[crs1026]

^These folks might actually help in arguing against a design that uses smaller trains but pushes the envelope in frequency to achieve the desired capacity. Bigger trains that run less frequently might appeal to these folks.

- Paul

 

[Admiral Beez]

^These folks might actually help in arguing against a design that uses smaller trains but pushes the envelope in frequency to achieve the desired capacity. Bigger trains that run less frequently might appeal to these folks.

- Paul

I'd like to see the DRL run the exact same trains as the other three main lines. A disparate fleet may offer savings upfront, but not when you need to dig it out again to expand to "regular" subways in 30 years.

 

[Adjei]

I'd like to see the DRL run the exact same trains as the other three main lines. A disparate fleet may offer savings upfront, but not when you need to dig it out again to expand to "regular" subways in 30 years.

Or build another line, like most sane cities have been doing.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Or build another line, like most sane cities have been doing.

I thought the DRL was another line?

 

[robmausser]

^These folks might actually help in arguing against a design that uses smaller trains but pushes the envelope in frequency to achieve the desired capacity. Bigger trains that run less frequently might appeal to these folks.

- Paul

No, they are NIMBYS. Nothing will appeal to them.

They moved next to an active train corridor and then are upset when people want to use it for trains.

 

[Adjei]

I thought the DRL was another line?

Is the DRL the be all and end all of Toronto transit expansion. If the line gets full, then build another one and expand the system.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Is the DRL the be all and end all of Toronto transit expansion. If the line gets full, then build another one and expand the system.

The DRL makes sense as your addressing capacity restraints at the flow's point of origin, downtown. Expanding the outer edges into the suburbs where you have multiple points of origin just makes the issues with the downtown point of origin worse.

 

[syn]

No, they are NIMBYS. Nothing will appeal to them.

They moved next to an active train corridor and then are upset when people want to use it for trains.

“My friends in Scarborough, help is on the way. We’re going to build proper transit, underground transit. Not the two-tiered transit system that all the people in Scarborough have to stand out in the freezing cold in the winter and everyone else in the city gets rapid underground transit. So we will be adding two additional stops on that.” - Doug Ford

Why wouldn't they complain? Increasing activity to every 90 seconds (or more when you factor in GO traffic) could change things for them dramatically.

The Fords have spent nearly a decade telling anyone who'd listen that transit should be underground. Now thousands of residents downtown and north of the Don Valley Parkway are being told they need to accept above ground transit, when there was already a plan in place for a complete, high capacity, underground solution.

Complaints and resistance are probably going to get worse.

There's an easy solution - Ford can go ahead and build the "proper transit" that was planned.

 

[MisterF]

Is the DRL the be all and end all of Toronto transit expansion. If the line gets full, then build another one and expand the system.

I agree in principle. Digging up an existing rapid transit line to convert it to a different technology is insane when you could just build a new line like other cities do. The problem is that things take so glacially long in Toronto. The Ontario Line was planned as an underground streetcar 108 years ago and as a subway 53 years ago. And now Doug Ford has delayed it even more by having it redesigning just as it was almost ready to start construction. At this rate after the RL is built another line downtown won't be built until the 2150s. We need to make the RL/Ontario line as high capacity as possible.

The DRL makes sense as your addressing capacity restraints at the flow's point of origin, downtown. Expanding the outer edges into the suburbs where you have multiple points of origin just makes the issues with the downtown point of origin worse.

I get the feeling he wasn't talking about expanding the system farther into the suburbs necessarily, but expanding the system wherever the capacity is needed. Which would probably be another line downtown.

 

[sixrings]

I do advocate for lrt on Eglinton and if it gets crowded then we build another line on Lawrence. That way more people are walking distance to transit. However lrt is relatively cheap to construct. I just can't imagine us digging up a second underground line to get downtown. That would be extremely costly and surely would result in endless debates.

 

[Leo_Chan]

I do advocate for lrt on Eglinton and if it gets crowded then we build another line on Lawrence. That way more people are walking distance to transit. However lrt is relatively cheap to construct. I just can't imagine us digging up a second underground line to get downtown. That would be extremely costly and surely would result in endless debates.

2100 City Council/Queens Park:
The Ontario Line is overcapacity and we need a line through Downtown Toronto from Sheppard/Victoria Park in the East to Albion/Hwy 27 in the West!
No, we need the North York Relief Line Relief Line!

 

[sixrings]

2100 City Council/Queens Park:
The Ontario Line is overcapacity and we need a line through Downtown Toronto from Sheppard/Victoria Park in the East to Albion/Hwy 27 in the West!
No, we need the North York Relief Line Relief Line!

Well I'm so pessimistic I think it's optimistic the Ontario line or whatever it's called will be open by 2100. Instead people will simply just move on to condo living and walk or bike to work.

 

[rbt]

Well I'm so pessimistic I think it's optimistic the Ontario line or whatever it's called will be open by 2100. Instead people will simply just move on to condo living and walk or bike to work.

I have high confidence about the University to Eglinton section. I expect the Western segment to be dumped pretty quickly after the next election as a money savings exercise.

Fare equilization and a few more off-peak Lake Shore trains is a far cheaper way of giving Exhibition/Liberty Village a metro station on the same timeline.

 

[BurlOak]

Is the DRL the be all and end all of Toronto transit expansion. If the line gets full, then build another one and expand the system.

Torontonians feels that there is a limit of 4 grade-separated transit lines allowed in Toronto. May as well spend as much money as possible on those.

 

[Forgotten]

What highway are they planning on building over either of those stations, on either of the planned alignments? The only highway located close to a station would be at the Exhibition Station on the Ontario Line.

Daily overcrowding? Please. The area is busy and getting busier, but let's not conflate the reality with the area as it sits now and with what is likely to happen in the near future with any fantasy visions of what it might become in some sort of idealistic world.

As for Regent Park, it's always going to be a long walk from the bulk of neighbourhood no matter when you situate the station. Siting the station at Parliament or at Sumach isn't really going to change things greatly.

Refer to the "Sumach" station they wanted to put under the highway next to a bunch of low rise houses, a dealership, a vet shop, and an elementary school.

Ever since the new office buildings and George Brown opened up on that stretch of King there has been foot traffic crossing the road at all hours during the day blocking and slowing down traffic. I wouldn't be surprised if the engineers at the city in their infinite wisdom putting down yet another traffic signal there.

The people use the subway to get to work so it shouldn't be a surprise that they flood the subways if it stops next to their building. It makes sense to build for them instead of capitulating to whatever agenda the planning puppets were pushing when they said people in Regent Park would walk to the station because it's so close! But back in our reality people will use the bus stop outside of their building not walk 800 metres to a station and at Parliament at least there's a bus.

York Mills Station is located in a river. It hasn't seemed to have been much of an issue there.

Were there flooding incidents at York Mills in the past? I seem to remember a few. There's always standing water in the tunnels and I remember winters where there were sheets of ice lining the tunnel visible from the platform and neither can be cheap to keep in good shape.