Y-U-S line becoming too long?

[Gil]

Just spitballing an idea about splitting the line at Union here:

If it were possible to secure rights (if needed) to run a subway line beneath the Union Station rail corridor, could you run the Yonge Line south to the rail corridor then west to serve Union from the south side of the train station?  You could make the to-be-redeveloped streetcar loop part of the transfer corridor.  The corridor is wide enough to allow the subway line to get around CIBC Square's north tower currently under construction.  As far as I can tell there shouldn't be much infrastructure beneath the rail corridor itself.

They've demonstrated with the whole Union Station renovation that they can keep everything running while digging out beneath it.  Starting from beneath the rail corridor would ensure that the existing line 1 could remain in service until they were ready to split the line.  You could still maintain the original tracks as a connection between the Yonge and University line, but it would only go in one direction as I don't think shoehorning a wye at Front and Yonge is possible.  I don't know that it would be possible with the configuration I proposed to extend the University Line further east (or if you'd want to) to say the Corktown station on the Ontario Line.  You would have the option (thought costly) of extending the Yonge Line westward. 

[Shaun]

Not every train need to run between highway 7(Richmond Hill) to Vaughan. 

But short turning trains at Sheppard west made things worse.  

Maybe having some trains short turn at Sheppard and running to Vaughan and then having trains run from Union to Richmond Hill makes sense.  

Ending trains at Finch will cause congestion and trains are backed up from York Mills to Finch going north anyways. 

Unless someone has a better idea....

[Mike]

34 minutes ago, Shaun said:

Not every train need to run between highway 7(Richmond Hill) to Vaughan. 

But short turning trains at Sheppard west made things worse.  

Maybe having some trains short turn at Sheppard and running to Vaughan and then having trains run from Union to Richmond Hill makes sense.  

Ending trains at Finch will cause congestion and trains are backed up from York Mills to Finch going north anyways. 

Unless someone has a better idea....

Is ATC suppose to solve the back up of trains issue at Finch?

[smallspy]

2 hours ago, Gil said:

Just spitballing an idea about splitting the line at Union here:

If it were possible to secure rights (if needed) to run a subway line beneath the Union Station rail corridor, could you run the Yonge Line south to the rail corridor then west to serve Union from the south side of the train station?  You could make the to-be-redeveloped streetcar loop part of the transfer corridor.  The corridor is wide enough to allow the subway line to get around CIBC Square's north tower currently under construction.  As far as I can tell there shouldn't be much infrastructure beneath the rail corridor itself.

Maybe not as much as a regular "street", but there is certainly infrastructure below the tracks.

 

Fibre optic cables, power, gas, and possibly the most importantly, the footings for the bridge structures and the station trainshed itself.

 

Dan

[Gil]

29 minutes ago, smallspy said:

Maybe not as much as a regular "street", but there is certainly infrastructure below the tracks.

 

Fibre optic cables, power, gas, and possibly the most importantly, the footings for the bridge structures and the station trainshed itself.

 

Dan

I figured there'd be more infrastructure running perpendicularly underneath the streets (Yonge and Bay in this case) than running in parallel beneath the rail corridor.  The tracks themselves are on an embankment.  As for the footings for the trainshed, the renovations at Union Station demonstrated that they could be dealt with while still maintaining station operations.

Does this seem like a reasonable way to split Line 1?  It does leave the option available to extend either line further if needed, but that would eat into the Ontario Line's passenger base.  Perhaps a short extension west of Union to say Spadina or Bathurst to get some east-west transit links in the area (perhaps a bit overkill, but the density and traffic often made surface options unreliable, moreso during events).

[smallspy]

15 hours ago, Gil said:

I figured there'd be more infrastructure running perpendicularly underneath the streets (Yonge and Bay in this case) than running in parallel beneath the rail corridor.  The tracks themselves are on an embankment.  As for the footings for the trainshed, the renovations at Union Station demonstrated that they could be dealt with while still maintaining station operations.

What I listed is the infrastructure running parallel to the tracks. And just because it's on an embankment doesn't mean that it isn't there.

 

Extending the footings in order to build the new concourse was "relatively" straight-forward, as they weren't moving them and new loads that they were going to carry weren't substantially different than what was there before.

 

You're suggesting threading a subway line through there however, which is a hugely more complicated issue. I suspect that with what you want to do, footings and columns would have to be moved, or shortened and get tied in to bridging columns to allow for larger spaces to be created for things like, say, a station platform or concourse. That's way more complicated than the work that has already been done.

 

15 hours ago, Gil said:

Does this seem like a reasonable way to split Line 1?  It does leave the option available to extend either line further if needed, but that would eat into the Ontario Line's passenger base.  Perhaps a short extension west of Union to say Spadina or Bathurst to get some east-west transit links in the area (perhaps a bit overkill, but the density and traffic often made surface options unreliable, moreso during events).

Does something need to be done? Maybe not now, but I could see a situation in the future where it does make sense to do so, yes.

 

I'm just not sure what might be best solution, however.

 

Dan

[Gil]

On 2/20/2022 at 9:39 AM, smallspy said:

What I listed is the infrastructure running parallel to the tracks. And just because it's on an embankment doesn't mean that it isn't there.

 

Extending the footings in order to build the new concourse was "relatively" straight-forward, as they weren't moving them and new loads that they were going to carry weren't substantially different than what was there before.

 

You're suggesting threading a subway line through there however, which is a hugely more complicated issue. I suspect that with what you want to do, footings and columns would have to be moved, or shortened and get tied in to bridging columns to allow for larger spaces to be created for things like, say, a station platform or concourse. That's way more complicated than the work that has already been done.

 

Does something need to be done? Maybe not now, but I could see a situation in the future where it does make sense to do so, yes.

 

I'm just not sure what might be best solution, however.

 

Dan

I'll concede to your point about the infrastructure under the railway embankment.  Still it's easier that trying to tunnel under (or through) CIBC Square.  Running all the way down to Lake Shore to go around CIBC Square would make for an unwieldy connection even if they could get back north to Union.

Did come across this from a Waterfront Toronto presentation (slides 28 and 24 respectively).  I don't know how accurate the cross-section renderings are but it looks like the footings for the railway tracks would need to be extended if they were to tunnel beneath.  Again, something that has already been demonstrated to work in Toronto.

 In terms of passenger circulation, again if the designs are accurate, you could significantly widen the western side and marginally widen the eastern side of the redesigned streetcar platform.  If the plan (which I don't know if discussions have gotten that far) is to have streetcars offload on the east side and board on the west side then this would make connections to the streetcars convenient from the new subway station.  You could simply extend the vertical circulation proposed on the east side further down to get access to the Bay East Teamway.

If splitting the line at Union redistributes demand from people riding through, they may need to widen the existing connecting tunnel between the streetcars and subway or simply build a dedicated concourse beneath the streetcar loop which may or may not force the subway line deeper depending on the configuration of the new station.  Hopefully out of the way of the majority of infrastructure already in place.  I know of the deep lake cooling pipes/tunnels, but I think they're further west by the pumping station next to the Roundhouse which might impact going further west.

Again, this is all just an idea if we wanted to split the line at Union.  If passenger demand at Union grows to exceed its new capacity with 2 separate platforms then maybe that's when we can start considering it.  You'd double the capacity by essentially having two separate subway stations.  The alternative would be to build beneath the existing subway station, but I don't think there's enough room on either side of Union to get one set of track to descend deeper with all of the existing infrastructure already in place.  I give you the northwest PATH tunnel from Union Station as an example. 

[Gil]

Not exactly getting longer, but another station on the YNSE is announced - Royal Orchard, as an election goodie perhaps?  Given the complaints from the neighbourhood leading to the line going deeper to mitigate vibrations, this is going to be a fairly costly station to build due to the access requirements.  I wonder once this and the Ontario Line is built which station will be crowned the deepest?

CP24: Ford government will build second station in Thornhill as part of Yonge subway extension

CBC: Ontario formally announces massive condo project in York Region while critics sound alarm

Toronto Star: Province drops the puck for massive transit hub project in York Region amid controversy  OR Non-paywall version

BlogTO: An extra station was just announced for Toronto's next subway extension

If Ford feels that Willowdale might flip on him, maybe he'll throw in some funding for the Drewry/Cummer station that was also cut to save money on the project?  Given this is one of the streets that changes names when it crosses Yonge will they keep the compound name or go with one or the other?  The juvenile will probably opt for Cummer, which also has it's length vs. Drewry going for it similar I guess to Collge being chosen over Carlton.  Development in the area, similar to what's planned for Bridge and High Tech stations can go towards offsetting the costs for this station.

I also posted this in the YRT/VIVA Thread, York Region is considering future extensions of Line 1 up to Major Mackenzie at both ends of the line with its 2051 Plan.  If and/or when they do even out the ends of the line is it worth closing the loop?

 

 

[81-717]

2 hours ago, Mike said:

If they extend the line to Major Mac at Jane it will lead to more (re)development north of Major Mac at which point they may want to extend line further north.

imo Major Mackenzie (or maybe Teston rd.) is the absolute maximum reasonable distance the subway line could/should be extended. Beyond that is what GO transit is for.

2 hours ago, Mike said:

If you make it a loop do you still designate specific station(s) as endpoints where crews get a break?

Perhaps like Coxwell is used for crew changeovers even though it's not an endpoint?

Edited April 22, 2022 by 81-717

[Mike]

3 hours ago, Gil said:I also posted this in the YRT/VIVA Thread, York Region is considering future extensions of Line 1 up to Major Mackenzie at both ends of the line with its 2051 Plan.  If and/or when they do even out the ends of the line is it worth closing the loop?

If they extend the line to Major Mac at Jane it will lead to more (re)development north of Major Mac at which point they may want to extend line further north.  If you make it a loop do you still designate specific station(s) as endpoints where crews get a break?

[smallspy]

16 hours ago, 81-717 said:

imo Major Mackenzie (or maybe Teston rd.) is the absolute maximum reasonable distance the subway line could/should be extended. Beyond that is what GO transit is for.=

Since it doesn't seem to be clear to most people....

 

A very large proportion - possibily even a majority - of people getting on at Finch Station today are not taking the subway all the way downtown.

 

And this would also extend to any extensions further north. While some may take the trip all the way to Queen or King, most of them will be getting off far upstream of those stations.

 

Dan

[81-717]

Fair enough, but there's also the issue of fare zones. Such an extension would put a large stretch of the line (not just a couple stations like the current TYSSE) within the YRT fare zone, and while a couple stations not too far outside the city border might get a pass (to be within the TTC fare zone), a significantly larger stretch might be questionable in that regard. The distance from Steeles to Major Mackenzie is half of that from Queen to Steeles (even though it may not seem like it due to less density in the area). This would put about 1/3 of either branch of the line within YRT territory. And it's not entirely clear how fare zones would be enforced on the subway vs. the bus. Would subway riders have to tap off upon exiting, and depending on where they got on/off, would pay either TTC, YRT, or both fares?

GO transit, on the other hand, is designed to connect to various local transit systems within/near the GTHA often with a single trip.

[smallspy]

5 hours ago, 81-717 said:

Fair enough, but there's also the issue of fare zones. Such an extension would put a large stretch of the line (not just a couple stations like the current TYSSE) within the YRT fare zone, and while a couple stations not too far outside the city border might get a pass (to be within the TTC fare zone), a significantly larger stretch might be questionable in that regard. The distance from Steeles to Major Mackenzie is half of that from Queen to Steeles (even though it may not seem like it due to less density in the area). This would put about 1/3 of either branch of the line within YRT territory. And it's not entirely clear how fare zones would be enforced on the subway vs. the bus. Would subway riders have to tap off upon exiting, and depending on where they got on/off, would pay either TTC, YRT, or both fares?

GO transit, on the other hand, is designed to connect to various local transit systems within/near the GTHA often with a single trip.

Oh, the fare issue is absolutely something that will need to be dealt with.

 

But that's also a bit of putting the cart before the horse, no? The line to Highway 7 hasn't even been started yet, nevermind further north.

 

Dan

[Mark Walton]

On 4/22/2022 at 4:59 PM, smallspy said:

Oh, the fare issue is absolutely something that will need to be dealt with.

 

But that's also a bit of putting the cart before the horse, no? The line to Highway 7 hasn't even been started yet, nevermind further north.

 

Dan

They'll probably do it the same way as at Vaughan, and probably 407, Pioneer Village, and York U as well: TTC fares are collected when you enter the station: YRT fares are collected when you board one of that system's buses. A throwback to TTC's own zone-fare system that was in effect until 1973, zone fares were collected at the bus-subway transfer point.