Hello Everyone

Railways always played a big role in my life. I was born and raised in a town which was totally divided into 4 or more big parts by railway tracks which crossed right in the centre of the town. People don't like it but they got used to it.

It seems that Toronto also has issues with its railways. Although they were very important in bringing more people and investment into the city, they cause some trouble today. Or maybe, they just did not fit with the way in which the city is growing today.

As we all know, a lot of high-rises and stacked row-houses are being built right beside the railway tracks. Just to give you a few examples: The West Don Lands, the Waterfront, City Place, Liberty Village and the Junction are just a few that I can think of right now.Since the industry is moving out of the city, these former railway and industrial lands are cheap and nobody seems to care when a developer wants to put a taller building on those sites, since the closest neighbours are usually further away. The funniest part is that the official plan is not really anticipating such an intensified growth in those areas.

I wonder what's the future of those developments. I've heard people are complaining about the noise and pollution and that may even be worse if GO transit opens a link with the airport which meas there will be more trains running both ways. And no, they won't be electric!

What also interests me is why the downtown part of the railways has never been buried. They have done that in many cities which had the tracks running through the downtown. There was a plan to do it in 1970, but because they tried to demolish the Union Station, it never happened - there was too much opposition from the citizens.

I live at the corner of Dundas and Logan (google it). The Lakeshore corridor passes over both streets just steps away from my front door. I actually like the background rumble of the Go and Via trains going by. Much like I got used to the streetcars at my last place. When I'm in bed and feel them go by it reminds me that the city outside is alive. In fact I barely notice them now.

"What also interests me is why the downtown part of the railways has never been buried."

I imagine it all hinged on a budget, to be honest.. Montreal got a freeway partially buried (but rail lines still all above grade) because of a huge event (was either the Olympics or the World's Fair), but burying a railway costs megabucks and would require the active participation of the Federal Government. That is something we are unlikely to see in these parts for quite some time.

Montreal's rail lines are not all above grade there is an underground line that comes across the Victoria Bridge, then into a tunnel below downtown and stays below ground all the way to the other side of Mount Royal. It was once used by Via, but now only commuter rail. It has long been considered one of the world's longest non-subway rail tunnels.

Hmmm! That's cool! I've gone some times by train and remember some tunnel downtown, but mostly I go by highway and see miles and miles and miles and miles of rail lines beside this freeway approaching Montreal from the West. There are oodles and oodles and oodles of places to live beside rail lines in Montreal:

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/WINTER%202008/Winter%20Part%20Two%202009/Late%20Summer%20Early%20Fall%202009/2010%20Summer%20Part%20Deux/IMGP6845.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/WINTER%202008/Winter%20Part%20Two%202009/Late%20Summer%20Early%20Fall%202009/2010%20Summer%20Part%20Deux/IMGP6844.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/WINTER%202008/Winter%20Part%20Two%202009/Late%20Summer%20Early%20Fall%202009/2010%20Summer%20Part%20Deux/IMGP6843.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/WINTER%202008/Winter%20Part%20Two%202009/Late%20Summer%20Early%20Fall%202009/2010%20Summer%20Part%20Deux/IMGP6842.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/WINTER%202008/Winter%20Part%20Two%202009/Late%20Summer%20Early%20Fall%202009/2010%20Summer%20Part%20Deux/IMGP6841.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/WINTER%202008/Winter%20Part%20Two%202009/Late%20Summer%20Early%20Fall%202009/2010%20Summer%20Part%20Deux/IMGP6840.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/WINTER%202008/Winter%20Part%20Two%202009/Late%20Summer%20Early%20Fall%202009/2010%20Summer%20Part%20Deux/IMGP6839.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/WINTER%202008/Winter%20Part%20Two%202009/Late%20Summer%20Early%20Fall%202009/2010%20Summer%20Part%20Deux/IMG_8851.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/WINTER%202008/Winter%20Part%20Two%202009/Late%20Summer%20Early%20Fall%202009/2010%20Summer%20Part%20Deux/IMG_8850.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/WINTER%202008/Winter%20Part%20Two%202009/Late%20Summer%20Early%20Fall%202009/2010%20Summer%20Part%20Deux/IMG_8849.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/WINTER%202008/Winter%20Part%20Two%202009/Late%20Summer%20Early%20Fall%202009/2010%20Summer%20Part%20Deux/IMG_8848.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/WINTER%202008/Winter%20Part%20Two%202009/Late%20Summer%20Early%20Fall%202009/2010%20Summer%20Part%20Deux/IMG_8847.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/WINTER%202008/Winter%20Part%20Two%202009/Late%20Summer%20Early%20Fall%202009/2010%20Summer%20Part%20Deux/IMG_8846.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/WINTER%202008/Winter%20Part%20Two%202009/Late%20Summer%20Early%20Fall%202009/2010%20Summer%20Part%20Deux/IMG_8845.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/WINTER%202008/Winter%20Part%20Two%202009/Late%20Summer%20Early%20Fall%202009/2010%20Summer%20Part%20Deux/IMG_8844.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/WINTER%202008/Winter%20Part%20Two%202009/Late%20Summer%20Early%20Fall%202009/2010%20Summer%20Part%20Deux/IMG_8843.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/WINTER%202008/Winter%20Part%20Two%202009/Late%20Summer%20Early%20Fall%202009/2010%20Summer%20Part%20Deux/IMG_8842.jpg

In terms of downtown, a lot of the new development is within 5-10 minutes walking distance to Union Station. Away from that we have the waterfront LRT line. Hopefully they will eventually get the line going in the east as well unless Ford blocks it, so that the new Donlands and East Bayfront developments get linked up.

As it is, the people who will live in the Donlands can at least walk to the King Streetcar which isn't so busy in the east side.

I live about 2 minutes from union right beside the tracks... I barely notice the trains at all, but then that's probably because we don't have electric trains and the trains are barely moving when they get to here.

I actually like the rhythmic sound of trains passing in the night. I had a friend once who lived by a line, and it was very comforting somehow. As long as they don't blow the whistle. Certainly house prices are lower if you are beside a line.

Love the grit in Montreal.

There is grit galore. None of it makes its way into the tourist guides, however....

Certainly house prices are lower if you are beside a line.
Are you referring to older buildings only, or does it also apply to new construction (for example condos at Liberty Village or in the Junction)?

I moved into Luna about two weeks ago facing the tracks, on the 8th floor. VIA trains are the only ones that actually bother me, though I am getting used to the sounds so its not much of a bother anymore. For some reason, VIA has the loudest engines.

Im used to living under the flight path for one of the runways at Pearson though, so the train noise really doesn't bother me. I actually enjoy watching the trains go by.

Are you referring to older buildings only, or does it also apply to new construction (for example condos at Liberty Village or in the Junction)?

Usually just smaller, older houses... but I imagine the intrinsic value of a new development beside a railway line will be lower than in a more desirable neighbourhood.

I actually live 5 minutes away from 2 different railroads (I'm at Duff/Davenport). I believe these are industrial use railroads only since it's always trains with tanks or freight carts. I can actually hear the train go by sometimes in the really late hours of night. Even in my neighborhood, there's smaller scale intensification with townhouse complexes being built along Dupont and side streets along the railroad. There's also the Foundry Lofts and Davenport Village development, and Upside Down Condos at a larger scale.

With land being more valuable than ever in this city, former empty plots of land are slowly being developed. Living beside railroads may not be the most desirable, but the market is proving that it is happening. Liberty Village and the Queen West Triangle developments is the most successful of these developments transforming former empty lands to new residential neighborhoods (Despite the mediocre to bad architecture).

Many years ago I lived close to a streetcar line, and really enjoyed the low rumbling sounds in the night.

With land being more valuable than ever in this city, former empty plots of land are slowly being developed. Living beside railroads may not be the most desirable, but the market is proving that it is happening. Liberty Village and the Queen West Triangle developments is the most successful of these developments transforming former empty lands to new residential neighborhoods (Despite the mediocre to bad architecture).
This is the topic of my big research that I'm working on right now. Not sure if that's a good way to begin, but I thinking of starting with explaining how urban planning emerged in the 19th century out of the opposition to poor housing conditions and unplanned unhealthy working class neighborhoods that would mix with the dirty industry and the polluting railways. Then all that happened is separating residences with railway and the industry.

It looks like today we are going back where we started, but with a completely different approach and tools... It doesn't surprise me that few of you truly complain about the trains.

I think if our trains were electric, then it would matter much less. For sure the actually rich people still want to live far away from ANYTHING (preferably separated by geographic features, like the Rosedale ravine for instance), but I think in terms of general prices, there is not a huge difference between near a highway/railway and not these days.

Some of the newest and most expensive condos downtown are right beside a railway and/or highway (ICE, MLS, L Tower).

Your right there, as long as the train has right of way and doesn't honk its horn ofcourse.

As much as I love the L-Train I can only imagine that office space and apartments that are right up beside it must be cheaper spaces to rent.

WZIm5-GjraY

Damn now I feel like a road trip to Chicago.

I love L-trains. Sure they may be noisy and obnoxious, but it just exemplifies dense urbanity. For me, taking the L train throughout Brooklyn was very cool too. Just a great vantage point for urban gazing.

I agree, part of the reason I like LRT over burried subways as well. Why should transit riders be forced underground through dark tunnels so that people can sit 1 person per vehichle chocking city streets with fumes. Makes no sense to me.

^ I'm sure if many motorists were given the chance to travel around town in highspeed, car-only tunnels rather than sitting around in surface traffic jams they'd jump at the chance. The Chicago L may create some interesting urban vistas, but I'm not sure if it's really something we should be fetishising. Overall I see it as a major cheapout compared to a real underground subway system.

We may view the L as being an elevated system, but over half of the system is at grade (53%) rather than elevated (36%) or underground (11%). It even goes so far as to have a few at-grade crossing (very rare for heavy 3rd rail transit) and many sections in expressway medians rather than along major street which seems more typical of LRT in places like Dallas rather than the metro system of a big, urban city. Yes, by cheaping out they may have managed to create a much longer system than TO or MTL, but it's ridership is significantly lower than either.

I'm always creeped out in high speed underground car tunnels. One big KABOOM and it is game over for a lot of vehicles. I'm always relieved to get out of the horrible, dark, dingy fluorescent lit things and back into daylight....
By the way, traffic can jam in an underground tunnel in precisely the same way it jams above grade.

Everytime I drive through a tunnel in NYC I think this is the time that somebody blows a hole through it.

I find it most unnerving. Every since Princess Diana... well, you get the picture. Could be a tanker of gas, etc... I really do not like them one bit, and I don't believe the air is healthy down there with all that exhaust, despite the ventilation.

I agree, part of the reason I like LRT over burried subways as well. Why should transit riders be forced underground through dark tunnels so that people can sit 1 person per vehichle chocking city streets with fumes. Makes no sense to me.

In most large cities, the subway doesn't exist to facilitate 1 person/vehicle above ground: it's packed like sardines both above and below ground. Putting the London Underground above ground is just not an option. Underground is the only solution to utter gridlock. Toronto isn't as dense and congested as other large cities around the world.

Forced underground? I don't buy the argument that transit riders would rather be above ground. The subway is far quicker and comfortable; especially in winter. Given a choice of taking LRT or subway downtown from Parkdale? I'd take the subway every time, even if the weather was perfect outside.

London's streets are far two narrow and disorganized to handle the type of mass transit that we here in Toronto can have. Also I never said transit riders would rather be above ground, I said I would. I did say I think it's unfair to expect TTC users to shuttle across town like moles while air polluting automotive drivers get to clog our streets no questions asked. It's time for a much more diverse way of looking at mass transit infrastructure in our city and that includes, streetcars, autos, and yes bikes.

Next time you use a bus, streetcar, subway, I want you to notice the demeanor of the people riding them. I've found that people on the subway tend to look more somber and reclusive. The same can be said for busses. I've always found the mood on streetcars to be more upbeat and people seem more jovial.

Given the choice which I am, I always take the slower streetcar across town even though I'm pretty close to the Bloor line. It's a way for me to stay in touch with what's going on across town. It's a much more visually stimulating way to get across town. On the subway all I'll learn is what Tampon is the best, or which gum will last the longest.

The only new subway line we really need at the moment is the DRL, and the Shepherd connection.

I'm always creeped out in high speed underground car tunnels. One big KABOOM and it is game over for a lot of vehicles. I'm always relieved to get out of the horrible, dark, dingy fluorescent lit things and back into daylight....
By the way, traffic can jam in an underground tunnel in precisely the same way it jams above grade.Shockingly enough, it sounds like you guys are not typical motorists. :eek:

But yes, traffic can always be slowed by sheer volume and accidents, but taking out obstacles like stop signs/traffic lights and cross walks (and raising the speed limit) would undoubtedly make a network of underground expressways much faster than travel via surface streets which, despite the odd exception, is the holy grail for most dedicated motorists. The point is, being able to go above or below the nitty-gritty city stuff and use an express, unobstructed passageway to get where you're going is not second class treatment regardless of attempts to portray it as such.

As far as all of this "Being underground is like a mole" and "No connection to the real world" business, it is transit planners job to move people to/from their destinations considering both efficiency (speed/capacity vs cost) and what people want (typically speed, convenience, and comfort). It is not their job to be social commentators or social engineers worrying about how much people are learning about their neighbourhoods and preaching the gospel that no matter how busy they are, people should be willing spend twice as much time reaching their destinations using surface travel since it's somehow more wholesome for them. These things are matters of opinion and personal choice rather than serious planning considerations.

As far as all of this "Being underground is like a mole" and "No connection to the real world" business, it is transit planners job to move people to/from their destinations considering both efficiency (speed/capacity vs cost) and what people want (typically speed, convenience, and comfort). It is not their job to be social commentators or social engineers worrying about how much people are learning about their neighbourhoods and preaching the gospel that no matter how busy they are, people should be willing spend twice as much time reaching their destinations using surface travel since it's somehow more wholesome for them. These things are matters of opinion and personal choice rather than serious planning considerations.



Actually the job of transit city is not solely the movement of people from A-B but to create new vibrant streetscape and new urban hubs that don't rely so heavily on the downtown core. It's not about getting from the outer ares to the downtown but about investing in areas of the city that will become their own centres of commerce. It is meant to provide more options for movement while adding value to regions, not just the core.

I think we've gone off topic here. :D

People love to live by subway stations, those are rail tracks no.

I think we've gone off topic here. :D

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/WINTER%202008/Winter%20Part%20Two%202009/Late%20Summer%20Early%20Fall%202009/2010%20Summer%20Part%20Deux/thread_direction.gif

Actually the job of transit city is not solely the movement of people from A-B but to create new vibrant streetscape and new urban hubs that don't rely so heavily on the downtown core. It's not about getting from the outer ares to the downtown but about investing in areas of the city that will become their own centres of commerce. It is meant to provide more options for movement while adding value to regions, not just the core.Yes, and none of those things have a direct connection to the underground vs surface vs elevated debate as all three systems can (and have) created good, pedestrian friendly streetscapes. The important thing is that it's done right because no type of transit is a guarantee.

Yes, and none of those things have a direct connection to the underground vs surface vs elevated debate as all three systems can (and have) created good, pedestrian friendly streetscapes. The important thing is that it's done right because no type of transit is a guarantee.

How can you say there is no difference between surface routes and underground routes when creating pedestrian friendly areas? Look at the Bloor line from Main to Kennedy. How old is that section of subway and how crappy is that part of the city? The subway has done nothing for that area.

^ First of all, as I mentioned in my previous post, the important thing with any type of transit line is that it's done right. In the case of that section of the D-B line there is wide station spacing which prevents this from providing strong local service, and the line isn't under a major street (it veers away from Danforth right after Main Station). The strongest way to create pedestrian friendly areas is generally to keep transit associated with major street or other corridors of density. This part of the line seems to connect the main part of the line with Scarborbough to be a sort of Scarborough-Downtown shuttle service. As a result, planned got exactly what they intended, and they would have got the same result whether the line was surface (ie Calgary LRT), elevated (Van Skytrain), or underground as long as it had the same station spacing and followed the same route.

Second, just because transit can play a role in creating good, pedestrian-friendly nabes doesn't mean that it's the only factor. It's quite possible for planner to do everything right and still fail to create the type of environment they wanted due to the effects of other factors.

How can you say there is no difference between surface routes and underground routes when creating pedestrian friendly areas? Look at the Bloor line from Main to Kennedy. How old is that section of subway and how crappy is that part of the city? The subway has done nothing for that area.

Its "better" than some areas along streetcar routes like Lakeshore in Etobicoke or much of Gerrard and Kingston Rd. in the east end, though, and they've all had streetcars even longer. The reason for that in all of those cases being that these areas didn't have a great urban environment to begin with, and haven't yet experienced the gentrification that brings new development.

But basically, the type of transportation in an area is not the deciding factor. Though as long as there exists some sort of appropriately scaled rail transit (~700 m spaced subway stations or streetcars, depending on the location and density), I'd say they have an equal chance for improvement.


Next time you use a bus, streetcar, subway, I want you to notice the demeanor of the people riding them. I've found that people on the subway tend to look more somber and reclusive. The same can be said for busses. I've always found the mood on streetcars to be more upbeat and people seem more jovial.

You also have to consider the demographics of the areas along streetcar routes, and the amenities that exist in them vs. subways and bus routes. Streetcars are mostly limited to the inner-city, home to all the young hipsters and artists and bohemians and yuppie-types, plus most attractions for the tourists or Torontonians just out for fun (i.e. they're taking the streetcar to go out for lunch, or to a club, or to the park, or an art gallery, or whatever - not to work), versus the overworked underpaid immigrant demographic taking the long bus rides to the fringes of the city, or the 9-5 office workers heading home on the subway.

I mean, it is nice to see stuff out the windows (and streetcars definitely provide a more pleasant ride than buses), but I don't exactly think the people on say, the Scarborough RT are going to be any more jovial than people on the Yonge line or something. Or people on the Bathurst streetcar being more upbeat than those on the nearby Ossington bus. For most people, these are just vehicles to get them to where they want to go, but for every person that enjoys watching the world from a streetcar window, you'll probably find someone just as fascinated with the dark subway tunnels.

It seems all attempts to keep this thread on track have failed as it now it seems to have been thoroughly derailed. For anyone living beside this proverbial railway, I sincerely hope that you weren't injured. :lol:

So, maybe this article will help this thread go back on the right TRACKS.

Diesel trains for now, Metrolinx says
GTA's rail link will not be electrified in time for the 2015 Pan Am Games but say it will be converted by 2018 at the earliest - residents are skeptical

Tags: 2015 Pan Am Games, Transit, Airport
By Joshua Freeman
November 27, 2010
Neighbourhoods: High Park / Roncesvalles Village / The Junction
Originally published in our Bloor West print edition(s).

One day, the city’s air-rail link will be an electrified green dream.

But in the interim, we’ll have to settle for diesel.

That’s the message Metrolinx delivered recently with an announcement it would enter into negotiations with Sumitomo Corp. of America to purchase diesel-powered trains for the city’s new rail link from Pearson International Airport to Union Station downtown.

Although residents who live nearby have voiced concern about the increased use of diesel, Metrolinx, the provincial body tasked with coordinating transit in the GTA, said the rail link could not be electrified in time for the Pan Am Games. Citing lengthy approval processes related to electrification, the group has said electrification might happen by 2018 at the earliest.

“This project was part of the Pan-Am bid book, so we really need this to be finished by 2015,” Transportation Minister Kathleen Wynne said.“We’re purchasing trains that can be converted to electric, so they’re not strictly diesel trains. We’re also building the whole line so that it can be electrified.”

Wynne also pointed out the trains will run on a new type of diesel that meets more stringent emission standards than any diesel currently in use.

Still, many residents living near the rail link aren’t sold. On Nov.16, about 50 people staged a rally outside Metrolinx’s downtown headquarters to protest the expanded use of diesel vehicles.

“We’re just not convinced they’re actually going to electrify it later,” said Carina Cojeen, a spokesperson for the Clean Train Coalition, in a later interview. The organization opposes the use of diesel trains.

“Any time you delay anything, it gets worse and worse and more expensive. That’s why we’re in the mess we’re in now with transit,” she said.

“It’s appalling that they will add to the pollution load of the entire region for something that will make them look good for the Pan Am Games.”

The airport link is coupled together with the Georgetown South GO Transit service expansion. Both projects could see upward of 300 trains a day moving through the Junction, Roncesvalles, Weston and Liberty Village.

With some diesel pollutants linked to cancer, critics cite environmental and health risks as a major concern.

However Wynne insisted the province is committed to electrification and said they wouldn’t be going to the trouble of designing the new line to electrification specifications if they weren’t.

“Ultimately the system does need to be electrified,” Wynne said.

But Cojeen said she’d like to see the link electrified from the very start of operation and would also like to see more stops along the way to service area residents.

Incoming Ward 13 councillor Sarah Doucette struck a similar tone.

“Putting more stations along the route makes it more accessible to people, which will take more people out of their cars,” Doucette said.She added one or two more stops on the rail link wouldn’t make much difference to the speed of the trip.

However she reiterated the main issue is health and noted there are many schools in the vicinity of the line.

“If it has to be diesel at least it’ll be the cleanest we can have, but I don’t think diesel and clean go in the same sentence,” she said.

Metrolinx said it expects to finalize a contract for the delivery of the new vehicles by February. The new line is expected to be operational in time for the Pan Am Games in 2015.
I wonder what those of you who live nearby (and those who don't) think of this.

I sense that the direction this thread has taken means the thread should be moved to Transit and Infrastructure.

I don't think it should, since it deals with neighbourhoods that happen to be beside the railway, not with the railway alone...

But anyway, as long as this topic is kept alive, I don't mind.

I can't stand people who bitch about railways and the noise. If you don't want to see or hear the trains then maybe shouldn't have moved there. It's like people who bitch about the noise from planes yet just moved within a km of Pearson.
Yes, all steps should be taken to try to minimize the sounds of the trains but in the long run the fault is yours.

let me help get back to the thread ... for 16 years I lived near Lambton Park in Toronto, just east of the Humber River, north of Dundas St., but south of the CP rail tracks. I spent much of my childhood around trains - CP freights and Milton line trains.

If I was not sitting on a hill near my house watching them, or trying to 'race' them on my bike, I was lying in bed at night feeling comforted by the rumbling of the trains.

15 years ago we moved to Mississauga - still living on Dundas St., but the CP rail tracks are now 2 km to the north.

But on a quiet clear night, I can still hear the freight trains moving.

Cheers, m

ps. my friends who live in Mississauga with the rail lines behind their house managed to develop great pitching arms from throwing crab apples (from their tree) at the freights.

I live about 100 meters south from the Lakeshore West line. Usually you don't hear them from my house, but the worst are when those things toot their horn at 3am.. Damn near gives me an aneurysm.

Usually they do that if somebody is on the track. It could be worse you could live near a ferry dock.

_4G47rjXTwE