[officedweller]

That's not the impression I've had. Nor does the B-Line seem any more crowded in the west than east. If anything it seems more crowded east of Cambie than west, and the new extension is only going one stop past Cambie.

But anecdotal observations are one thing. Are there ridership numbers for the B-Line by segment?

Yes, that's right - the overload on the B-Line is between Commercial and Cambie / Granville when both the office and hospital load and the UBC load are on board.
That's the segment that will be served with higher capacity by the SkyTrain Extension.
When the office and hospital workers get off the B-Line between Cambie and Granville, that frees up some space, so the loading isn't additive all the way along.
There are also the transfer to Canada Line at Cambie where people will exit the bus.

There probably are numbers, but I'm not sure.

UBC says that the B-Line from Arbutus will be at capacity when the Broadway Extension is opened. in 2025.
UBC coming on board in the past few years has had the biggest impact on the push for a UBC Extension.

The City of Vancouver later looked into rapid transit all the way to UBC via rapid bus or LRT in 1999, but it was not considered by the Province as part of Phase II of the Millennium Line.
A TransLink study maybe 10 years ago looked at LRT all the way to UBC as an alternative to SkyTrain to Arbutus, but it was rejected.

 

[ssiguy2]

The B-Line is just as busy west of Arbutus to UBC as it is from Commercial to Arbutus. The difference, however, is that the western portion runs much faster and more reliably because it is much more residential {and much of it low density SFH}. The current SkyTrain extension portion is not only busy but painfully slow and congested to say nothing of problematic due to going right beside Vancouver's biggest hospital.

As far as the OL, it will never reach Yonge Line ridership levels and will take a big chunk of ridership off Yonge itself. 100 meter stations running Montreal/Vancouver 100 meter trains will be more than enough capacity possibly forever. Remember kids, the basis of the DRL and it's potential was based upon how effective it would be at relieving Y&B but that was BEFORE RER was considered. If ML decides to the do the logical thing {admittedly a big 'if'}, Ridership on the Danforth line will drop before it gets to Pape. This is because no one in their right mind coming from Scar would take the subway unless they are right along the route. Also the congestion at Y&B is obviously much more severe at rush hour but with RE and GO commuter hopefully getting fare equality with the TTC, rush hour workers who took the Yonge line before will now take GO commuter as it will be just as cheap but more comfortable and a hell of a lot faster.

Now that it is increasingly looking like Toronto is getting a true RER/S-Bahn system, all the studies about the DRL and Y&B station are no longer valid.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

As far as the OL, it will never reach Yonge Line ridership levels and will take a big chunk of ridership off Yonge itself.

How can you be so sure of that, especially given population growth? The RLN was projected to have 2/3rds of Yonge Line ridership (and more ridership than BD) within not even 10 years of use.

If ML decides to the do the logical thing {admittedly a big 'if'}, Ridership on the Danforth line will drop before it gets to Pape. This is because no one in their right mind coming from Scar would take the subway unless they are right along the route. Also the congestion at Y&B is obviously much more severe at rush hour but with RE and GO commuter hopefully getting fare equality with the TTC, rush hour workers who took the Yonge line before will now take GO commuter as it will be just as cheap but more comfortable and a hell of a lot faster.

This is absolutely not going to happen. This idea has been kicking around for a while, and MX has yet to ever commit to making RER attractive to commuters living in Toronto's inner suburbs.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Just because it won't match Yonge's ridership right away doesn't mean it's overbuilding.

It's like arguing Toronto overbuilt the first subway line on Yonge because it wasn't full. They didn't overbuild; a subway was simply the next logical step. The streetcar route was maxed out. Even though they didn't run full 6-car configurations at the start, that quickly changed.

The same is true in this situation. Ridership will be high to start, and if projections hold true, it'll be at or near capacity in relatively short order. The same cannot be said for the SSE, EWLRT nor the YNSE.

If you want an example of overbuilding transit, we have it on the Sheppard Line.

Some people here would be arguing that the Yonge Line should have been built to an ultimate capacity of 20,000 pphpd because that's all the ridership it would generate in the year 1964 (a mere 10 years after opening).

 

[nfitz]

Ridership on the Danforth line will drop before it gets to Pape. This is because no one in their right mind coming from Scar would take the subway unless they are right along the route.

What else are they going to take? Line 5 will be slower. The GO platforms at Union are too far south for the destination of most riders on B-D. Remember the downtown station with the most arrivals in AM peak is Dundas. Neither it nor Queen are well served by GO Trains.

RER does little to relieve travel from the northeast. If anything, there's a risk that expanded Stouffville service, and the improved connection at Kennedy (especially once trains don't spend so long between Warden and Kennedy) would increase ridership transferring from GO to Line 2 at Kennedy! Not to mention the increase one will get from the Line 2 extension, especially north of the 401.

 

[M II A II R II K]

And plus North York Yonge stations are also actual destinations. Don Mills stations would just be transfer points.

 

[afransen]

And plus North York Yonge stations are also actual destinations. Don Mills stations would just be transfer points.

For now, there is redevelopable land along Don Mills.

 

[NoahB]

Not sure what you're talking about. Both the OL and DRL have stops at Osgoode and Queen...where Yonge/University Line stations already exist.

The RLS stations box for Osgoode would have been as far east as York St,

and the box for Queen would have been as far west as Bay St

That means the distance between the two is about 250m, which is absurd for subway spacing where there are no physical impediments between the two to make this make sense.
The Ontario line shifts the two stations a little further apart, increasing access to the new subway downtown.

The old station exists, yes. The new station will exist in the future and should be spaced out in a better way for stations that probably cost 500+ million each.

I don't hear any complaints whatsoever about this being an issue in Scarborough.

That is because TBMs will have to be used for that alignment. All its new station will be relatively deep.
The current SRT-Subway transfer isn't that bad considering the number of people using the buses. the current layout makes both equal distances to them. A single ride journey to Scarborough Center would have been ideal, but remember the alternative was a streetcar route with grade crossings at the time the SRT was built.

4-5 minutes is probably a stretch - deep stations don't seem to be an issue in other cities with major subway systems.

Their systems also tend to be more comprehensive and serve higher populations. And also tend to be used as medium-long distance travel with busses and trams handling the short distance travel. They also use elevated lines where there is space, and existing rail right of ways when that is available.
But without specific examples, I cant really discuss this point further. At this point, cities have done things in every single possible combination. Toronto on the other hand kept swinging between either replacing all subway plans with street-running Flexties or underground TR subways to the distant suburbs.

Ford said he would use the power and financial wherewithal of the Provincial government to build transit and subways faster and more efficiently than before.

Why couldn't he have simply done that with the DRL and DRL North? Would would he need another 20 years to get it done?

No he cannot.

When it takes 11+ years to build a simple tramline tunnel through the relatively low-density Eglington then they have no chance in train hell to build the RLS+RLN by the early 2030s. Remember, using the TR tarins means that they will just try to tunnel the whole line underground to Eglinton and then Shepperd. Switching to something that can easily extend above ground will help with future extensions. The OL station at Eglinton will be elevated for example.

Ford said he would use the power and financial wherewithal of the Provincial government to build transit and subways faster and more efficiently than before.

Why couldn't he have simply done that with the DRL and DRL North? Would would he need another 20 years to get it done?

I can't help but notice no one actually addresses the capacity issues (for both GO and the OL) that have been brought up by myself and others. People want to fixate on NIMBYs, deep stations and things taking too long. None of which should really matter here, as they don't seem to be a problem for supporters when it comes to any of the lines Ford is trying to fast track.

I have addressed the capacity issues a million times at this point. The Ontario Line capacity will be higher than the current Line 1 capacity. And higher than Line 2. That is not low capacity. Europe also has shown that you can run a lot of heavy trains per hour on just 4 tracks. Union is not the center of Toronto. It just happens that all the commuter train lines meet there for historical reasons. The OL will work as an interpreter. This line is a Relief Line for GO trains/Union.

 

[NoahB]

Haven't we all been living under a rock for the last year?

Not sure what Overlea has got do do with it. No one hear is advocating that it need be underground north of O'Connor (except perhaps at the Eglinton intersection itself, to minimize transfers to Line 5) - it's more a debate on where the above-ground should go that far north.

But hang on you say - Vancouver actually did studies of the impacts of above-ground to underground? Isn't that simply the kind of thing people are asking Metrolinx to do - who seem to have taken all the previous community consultation and thrown it out the window.

Sterilizing the rail corridor by using the two tracks of remaining capacity for local transit, on the primary corridor connecting Toronto to the eastern part of the country is a terrible move. At least the new proposal to put the subway entirely on the north side of the tracks, leaves room to add additional tracks in the future, with some expropriations.

The other issue you forget is the shear hypocrisy of the Doug Ford government, unwilling to spend hundreds of millions extra to put the subway underground in this urban area, and yet at the same time willing to spend billions extra on each of the very suburban Eglinton (where's there's massively-wide ROWs) and Scarborough, to put the new extensions underground. I'm yet to hear a single person, opposed or in favour of any of these projects, put together an argument (let alone a coherent argument) on how that makes any sense!

I would bet all my savings that the RLN would have been underground all the way to Shepperd because the TR trains would need larger/longer portals.

Vancouver Studied it and found that it was not practical as the road was too narrow to support the current traffic demand including busses that would still need to use the corridor. It would have eliminated two-thirds of the left turns at lights for 'visibility reasons' and eliminated all parking on the corridor. They also found it would be too close for comfort to the existing buildings. (Skytrain Stations are typically 17-27m wide, while Broadway is only 20m wide)

That is not a big problem for the OL elevated stations as they will pass through much wider roads is my point there.

Sterilizing the rail corridor by using the two tracks of remaining capacity for local transit, on the primary corridor connecting Toronto to the eastern part of the country is a terrible move. At least the new proposal to put the subway entirely on the north side of the tracks, leaves room to add additional tracks in the future, with some expropriations.

There will be 4 tracks! For the frequency MX is targeting even those 4 won't hit their limit.

The other issue you forget is the shear hypocrisy of the Doug Ford government, unwilling to spend hundreds of millions extra to put the subway underground in this urban area, and yet at the same time willing to spend billions extra on each of the very suburban Eglinton (where's there's massively-wide ROWs) and Scarborough, to put the new extensions underground. I'm yet to hear a single person, opposed or in favour of any of these projects, put together an argument (let alone a coherent argument) on how that makes any sense!

The hypocrisy is not lost on me. But for the OL, it is a common-sense plan. The SSE is a bit overbuilt but this is a price to be paid to move on from this debate. The EWLRT should be elevated to save costs while staying grade-separated, but hey the PC Gov says they will pay for it. I have repeated these lines so many times now. Whether it makes sense to you that someone can see the hypocrisy but still single out the silver linings is up to you.

 

[M II A II R II K]

And north of Sheppard it could veer east to run through Highway 404.

 

[nfitz]

There will be 4 tracks! For the frequency MX is targeting even those 4 won't hit their limit.

For now, with only two GO lines. But as frequency increases, what then. Even in the 1970s GO Transit was talking about subway-like frequencies.

Meanwhile, there has been talk of serving the proposed Peterborough GO line up the Stouffville branch. And what if VIA HFR runs up there as well? I can easily seeing them pushing this to six tracks in a few decades - especially with the plan to use the previously proposed HFR line for GO train storage. That after the proposals went to VIA for comments, that they are still planning to use the Don for storage, but have moved the Ontario Line tracks to make it easier to add more mainline tracks says a lot to me.

 

[syn]

That means the distance between the two is about 250m, which is absurd for subway spacing where there are no physical impediments between the two to make this make sense.
The Ontario line shifts the two stations a little further apart, increasing access to the new subway downtown.

That's the closest distance between the two. Based on the map it's a large station with other access points.

This is not unusual downtown. Dundas to Queen is about the same distance in terms of access.

Osgoode to St. Andrew is about 300m.

This is Downtown Toronto, not the suburbs.

Even if you want to assume that's too close, the plan could've simply been revised. It's not an excuse to get rid of it.

Their systems also tend to be more comprehensive and serve higher populations. And also tend to be used as medium-long distance travel with busses and trams handling the short distance travel. They also use elevated lines where there is space, and existing rail right of ways when that is available.
But without specific examples, I cant really discuss this point further. At this point, cities have done things in every single possible combination. Toronto on the other hand kept swinging between either replacing all subway plans with street-running Flexties or underground TR subways to the distant suburbs.

The Bloor and YUS lines both contain elevated/above ground sections. A significant portion of the Spadina Line runs alonside cars on Allen Road. Toronto used to be quite pragmatic about subway construction.

If people are claiming that deep stations are a problem, then the onus is on them to demonstrate it - especially how it's a more important factor than capacity. Metrolinx has not done this, and they've completely ignored it when it comes to the SSE, which will require very deep digging.

No he cannot.

When it takes 11+ years to build a simple tramline tunnel through the relatively low-density Eglington then they have no chance in train hell to build the RLS+RLN by the early 2030s. Remember, using the TR tarins means that they will just try to tunnel the whole line underground to Eglinton and then Shepperd. Switching to something that can easily extend above ground will help with future extensions. The OL station at Eglinton will be elevated for example.

Again, there are plenty of of above ground sections that use TR trains very successfully. Why is it all of a sudden a problem for TR trains to emerge from underground when they've been doing it for the past 50 years?

The OL is already behind schedule. It's actually further behind the all-underground SSE and EWLRT.

It would seem Ford was not being truthful when he said the provincial government could do things faster and more efficiently.

I have addressed the capacity issues a million times at this point. The Ontario Line capacity will be higher than the current Line 1 capacity. And higher than Line 2. That is not low capacity. Europe also has shown that you can run a lot of heavy trains per hour on just 4 tracks. Union is not the center of Toronto. It just happens that all the commuter train lines meet there for historical reasons. The OL will work as an interpreter. This line is a Relief Line for GO trains/Union.

Based on the numbers Metrolinx has released this is not true.

Is it low capacity in the most general sense? No. But it's lower capacity than the previous DRL plan by a fairly significant margin.

 

[dullturtle06]

ya metrolinx is being super inconsistent with the above and below grade justifications. Like the SSE lawrence station depth of 40 meters just ridiculous, should been an elevated bridge over highland creek.

but this was the cities plan: single bore, TBM under the river. so because the needed to get the project out to tender asap due to the SRT being decommissioned, and them not wanting the project to get scrapped if ford would lose. They just took the cities design added, lawrence station and the extension to sheppard.

if this wasnt a time sensitive project metrolinx probably would have redesigned it for a bridge over highland creek. This is seen with the realignment with the yonge north extension.

so seems like there is a consistency with focusing on methods other than tunnelling and deep bore.

cities and ttc's love of tunneling seems like the issues with these projects

 

[allengeorge]

cities and ttc's love of tunneling seems like the issues with these projects

Please explain the Eglinton Crosstown extension then?

 

[Northern Light]

I have addressed the capacity issues a million times at this point. The Ontario Line capacity will be higher than the current Line 1 capacity. And higher than Line 2.

That is not accurate, so far as I'm concerned. The numbers quoted by Mx in terms of train capacity (people per m2) are completely unrealistic.

They quote a higher number than the observed crush-load total for a conventional TTC train.

That's nonsense.

Their throughput number (trains per hour) also stretches credulity; even moreso because its based on a capacity number that would be severe crushload and would cause extended dwell times.

That is not low capacity

No, its not; but its far lower than 'stated capacity'; and less than required.