I finally realized why route #1 (Bayview) would be considered.
There are a few stations beyond the identified corridors that were also shown at today's meeting.
That makes a lot of sense, but then it would also not make much sense to got with alignments 5 or 6 as then the station at Victoria Park and Eglinton and the area around it would not be grade separated interchange station. At least Science Centre has the station grade separated if that was a major factor.I finally realized why route #1 (Bayview) would be considered.
If they are stupid enough to not grade-separate ECLRT all the way to Don Mills, than it makes much more sense to have the interchange station on the grade-separated portion. I believe they were that stupid, and that it is too late to change that plan - a change that would have cost next to nothing if only it were done right the first time.
That makes a lot of sense, but then it would also not make much sense to got with alignments 5 or 6 as then the station at Victoria Park and Eglinton and the area around it would not be grade separated interchange station. At least Science Centre has the station grade separated.
Well, those two options are contingent on a Sheppard Extension to Victoria Park.It's also worth noting that 5&6 have it end along the SELRT corridor and not the Sheppard corridor. To me, that seems like a huge mistake since an extra transfer would be required for anyone along sheppard avenue
If sheppard goes to Victoria park, people will complain that its still a stub. If you want sheppard east completed to STC, 5 and 6 are the best options.Well, those two options are contingent on a Sheppard Extension to Victoria Park.
When it comes to the interchange at Pape, they should demolish the existing station and start with a blank slate. The goal should be to build a spacious, high-capacity interchange station with excellent architecture, finishes, and art. If feasible, they should design the station so that you can get off a westbound train at Pape and walk across the platform to the southbound DRL train.
The first part may actually be best. Close Pape station during construction (i.e run trains through) and ensure interchange station will have capacity. The rest does seem like a waste of money.When it comes to the interchange at Pape, they should demolish the existing station and start with a blank slate. The goal should be to build a spacious, high-capacity interchange station with excellent architecture, finishes, and art. If feasible, they should design the station so that you can get off a westbound train at Pape and walk across the platform to the southbound DRL train.
Taking away a half meter takes away about a quarter of the potential capacity of the train, and therefore the line. It might be fine for a line like Sheppard, but not a trunk line like the Relief Line. Also: stations are the most expensive part of subway construction. If you have to make up for lost width by lengthening a platform, you significantly increase the cost of building a station.
The first part may actually be best. Close Pape station during construction (i.e run trains through) and ensure interchange station will have capacity. The rest does seem like a waste of money.
With what money?
One must consider that seats are still in the way, so they'd take up a lot more space than anticipated. The only space removed is that of standing individuals. Remove 15% of space, a lot less people can ride a crush loaded train at rush hour because standing room on the train uses the least space per person. I tried to factor that into the equation. There's also issues with train frequencies and stuff that could arise and also the fact that dwell times could increase/decrease since there's not enough space to fit everyone in at once. I just guessed at around 25% because there's really no way of knowing without testing it first.Does that add up? If losing 15% in width, how would it lose 25% in capacity?
The $3 billion that they plan on using for the replacement of the SRT.
The rest does seem like a waste of money.
Bingo.Option 2 and 3 could eventually interline with Richmond Hill GO line -- and replace the GO trains -- basically send the subway trains north to Richmond Hill as the Richmond Hill RER by 2041-2051, reconnecting with Yonge subway at the north end of the Yonge subway extension.