News   Nov 27, 2024
Towers to be Introduced to Longo's Site at 7 and Woodbine in Markham
 806     4 
News   Nov 27, 2024
Masterplanned Community in Markham Would Replace Big Box Centre
 687     1 
News   Nov 27, 2024
Menkes Welcomes First Occupants to Festival at Assembly Park in Vaughan
 1K     1 

Danforth Line 2 Scarborough Subway Extension

Rainforest said:
Conversion to low floor is doable, but would cost too much. Not just the platforms lowered, but stairs and elevators rebuilt as well, electric feeds in the tunnels changed etc.

If there is a desire to avoid the transfer at Don Mills, but not to pay for extending the full-fledged subway, then we should look for a technology that can reuse the existing tunnel with minimal changes.
Click to expand...

High floor would work, but youd have to build high floor platforms along sheppard. Not impossible.

However I think it would be better to simply elevate the existing subway tech along sheppard.

For probably the same cost required to convert the tunnels for even high platform LRTs, you could use that money for the elevated line.
 
Found a proposed bus connection for the Scarborough Subway Extension in the 1488 pages technical report. (p.297)
Here is the link: http://www.metrolinx.com/en/greater...ension/04-RPT_SSE-EPR-Addendum_Appendix-B.pdf

Screenshot_20200710-104140_Drive.jpg


Interesting to see is 102 Markham Rd is breaking up into 102 and 173 Markham North.
 
Last edited:
So it looks like Lawrence will be more than 300 meters from the north end of the platform to the buses. 4 minutes walk. Nice. There is nothing in the addendum about the vertical alignment, but the 2017 report says that the top of the tunnel is 29 meters from the surface. So, a ten storey climb then a 4 minute walk. That's beautiful. The DoFo workout.
 
CapitalSeven said:
So it looks like Lawrence will be more than 300 meters from the north end of the platform to the buses. 4 minutes walk. Nice. There is nothing in the addendum about the vertical alignment, but the 2017 report says that the top of the tunnel is 29 meters from the surface. So, a ten storey climb then a 4 minute walk. That's beautiful. The DoFo workout.
Click to expand...
be happy there is a stop...
 
CapitalSeven said:
So it looks like Lawrence will be more than 300 meters from the north end of the platform to the buses. 4 minutes walk. Nice. There is nothing in the addendum about the vertical alignment, but the 2017 report says that the top of the tunnel is 29 meters from the surface. So, a ten storey climb then a 4 minute walk. That's beautiful. The DoFo workout.
Click to expand...
The EPR shows the bus terminal right beside it.

1594432647900.png

The thing 300m north is just a bus loop, presumably just for buses to turn around.
link: http://www.metrolinx.com/en/greater...ension/03-RPT_SSE-EPR-Addendum_Appendix A.pdf
page 8-9
 
I feel like the bus loop is mainly for the 16 which will have an easier time accessing the loop than at the intersection.

The 133/136 Neilson breakup is interesting. Presumingly the 133 will only go to Malvern Town Centre with the 136 going to Morningside Heights.

Also planned for artics bus bays on 129 and 131.
 
Steve X said:
I feel like the bus loop is mainly for the 16 which will have an easier time accessing the loop than at the intersection.

The 133/136 Neilson breakup is interesting. Presumingly the 133 will only go to Malvern Town Centre with the 136 going to Morningside Heights.

Also planned for artics bus bays on 129 and 131.
Click to expand...
Haydepoon's post from yesterday shows the 16 providing local service to Sheppard and stopping on street on McCowan at Lawrence East Stn.
I was thinking service north of Lawrence might be lower frequency since it is paralleling the subway so something like every other bus turns around at that bus loop north of Lawrence, but Haydenpoon's post also shows the 16 having the same 7.5 min frequency at both Lawrence and Sheppard, so this isn't the case. Can't think of any other specific use for the bus loop. Will look through the report to see if it says anything about the bus loop.

Btw Haydenpoon's post is from here (pg 198-300, pls include links next time, I want to read 1844 page documents too!):
 
Last edited:
Johnny Au said:
There should be a direct entrance to the hospital from the station.
Click to expand...

That would be very challenging to implement from an airflow control standpoint; which is one of the primary defences hospitals have against spread of disease.

You could have a covered walkway, perhaps even semi-walled walkway (lots of vents) but there needs to be an air-gap or physical mechanism to prevent arriving/departing trains from impacting airflow even when doors are open due to people walking through them.
 
rbt said:
That would be very challenging to implement from an airflow control standpoint; which is one of the primary defences hospitals have against spread of disease.
Click to expand...
And, further, simply not having anyone at all in the hospital that doesn't need to be in it. They don't want to become part of some shortcut route where it's faster to get from A to B (or more comfortable and air conditioned) so everyone is marching through it.
 
I made a search for "bus loop" in the report and found out the purpose of the bus loop.
Pg 211 of the report linked below:
" TTC Bus loop for Route 54 at St. Andrews Rd "
and on pg 22: " proposed short turn bus loop north of the station at Lawrence East "
So the loop is for buses on the 54 short turning at Lawrence East. Not sure why the buses can't turn around and Lawrence East bus terminal, but we don't have any detailed designs of the bus terminal yet so who knows.
Some extra info:
The 54 is the only bus route planned to use the loop: "One TTC bus route will be redirected north along McCowan Road to arrive at the proposed bus loop"(pg 197)
A.M. peak frequency is 4 buses per hour: "TTC bus loop north of Lawrence Avenue East will accommodate 4 buses arriving during the Peak AM hour, as per the future estimation of bus schedule service for the station at Lawrence, provided by Metrolinx. A service station will be included within the area, location to be determined." (pg 182)

Report: http://www.metrolinx.com/en/greater...ension/04-RPT_SSE-EPR-Addendum_Appendix-B.pdf

(I originally put this in a edit in my original post but decided to put it in a separate post instead.)
 
sche said:
Haydepoon's post from yesterday shows the 16 providing local service to Sheppard and stopping on street on McCowan at Lawrence East Stn.
I was thinking service north of Lawrence might be lower frequency since it is paralleling the subway so something like every other bus turns around at that bus loop north of Lawrence, but Haydenpoon's post also shows the 16 having the same 7.5 min frequency at both Lawrence and Sheppard, so this isn't the case. Can't think of any other specific use for the bus loop. Will look through the report to see if it says anything about the bus loop.

Btw Haydenpoon's post is from here (pg 198-300, pls include links next time, I want to read 1844 page documents too!):
Click to expand...
It's better that TTC runs one branch and only one branch on any routes. Having two branches and expect the short turn branch to blend is absolutely unthinkable on the TTC with their kind of management. You'll end up seeing two buses every 15 min than a 7.5 min headway. The 7.5 min headway is for AM peak (which is the max requirement used during planning). Midday service would be closer to 15 min.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top