has a wide strip of parkland, it's probably easier to use than Front is, although Front will allow for more density.

But with the LRT going in along Cherry, that area will still be pretty well connected by transit.

As for having nothing between Bloor and Overlea, the reality is that even a Pape DRL would still only have 1 station between Danforth and Overlea anyway. Building an extra 2km of tunnel, plus a crossing of the Don Valley, is a lot extra for 1 station, isn't it? To put it in perspective, from Overlea & Milwood to Don Mills & Eglinton is about 3km.

I'm not sure about the densification argument. St. James Town is already ultra-dense. Cabbagetown is not going to change. Regent Park is already happening. So it's only the southern end of Parliament where much would change, and I think that's going to happen whether or not a subway is built.

Cabbagetown is most certainly going to change. They're already pushing the wall of condos over to Sherbourne St, which isn't that far from Parliament at all. What's to say that it won't be pushed a block further east?

Also, despite the density of the Parliament corridor, I don't think a Parliament DRL would have as much of an impact as a more easterly routing, since Parliament is so close to the core that a lot of those people will be walking, biking, or taking streetcars downtown. A more easterly routing would have less competition from these modes. Similarly, a Parliament DRL seems less likely to divert many riders off the streetcar routes coming in from the east, since there'd be little to no time savings in transferring from streetcar to subway that close to the core.

Most people in Cabbagetown who are taking the streetcar are taking it to connect to Yonge or University. None of the streetcar routes in Cabbagetown actually go downtown (downtown being anything south of Queen). The Dundas streetcar kind of catches the tip of it, but that's about it. Also, the N-S transit in that area is pretty bad, especially when you compare those routes to the frequencies of the Spadina and Bathurst streetcars, which are roughly mirror to Parliament compared to Yonge.

I think it's really a chicken and egg scenario. There isn't a lot of demand for the route right now because the routes that currently exist don't go where people want to go. The Parliament and Sherbourne buses don't curve in and go to Union, or even go anywhere close to downtown. No matter what route you get on in that area, you're still at least 1 transfer away from getting downtown.

And like it or not, that wall of condos is going to continue pushing east, just like it has continued to push west (the number of high-rise condos in the Entertainment district has at least tripled in the past 5 years). Sherbourne north of Carlton has seen 3 major projects in the past 3 years, with at least 2 more in the works now. And then there's Regent Park, which is just really getting started. I see this time as the beginning of the build-up, not the end.

 

[innsertnamehere]

I think we need a streetcar route, and if possible, ROW on parliament or sherbourne. not a subway. and are you suggesting that decoupling the yonge line will be cheaper than building 2 new stations under existing subway stops? come on man, it would probably cost $1 billion+ to decouple the lines.

anther thing I have been thinking about is what to do with the streetcars if/when the DRL is built. I was thinking that if it was built on king like i think it should, that maybe we reduce queen to one lane each way, and install a streetcar ROW, as long as the king streetcar through downtown is removed. all the "Suburban" parts of the king route could be merged with the new Queen ROW. you could build the waterfront LRT while your at it as well, but just have it route along queen instead of heading to union.

 

[car4041]

As for having nothing between Bloor and Overlea, the reality is that even a Pape DRL would still only have 1 station between Danforth and Overlea anyway. Building an extra 2km of tunnel, plus a crossing of the Don Valley, is a lot extra for 1 station, isn't it?

That's a good point.

Cabbagetown is most certainly going to change. They're already pushing the wall of condos over to Sherbourne St, which isn't that far from Parliament at all. What's to say that it won't be pushed a block further east?

The fact that there are moves to make it a heritage conservation district? And Parliament too. But yes, in any case, Parliament is still more dense than the equivalent part of Pape.

If we did build a DRL to Castle Frank, what do you think of it then taking over the entire Richmond Hill GO line? (maybe with a couple of strategic diversions)

 

[dunkalunk]

In the mean time, how about additional frequency and stations in particular the Richmond Hill GO line? I was thinking of the following stations from Union:


UNION all connection
Cherry NEW Waterfront and Cherry Streetcars, DRL
Gerrard NEW 505 and 506 Streetcars
Milwood NEW
Eglinton NEW Eglinton Crosstown LRT
ORIOLE RELOCATED NORTH OF 401 DRL Terminus, Sheppard Subway
Thornhill NEW (at John Street)
Langstaff 407 Transitway
Richmond Hill
19th Ave NEW (at Bayview Ave)


I also know that through-running some Georgetown trains to Richmond Hill has been pitched numerous times before and would be an excellent express compliment to the more local DRL.

 

[gweed123]

That's a good point.

Thank you, haha. I just figured that the significant extra cost, plus the fact that it's not going to be one of the busiest stations on the line (probably about middle of the pack on the system), makes it not really worth the added expense in my mind, especially when there are other less costly alternatives out there.

The fact that there are moves to make it a heritage conservation district? And Parliament too. But yes, in any case, Parliament is still more dense than the equivalent part of Pape.

Interesting that it includes only a limited strip north of Carlton, and pretty much nothing on the east side of Parliament (aside from the strip of commercial).

Yes, that may limit the redevelopment somewhat, but there are plenty of other sites in that area that could be redeveloped. I'm thinking specifically that whole big block bordered by Carlton, Wellesley, Sherbourne, and Parliament. That would be outside the HCD according to those maps.

As for station locations, I was thinking something like this (using the Esplanade alignment): Union (existing), St. Lawrence (between Church and Jarvis), Esplanade (between Sherbourne and Parliament), Corktown (between King and Front), Moss Park (between Queen and Shuter), Regent Park (between Dundas and Oak), Cabbagetown (centred at Parliament & Carlton), St. James (Wellesley northward), Castle Frank.

I figure going with area names for that segment is easier than going with "WhateverItIs East". Do the same subtitle thing that the University line has. I would also like to note that it's the exact same number of stations using that route as it would be going from Castle Frank to Union via B-D & YUS.

If we did build a DRL to Castle Frank, what do you think of it then taking over the entire Richmond Hill GO line? (maybe with a couple of strategic diversions)

Hmm interesting, I hadn't considered that. It can maybe follow it for a stretch through the Don Valley, but I think hitting Thorncliffe and Flemingdon Parks directly is going to be key for ridership.

It may be worth considering for parts north of Eglinton though, specifically using the abandoned line around the west side of the Don Mills neighbourhood and then connecting back up that way. That would be very long term though.

 

[gweed123]

In the mean time, how about additional frequency and stations in particular the Richmond Hill GO line? I was thinking of the following stations from Union:


UNION all connection
Cherry NEW Waterfront and Cherry Streetcars, DRL
Gerrard NEW 505 and 506 Streetcars
Milwood NEW
Eglinton NEW Eglinton Crosstown LRT
ORIOLE RELOCATED NORTH OF 401 DRL Terminus, Sheppard Subway
Thornhill NEW (at John Street)
Langstaff 407 Transitway
Richmond Hill
19th Ave NEW (at Bayview Ave)


I also know that through-running some Georgetown trains to Richmond Hill has been pitched numerous times before and would be an excellent express compliment to the more local DRL.

I would definitely be all for that. In fact, on my GO REX plan I believe I suggested all of those stations with the exception of Gerrard. That one does make sense too though.

Interlining with Georgetown also makes sense.

 

[Tulse]

According to Steve Munro, it simply isn't technically possible to decouple the YUS line at Union -- there is no room in that extremely crowded space for all the additional trackage required.

 

[car4041]

According to Steve Munro, it simply isn't technically possible to decouple the YUS line at Union -- there is no room in that extremely crowded space for all the additional trackage required.

For reference, this is what Steve said. http://stevemunro.ca/?p=6218
I'm not sure if he thinks it's impossible, but at the very least he seems to think that it's extremely difficult and not worth the huge disruption that would be involved.

Steve: This proposal would involve a complete restructuring of Union Station and the two existing subway lines that, aside from the complexity and its conflict with work now underway, would probably be impossible without a complete shutdown of both lines. Double-decking Union Station would require regrading of the University line (assuming that it would wind up on the bottom level) from St. Andrew Station southwards. The lines could not be completely decoupled because a track link from the now-isolated Yonge line to University would be essential for access to Wilson and Greenwood yards.

Steve: Taking the University line down York Street would be a big challenge because you have to get under the foundations of the railway viaduct. They go down a long way. Also I don’t know how you would build this new connection while maintaining through service on the two lines. As for taking Yonge to the west, yes, if the University line were not in the way, that would work fine. However, you have still not addressed the problem of getting more capacity into the core than the current two lines

He favours a Wellington alignment for the DRL.

 

[nfitz]

For reference, this is what Steve said. http://stevemunro.ca/?p=6218
I'm not sure if he thinks it's impossible, but at the very least he seems to think that it's extremely difficult and not worth the huge disruption that would be involved.

Also note that Steve seemed to be working on the assumption that to do so, would involve building a double-decker station at Union - which would interrupt Union Station for a long period of time. You could actually achieve it in other ways, such as stopping Yonge service at the old end of the line just west of Union for years, and instead building new deep platforms for the University line under York instead of under Front, and then extending the Yonge line west on Front, and the University line south on York, and presumably turning east somewhere between the tracks and the lake.

I doubt you'd really want to do this until you've built a DRL though - and ultimately, you'd be looking at 2 additional east-west lines. Maybe in a century or two.

 

[gweed123]

Also note that Steve seemed to be working on the assumption that to do so, would involve building a double-decker station at Union - which would interrupt Union Station for a long period of time. You could actually achieve it in other ways, such as stopping Yonge service at the old end of the line just west of Union for years, and instead building new deep platforms for the University line under York instead of under Front, and then extending the Yonge line west on Front, and the University line south on York, and presumably turning east somewhere between the tracks and the lake.

I doubt you'd really want to do this until you've built a DRL though - and ultimately, you'd be looking at 2 additional east-west lines. Maybe in a century or two.

The assumption that I was working under was not to double-deck Union, but to build a new Yonge platform between Bay and Yonge, south of Front. Basically it would run NE-SW under the bus terminal and rail tracks. The biggest change would be a regrading of the Yonge tracks from King down to Union, whereby the new tracks would pass underneath what would become a wye. Rather than the DRL taking a 90 degree turn after leaving Union like it does now, it would pass through the wye going straight under Front eastbound.

The whole setup at King would be similar to what exists at the upper level of St. George, where the trains can either go straight and descend to Spadina - Bloor Platform (New Union), or turn right and continue to Spadina - YUS Platform.

No reconfiguration of Union necessary, just the tracks east of it.