asher__jo
Active Member
The hydro corridor.
|
|
|
Ontario Line (was Relief Line South, in Design)
- Thread starter JasonParis
- Start date
asher__jo
Active Member
It's not about prejudice, it's about desiring something other than a Vegas strip environment.
ARG1
Active Member
That's an interesting corridor, to say the least, and is likely to be difficult to curve the TRs towards, not to mention that having Hydro One to agree to transit in their corridors seems to get more difficult over time.
asher__jo
Active Member
It's a shame the subway is a fortune. But McCowan is upzoned perhaps not all is lost.
officedweller
Senior Member
If you want a centre of road station (which itself makes it expensive), here's one planned for the Surrey SkyTrain Extension (that's an emergency exit on the right side).
All the others are side-of-road stations.
NoahB
Active Member
It is prejudice if you're all thinking of Dubai in the UAE when I'm talking Riyadh in Saudi Arabia. iugdflkuh
It's like seeing NYC and Edmonton as the same just because it snows in both. You are not helping your argument.
smallspy
Senior Member
ARG1
Active Member
How is this a strawman? People are arguing that it makes no sense that the Ontario Line is above ground, while the province is burying the Scarborough extension, so I'm asking in return if they can name an alignment that would see the subway run above ground, instead of tunneled, and serve the same amount of people and have the same development potential as the underground option, or in other words, not the RT.
Jaye101
Active Member
AFAIK Kennedy Station would have to be rebuilt to pursue any above ground solution that doesn't require a ton of expropriation. Simply elevating it over Eglinton and McCowan would also require a ton of expropriation. Line 2 was built to be extended eastward on Eglinton.
north-of-anything
Active Member
I just hope the Ontario Line gets built before any of this; it's the one line we can't afford to debate and tweak any longer.
robmausser
Senior Member
If you want a centre of road station (which itself makes it expensive), here's one planned for the Surrey SkyTrain Extension (that's an emergency exit on the right side).
All the others are side-of-road stations.
better, but still not necessary for the Eglinton West LRT if elevated.
There doesnt need to be a fare payment building like in this rendering, as an on-street LRT wouldnt have one either.
But I digress as this is not the thread topic, I was just stating how purposefully overbuilt the elevated Eglinton plan was as to sabotage it.
Well, those people who did that to try and force the on-street alignment got exactly what was coming to them; its now going to be buried at great expense.
It feels like the RT conversion to LRT for Scarborough (rather than doing the RT refurbishment plan that the TTC wanted) that opened up pandoras box and now we have a subway line planned.
ARG1
Active Member
To be honest, I actually do think that Fare Gates would've been a good idea. I think even operationally, TTC would rather reduce the amount of points where people can enter without payment, so if a certain section gets grade separated where the installation of fare gates is simple and painless, there is no reason not to do that. As shown in Vancouver, even stations that weren't designed to have fare gates in the first place, can usually have them built in with little to no trouble whatsoever. The only downside is this often leads to situations where the two platforms aren't within the same pay zone, which isn't elegant to say the least.
Allandale25
Senior Member
ARG1
Active Member
The NIMBYs are getting desperate...
micheal_can
Senior Member
Ok, let's just plow the neighbourhoods that are too close.
Problem solved.