News   May 06, 2024
Amexon Nominated for BILD Green Builder of the Year for Residences at Central Park
 136     0 
News   May 06, 2024
Four High-Rises and Public Park Proposed South of Whitby GO
 670     0 
News   May 06, 2024
News Roundup for May 6, 2024
 570     0 

Transit Fantasy Maps

RedRocket191 said:
Since refurbishing and expanding the SRT means that it's sticking around, I don't see a reason why we can't consider building branches and more expansions. We could send it down Ellesmere to Scarborough College, and if the Neilson-401 alignment is chosen for the SRT, then the Scarborough-Malvern LRT won't have to leave Kingston Road. I'm sure many people on this board would love that.

There are also opportunities to expand the SRT on the southern end to build the Eglinton Crosstown using SRT technology.

Since it looks like it's going to be sticking around for some time, I say go for it.
Click to expand...

Branching SRT to serve Ellesmere and UTSC sounds good. That would be a relatively short new link, but leverage the existing portion of line.

Regarding Eglinton Crosstown, using the SRT / ICTS technology there would bring the costs to the subway territory, as it can not run in the on-street ROW like light rail. Yet, the capacity will remain in the light rail territory. Really the worst of the two worlds.
 
Rainforest said:
Regarding Eglinton Crosstown, using the SRT / ICTS technology there would bring the costs to the subway territory, as it can not run in the on-street ROW like light rail. Yet, the capacity will remain in the light rail territory. Really the worst of the two worlds.
Click to expand...

Comparing an on-street LRT to an elevated ALRT line, the ALRT line would have a higher capacity. Light rail could match it, but only if it was also elevated.

As for costs, Vancouver is looking at around $140 million per KM for their Evergreen line, which includes elevated, at grade and tunneled sections. Subways could be in the $200+ million.

I see your argument and recognize that there is quite a bit of truth to it, but I don't think its the worst case scenario.
 
RedRocket191 said:
Comparing an on-street LRT to an elevated ALRT line, the ALRT line would have a higher capacity. Light rail could match it, but only if it was also elevated.
Click to expand...

You are right; however, choosing light rail gives us more flexibility. With LRT, we can have a fully grade-separate central section served by a mix of 2-car and 3-car trains, and on-street peripheral sections served by 2-car trains only. If / when needed, we can expand the fully grade-separate section piece by piece.

With ALRT, we have to be fully grade-separate for the whole length of line, including the peripheral sections with lower ridership. Hence, the Phase I costs will certainly be higher.
 
My favourites for subway line construction are:

- finish Sheppard (I hate half complete things) - this means from Downsview Station to Scarborough Centre.
- subway along Eglinton East (Yonge - to Airport).
- the last one would be Union out along Dundas St. through Bloor - up until the Sheppard line (I think just south of there is a fairly dense apartment area).

Basically make sure that all of the current subway lines interconnect...

Then I would move onto GO TTC integration - common stations at points where GO and the Subway meet. Integrate the systems with a zone based system (i.e. zone - basic, and zone express - where express allows you to use both GO and TTC in the Toronto city area).
 
cacruden said:
My favourites for subway line construction are:
- subway along Eglinton East (Yonge - to Airport).
Click to expand...

Do you mean just Eglinton West? Why not Eglinton East, too? It's busier and has more stuff along it.

cacruden said:
- the last one would be Union out along Dundas St. through Bloor - up until the Sheppard line (I think just south of there is a fairly dense apartment area).
Click to expand...

Do you mean a line up Don Mills? Union to the Sheppard line via Don Mills would pass through an almost continuous string of apartment areas.
 
Sorry - wrong east - my east - your west :p

I actually don't know the street. That was chosen based on a density map, there seemed to be one underserved area where there was a string of high density running up the west side (yep that west) of the Toronto area. Just checked - nope, not Don Mills.
 
cacruden said:
Sorry - wrong east - my east - your west :p

I actually don't know the street. That was chosen based on a density map, there seemed to be one underserved area where there was a string of high density running up the west side (yep that west) of the Toronto area. Just checked - nope, not Don Mills.
Click to expand...

You'd actually terminate the line at Yonge and go no further east? Eglinton East is a fair bit busier than Eglinton West. Planning transit routes based on apparent "density" isn't automatically a good thing...

So how does your "Dundas" line get from Union to Sheppard (Downsview?)? Like, would it go up ~Keele?
 
I was working purely from memory. Actually I believe I had Sheppard going slightly west of Downsview station to connect up with the "Dundas Line". The Dundas line would go up existing corridors (rail) probably to somewhere between Jane & Keele.
 
cacruden said:
I was working purely from memory. Actually I believe I had Sheppard going slightly west of Downsview station to connect up with the "Dundas Line". The Dundas line would go up existing corridors (rail) probably to somewhere between Jane & Keele.
Click to expand...

A parallel duplicate of the Spadina line, then.
 
scarberiankhatru said:
You'd actually terminate the line at Yonge and go no further east? Eglinton East is a fair bit busier than Eglinton West. Planning transit routes based on apparent "density" isn't automatically a good thing...

So how does your "Dundas" line get from Union to Sheppard (Downsview?)? Like, would it go up ~Keele?
Click to expand...

I have been on Eglinton (West) and nothing moves for a very long distance. No, no east, not until the following construction was done, then I would go back to the drawing board .... and worry about phase II.

Besides - it goes towards scarborough and my Toronto does not include scarborough :eek:
 
cacruden said:
No Spadina was more a duplicate of Yonge, a wide loop west. I have seen no willingness between Bloor and Union on the east to go for increased density. Whatever line is a go, if they are not willing to increase future density - I would scrap it.
Click to expand...

The density you're so concerned about already exists along Don Mills. A line from Dundas to Downsview would be a redundant parallel of the Spadina line, expending billions of dollars just to shift riders 2km westward.
 
http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=U...d=112860859837020732045.00045172fb8e503998e92

pretty random, I haven't had much to do at work lately so have been looking at map-porn obsessively. Either way, slapped this together. There are a lot of parts that are inaccurate/unclear (i messed up part of Don Mills) but on the whole it should give the gist.

I got rid of streetcars, at least the legacy trams we have. I don't really have anything against them, but if I have to read another article pertaining to some kind of streetcar magic (Stephen Rees!) I am going to be sick. In my books, transit is about moving people from point a to point b, and occasionally point c on the weekends. I think our nostalgia for our current (eventually to be replaced) streetcars might be clouding judgment about future directions.

Other than that, the only other major change is my affection for interlining and poor map skills. In both cases, I feel it makes the system look more convoluted (i.e. good) and extensive. I know that is more David Blaine than substance, but after years of looking at that "U" w/ a line through it I am getting highly bored.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top