[smallspy]

From what I have seen, it appears that the assumption is a midtown train would stop at Eglinton, where passengers could transfer to the Crosstown via steps to the Leslie stop. Is this preferable to trying to make a stop at Don Mills and making a connection to Relief Line North?

I think that the only people assuming a stop at Eglinton on any conceivable future Midtown GO line are the same people who think that there should be a stop on the Richmond Hill Line at Bloor. The geography doesn't lend itself to a good connection there.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[robmausser]

I think that the only people assuming a stop at Eglinton on any conceivable future Midtown GO line are the same people who think that there should be a stop on the Richmond Hill Line at Bloor. The geography doesn't lend itself to a good connection there.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

Montreal REM would like to have a word with you

Also the connection at Eglinton for the Midtown GO is fine.

https://goo.gl/maps/G79qiXE7mFq

Really not that difficult at all.

Richmond Hill is more of a challenge yes, but nothing like Richmond Hill at Bloor

https://goo.gl/maps/6ZajUVMyCLQ2

 

[DonValleyRainbow]

I suppose the question could be asked. At what cost can we justify the work of preparing this line for Pickering airport. We don't want another Pearson where the rail line comes near but not close enough to the airport terminal. IIRC the plans called for a spur line into the terminal area.

Just adding in the Pickering airport plan here for reference. Would it make sense to move the terminal closer to the rail line, for example, rather than another spur line? Is the airport to far out into the future to even consider the impacts of decisions made today on the potential airport many years from now?

So essentially, you want to ensure that we don't have a Pearson scenario where it is difficult for commuters from the far west (e.g. Kitchener, Guelph, Georgetown) to get to the airport (get off at Malton + local bus, or transfer to UPX at Weston). This would be of benefit to people in...Claremont...Myrtle Station...Burketon Station...Pontypool...Tapley...Springville...Peterborough?

Not knocking on the idea or Peterborough itself.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

So essentially, you want to ensure that we don't have a Pearson scenario where it is difficult for commuters from the far west (e.g. Kitchener, Guelph, Georgetown) to get to the airport (get off at Malton + local bus, or transfer to UPX at Weston). This would be of benefit to people in...Claremont...Myrtle Station...Burketon Station...Pontypool...Tapley...Springville...Peterborough?

Not knocking on the idea or Peterborough itself.

Having the station be a through station rather than a terminal station on a stub line would simplify operations.

 

[SaugeenJunction]

So in terms of the use of the use of the CP Midtown Line (North Toronto Sub) and the Havelock Sub, VIA Rail is eying these two for their High Frequency Rail proposal, which may see funding flow to it from the Federal Infrastructure Bank by the end of the year.

This project would See VIA trains run from Union, up the Don Branch, along the North Toronto Sub, to the Havelock Sub (then onto Peterborough, Ottawa, Montreal, and Quebec City). Details on the projet are scarce, but I'd assume that running roughly hourly (in each direction) VIA trains would eat up lots of trackspace/time for future GO operations. Based on the Infrastructure Bank model however, any new track would be owned by a private consortium, meaning that GO could buy access. This subject has been discussed and debated to much length on the UT VIA thread.

Anyways, I just wanted to mention this as food for though, considering the topic of the thread.

Here is a map of the VIA Dedicated Tracks/High Frequency Rail proposal:

 

[smallspy]

Montreal REM would like to have a word with you

Also the connection at Eglinton for the Midtown GO is fine.

https://goo.gl/maps/G79qiXE7mFq

Really not that difficult at all.

Richmond Hill is more of a challenge yes, but nothing like Richmond Hill at Bloor

https://goo.gl/maps/6ZajUVMyCLQ2

I'm well aware of the plan to build a transfer at Eduard-Montpetit - they've been thinking about it for quite a few years - and just because they think that it's a good idea doesn't actually make it one. The ongoing costs of this design will eat up untold millions of dollars for the rest of its existance. And for what, 3500 customers per day? Is it worth it? I don't think so.

Again, because of the geography, it would be much easier to build a connection at Don Mills than at Eglinton. And heck, that doesn't even take into account the fact that there's just more potential destinations around Don Mills than there is at Eglinton.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[44 North]

I think Eglinton/Leslie would be pretty optimal, especially considering it'd also be at the nexus of any potential service on a reactivated Leaside spur. Anything at Don Mills wouldn't have this. However Don Mills would be okay since it provides enough of a distance buffer to also have a station at Millwood (which could in effect be the de facto RL transfer station).

 

[steveintoronto]

Montreal REM would like to have a word with you

Also the connection at Eglinton for the Midtown GO is fine.

https://goo.gl/maps/G79qiXE7mFq

Really not that difficult at all.

Richmond Hill is more of a challenge yes, but nothing like Richmond Hill at Bloor

https://goo.gl/maps/6ZajUVMyCLQ2

Not to disparage the concept, but when REM have actually started this, let alone built it, it can be used as a comparison. There are better ways to do this if Toronto so chooses, and the escalators being planned/used for Grand Central's East Side Access and London's Crossrail would be better comparators.

At this point in time, using REM as an example of how to do anything is problematic. Montreal and Quebec will rue the day they got sweet talked into REM, and the massive problems they're going to have.

 

[steveintoronto]

I think Eglinton/Leslie would be pretty optimal, especially considering it'd also be at the nexus of any potential service on a reactivated Leaside spur. Anything at Don Mills wouldn't have this. However Don Mills would be okay since it provides enough of a distance buffer to also have a station at Millwood (which could in effect be the de facto RL transfer station).

I suspect the Province taking the lead on "Relief Line North" (I use the term "lead" diplomatically, they're stepping in and pushing the City aside, rightly so) will have the answer for transferring at (ostensibly) the Science Centre station, by connecting further north to the Richmond Hill line....perhaps, big perhaps, even redirecting the flow downtown from the valley, the latter which remains a flooding liability. The valley line could remain as an express route to Union when conditions permit. Local and interchange traffic would come down the Relief Line.

 

[DonValleyRainbow]

I think Eglinton/Leslie would be pretty optimal, especially considering it'd also be at the nexus of any potential service on a reactivated Leaside spur. Anything at Don Mills wouldn't have this. However Don Mills would be okay since it provides enough of a distance buffer to also have a station at Millwood (which could in effect be the de facto RL transfer station).

I suspect the Province taking the lead on "Relief Line North" (I use the term "lead" diplomatically, they're stepping in and pushing the City aside, rightly so) will have the answer for transferring at (ostensibly) the Science Centre station, by connecting further north to the Richmond Hill line....perhaps, big perhaps, even redirecting the flow downtown from the valley, the latter which remains a flooding liability. The valley line could remain as an express route to Union when conditions permit. Local and interchange traffic would come down the Relief Line.

So to be clear, you're talking about a potential interchange with the Relief line being located at north of the north portion of The Donway? I do see that as a good alternative, but it won't quite work if the Leaside Spur is reactivated. Having a transfer at Eglinton vs. Don Mills is accomodating Leaside Spur though.

As for flooding risk, I think much of this will be relieved by a) the Don Lands redevelopment that was just announced, and b) use of the CP Don Branch, regardless of whether or not the Leaside Spur is reactivated.

 

[steveintoronto]

So to be clear, you're talking about a potential interchange with the Relief line being located at north of the north portion of The Donway?

Without being more detailed, yes. *Somewhere* further north than the initially projected Sheppard terminus. I agree with a few other posters, it doesn't make sense to terminate at Sheppard *especially when using the term Regional* when it could go further north to intercept traffic heading down the Bala sub, and thus almost eliminating the need for a Broadview/Castle Frank interchange.

I do see that as a good alternative, but it won't quite work if the Leaside Spur is reactivated. Having a transfer at Eglinton vs. Don Mills is accomodating Leaside Spur though.

That warrants much further discussion, but of course, is predicated on the Leaside Spur being possible to re-activate. *IF* the Leaside Spur can be/is reactivated, it makes a number of wonderful things possible.

As for flooding risk, I think much of this will be relieved by a) the Don Lands redevelopment that was just announced, and b) use of the CP Don Branch, regardless of whether or not the Leaside Spur is reactivated.

Also worthy of much more discussion. It's interesting that ML have sunk as much capital as they have into the CP Don Branch, they obviously have future aspirations for it, and they must also have faith the flood situation can be addressed.

As for the Bala Sub, I think the "flood risk" can be divided into upper and lower reaches of the Don, which means that because one scheme is too risky due to flood risk of one portion doesn't negate the viability of using another portion. In other words, *segments* of the present Bala Sub could be used in schemes that don't involve all of it. Flood risk besides, and the convolutions of it, it's still an exquisite transit corridor for express purposes.

Reference for the Metrolinx Relief Line presentation:
http://www.metrolinx.com/en/docs/pdf/board_agenda/20170628/20170628_BoardMtg_YSNERL_Report_EN.pdf

Edit to Clarify: My earlier reference to "the Science Centre" may be incorrect. The concept is right, the detail wrong. *At some point* traffic from the RH line could be transfered to the Relief Line to interchange with the B-D subway line in lieu of a very expensive and problematic interchange at the Bloor-Danforth Viaduct.

 

[44 North]

I suspect the Province taking the lead on "Relief Line North" (I use the term "lead" diplomatically, they're stepping in and pushing the City aside, rightly so) will have the answer for transferring at (ostensibly) the Science Centre station, by connecting further north to the Richmond Hill line....perhaps, big perhaps, even redirecting the flow downtown from the valley, the latter which remains a flooding liability. The valley line could remain as an express route to Union when conditions permit. Local and interchange traffic would come down the Relief Line.

Yeah the RL and/or commuter improvements is definitely an interesting topic for discussion; very dynamic with lots of opportunities. Many of which have been considered in some official way going back decades. For getting the RH line out of the valley, officially there were two options: Leaside Spur, or some kind of arcing viaduct just north of Eglinton to bring the line to North Toronto Sub grade. The former is a political hot potato (tho still viable), the latter isn't all that possible bc of new development in the path of this option. However what you and others before you have described could be explored (i.e some transition to a Don Mills tunnel north of Lawrence).

So to be clear, you're talking about a potential interchange with the Relief line being located at north of the north portion of The Donway? I do see that as a good alternative, but it won't quite work if the Leaside Spur is reactivated. Having a transfer at Eglinton vs. Don Mills is accomodating Leaside Spur though.

No I was talking about the conventional RL route, with the logical subway station around Overlea/Thorncliffe Dr. If the Midtown corridor were to ever have a station approx between Millwood and Thorncliffe Dr serving East York Town Centre (something considered officially years ago and even recently), it could become an "interchange" with the nearby RL. It wouldn't be all that optimal due to distance, but could work as an interchange nonetheless.

 

[facepalming_brooklynite]

How about a stop at Dupont & Dufferin? Could make sense with the Galleria development and other stuff along Dufferin, though ideally it should then intersect with a north-south transit line (higher order than the Dufferin bus)

 

[steveintoronto]

An apology to the posters in this string. I'd jumped in too soon before reading the very first post, and the map there. I'm still trying to find out more about the date and present relevance of that map, and what's still 'up for consideration'...but route '10' is what I've been promoting prior as a manifestation of the Relief Line. That's why I question the date of this map, as '10' if it assumes the alignment of Relief Line South on it's southern leg, Relief Line as now presented by the City would be rendered moot, and it would become RER in tunnel, something to me that makes immense sense. The cost of tunneling is roughly the same no matter the cross-section (within limits, but let's use Crosstown's diameter as a reference) so why not go for a *Regional* gauge, both track and loading gauge, to connect into the rest of the RER network, just as Midtown Corridor would be? I don't see the logic of continuing to build to TTC gauge (and therefore subways) when "through-running" should be the end-goal, and that means RER running into, and later further west from the proposed Relief Line South terminus of Osgoode. All tunneling from here on should be done forward compatible to accommodate RER w/ overhead catenary @ 25kVAC, and therefore dual mode LRVs (a version of the forthcoming Citadis Spirits can be so equipped) to run 'tram-trains' until such time as the routes become fully through-running onto extant GO RoWs and run by RER stock.

Combining Route 10 and DRL makes incredible sense, and that was pretty much the gist of my earliest post in this string. Metrolinx have already taken 'ownership' of Relief Line North, so there's already inertia in this direction.

Edit to Update: Found the date of the map being discussed and a source:
http://www.neptis.org/sites/default/files/metrolinx_review_2013/figure_2.jpg

Map is dated 2008.

 

[steveintoronto]

I think a solution is to also build a station at Dupont Subway station on the Spadina Line, which is not over capacity, and only operate to there during rush hour to drop people off. Summerhill during rush hour will be boarding only.

I'd previously mentioned an at least partial solution to this in another string. Assuming the corridor is acquired completely by Metrolinx (The Missing Link would be necessary to do this) then the four track corridor west of Summerhill could host two tracks for GO trains, two for TTC streetcars, such that both the Bathurst and/or Spadina lines ramp up onto the the RoW and loop or reverse direction (this would take double-ended stock) at Summerhill. They would service a stop at Spadina too, which would be a Midtown station with pedestrian walkways to Dupont Station. Spadina may be more problematic to build streetcar ramps for, as a building or two would have to be demolished to permit this, but Bathurst looks very opportune to do this at. A streetcar route could continue west from there also, acting as a Dupont surrogate, and serving major intersections that a Midtown train would miss. The streetcars would run as far west as the next Midtown station (ostensibly the intersection(s) of present north-south GO lines).

If a Midtown line is instituted while CP still owns the RoW, obviously those two spare track alignments would be needed for Metrolinx. East of Summerhill becomes more problematic with freight operations still extant.