nfitz said:
I don't think they'd build the relief line far enough south to intersect Lower Spadina Avenue. It would surely stay north of the Gardiner.

And even then, should a relief line be that convenient for BMO Field? It won't be designed for occasional events. I doubt the station would be south of King. King and Dufferin? King and the Kitchener/Barrie line? It's still going to be a bit of a hike. BMO Field already has a GO station, which currently has service to Union every 30 minutes off-peak.

There's lots of reasons to build Phase 1 west of Spadina. The biggest being that King is already a disaster zone between Spadina and Bathurst in rush hour ... and will only get worse if everyone has to board streetcars at King/Spadina. I'd think Bathurst would be a logocal end point for Phase 1. It's only 600 metres further west than Spadina, and doesn't sterilize future options.
Click to expand...

King St is not much further from BMO field than the Rogers Centre is from Union/St Andrew stations and people still make the walk over. Under King would be fine IMO
 
Woodbridge_Heights said:
King St is not much further from BMO field than the Rogers Centre is from Union/St Andrew stations and people still make the walk over. Under King would be fine IMO
Click to expand...

I agree....if you observe people leaving BMO Field the two most prevalent patterns is people going to the GO station or people walking under it to get to Liberty Village.....those people split into 3 groups once in LV...those who parked there and are going to their cars...those that are going there for a post match meal/drink and those that are headed to King Street to catch a streetcar either east or west.

A subway in the area would serve the 2nd and 3rd groups (presuming the people going for post match meal/drink eventually leave the establishment they end up in ;) ) better than the current streetcar does and as the stadium expands at the same time parking availibility shrinks...they may grow as a percentage of the total.
 
Adjei said:
This is why I find it funny when all these mayoral candidates are talking about this line as if it will be built tomorrow. This line is about 15 years away from completion and that's just for the short segment, not even the extended phases people here want.
Click to expand...

we all know the real hurdle is coming to a consensus and getting funding. I think the mayoral candidates who have spoken up in support for the DRL are doing it from a "we'll get it funded" perspective.
 
The first phase that opens can be just Pape to St. Andrew, so long as they are continuously extending it. Not like with Sheppard where you finish one phase and then it's up in the air as to how and when it gets extended, if ever.
 
I think the 2029 date is way too pessimistic. Compare it to the Scarborough subway date of 2023 which is pretty much at the exact same stage as the DRL right now. I think a 2024 or 2025 date is much more realistic.
 
innsertnamehere said:
I think the 2029 date is way too pessimistic. Compare it to the Scarborough subway date of 2023 which is pretty much at the exact same stage as the DRL right now. I think a 2024 or 2025 date is much more realistic.
Click to expand...

No the Scarborough subway is further ahead of the DRL. One we know the route and the station locations for the most part for it. No one knows which streets the DRL will go and where the stations will be. The TTC and Metrolinx are only just coming to study that now and hope to have that ready to present to council next year. The second point is funding. Scarborough has full funding. The DRL has 0 funding and uncertainty about where funding is going to come from if you look at the political landscape in the province. Knowing Toronto, I won't be surprised if that's the actual opening date of 2029.
 
nope. the scarborough line is going to go through the same process as the province wants to examine if an alignment on the old SRT corridor is possible.

Also, the 2029 date is supposed to be the earliest possible date. Meaning they presume that once the EA is finished it will move straight on to construction.
 
I hope it's not 2029. If it is though, they should not just build St Andrew to Pape. It should go to Eglinton on both ends, maybe up to Finch East on the Don Mills section. We can't waste 15 years just to build a stubway.
 
denfromoakvillemilton said:
I hope it's not 2029. If it is though, they should not just build St Andrew to Pape. It should go to Eglinton on both ends, maybe up to Finch East on the Don Mills section. We can't waste 15 years just to build a stubway.
Click to expand...

I would understand building it from Eglinton to Dundas West in 15 years but to build only the shortest section in 15 years is a a complete joke.
 
Adjei said:
I would understand building it from Eglinton to Dundas West in 15 years but to build only the shortest section in 15 years is a a complete joke.
Click to expand...

You're absolutely right, but this is about par the course. This also means Scarborough will take even longer.
 
Last edited:
If councillors don’t approve spending on an accelerated environmental assessment for part of the so-called downtown relief line soon, a senior city official warned, the project will be put on hold – and it won’t be revisited until next year.

To avoid another delay, and have the environmental assessment begin in June, councillors will have to agree on funding at committee in May and again at a full council the following month. The six-month assessment would generate a proposed route and station locations for the eastern portion of the line, recommendations that would be presented to the new council in the first part of 2015.
Click to expand...

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...n-a-century-old-subway-dream/article17850686/
 
still 6 months left, we will see.

The article there speaks of accelerating the process, meaning that 2029 date is quite likely incorrect. The current plan is that route design won't even start until next year, while the article is talking about presenting route selection by early 2015.
 
innsertnamehere said:
still 6 months left, we will see.

The article there speaks of accelerating the process, meaning that 2029 date is quite likely incorrect. The current plan is that route design won't even start until next year, while the article is talking about presenting route selection by early 2015.
Click to expand...

The article is so dramatic though. All it's saying is that they need more to begin the early EA. I expect city council will make the right decision.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top