Talk:Relief Line (Toronto)

Map

It would be cool if someone could make a map of the Downtown Relif Line. Transit Toronto made a nice one if someone neads referance. I'd do it myself but I don't know how.

I'd be glad to make one, I'll have it uploaded by tonight, tomorrow the lastest. --Yllianos 20:30, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Hey Yllianos are you the guy who made that crazy fantasy subway map a few months ago? Regardless if you did or not how to you to it? I wanted to make one of my own for a while but I don't know how. Any tips would be awsome.

Yeah I've been making those fantasy maps; I based them on the way the London Underground does them. Other then that I can recommend (if this helps or not) check out the one used on my TTC fantasy site: [[1]] and the map featured: [[2]] and then the Vancouver SkyTrain map featured on wiki: [[3]] however the Skytrain map is one of my earlier works... I'm planning on updating it soon.

If you need help just message me --Yllianos 17:41, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I thought they were talking about this Downtown Relief Line (DRL) running along Queen Street and not in the Front Street area or Queens Quay/Lakeshore areas. It may be too late to put a line on any of these streets with all the development work in the area but it would make more sense to connect to Queen Street with major tourist areas such as the Eatons Centre, Osgoode Hall, etc there and more people work along Queen Street to King Street corridor of streets (Queen, Richmond, Adelaide, King, Wellesely).

I like the idea of it running to things like the St. Lawrence Market, Skydome, Exhibition, etc but there are already street cars and proposed LRT extensions in discussion such as the the Waterfront LRT.

To me, it makes more sense for the city/province to concentrate on developing the Downtown Relief Line than to expand into Markham/Richmond Hill with an extension north of Finch. Who's going to pay for the maintenance north of Toronto, with the extension to Vaughan already in the works has this been thought of? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.245.222.152 (talk) 05:32, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

If this map is supposed to be contemporaneous to 1985, why does it read 'Rogers Centre' or 'Skydome' at all? DarrenBaker (talk) 22:08, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Some of the proposed station names on the map are wrong. "Atiritari" should be "Ataratiri" (and that neighbourhood was never built anyway; it's now called West Don Lands). "College West" makes no sense, as College Street doesn't even extend that far west; the station would actually be on Dundas Street or Howard Park Avenue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.49.158.27 (talk) 04:27, April 25, 2010‎

Naming stations, supplying maps?

I am concerned that it is premature to name stations, or supply maps, at least no without making clear how notional they are.

The current alignment in the article, is not the most recently suggested. The earliest suggested routes crossed the Yonge-Spadina line at Queen. The suggested route in the article crosses at Union Station. Another more recent suggestion has the route cross the Yonge-Spadina line twice, at King.

Some proposals have involved the TTC or metrolinks saving money by using the same right of way as GO trains -- even though that right of way isn't generally in convenient walking distance of anything.

The knowledgeable Steve Munro argues that the line should extend north of the Bloor-Danforth line, particularly in the east. I think he makes a good point.

The (proprietary) maps that accompany the notional proposed routes I have seen floated so far have been interesting. I'd like to see the article have some maps -- but only if it is very clear they are not even close to being official. Geo Swan (talk) 17:29, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

None of the proposals that has named stations is an official proposal, and the different proposals follow different routes and have different station placement. So I trimmed the entire stations subsection.

Three different incompatible proposals placed stations at the St Lawrence Market, Sherbourne and King and on the railway embankment where it crosses Cherry Street. They are all within walking distance of my home. But, at most, one will be built. I prefer that the article not offer readers vague promises as if they were part of an official plan. There may be an RS somewhere who compared the different station placements of the different proposals, but I am not aware of one. Geo Swan (talk) 21:59, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

• Four public meetings are being convened to discuss the Downtown Relief Line. One is in my neighbourhood, on Monday. I hope to attend. I suspect it will confirm it is still too early to cover routes and station locations. Geo Swan (talk) 22:46, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

• I did attend the meeting. The four alternate routes were only vaguely specified, by where they crossed the Danforth line, and the Yonge-University line. Several dozen possible station locations were on a map. But the actual alignments hadn't been suggested. Geo Swan (talk) 23:43, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

• Oh yeah, one of the planners confirmed for me something I suspected. Phase one of the DRL, that stops the Danforth line, will have hardly any impact on congestion on the Yonge line north of Bloor. I forget the exact figure he claimed. I said "that is less than 1 trainset worth of passengers, per hour".

So, the DRL will provide relief on Yonge only by providing an alternate path for passengers heading downtown, from the east, and by providing a second station for transfer for north-south passengers who want to head east, and westbound passengers who want to head north or south.

According to the planner I spoke with, it will only allow a few hundred passengers who would have started on the Yonge line to first head for the Danforth line. I suspect this will be a huge disappointment, when the line is complete, and billions of dollars have been spent. I think it should be built all the way to Don Mills station, right from the beginning. Geo Swan (talk) 00:12, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

I made this RDT in the interim, which is a kind of broad thing showing connections. I agree with your opinions on the DRL but for the article, I believe we should focus on what is being proposed and studied by the City at this time (Pape/Broadview to University Line). Anything else is purely speculation. Once they confirm alignment and stations, we can expand the RDT and the article accordingly. --Natural R_X 14:27, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Name

The City of Toronto currently refers to this line as simply the Relief Line. Do we think this is enough to start a move proposal discussion? Or do we want to not open this can of worms? --Natural R_X 18:11, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

I think that historically it was called by the Downtown name, and we don't know what its name will finally be when it gets built. Because "relief line" is such a generic expression, I would say leave it for now. Secondarywaltz (talk) 15:54, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

The article is slanted towards history

@Secondarywaltz: @Geo Swan: @Natural RX: It would be good if this article has some stuff about recent developments, but not too much to end up with too much recentism. For example, we can add in some more recent statistics from various reliable sources. What do you think? Johnny Au _{(talk/contributions)} 22:58, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

We can add Metrolinx's latest projected ridership statistics and the amount of relief provided on other lines, but other than that, it really is a big question mark. Studies are still determining alignment, stations, length etc. --Natural R_X 23:46, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

For me, this is still at the basic concept stage, with multiple vague options. I'm not going to touch it until there is hard referenced information. Good luck! Secondarywaltz (talk) 00:18, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

The article is shaping up well. Keep up the good work, everyone involved in editing this article! Johnny Au _{(talk/contributions)} 03:11, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

There should be developments in the EA in the new year, hopefully that will provide some more substance as to length, alignment etc. --Natural R_X 07:02, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

That would be great. I am looking forward to the EA in the new year then. Johnny Au _{(talk/contributions)} 16:14, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

DRL Now

Should the link to DRL Now be removed, given that it is defunct? Johnny Au _{(talk/contributions)} 03:49, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

I didn't see why not. Additionally, I removed the Transit Toronto link since it is cited in the references already, and the fantasy maps link because I did not see relevance. --Natural R_X 16:06, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. Johnny Au _{(talk/contributions)} 03:14, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

I have added the Toronto Relief Line Alliance, which is the unofficial successor of DRL Now. Johnny Au _{(talk/contributions)} 03:17, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

We don't need a separate section for this. If we are to note certain support or opposition groups, we should have both in one section with their positions elaborated upon, to meet the requirements of WP:PLUG and WP:NOTE. I have removed the section in the meantime. --Natural R_X 00:19, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 26 January 2016

Downtown Relief Line → Relief Line – Official studies by the City of Toronto and Metrolinx now refer to this name. This does not prohibit content and historical reference to the DOWNTOWN Relief Line to remain here. --Natural R_X 16:47, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

• Support per both the official sources and the Toronto Relief Line Alliance. Johnny Au _{(talk/contributions)} 23:16, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Upon realizing that Sydney has its own Relief Line, it should be moved to Relief Line (Toronto) instead, with Relief Line being a disambig page. Johnny Au _{(talk/contributions)} 14:39, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
• Support The Relief Line as a transit proposal is evolving outside of it's historical jurisdiction as a downtown (or Queen Street) subway line and into a line with its proposed alignment mostly in the former boroughs of East York and North York. (polskaGOLA) (talk) 01:26, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose there are multiple Relief Lines. Relief Line (Toronto) would be the target, since we have CBD Relief Line in Australia; one in Berlin detailed at Berlin–Magdeburg railway and many other places [4] ; a set index should be built -- 70.51.200.135 (talk) 06:10, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose - there is also the CBD Relief Line. In addition, the term "relief line" refers more generally to a secondary line running alongside a main line. Lamberhurst (talk) 10:36, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Comment I think incorporating this disambiguation would be fine, if others could indicate is they support renaming at all and whether it should be disambiguated or not, I think it would be helpful in achieving consensus. --Natural R_X 14:45, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
    • Happy to accept Johnny Au's suggestion of Relief Line (Toronto) and having a disambig page for Relief line. Lamberhurst (talk) 16:45, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
• Move to Relief Line (Toronto) Ground Zero | t 16:58, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose The relief line that I am most familiar with begins at Ladbroke Grove and ends 51 miles 63 chains away at Foxhall Junction (that being 660 yards from my house); it is the northern pair of tracks of a four-track route. --Redrose64 (talk) 00:13, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Comment The Great Western Main Line can still be in the Relief Line disambig page. Johnny Au _{(talk/contributions)} 03:24, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
• Support - Relief Line (Toronto) plus a new disambiguation page seems sensible. Citobun (talk) 03:27, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
• Support - Relief Line (Toronto) plus a new disambiguation page seems sensible - "Downtown Relief Line" is clearly no longer the correct name. DiligentDavidG (talk) 13:57, 29 January 2016 (UTC)