Palma
Senior Member
its metrolinx that has the stupid naming conventionsTTC screw up? If you are referring to the Crosstown that's Metrolinx's doing.
its metrolinx that has the stupid naming conventionsTTC screw up? If you are referring to the Crosstown that's Metrolinx's doing.
One of the few good things from Minnan-Wong so far:
http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2017/ex/comm/communicationfile-69403.pdf
I've been saying the same thing since Ford started pitting downtown vs the outer city. Calling it Downtown anything is picking an unnecessary fight, as stupid as that is. The 'Don Mills line' would get near unanimous support on City Council, amongst downtown and suburban councillors alike.
The name would instil a mental goal of reaching Don Mills which would help bury the need to extend the Sheppard line east as a subway. Instead, Line 4 could be merged into the Don Mills line and eventually form a loop around the city:
City Hall to Pape, up to Don Mills, across Sheppard to Dufferin, down Dufferin to Queen, across Queen to City Hall.
I've been saying the same thing since Ford started pitting downtown vs the outer city. Calling it Downtown anything is picking an unnecessary fight, as stupid as that is. The 'Don Mills line' would get near unanimous support on City Council, amongst downtown and suburban councillors alike.
The idea of naming it for the end destination is a good one, for the very reason we have been discussing, ie maintain continued focus on the Long objective of the project.
I never thought much of it at the time, but in today's political climate Line 2 would never have reached Kipling or Kennedy.....the line would still be stuck at Keele and Woodbine. Can't allow that to happen with the DMWRL
- Paul
The idea of naming it for the end destination is a good one, for the very reason we have been discussing, ie maintain continued focus on the Long objective of the project.
I never thought much of it at the time, but in today's political climate Line 2 would never have reached Kipling or Kennedy.....the line would still be stuck at Keele and Woodbine. Can't allow that to happen with the DMWRL
lol, the Denzil Mills line. If this is to be considered an upgraded Don Mills LRT (which in a way it is) I guess the terminus would be Hwy 7 in Markham. I personally kinda like the idea of doing something vague like how Vancouver has with the Canada Line and Millennium Line, or with Ottawa's Confederation line. Maybe we could do Ontario Line or Coronation Line.
I thought that one of the stated benefits of the Queen alignment was that it was closer to bedrock than Kinghttp://reliefline.ca/pages/corridor-b.
View attachment 108690
And it was pointed out in the Pape vs. Carlaw debate that this would be the deepest subway in Toronto, deeper than Sheppard, since it needs to get under the Don River. So either it would have to be very deep cut and cover, or they'd mine the section under Yonge and under University and keep boring?
I personally kinda like the idea of doing something vague like how Vancouver has with the Canada Line and Millennium Line, or with Ottawa's Confederation line. Maybe we could do Ontario Line or Coronation Line.
They use those names because their transit lines don't adhere to the road network like ours do.
What do you guys think about this?
I'd want the City to consider a proper name that makes sense, not have politicians try and name it after someone. Screw that, one single person has not championed this line for half a century, it has taken public pressure to get it to this point and it still crawls at an agonizing pace.
- Canvass the readers of this thread (and all UT'ers) to submit suggestions for a new name for the Relief Line.
- Make a poll in this thread for a new name, and close it at a certain date.
- Allowing UT'ers to privately submit the poll results to city council/committee and Metrolinx, but in a way that doesn't say 'our choice should be the new name' but just generally highlighting the need for a name change.