Transit Fantasy Maps

[BurlOak]

In the past the ward boundaries were based on the federal or provincial ones. Currently are 23 ridings in Toronto and one of those is split about 50/50 with Pickering so if we had been keeping up with how the province and federal government are drawing the lines there would be 22.5 * 2 = 45 wards (Scarborough currently underrepresented comparatively by 1 councillor). The redistribution happening now at the federal level will change this further to have 25 ridings in the city (an additional 1/2 riding in Scarborough, 1 riding in North York, and 1 downtown) which under the old ward mapping method would yield 50 councillors but perhaps now is the time to go to a councillor system based on one councillor per city federal riding (25 councillors).

There already is a body responsible for setting political boundaries and it make great sense to not create another. 25 councillors makes the most sense - but there are 2 problems.

1. This is what Ford proposed and thus it must be opposed.
2. I can't imagine a level of government that would have the honour and integrity to reduced their own numbers - essentially they are putting themselves out of work for the betterment of their city.

 

[EnviroTO]

I don't know that reducing councillor numbers is to the betterment of the city or not. I would really need to know how easy or difficult it is to keep up to requests made to local councillors.

 

[rbt]

I don't know that reducing councillor numbers is to the betterment of the city or not. I would really need to know how easy or difficult it is to keep up to requests made to local councillors.

New York's system is telling.

While it's true that Council is only 51 members for a population much much larger than Toronto (~163,000 constituents vs ~59,000); there are also 59 Community Boards for handling local matters.

Each of the 59 Community Boards consists of 50 appointed members with 2-year terms; 2,950 members in total (~2,825 constituents on average). These are frequently the heads of neighbourhood associations, BIA's, etc. and are the people you turn to for minor local matters like adding a speed-bump or a stop-sign in your neighbourhood.

Councillors handle larger issues like overall city design standards, and budgeting.


We could be represented by 25 council members if we somehow add additional members to Community Council; either appointed by the councillors or perhaps an elected local planner?

 

[gweed123]

New York's system is telling.

While it's true that Council is only 51 members for a population much much larger than Toronto (~163,000 constituents vs ~59,000); there are also 59 Community Boards for handling local matters.

Each of the 59 Community Boards consists of 50 appointed members with 2-year terms; 2,950 members in total (~2,825 constituents on average). These are frequently the heads of neighbourhood associations, BIA's, etc. and are the people you turn to for minor local matters like adding a speed-bump or a stop-sign in your neighbourhood.

Councillors handle larger issues like overall city design standards, and budgeting.


We could be represented by 25 council members if we somehow add additional members to Community Council; either appointed by the councillors or perhaps an elected local planner?

That sounds a lot like a two-tiered government system. I've floated it in the past, but what I'd like to see is Toronto de-amalgamated into Toronto, Scarborough, North York, and Etobicoke. Then, I would like to see all upper-tier governments in the 905 abolished (York Region, Peel Region, Halton Region, Durham Region), as well as Hamilton de-amalgamated, and everyone put under a single upper-tier government. This would allow municipal governments to deal with the smaller things, but would have things like Long Range growth Planning, Transportation Planning, road ownership and repair, transit operations, EMS, utilities, and other things under the control of the regional government.

 

[dunkalunk]

That sounds a lot like a two-tiered government system. I've floated it in the past, but what I'd like to see is Toronto de-amalgamated into Toronto, Scarborough, North York, and Etobicoke. Then, I would like to see all upper-tier governments in the 905 abolished (York Region, Peel Region, Halton Region, Durham Region), as well as Hamilton de-amalgamated, and everyone put under a single upper-tier government. This would allow municipal governments to deal with the smaller things, but would have things like Long Range growth Planning, Transportation Planning, road ownership and repair, transit operations, EMS, utilities, and other things under the control of the regional government.

I do like the idea of having an upper tier municipal government covering the GTA, although I think the time for de-malgamating Toronto has passed (maybe apart from Scarborough and Etobicoke)

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

Just to get this back on track,

Quickie, DRL, Eglinton, Finch and Sheppard only. Some changes.

 

[WislaHD]

Just to get this back on track,

Sorry about that. I've opened a thread to continue discussion here.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

Sorry about that. I've opened a thread to continue discussion here.

No problem, I just wanted to show off my map

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Made some changes:

- Extended the Bloor-Subway westbound to Queensway. Might as well if we’re going to extend to East Mall to build the DRL rail yard.

- I feel that there should be a transportation hub built at Roncesvalles to shift GO rail passengers coming from the Lakeshore West line away from Union Station. Rather then going to Union and transferring to the Yonge-University Subway, they go to Roncesvalles and transfer onto the DRL (Toronto Crosstown) to get downtown. I would hope that this would mean that some of the trains on the Lakeshore West (GO) line could terminate at Roncesvalles so that more space will be available for other trains at Union.

- Changed the alignment of DRL east, so that it could get direct access to Greenwood yard (as recommended by Steve Munro). It now connects to the Danforth subway at Donlands and has two more stations at Degrassi and Gerrard.

- And it case it wasn’t obvious, Eglinton isn’t a heavy rail metro. It's light rail.

Try PDFs if images aren't loading.

Large PNG, PDF

And a grade map:

Large PNG, PDF

 

[innsertnamehere]

Interesting, though I still don't agree with the DRL becoming the Scarborough extension.

Also, what is with the unnecessary corridor duplication at Jane and Eglinton? Just have Jane run along the rail corridor to Eglinton where you have the DRL placed currently, saves the unnecessary duplication of service.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Also, what is with the unnecessary corridor duplication at Jane and Eglinton? Just have Jane run along the rail corridor to Eglinton where you have the DRL placed currently, saves the unnecessary duplication of service.

My bad. I will have to change that. It's leftover from an earlier version of the map that I had running to Bloor.

Interesting, though I still don't agree with the DRL becoming the Scarborough extension.

The logic behind it is to shift riders away from the crowded Danforth subway and GO rail lines and to allow for faster trips downtown for passengers coming from the east (~5 to 10 min faster). What don't you like about it?

 

[BurlOak]

The logic behind it is to shift riders away from the crowded Danforth subway and GO rail lines and to allow for faster trips downtown for passengers coming from the east (~5 to 10 min faster). What don't you like about it?

I recall a few pages back I drew up the station layout for a Vic Park interchange between this DRL-Scarborough subway and the Bloor-Danforth (proper) subway. The curves needed to get from the Rail corridor up to (just north of) Danforth (whether underground, at-grade, or elevated) would necessitate the demolition of one city block.

If the subway extension to to Sheppard and McCowan actually happens, then I like this concept - but I doubt it could be implemented.

 

[innsertnamehere]

It's expensive, as it would have to be tunnelled, and would only save some people a transfer. It would also complicate DRL operations as the DRL would have to split, limiting capacity on both portions of te split line. It's more economical to simply build the DRL to donlands and have them transfer there, 3 minute transfer would probably save close to a billion in tunnelling costs, expensive bloor line realignments, and unnecessary operation complications for the DRL.

 

[BurlOak]

It's expensive, as it would have to be tunnelled, and would only save some people a transfer. It would also complicate DRL operations as the DRL would have to split, limiting capacity on both portions of te split line. It's more economical to simply build the DRL to donlands and have them transfer there, 3 minute transfer would probably save close to a billion in tunnelling costs, expensive bloor line realignments, and unnecessary operation complications for the DRL.

I thought the proposal was to have one line from Scarborough (STC or Sheppard/McCowan) to downtown - with an interchange station at Vic Park, and one line from Vic Park to Kipling (or East Mall).

 

[innsertnamehere]

Yes, but there is also a line going up Don Mills that would share tracks with the Scarborough line. Expensive realignment of tracks in the bloor-danforth tunnels also has to be accounted for, and of course the extra 4km of tunnels. $1.5-$2 billion in costs to eliminate a transfer..