[Rainforest]

The Parkdale-Parkside alignment is still the best bang for our buck because... well...

View attachment 174235View attachment 174236
View attachment 174242

And just five minutes west away from Roncy:

View attachment 174238View attachment 174239

You neglect all this via a more easterly diversion of the alignment up Dufferin or the Kitchener or Barrie GO rail corridors.

Meanwhile, this is Brockton:

View attachment 174241

How do the two alignment options even stack up fairly? Seriously guys, c'mon.

Well, Parkside Drive is the exact opposite of those pictures . Single-family houses on the east side, squirrels and robins on the west side.

Parkdale does have density, and therefore serving it with a subway isn't a bad idea. And yet, subway isn't the only option to serve it with transit. The Queensway / Lakeshore West streetcars can do the job comfortably, especially if they run to the closest RL West subway station and aren't affected by the downtown congestion.

The Dufferin corridor has a greater current demand, and will have more connections to the surface routes, plus a connection to Bloor subway. So, it seems to be a better route, at least if the RL West construction would start in the next 5 years. Since it will be quite a bit more than 5 years, things could change of course.

 

[Hopkins123]

lol...and it would be an entitlement, because it would cost a bundle to be the fiefdom of a chosen few. I live right at the top of Roncy, btw,

What would make sense is to tie the Roncy streetcar into a station at either end, which it would automatically as is with Bloor (improved passenger connections are imminent in the next few years to the south of there and the west to Dundas West) and there would be another streetcar intersect on the east side of Parkdale, on the Georgetown Corridor via the Queen, King or both streetcar routes.

One of the only proposed divergence from the cross-core routings (either under Queen or King, Queen being much preferable since King will ostensibly be made a Transitway all the way to the Humber Loop) that I've seen in this string is the brilliant one by a poster of using the Barrie Corridor which is bog obvious, but I'd overlooked in my simple and fast connection as RER and/or Metro up the Georgetown Corridor to Bramalea. A split in the route in northern Parkdale would see alternate service from downtown in tunnel emerge onto the mainline to go every other train up each leg. The prime purpose of the Relief Line is...ta da: "Relief" and that means the present subway and Union Station, and secondarily, diverting the catchment areas north of the City completely away from the subway! Passengers then get a one-seat ride from the hinterlands to the core, and vice versa, or even through the core to get to the other side, without have to use any TTC vehicle save for maybe the last mile.

A split (and on the eastern end too) would mean 15 min intervals of RER on the legs, and 7.5 min interval through the core.

This isn't rocket science, this is being done and done well in a number of "world cities". And it means that it can be built without interrupting the present subway service save for passenger interconnections at stations where the lines intersect. And that interruption would just be using alternate stairways or the like. Again, exactly as has been done in London, Paris, German and EU cities etc, etc, cities where they have vastly superior transit to what we have.

Example:

5 things Toronto could learn from Vienna

Vienna is called the City of Dreams for a reason: aside from it being the birthplace of Freud, Austria’s capital is voted one of the world’s most l...

www.blogto.com

Not mentioned in that article is this:
Vienna S-Bahn - Wikipedia
and
Vienna U-Bahn - Wikipedia

Trying to wind a "relief line" like a piece of spaghetti to as many places as possible completely defeats what the concept is all about. Serve those areas by all means...as feeders to the 'Relief Trunk' with buses, streetcars, soap-box derbies, whatever.

This thing is going to cost a fortune, but it can make sound business sense and financed by Enterprise along with government subsidy as long as it makes sense and does the bare minimum in terms of routing and tunnelling. Get it through the core in tunnel, and to the upper Don Valley, perhaps a leg up to Unionville too, make it do what RER is purported to be doing, and combine them, but don't try and make it 'local service'. Deep tunnel is expensive enough as it is. The fewer the stations, the better. And the fewer the diversions, the better. Serve the locals with local transit.

As a footnote Parkside Dr hosts a major sewer under it, and the area around Bloor has a powerful aquifer that feeds the pond on 'Spring Road' (the name give it away). The aquifer has an astounding pressure to it, some fifty feet of head or so.

If anyone thinks Parkside Drive, think surface route, not tunnel. And the load (including by-passing Roncy) is not enough to warrant subway. The way to do Parkside (and area) is with a bus express from the present streetcar station on the Parkside Bridge, up to Keele Station. Cheap, affordable, very quick to institute, and it should be running now! It's my view that the Queen car should be going up Roncy, and the King should be on the Queensway to the Humber Loop as the western extension of the King Transitway.

But that's described in another string.

There may be water table issues at Keele and Bloor, I agree (explaining why engineeers of the past probably decided on elevating the existing station versus tunneling it) but technology has evolved since then. If they figured out the East Don River crossing directly at Sheppard and Leslie and Montreal has subways crossing the St Lawrence River underground, they can get this right.

Parkside is a means to an ends; a direct path from Queen to Bloor that doesn't require any tunneling as the trench would be parallel to the roadway on the edge of the park itself. This also has the added benefit of placing up to 3 stations (including a potential new Sunnyside GO interchange) through Parkdale versus just one on its eastern fringe. Think of Parkside like the way we think of today's subways routing through Warden Woods or Nordheimer/Cedarvale Ravines. A means to an ends!

A direct subway connection to Dufferin Mall and Galleria Mall may be nice-to-haves but are not practical in the grand scheme of things. Both destinations are relatively close to Bloor as is. "Winding a "relief line" like a piece of spaghetti" is precisely what a Dufferin alignment seems to feel like, IMO. This may be devolving into a fantasy thread but still some degree of realism is required here. Most "relief" will come from fanning out the catchment of riders i.e. connecting with GO, the 80 and 508 at Roncy. Forcing commuters to ride the 508 1.4 kms further inward to meet the DRL at Dufferin will be a traffic and logistical nightmare along Queen through Parkdale.

 

[steveintoronto]

There may be water table issues at Keele and Bloor, I agree (explaining why engineeers of the past probably decided on elevating the existing station versus tunneling it) but technology has evolved since then. If they figured out the East Don River crossing directly at Sheppard and Leslie and Montreal has subways crossing the St Lawrence River underground, they can get this right.

Parkside is a means to an ends; a direct path from Queen to Bloor that doesn't require any tunneling as the trench would be parallel to the roadway on the edge of the park itself. This also has the added benefit of placing up to 3 stations (including a potential new Sunnyside GO interchange) through Parkdale versus just one on its eastern fringe. Think of Parkside like the way we think of today's subways routing through Warden Woods or Nordheimer/Cedarvale Ravines. A means to an ends!

A direct subway connection to Dufferin Mall and Galleria Mall may be nice-to-haves but are not practical in the grand scheme of things. Both destinations are relatively close to Bloor as is. "Winding a "relief line" like a piece of spaghetti" is precisely what a Dufferin alignment seems to feel like, IMO. This may be devolving into a fantasy thread but still some degree of realism is required here. Most "relief" will come from fanning out the catchment of riders i.e. connecting with GO, the 80 and 508 at Roncy. Forcing commuters to ride the 508 1.4 kms further inward to meet the DRL at Dufferin will be a traffic and logistical nightmare along Queen through Parkdale.

Why do all of that as a subway? Just extend the King or Queen car up there to by-pass Roncy, and have only local streetcars do Roncy, which is incredibly slow. And tie the College car into it too instead of looping at High Park. Yet another connection tied in.

Or use buses. Save the money for somewhere else that needs it.

I don't understand, in this time of absolute absence of government funding, why anyone could come up with the fantasies of subways everywhere/anywhere. When does Sheppard sink in? Toronto hasn't even a budget for for the SmartTrack stations, or for needed maintenance of the present subway.

The Relief Line to serve its intended purpose and up graded to RER will draw investors. There's a clear and absolute demand for it, even if governments do have to contribute operating subsidies. Those subsidies actually save money, something that investors realize contributes to the stability of the investment.

Ford is now in office, and if it hasn't already become clearly obvious, he's not spending. And the City has no money. So who's going to build all these toy fantasies?

 

[thettctransitfanatic]

Why do all of that as a subway? Just extend the King or Queen car up there to by-pass Roncy, and have only local streetcars do Roncy, which is incredibly slow. And tie the College car into it too instead of looping at High Park. Yet another connection tied in.

Or use buses. Save the money for somewhere else that needs it.

I don't understand, in this time of absolute absence of government funding, why anyone could come up with the fantasies of subways everywhere/anywhere. When does Sheppard sink in? Toronto hasn't even a budget for for the SmartTrack stations, or for needed maintenance of the present subway.

The Relief Line to serve its intended purpose and up graded to RER will draw investors. There's a clear and absolute demand for it, even if governments do have to contribute operating subsidies. Those subsidies actually save money, something that investors realize contributes to the stability of the investment.

Ford is now in office, and if it hasn't already become clearly obvious, he's not spending. And the City has no money. So who's going to build all these toy fantasies?

I have a toy fantasy. Bus BRT from Humber to Keele Stn via The Queensway, Colborne Lodge, Lakeshore, Parkside. And then, instead of the dumb 504A on Roncy, have all of the 504s turn back at Sunnyside. Then we can have a Relief Line under Roncy.

 

[steveintoronto]

Then we can have a Relief Line under Roncy.

Even if there was a business case for doing so (there's nothing even close) you do realize that it had massive renovations done on it four or so years ago to put a brand new trunk sewer deep under it? It was closed for about a year.

I think you might wish to talk to the locals to see if they want to go through that again...

 

[thettctransitfanatic]

Even if there was a business case for doing so (there's nothing even close) you do realize that it had massive renovations done on it four or so years ago to put a brand new trunk sewer deep under it? It was closed for about a year.

I think you might wish to talk to the locals to see if they want to go through that again...

Then building a elevated LRT or BRT on Parkside, that's a idea that sounds better in that case.

 

[Leo_Chan]

Is Dufferin vs Roncesvalles for Line 3 the new Queen vs Bloor for Line 2?

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

I agree with @Hopkins123 here but if flooding is too much of a concern then just stick with Dundas West.

 

[nfitz]

I don't understand, in this time of absolute absence of government funding, why anyone could come up with the fantasies of subways everywhere/anywhere.

I don't think it's true that there's an absolute absence of government funding. The federal $billions for Toronto aren't yet committed (though perhaps someone should get on that before the next federal election).

Though that being said almost think there was more activity in the fantasy map thread before 2007 or so, when suddenly money started to appear again.

Still, if people come up with fantasies during lean times, I don't think one would expect it to stop now.

Now back to my thoughts of extending the Relief Line to Toronto Island ...

 

[steveintoronto]

The federal $billions for Toronto aren't yet committed (though perhaps someone should get on that before the next federal election).

Unfortunately, Federal funding is not only contingent on the Province's share in almost all cases, it requires the Province to pay for it initially, and then the Province reimbursed later.

Even though this is going to cause real hardship, it will mean the Feds eventually channelling funds directly to municipalities, and ostensibly using the Infrastructure Bank to draw in private capital to form consortiums that are federally chartered so that the Province has no say on them. This is especially catered for by Section 92 of the Constitution, the Transportation Act and various Railway Acts, and has been used some 400 times in the last century, and supported my many SCC decisions.

If Ford goes on the fritz, the Feds will have to drive the train around him. That being said, private investment and participation by the Infra Bank means a business case must be made. That eliminates all of the fantasy suggests many are making. The one overbearing and desperately needed one is a direct and meaningful Relief Line to cut across the core and out both ends, ostensibly on different branches each end. It must utilize present rail corridors where present, and do the job RER was touted to do, either as RER or a Metro equivalent. It must not only loop underground through the core, in as direct a manner as possible, it must serve regions not already served to completely avoid the present subway (Other than passenger change at intersecting stations) and be part of Metrolinx' standard gauge network. By being so, and being grander in scale than the present TTC Relief Line, it will cost more, a lot more for the lengths we're talking, but it will also have a far higher business case index such that it will attract private investment. REM in Montreal is a prime model to compare to, but done even better.

It will require a public subsidy, but in doing so, will eliminate many of the costs that would have had to happen anyway if RER is built with public funds (which it isn't, Ford et al are going to spend pennies where dollars are needed).

 

[nfitz]

unfortunately, Federal funding is not only contingent on the Province's share in almost all cases, it requires the Province to pay for it initially, and then the Province reimbursed later. ...

I'm not saying there's not going to be issues. but I don't think that it's correct to say that there's an "absolute absence of government funding".

 

[steveintoronto]

^OK, "almost absolute absence". Ford has yet to commit to anything other than crumbs. (And an exhortation to praise his glorious existence for that)
"Be part of Metrolinx' standard gauge network" I'd best clarify. *Operate as part of Metrolinx' network". As a property of a consortium (of which Metrolinx may or may not be a partner) the private network would be leased by contractual agreement with Metrolinx. That contract may or may not include the rolling stock, probably best that be wholly owned by ML....but some models in other nations have the rolling stock privately owned too.

Is this a good thing? A lot depends on how the consortium is structured, and perhaps created by Order in Council federally for oversight, mission and accountability, but Ford should love this, not try to fetter it, as it will only appear as an operating cost, not build cost on the provincial books.

And frankly, I see no other choice in the present climate but to do it with massive private investment. And what reputable company would do it with the present QP crowd? There's no way the Pension Funds or other established investors would have anything to do with Ford. They're far too moral and reasonable in comparison.

 

[WislaHD]

How much do we weigh the "relief" aspects of the West Extension versus the "coverage" and redevelopment aspects?

For me, the relief moniker comes from the purpose served by the Sheppard to Queen section of the line. The west extension is about providing better service and coverage to the west end of downtown, and relief is a secondary concern here.

Sunnyside vs. Dufferin back-and-forth seems to be a decision about prioritizing one set of neighbourhoods with rapid transit over another, which is a fine debate. I am less thrilled however about any rail corridor alignments that end up bypassing both sets of neighbourhoods.

 

[steveintoronto]

I am less thrilled however about any rail corridor alignments that end up bypassing both sets of neighbourhoods.

But that's exactly the point: "Relief" for the subway, by intercepting the catchment from the outer burbs and regions from all outlying areas, not local ones.

Thus my term "Pape Entitlement" for what the TTC is planning. There barely a business case, as Metrolinx now admit. In fact, as costs rise for that section, there isn't one at all, and the Papers get a service no-one else does.

Let the present subways, streetcars and buses serve the areas the relief line runs through, then deliver them to stations at major points. This isn't being paid for by the City! If it was, then fine, serve the entitlements. Let the City through the TTC better serve the communities to get them to and from a new higher speed trunk. Running up the extant Barrie corridor, for instance is very close to Dufferin. Have a station at every major intersection, and take a bus, LRT or whatever to that station.

It's even questionable whether the province can fund this, let alone the City which truly can't. If there's a business case to be made for serving neighbourhoods presently unserved by subway, then present a business case, and the Market, given a subsidy, will built it.

There's only a business case for even the trunk I propose because it will save massive amounts otherwise earmarked for being spent, and that's RER. Common sense alone says to combine the needs, relieve Union at the same time as the subway, and get people downtown and back out in as expeditious manner as possible with the lowest costs to doing so. And that will attract Private Investment. Like it or not, financing is not forthcoming otherwise.

Metrolinx is already at the DBFOM level of finance, and still struggling to get things done. We have to make some very rational decisions on how to approach building needed infrastructure, and "Relief" is the magic word to allow the subway as is to keep returning yield on investment made in previous gens.

The answer is to by-pass in as massive a way as possible so we're not stuck with the same challenge yet again in 20 years.

London's Crossrail is touted to be at capacity the day it fully opens, plans are already in place to address that. We're not anywhere close to having a Crossrail, but that's the level we need to aim to.

 

[Leo_Chan]

But that's exactly the point: "Relief" for the subway, by intercepting the catchment from the outer burbs and regions from all outlying areas, not local ones.

Thus my term "Pape Entitlement" for what the TTC is planning. There barely a business case, as Metrolinx now admit. In fact, as costs rise for that section, there isn't one at all, and the Papers get a service no-one else does.

Let the present subways, streetcars and buses serve the areas the relief line runs through, then deliver them to stations at major points. This isn't being paid for by the City! If it was, then fine, serve the entitlements. Let the City through the TTC better serve the communities to get them to and from a new higher speed trunk. Running up the extant Barrie corridor, for instance is very close to Dufferin. Have a station at every major intersection, and take a bus, LRT or whatever to that station.

It's even questionable whether the province can fund this, let alone the City which truly can't. If there's a business case to be made for serving neighbourhoods presently unserved by subway, then present a business case, and the Market, given a subsidy, will built it.

There's only a business case for even the trunk I propose because it will save massive amounts otherwise earmarked for being spent, and that's RER. Common sense alone says to combine the needs, relieve Union at the same time as the subway, and get people downtown and back out in as expeditious manner as possible with the lowest costs to doing so. And that will attract Private Investment. Like it or not, financing is not forthcoming otherwise.

Metrolinx is already at the DBFOM level of finance, and still struggling to get things done. We have to make some very rational decisions on how to approach building needed infrastructure, and "Relief" is the magic word to allow the subway as is to keep returning yield on investment made in previous gens.

The answer is to by-pass in as massive a way as possible so we're not stuck with the same challenge yet again in 20 years.

London's Crossrail is touted to be at capacity the day it fully opens, plans are already in place to address that. We're not anywhere close to having a Crossrail, but that's the level we need to aim to.

Are you saying that the Relief Line, in its simplest form, should provide the most relief with the fastest service in the cheapest corridor and completing the network, while avoiding slowdowns from serving transit starved neighbourhoods?