[ssiguy2]

The curves of the RH commuter line would NOT be used. As I stated the route would be exactly th same as the subway portion from roughly Liberty Village to Eglinton......the city wouldn't save a dime. It does however mean that a northern extension would be faster to build and MUCH cheaper. Basically it would only require electrification of the corridor to begin with. Extra stations, more tracks can be added incrementally like all the RER routes. The chances of anorthern extension using subway is between zero to nil in the next 40 years. On the Western portion it could exit a tunnel at roughly Liberty Village/Queen East and then continue towards Burlington on the already built Lakeshore RER. This would greatly relieve crowding of both passengers and trains at Union and offer a vital RER relief line thru the core and yet still provide a very useful DRL. Trains may not be needed as frequently to RH to to make for effective DRL service but everyother train could short-turn at, for example, Don Mills.

By using RER it makes it far more politically palatable and profitable to both the Liberals and Tories. By just building aa basic subway DRL, the service is primarily for Torontonians and the Tories have never gotten seats in Toronto city and never will. In other words by building a standard subway DRL they will gain no political points and hence provincial funding will be next to impossible to get. On the other hand if it is seen as a thru route downtown but also offering new service to the 905 and suburban Toronto the Tories will get some real political windfalls making funding far more likely.

Politics runs Toronto transit infrastructure so Torontonians should work within that reality to their benefit and a RER DRL fits into that reality perfectly.

 

[Hopkins123]

We're discussing increases in the cost of subway contruction. It makes no sense to compare to R.E.M., because that's not even a subway.

Semantics. What Montreal is proposing to build is definitely on the same scale as Toronto's subway system. Just look at the renders:

There are certainly some subway-level costs involved here.

 

[Tuck]

Semantics. What Montreal is proposing to build is definitely on the same scale as Toronto's subway system. Just look at the renders:

There are certainly some subway-level costs involved here.

Its... its so beautiful.

That said, its a very different system than what Toronto needs. I don't think Toronto has the space for a fully grade separated, above ground system like that?

 

[TheTigerMaster]

There are certainly some subway-level costs involved here.

Key word: SOME

The vast majority of this project reuses existing infrastructure, including reusing existing tunnels. REM is irrelevant when discussing how to reduce costs of subway construction, unless you have a plan to discover scores of unused tunnels in Toronto suitable for subway service.

 

[Kitsune]

Sydney is doing something similar to Montreal - building a 31km rapid transit line reusing surface routes with a a brand new 11 km tunnel (including a portion under the harbour) for 11 billion aussie dollars. The underground is going to have 5 stations ... and a couple of them are going to be built under existing underground RER stations.

 

[Tuck]

Sydney is doing something similar to Montreal - building a 31km rapid transit line reusing surface routes with a a brand new 11 km tunnel (including a portion under the harbour) for 11 billion aussie dollars. The underground is going to have 5 stations ... and a couple of them are going to be built under existing underground RER stations.

You're describing smart track with a bonus tunnel.

 

[Kitsune]

I dont see smart track doing 3 to 4 minute frequencies. Its interesting as Sydney is doing things in reverse of Toronto - RER first and Subway second.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

I dont see smart track doing 3 to 4 minute frequencies. Its interesting as Sydney is doing things in reverse of Toronto - RER first and Subway second.

Is it 3 to 4 mins on the whole line, or just on the trunk?

GO RER will be operating on similarly high frequencies on the trunk, but drops down to low frequency 15 min service on the branches. Montral's REM is in a similar situation.

 

[Kitsune]

Is it 3 to 4 mins on the whole line, or just on the trunk?

GO RER will be operating on similarly high frequencies on the trunk, but drops down to low frequency 15 min service on the branches. Montral's REM is in a similar situation.

The whole line from my understanding. It'll take only 7 years to be fully completed... which is something considering it is only the third crossing of the harbour, which is a drowned river valley.

 

[MisterF]

The differences between subway, light rail, RER, REM, etc. are fuzzy and there's no perfect way to categorize them.

The curves of the RH commuter line would NOT be used. As I stated the route would be exactly th same as the subway portion from roughly Liberty Village to Eglinton......the city wouldn't save a dime. It does however mean that a northern extension would be faster to build and MUCH cheaper. Basically it would only require electrification of the corridor to begin with. Extra stations, more tracks can be added incrementally like all the RER routes. The chances of anorthern extension using subway is between zero to nil in the next 40 years. On the Western portion it could exit a tunnel at roughly Liberty Village/Queen East and then continue towards Burlington on the already built Lakeshore RER. This would greatly relieve crowding of both passengers and trains at Union and offer a vital RER relief line thru the core and yet still provide a very useful DRL. Trains may not be needed as frequently to RH to to make for effective DRL service but everyother train could short-turn at, for example, Don Mills.

By using RER it makes it far more politically palatable and profitable to both the Liberals and Tories. By just building aa basic subway DRL, the service is primarily for Torontonians and the Tories have never gotten seats in Toronto city and never will. In other words by building a standard subway DRL they will gain no political points and hence provincial funding will be next to impossible to get. On the other hand if it is seen as a thru route downtown but also offering new service to the 905 and suburban Toronto the Tories will get some real political windfalls making funding far more likely.

Politics runs Toronto transit infrastructure so Torontonians should work within that reality to their benefit and a RER DRL fits into that reality perfectly.

Okay I get what you're proposing now. I actually had a similar idea years ago and I still think it has a lot of merit. I disagree, though, about northern DRL extensions not happening in the next 40 years. The resistance to the DRL always seemed to come from downtown and building an entirely new line. But extending an existing line is much easier to get approved. When it comes to the subway, suburban extensions are all Toronto has done for decades.

Is it 3 to 4 mins on the whole line, or just on the trunk?

GO RER will be operating on similarly high frequencies on the trunk, but drops down to low frequency 15 min service on the branches. Montral's REM is in a similar situation.

Smarttrack has evolved to a point where it's basically being thought of as an enhancement to RER rather than a separate, parallel service. It seems that some sanity is prevailing. With that in mind, the RER system as enhanced by Smarttrack will have frequencies in the neighbourhood of 4-8 minutes from Pearson Airport through downtown to Unionville.

 

[Euphoria]

While I appreciate the savings of using existing rail ROW's for subways or even light rail, I think we run the risk of duplicating lines. The confirmed DRL route does this a bit in the east, with stations at Gerard and Unilever, where we'll have ST stations. Connections from the DRL to ST/GO RER are important, but let's make sure we're maximizing coverage, which is why I wouldn't recommend running the western branch of the DRL under Roncesvalles or in the Kitchener/Barrie/UPX ROW, as we'll already have coverage there with ST. I'd personally rather see the DRL run north a bit further east, either up Dufferin or Ossington. (I have reasons for Ossington, which I won't rehash...). It makes no sense to tear up perfectly useful streetcar lines on roads such as Roncesvalles or Bathurst either, as these lines work, are already built, and may one day even have their own surface ROW's a la St. Claire. Transfer to GO and ST is important though. I can see having a DRL station at Queen and Dufferin, with transfers to the planned Liberty Village ST station being critical. With regard to ST not having a raison d'etre, as it's just GO RER with greater frequency, I would disagree strongly on the basis of its fare structure. ST has to be cheaper than GO and have some kind of transfer allowance applicable to TTC and vice versa. Otherwise the whole fare system in the GTA needs to be revisited and become distance based, with premium charges for express heavy rail.

 

[kEiThZ]

I dont see smart track doing 3 to 4 minute frequencies. Its interesting as Sydney is doing things in reverse of Toronto - RER first and Subway second.

And that makes sense. I've said it before. And I'll say it again. Suburban rail with full TTC integration would kill a lot of the demand for a Scarborough subway. LRT won't do that.

 

[Hopkins123]

While I appreciate the savings of using existing rail ROW's for subways or even light rail, I think we run the risk of duplicating lines. The confirmed DRL route does this a bit in the east, with stations at Gerard and Unilever, where we'll have ST stations. Connections from the DRL to ST/GO RER are important, but let's make sure we're maximizing coverage, which is why I wouldn't recommend running the western branch of the DRL under Roncesvalles or in the Kitchener/Barrie/UPX ROW, as we'll already have coverage there with ST. I'd personally rather see the DRL run north a bit further east, either up Dufferin or Ossington. (I have reasons for Ossington, which I won't rehash...). It makes no sense to tear up perfectly useful streetcar lines on roads such as Roncesvalles or Bathurst either, as these lines work, are already built, and may one day even have their own surface ROW's a la St. Claire. Transfer to GO and ST is important though. I can see having a DRL station at Queen and Dufferin, with transfers to the planned Liberty Village ST station being critical. With regard to ST not having a raison d'etre, as it's just GO RER with greater frequency, I would disagree strongly on the basis of its fare structure. ST has to be cheaper than GO and have some kind of transfer allowance applicable to TTC and vice versa. Otherwise the whole fare system in the GTA needs to be revisited and become distance based, with premium charges for express heavy rail.

The fundamental problem with the Dufferin Street corridor (and Ossington for that matter) is that it runs too close to the existing Spadina Line, especially the further north you go. The majority of Dufferin is also stable single family housing south of Eglinton.

We also cannot get too fixated on route ridership levels as they exist today. An east-west DRL at Queen and east-west Crosstown at Fairbank Stn will transformatively change the total number of people staying on the 29 bus long distance. 35/195 Jane will also transform post-Crosstown and post-Finch LRT with ridership drops.

Keele is mid-way between Jane and Dufferin and therefore can siphon ridership away from both. It is the most convenient way to get to Bloor (not disrupting Roncy or its streetcar operations), easiest place to build an interchange with the Bloor-Danforth (building at Dundas West would be very complex and deep whereas Keele could be shallow and integrate well with the existing mezzanine plaza), and permits a smooth curve transition into the Weston-Galt north of St Clair where it could run elevated over the tracks VanCity style.

The fear of duplicating service in the rail corridors is short-sighted. The Weston-Galt cuts diagonally across northwest Toronto and thus has the potential to intercept several routes prior to them hitting Bloor-Danforth or even the Crosstown. People in Rexdale, for instance, would appreciate faster alternatives to get directly downtown. The commute from Humber College to City Hall on a DRL could be 30 minutes or less. GO Transit won't all of a sudden agree to building stops every kilometre or so apart to serve all the communities and local routes along the way, but a TTC-made solution would.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

The whole line from my understanding. It'll take only 7 years to be fully completed... which is something considering it is only the third crossing of the harbour, which is a drowned river valley.

That's great. Sounds more like a subway than RER to me. Unless the stop spacing is very wide

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Okay I get what you're proposing now. I actually had a similar idea years ago and I still think it has a lot of merit. I disagree, though, about northern DRL extensions not happening in the next 40 years.

I'd hope the physical limitations of the Yonge Line would make it a greater priority. Hopefully the upcoming design and EA for the extension to Sheppard will push the project into political consciousness