[BurlOak]

I like the Bay Express subway concept in general, but not sure it can go that far south. The problems are the conflict with PATH, and the water table issues when the line gets close to the lake.

How deep are the PATH crossings - I suspect not very.
I doubt the Bay Line would be at a lower elevation than the current Queens Quay LRT stop.

 

[BurlOak]

Assuredly there'd be a stop at Harbord. Front and King could be consolidated into one stop (Clarence Sq being the southern exit). Here's an idea for replacing the 510 with an extension of the Spadina Subway. The Yonge-University Line now ends at St George Stn:

This hits many nodes en route: U of T (a PATH system could even connect the Harbord stop directly to Sidney Smith and Robarts), CAMH, Kensington Market, Chinatown, Fashion District, West Queen West/SoHo, King West, CityPlace, Rogers Centre, Harbourfront Centre, One York, Queen's Quay Ferry Docks, Weston Harbour Castle, Scotiabank Arena/Jurassic Park. It's also very complimentary to the Ontario Line.

This was on the Ontario Line thread, but likely belongs in the fantasy thread. However, I want to argue it as an alternative to the Yonge-Bloor Station enhancements. Y-B enhancement is expected to cost $1.1B. This results in 2 questions:

1. Will an interlined Yonge-Bloor subway do more for Y-B capacity than the planned improvements? The improvements add an extra platform on the Bloor Line, and nothing on the Yonge Line. It includes some additional stairs between the 2 levels. The interline means that every second train from East or West head downtown - cutting the number of Y-B transfers in half. It also means some of the remaining passengers would simply wait for the next train, farther reducing the number of transfers at the Y-B station. But all Yonge Bloor trains would use all St. George and Bay platforms, forcing Spadina to find a new route.
2. If the $1.1B is used to decouple Spadina, how far could it take us. For this, the goal would be to make the decoupled line as cheap as possibly, but also useful enough that there will not be major objections from those currently using the Spadina leg. The above has the line going down Spadina, with the transfer occurring at Spadina Station (which is the long one with former moving sidewalk ). The major downside is that the construction would likely disrupt the active major Spadina LRT line.

 

[Richard White]

If the $1.1B is used to decouple Spadina, how far could it take us. For this, the goal would be to make the decoupled line as cheap as possibly, but also useful enough that there will not be major objections from those currently using the Spadina leg. The above has the line going down Spadina, with the transfer occurring at Spadina Station (which is the long one with former moving sidewalk ). The major downside is that the construction would likely disrupt the active major Spadina LRT line.

This was originally the plan and one of the reasons there is a crossover at Spadina. The Spadina line was to be truncated at Spadina whenever the University line closed. From 1969 to 1978 the university line closed at 9 pm and on Sundays and holidays it closed all day. The thinking was that service would end at Spadina where people would transfer.

The problem was that Spadina is not transfer friendly. There are no accessible methods between platforms other than an escalator and a long walk down the hallway since they took out the moving sidewalk. IIRC the only time in recent memory that they made the transfer purposely (not because of a suicide, emergency alarm, derailment, etc) was during the G20 when all subway trains were turning back at the first point outside downtown. They had no choice otherwise they would not have done it.

 

[BurlOak]

I have far from thought out the details, but assuming the new leg of Spadina goes down Spadina (or Huron) to the SkyDome. If Huron, a station entrance would be at Spadina. This would be about 4 km in length and there would be 6 stations. Assuming it's $150M/km and $150M per station (no bus bays for any of them), it would cost $600M plus $900M = $1.5B. A bit more than the Y-B station improvement costs, but not terribly different.

The other problem is that those Spadina leg travels would not see any benefit in this. Going down Bay or Elizabeth/York would be an option that would be more than acceptable. Problem is, it would require an additional Bay station (platforms) and the Spadina LRT would have to be extended up to Dupont - to not remove the current expectation of being able to transfer from the Spadina subway to the Spadina LRT). In terms of cost, it would likely add $300M to $400M (extra 1km+ of track, extra platforms, LRT work).

 

[BurlOak]

This was originally the plan and one of the reasons there is a crossover at Spadina. The Spadina line was to be truncated at Spadina whenever the University line closed. From 1969 to 1978 the university line closed at 9 pm and on Sundays and holidays it closed all day. The thinking was that service would end at Spadina where people would transfer.

The problem was that Spadina is not transfer friendly. There are no accessible methods between platforms other than an escalator and a long walk down the hallway since they took out the moving sidewalk. IIRC the only time in recent memory that they made the transfer purposely (not because of a suicide, emergency alarm, derailment, etc) was during the G20 when all subway trains were turning back at the first point outside downtown. They had no choice otherwise they would not have done it.

Interesting - and kind of hard to believe that the we would build such expensive infrastructure and not fully utilize it.
With the ridership (not to mention expectations) that we now have of the Spadina leg riders, we cannot ask them to do the transfer. As you mention, it's not a convenient transfer, but with the numbers we have now, those transferring passengers would flood the Bloor-Spadina station - causing similar problems to what we now see at Y-B.

 

[Richard White]

with the numbers we have now, those transferring passengers would flood the Bloor-Spadina station - causing similar problems to what we now see at Y-B.

The transfer is so inconvenient that nobody in their right mind would do it. Even now, it is a 10 minute walking transfer between lines. It is infact faster and more convenient to transfer at St George and backtrack then it is to get off at Spadina to transfer.

I used to work at Dupont and Spadina but always changed at St George. It was faster.

 

[BurlOak]

The transfer is so inconvenient that nobody in their right mind would do it. Even now, it is a 10 minute walking transfer between lines. It is infact faster and more convenient to transfer at St George and backtrack then it is to get off at Spadina to transfer.

I used to work at Dupont and Spadina but always changed at St George. It was faster.

I always transferred at Spadina, because as a kid, there was no other moving sidewalk like (this outside of the airport).

 

[JSF-1]

I made a GO Map with the idea of being something similar to what you would see in a European/Asian Commuter system where they operate more like metro services than what we consider commuter rail. There are more stops on all lines as commuter rail across the pond have closer stop spacing due to being electrified as well as being essentially pseudo-subway lines. Whenever I do these types of maps I find it amazing to just look at the severe difference in development between the east end of the GTHA and the west end. As well I also see a severe flaw in the system, that being there is only 1 major terminal and all services serve it. To me this is something that needs to be changed as most major cities/regions tend to have multiple major terminals. While doing the map I really wanted to connect the Niagara Falls line to Hamilton instead of Union for the fact that I see Hamilton as a possible major hub and a sort of gateway to southern Ontario. However the trackage linking Hamilton to West Harbour doesn't exist and isntalling it would either require tunneling under Dundurn Street or creating a tight curve track near where the Lakeshore line splits. Lastly I included the Peterborough (Mid-Town) line, the Bolton Line, and a re-activated Belt Line as I am a big supporter of a Loop Line being built.

 

[Streety McCarface]

I made a GO Map with the idea of being something similar to what you would see in a European/Asian Commuter system where they operate more like metro services than what we consider commuter rail. There are more stops on all lines as commuter rail across the pond have closer stop spacing due to being electrified as well as being essentially pseudo-subway lines. Whenever I do these types of maps I find it amazing to just look at the severe difference in development between the east end of the GTHA and the west end. As well I also see a severe flaw in the system, that being there is only 1 major terminal and all services serve it. To me this is something that needs to be changed as most major cities/regions tend to have multiple major terminals. While doing the map I really wanted to connect the Niagara Falls line to Hamilton instead of Union for the fact that I see Hamilton as a possible major hub and a sort of gateway to southern Ontario. However the trackage linking Hamilton to West Harbour doesn't exist and isntalling it would either require tunneling under Dundurn Street or creating a tight curve track near where the Lakeshore line splits. Lastly I included the Peterborough (Mid-Town) line, the Bolton Line, and a re-activated Belt Line as I am a big supporter of a Loop Line being built.

View attachment 222323

I'd add The Boardwalk (A station east of Kitchener), and Breslau Stations to the Kitchener line.

 

[MrGoose]

I personally don't understand the need for a circle line in Toronto.

In cities with circle lines, the circle line goes around the city centre around the edge of the city center. These cities don't border large bodies of water. In Toronto such a line would have to go under the lake whereas whenever we see fantasy maps with circle lines they go out into the suburbs and come back to the city center.

Thats just my pet peeve though.

 

[Johnny Au]

I personally don't understand the need for a circle line in Toronto.

In cities with circle lines, the circle line goes around the city centre around the edge of the city center. These cities don't border large bodies of water. In Toronto such a line would have to go under the lake whereas whenever we see fantasy maps with circle lines they go out into the suburbs and come back to the city center.

Thats just my pet peeve though.

What is the Chicago Loop then?

 

[Streety McCarface]

What is the Chicago Loop then?

That's more akin to building a loop around downtown (ie Jarvis, Bloor, Bathurst, Front or around those borders) as opposed to looping line one, looping Line 4 & the relief line, or looping RER through the annex.

 

[Rainforest]

How deep are the PATH crossings - I suspect not very.

To my understanding:
- Line 1 mezzanines and the PATH are mostly at level -1.
- Line 2 platforms are at -2.
- Ontario Line will have to go under Line 1, and thus will have platforms at -3. The depth of OL at Bay can't differ much from its depth at Yonge or University.

Thus, if we are OK with the future Bay line ending at Queen, then it can run at almost any depth. If we want to reach King, then we can't use -3 because of the conflict with OL. We have to ether thread it at -2 and fit above the OL but below PATH and most of the utilities, or go for super-deep at -4. If we want to reach Union, that's basically same except a longer tunnel and more utilities to clear.

I doubt the Bay Line would be at a lower elevation than the current Queens Quay LRT stop.

The current Queens Quay LRT stop is very shallow and has no mezzanine. TTC definitely prefers subway stations with mezzanines, although perhaps that requirement can be lifted once.

Anyway, the main problem is that the existing streetcar loop is at the same level as Line 1 platforms. If we want to extend the future Bay subway line to south of Union, then its Union station would have to be much deeper in order to get under all the structures. That means either a deep Queens Quay station as well, or a large change of depth between Union and Queens Quay. That might still be doable, but certainly adds a great deal of complexity.

If the Waterfront streetcar system is upgraded and the existing loop expanded well before we start dealing with the Bay subway line, then it will be very hard to justify the rebuilding of something that already works.

 

[rbt]

TTC definitely prefers subway stations with mezzanines, although perhaps that requirement can be lifted once.

I think the mezzanine requirement is considered a lesson learned from the original Yonge stations.

King, for example, has tons of exits but any passenger wanting a specific exit (and not clever enough to board near that exit) will walk the length of the platform causing congestion. If there was a mezzanine, they would go off the platform with the flow of the crowd then find the exit they wanted.

Finch has 40% higher ridership than King but passenger flows are much much smoother. Imagine if the TTC bus, York/GO Bus, and south pedestrian exits each had a specific platform level stairwell to use.

 

[crs1026]

To be useful, that line ought to.go north under Bay from Union to at least Queen, and perhaps further. Makes no sense to force a transfer at Union, (that moves the point of peak overcrowding from Bloor to Union) and the end destination of riders coming south may be too far east of Spadina and too far north of Union to be walkable.

- Paul