WislaHD
Superstar
Yah, given how much dirt we are extracting from the ground at the moment, it'd be wise to use it for something practical instead of shipping it off to who knows where.
|
|
|
Johnny Au
Senior Member
That who knows where is in Burlington.
BurlOak
Senior Member
The would take foresight and vision.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Time and money - filling in the lake requires an EA. If you want an example of local reuse (of contaminated fill), check out WT and their plans for the Portlands instead.
AoD
AoD
I still maintain that my 'bury the Gardiner along the front of the Harbour and create a waterfront park on top of it' is the best solution to a whole handful of problems. Solves the Gardiner situation, solves the fill situation, and solves the discontinuous waterfront situation. And unlike other Gardiner burial schemes, this one would pay for a lot of it itself, because of the reclaimed land for development from the old Gardiner site and the current waterfront slips that would become land-locked if a new park is placed further into the harbour.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
I think you might be underballing the cost/technical challenges of building an expressway and associated on/off ramps by the lake. It is highly unlikely that sale of the Gardiner lands (which is partly occupied by Lakeshore) will be sufficient for the project.
It might be a bit of a heresy coming from me, but I think the best option for the central portion is probably rebuild and rationalizing the on/off ramp system.
AoD
BurlOak
Senior Member
But the study was only for the East Gardiner.
That guaranteed that no complete solutions would be studied.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
The city has already decided to undertake permanent repair on the western portion of the Gardiner, whatever complete solutions one came up with won't likely be implemented for multiple decades, given the sunk cost into the repair.
AoD
Rainforest
Senior Member
"Fixing" John Tory's Smarttrack plan
Although preferring a conventional-subway DRL, I thought of how John Tory's Smarttrack plan can be "fixed" and implemented.
Problems with the original plan:
1) I don't believe the required level of service can be sustained with rail being entirely on surface. Some sections are too tight.
2) Absence of the link up Don Mills corridor limits the Yonge relief effect. Many riders from the east will continue to use Yonge line.
Adding some tunneled sections can fix those issues:
The central section is all in tunnel; presumably under Wellington. This should sustain 3 branches, with combined headways of 5 min (15 min per branch), or even 3 min 20 s ec (10 min per branch).
The East York - Don Mills branch runs in a tunnel all the way to the northern end of Pape, then on a bridge over Don Valley, and elevated or tunneled in Overlea area. (I avoided the southern section of Bala sub, because it is very difficult to connect to BD subway, and because of the flood risks.) Being in the tunnel, this branch can have several useful stations in East Toronto and East York. North of Overlea, the line joins CP tracks, then splits north on a bridge parallel to DVP, and joins to the Bala sub.
The Agincourt and Lakeshore East branches may need a few tunneled sections, but mostly run on surface.
The western branches are almost entirely on surface. For this map, I selected routes optimal for 416 (Lakeshore West, Airport, and CP track to Steeles and Islington. I realize that from the GTA network purpose, it may be better to run two branches into Brampton and Mississauga. Anyway, the exact route of the outer sections is not the main point here.
Although preferring a conventional-subway DRL, I thought of how John Tory's Smarttrack plan can be "fixed" and implemented.
Problems with the original plan:
1) I don't believe the required level of service can be sustained with rail being entirely on surface. Some sections are too tight.
2) Absence of the link up Don Mills corridor limits the Yonge relief effect. Many riders from the east will continue to use Yonge line.
Adding some tunneled sections can fix those issues:
The central section is all in tunnel; presumably under Wellington. This should sustain 3 branches, with combined headways of 5 min (15 min per branch), or even 3 min 20 s ec (10 min per branch).
The East York - Don Mills branch runs in a tunnel all the way to the northern end of Pape, then on a bridge over Don Valley, and elevated or tunneled in Overlea area. (I avoided the southern section of Bala sub, because it is very difficult to connect to BD subway, and because of the flood risks.) Being in the tunnel, this branch can have several useful stations in East Toronto and East York. North of Overlea, the line joins CP tracks, then splits north on a bridge parallel to DVP, and joins to the Bala sub.
The Agincourt and Lakeshore East branches may need a few tunneled sections, but mostly run on surface.
The western branches are almost entirely on surface. For this map, I selected routes optimal for 416 (Lakeshore West, Airport, and CP track to Steeles and Islington. I realize that from the GTA network purpose, it may be better to run two branches into Brampton and Mississauga. Anyway, the exact route of the outer sections is not the main point here.
Last edited:
Oh I know the sale of the lands won't be sufficient to cover the entire cost, but it would bring the outstanding balance of the project cost down to a point where it can be covered by reasonable tolls over a decent period of time.
As for the on/off ramps, they can be simplified like this: Spadina only feeds traffic coming from and going to the west, Jarvis only feeds traffic coming from and going to the east, Simcoe and York become opposing one-way streets (basically rejigged to become one-way extensions of University), Bay gets its exit dropped, and Yonge gets a full interchange.
Very similar to what I had come up with, but I like some of the changes. A couple of curious omissions though:
1) No electrified service on the Milton line? Even in the form of a spur to Square One?
2) I like the Weston branch, but why not extend it to Highway 7 to have it end at another major transit line?
3) Ditto for the Lakeshore and Stouffville corridors. To me, they seem to end a station or two short of their natural terminus points: Port Credit or Clarkson in the west (since Port Credit is pretty tight for a terminus), Unionville in the northeast, and Pickering in the east. I understand the "it's for Toronto" mentality, but it's curious that you extended it into the 905 for the Richmond Hill line, but none of the others.
Overall though, a very solid plan, and one that I agree with when it comes to how the DRL should take shape. The "relief" aspect of something like this is miles ahead of what any TTC subway within a reasonable budget could do.
Rainforest
Senior Member
"Fixed" John Tory's Smarttrack plan; plus subways and LRTs
This is how the map could look with the "fixed" Smarttrack, plus subways and some LRT lines:
Subways: YUS, BD, Sheppard. I did not do anything fancy with Sheppard, only the most obvious extension to Downsview.
LRT:
1) Eglinton
2) Sheppard East, with a Malvern branch
3) Finch West and East
4) Eglinton East - Kingston - Morniungside
5) Don Mills (a branch of Eglinton). North of Finch, turns east to serve Seneca College, then up 404 and Woodbine into Markham
6) Jane (a branch of Eglinton)
7) Kipling
I did not draw Waterfront East or West line, as they would not be legit on the map of this scale. For the same reason, I did not draw any BRT lines.
This is how the map could look with the "fixed" Smarttrack, plus subways and some LRT lines:
Subways: YUS, BD, Sheppard. I did not do anything fancy with Sheppard, only the most obvious extension to Downsview.
LRT:
1) Eglinton
2) Sheppard East, with a Malvern branch
3) Finch West and East
4) Eglinton East - Kingston - Morniungside
5) Don Mills (a branch of Eglinton). North of Finch, turns east to serve Seneca College, then up 404 and Woodbine into Markham
6) Jane (a branch of Eglinton)
7) Kipling
I did not draw Waterfront East or West line, as they would not be legit on the map of this scale. For the same reason, I did not draw any BRT lines.
Rainforest
Senior Member
Thanks for the comments!
True. If I could present a group of several maps, I would draw more lines particularly in Mississauga and Brampton. But on a single map, increase of the coverage area would make the central area less legit. Therefore, I decided to focus on the 416 services.
Richmond Hill Centre just happened to be lucky to be on the same map
This is not clear-cut. A rail based plan (with some tunnels) can certainly do more for the riders from outer sections of GTA, as well as those who travel long distances within GTA but not to the downtown core. However, it requires a consistent implementation, rather than small one piece at a time expansions. Otherwise, all modest incremental capacity increases will be consumed by increasing demand from 905, with nothing left to relief the Yonge line.
In contrast, a conventional-subway DRL project will certainly relief Yonge, even if expanded one piece at a time.
True. If I could present a group of several maps, I would draw more lines particularly in Mississauga and Brampton. But on a single map, increase of the coverage area would make the central area less legit. Therefore, I decided to focus on the 416 services.
Richmond Hill Centre just happened to be lucky to be on the same map
This is not clear-cut. A rail based plan (with some tunnels) can certainly do more for the riders from outer sections of GTA, as well as those who travel long distances within GTA but not to the downtown core. However, it requires a consistent implementation, rather than small one piece at a time expansions. Otherwise, all modest incremental capacity increases will be consumed by increasing demand from 905, with nothing left to relief the Yonge line.
In contrast, a conventional-subway DRL project will certainly relief Yonge, even if expanded one piece at a time.
Thanks for the comments!
True. If I could present a group of several maps, I would draw more lines particularly in Mississauga and Brampton. But on a single map, increase of the coverage area would make the central area less legit. Therefore, I decided to focus on the 416 services.
Richmond Hill Centre just happened to be lucky to be on the same map
Hahaha, fair enough. Maybe put some arrows on some of them then to indicate that they extend beyond the edge of the map? Just a thought.
I've rather recently come to the conclusion that the optimal solution (in my opinion) is to not try and merge regional relief and serving downtown shoulder areas into a single project, because you're likely to end up with a frankenstein that does neither particularly well. IMO, to serve the shoulder areas of downtown, particularly in the west, you really need 4 lines: WWLRT, GO REX (rail corridor), GO REX DRL, and a Queen LRT. This ensures that both local and regional travel patterns are served, and don't have a particularly large overlap.
The Queen LRT I think would be the most controversial, as it would basically involve turning Queen into a pedestrianized street, but I would think that removing the streetcar off of King (because that's where the GO REX DRL would be) would be a pretty good compromise.
ksun
Senior Member
Question, why even in fantasy, all the maps show nothing but completely straight lines following the grid? Do they really have to be?
Stations should go where demand is, instead of giving a station just because it happens on the line. For example, Yonge/Lawrence and York Mills don't really deserve stations there but they have just because they are on Yonge st. If designed a better way, the line could potentially give more densely populate area DIRECT subway access (not just a feeder bus). How many people are actually within walking distance to Lawrence or York Mills station? The urge to have all lines on straight lines in Toronto is uncanny.
Stations should go where demand is, instead of giving a station just because it happens on the line. For example, Yonge/Lawrence and York Mills don't really deserve stations there but they have just because they are on Yonge st. If designed a better way, the line could potentially give more densely populate area DIRECT subway access (not just a feeder bus). How many people are actually within walking distance to Lawrence or York Mills station? The urge to have all lines on straight lines in Toronto is uncanny.