[officedweller]

- was elevating the Expo Line through Central Park a problem?

No, because it was a historical inter-urban railway RoW from New Westminster to Vancouver.
There may even have been old tracks in place when the Expo Line was built, as a railway overpass over Boundary Road was demolished about that time. It was called the Central Park Line. The Expo Line follows much of this route.
Here's a write-up:

The Central Park Line: the very first interurban in greater Vancouver - The Buzzer blog

Today, I’m pleased to present a brief look at the Central Park Line, one of the interurban lines that used […]

buzzer.translink.ca

 

[junctionist]

Of course not - it's only slightly less silly than tunnelling under. But see also Central Park.


If only there was a station called High Park, next to the park. Though perhaps we can just build a streetcar loop on a nearby line that goes through the densely-populated streetcar suburbs.

Yes, let's see also Central Park. It doesn't have any elevated lines running through it, though New York has plenty of elevated tracks elsewhere. Some lines pass underneath it.

There are some 13 subway stations within a block of the park. People from all around the city want to go there, and the transit system makes it happen efficiently.

High Park's existing subway station only serves one part of the park decently, and its entrance isn't even within the park. To get to the station, many people have to take streetcars that travel at walking pace in downtown traffic and buses that get stuck in traffic to reach line 2. It can take close to an hour to get there from many parts of even the pre-amalgamation city of Toronto during congested times (to say nothing of trying to get there from the suburban parts of the city by transit), despite the distance only being under 10 km.

Many of Toronto's "streetcar suburbs" are now in the heart of the city and densifying fast. They're congested. Condos are going up. Multiplexes are going in. People more options to need to reach destinations like High Park quickly by transit or they're just going to use cars and demand parking in the park. This isn't 1966 anymore. There's a lot more people and cars in Toronto now--especially in the pre-amalgamation city of Toronto.

 

[nfitz]

Yes, let's see also Central Park. It doesn't have any elevated lines running through it, though New York has plenty of elevated tracks elsewhere. Some lines pass underneath it.

I don't know what New York has got to do with this. The discussion was about Central Park in Burnaby that has the elevated Expo line going through it.

 

[Bureaucromancer]

No, because it was a historical inter-urban railway RoW from New Westminster to Vancouver.
There may even have been old tracks in place when the Expo Line was built, as a railway overpass over Boundary Road was demolished about that time. It was called the Central Park Line. The Expo Line follows much of this route.
Here's a write-up:

The Central Park Line: the very first interurban in greater Vancouver - The Buzzer blog

Today, I’m pleased to present a brief look at the Central Park Line, one of the interurban lines that used […]

buzzer.translink.ca

There were tracks in place on much of the corridor into the 90s

Although I will say… I’m not opposed to an elevated or surface LRT row directly parallel to park side drive… I dropped my concept in the fantasy thread the other day, but my own inclination is this is better an LRT with a transfer to the OL Western extension, at which point we can talk about High Park / Parkside as a green track surface LRT that need not have much actual interface with surface traffic.

 

[torontowest91]

The Park Lawn GO station will surely be built before an Ontario Line extension is considered.
The current station design reserves room for two future tracks on the North side of the existing 4 tracks.

A good reference here:


Since there is no room for two additional GO tracks through Exhibition, I think a future extension of OL to Park Lawn generally makes sense. ~5.8km at/above grade, few opportune locations for stations (eg. Windermere, Roncesvalles/St. Josephs, Jameson/Dunn).

The most expensive challenge would be the corridor widening; a bit of GO track shifting to the south, retaining wall construction along the north, and road bridge reconstruction at Dufferin (likely to be completed sooner by City/TTC), Dunn, and Jameson.

park lawn go is basically cancelled/on hold for now... so who knows

 

[afransen]

park lawn go is basically cancelled/on hold for now... so who knows

Given the buckets in spending on GO, this seems like a really foolish thing to postpone hoping developers will pay for it.

I say build the damn thing and add a land value tax to finance it. Rather than hoping and dreaming that developers finance public infrastructure, we should capture the land value increases from infrastructure and permissive zoning as a land value tax.

 

[JasonParis]

Curious what people think — if the UPX were merged with Line 3, how might the service patterns work? And how would the Exhibition/Don Valley branches be handled compared to the Union Station leg?

 

[Transit]

Curious what people think — if the UPX were merged with Line 3, how might the service patterns work? And how would the Exhibition/Don Valley branches be handled compared to the Union Station leg?

If it's even physically and/or technologically possible within the corridor, I could see UPX being converted to a second line using "Ontario Line" technology, but I have a harder time seeing UPX merged with Line 3.

 

[flackoteelex]

If it's even physically and/or technologically possible within the corridor, I could see UPX being converted to a second line using "Ontario Line" technology, but I have a harder time seeing UPX merged with Line 3.

This is a key component of my transit fantasy map - converting the UPX into a new electrified line with tight headways. I think that having a commuter train that serves the airport is more needed than an airport train that is overloaded with commuters. Union, Spadina-Front, King-Liberty, Lansdowne, "Dundas West" (really Bloor GO, but the future tunnel will help that connection), St Clair-Old Weston, Mount Dennis, Weston and Woodbine as bare minimum stations.

 

[KhalilHeron]

You can split a subway line/ metro in two directions. You see it often in London with many of it's Underground lines (Northern line) and it's Elizabeth line. Vancouver's Skytrain also does this.

From Exhibition you can have one line veer off to Mt. Dennis and another line continue westward to Mimico.

Extending the OL to Mt. Dennis can help to fill the gaps between the GO stations on the Kitchener line. No more smart track stations. Just get off at Mt. Dennis GO station and from there transfer onto the OL to go to St. Clair, etc.

I posted this image a while ago in the Transit Fantasy thread.

EDIT: The portion heading up to Mt Dennis is underground. I messed up the colour. Should be dark blue.

If the line goes up Roncesvalles i think terminating at jane instead of mt dennis could avoid fully duplicating the kitchener corridor while also serving the junction and Lambton better. I think sending the line or a branch to mimico is a good idea. It'd still be nice to have a go station at park lawn but if a western extension happens before the development at park lawn go maybe GO could be added later. I

 

[JasonParis]

If UPX became part of the Ontario Line, you can even imagine more branches of Line 3, or at least its technology.

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

Duplicating the GO and UPX lines should be avoided, UNLESS they decide to build a forest of condo buildings (with decent family-sized suites, not the current shoeboxes).

 

[reinventingthewheel]

This is a key component of my transit fantasy map - converting the UPX into a new electrified line with tight headways. I think that having a commuter train that serves the airport is more needed than an airport train that is overloaded with commuters. Union, Spadina-Front, King-Liberty, Lansdowne, "Dundas West" (really Bloor GO, but the future tunnel will help that connection), St Clair-Old Weston, Mount Dennis, Weston and Woodbine as bare minimum stations.

More metro-like service and electrification on the UP line is a valid future expectation. Lacking any obvious connection to the OL though, there’s no compelling reason they would source the same rolling stock here. That will come down to a lot of number crunching and choosing the best bid on the table at that time.

 

[goodcitywhenfinished]

View attachment 699855
If the line goes up Roncesvalles i think terminating at jane instead of mt dennis could avoid fully duplicating the kitchener corridor while also serving the junction and Lambton better. I think sending the line or a branch to mimico is a good idea. It'd still be nice to have a go station at park lawn but if a western extension happens before the development at park lawn go maybe GO could be added later. I

Tangent but Toronto looks so much better sideways.

 

[goodcitywhenfinished]

I think branching the western extension is a good idea. Everyone worried about headways being impacted should take a look at Skytrain in Vancouver.

Ontario Line will also have platform screen doors so it is even more delay-proof than Skytrain.