[k10ery]

How much do you think it will cost to construct a crosstown line?

Good question, right? It's 20 km from Agincourt to the WTJ. Let's say electrification at $20 million/km, track rolling stock and a yard at $40 million/km. Add in a big Dupont transfer station at $100 million, and you're at $1.3 billion. A pittance!

Now how much to buy or rent the ROW? That's the big question. If I were a CP shareholder I certainly wouldn't be saying no at $1.5 billion.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Union Station would be getting too, too crowded. Add a Relief Line at Union, there will be little relief. Better to move a downtown station for the Relief Line a block, two or three away from Union Station.

Then there's the talk (mostly it seems to be always just talk) about a high-speed rail line in the Windsor-Toronto-Montréal-Quebec City corridor. Put the station at Union Station, that'll add even more congestion to Union Station. Maybe the Toronto station should also be somewhere other than at Union. Maybe it should join with the downtown station of the Relief Line as well, but at somewhere other than Union. Dupont Station on the Spadina Line could be a starting point.

 

[M II A II R II K]

Have the eastern DRL follow the GO corridor to Gerrard & Carlaw, then add a new connection north to hook up with the Richmond Hill line and continue along it which diverges and heads towards Don Mills & Eglinton and back again anyway.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Union Station would be getting too, too crowded. Add a Relief Line at Union, there will be little relief. Better to move a downtown station for the Relief Line a block, two or three away from Union Station.

Then there's the talk (mostly it seems to be always just talk) about a high-speed rail line in the Windsor-Toronto-Montréal-Quebec City corridor. Put the station at Union Station, that'll add even more congestion to Union Station. Maybe the Toronto station should also be somewhere other than at Union. Maybe it should join with the downtown station of the Relief Line as well, but at somewhere other than Union. Dupont Station on the Spadina Line could be a starting point.

Part of me thinks that Union Station needs to be rebuilt. Not just a little addition, but a major rebuild. The station is the centre of downtown and eventually we're going to have to come to terms with the fact that this little station can't absorb all the traffic that will be running through it in the next 60 years or so.

An alternative patchwork solution could be a new transit hub at Roncesvalles and Queen, which would connect to the GO Lines, Waterfront West LRT (if it's ever built) and the DRL.

Anyways, the downtown station for the Relief Line is already a few blocks from Union (at King/St.Andrew). I would eventually like to see all three of these stations linked up with a new pedestrian tunnel with one paid fair zone. I don't think that PATH can handle all the traffic.

 

[innsertnamehere]

The current union Reno is designed to double VIA capacity, so HSR could probably be handled.

 

[junctionist]

Union Station has a massive concentration of transit. The big metropolitan cities of the world tend to have multiple stations like Union Station. I think a second major station would be excellent. It could spur the development of a second major business district downtown like the present CBD. Without much room left for further development around Union Station, it could be quite beneficial for growth in the city.

 

[CapitalSeven]

Anyways, the downtown station for the Relief Line is already a few blocks from Union (at King/St.Andrew).

What do you mean already? There hasn't been an EA and the route has not been decided.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

What do you mean already? There hasn't been an EA and the route has not been decided.

That's where the Commission has decided the stations will be +-500m. Tentatively at least. Nothing is set in stone of course. This is the beginning of a very long journey.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

The current union Reno is designed to double VIA capacity, so HSR could probably be handled.

Can't wait to read about it in the next HSR study.

But seriously, don't hold your breath for it. I don't even think that any of the parties in Ottawa have come out in favour of it. Nor am I sure if it is economically viable.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

Union Station has a massive concentration of transit. The big metropolitan cities of the world tend to have multiple stations like Union Station. I think a second major station would be excellent. It could spur the development of a second major business district downtown like the present CBD. Without much room left for further development around Union Station, it could be quite beneficial for growth in the city.

Summerhill....

Can't wait to read about it in the next HSR study.

But seriously, don't hold your breath for it. I don't even think that any of the parties in Ottawa have come out in favour of it. Nor am I sure if it is economically viable.

I think Windsor to QC City is Viable.

 

[nfitz]

That's where the Commission has decided the stations will be +-500m. Tentatively at least.

They haven't even got that far. The last staff report to the commission on the DRL clearly stated that "Although the alignments shown on these DRL exhibits reflect an illustrative-only King Street alignment and example DRL station locations, the specific alignment and station locations will be assessed and determined during future phases of the project."

 

[diminutive]

Union Station has a massive concentration of transit. The big metropolitan cities of the world tend to have multiple stations like Union Station. I think a second major station would be excellent. It could spur the development of a second major business district downtown like the present CBD. Without much room left for further development around Union Station, it could be quite beneficial for growth in the city.

There's a big 'yes, but...' here.

Yes, most major cities have >1 major rail hub.

That's not usually been the result of rational transit planning though. Most rail networks in those cities were built by private operators. In some cases terminals were the result of government bans on railways downtown; London's scattering of terminals outside of its (historic) CBD is the result of government legislation banning railways through the City, which in turn required the construction of the first underground lines to connect the terminals.

Thankfully most American cities were more rational in their approach and built joint ("Union Stations"). So, outside of NYC n Chicago, I don't think any other American city has more than one major rail hub.

In any case, almost all European and Asian cities which ended up stuck with multiple terminals have been in the process of trying to unify their system through quite large (and expensive!) tunnel projects. Looking at most regional or commuter rail systems in Europe, it's a bit redundant to talk of 'major stations' since very few commuter rail services terminate anywhere downtown.

So it's a bit senseless to set about trying to make a second hub downtown for commuter rail. In future intercity or HSR services could be shunted off to a different station somewhere downtown without too much impact, but what would the upside be?

 

[TheTigerMaster]

They haven't even got that far. The last staff report to the commission on the DRL clearly stated that "Although the alignments shown on these DRL exhibits reflect an illustrative-only King Street alignment and example DRL station locations, the specific alignment and station locations will be assessed and determined during future phases of the project."

Interesting. Thanks for pointing that out. They probably shouldn't have bothered making a map then. Slightly misleading since they don't know where the line will be. Guess its good politics.

 

[nfitz]

Interesting. Thanks for pointing that out. They probably shouldn't have bothered making a map then. Slightly misleading since they don't know where the line will be. Guess its good politics.

Have to start with assumptions ... and need to present them.

The media however should be more responsible.

 

[CDL.TO]

There's a big 'yes, but...' here.

Yes, most major cities have >1 major rail hub.

That's not usually been the result of rational transit planning though. Most rail networks in those cities were built by private operators. In some cases terminals were the result of government bans on railways downtown; London's scattering of terminals outside of its (historic) CBD is the result of government legislation banning railways through the City, which in turn required the construction of the first underground lines to connect the terminals.

Thankfully most American cities were more rational in their approach and built joint ("Union Stations"). So, outside of NYC n Chicago, I don't think any other American city has more than one major rail hub.

In any case, almost all European and Asian cities which ended up stuck with multiple terminals have been in the process of trying to unify their system through quite large (and expensive!) tunnel projects. Looking at most regional or commuter rail systems in Europe, it's a bit redundant to talk of 'major stations' since very few commuter rail services terminate anywhere downtown.

So it's a bit senseless to set about trying to make a second hub downtown for commuter rail. In future intercity or HSR services could be shunted off to a different station somewhere downtown without too much impact, but what would the upside be?

Bingo. Berlin spent billions centralizing things into the new Hauptbahnhof a few years ago. Madrid is spending billions to connect Chamartin to Atocha as we speak (and built tunnels to eliminate Principe Pio back in the 90s). Off the top of my head, there have also been projects in Antwerp, Malmo, Lyon, Brussels, and Oslo to centralize rail stations. Multiple stations is a historical error places are trying to fix, not the result of intentional planning decisions.