Transit Fantasy Maps

[gweed123]

Sounds like a good plan, gweed, and I love that you've made a map to go with it. If you're going with such a great comprehensive plan, I'd definitely include the North Toronto line. Personally, I'd also include a diversion of the Milton line to Mississauga Centre.

Thanks guys! Is the North Toronto line the one that runs along the corridor just north of Steeles? From where to where would you suggest it run? I haven't seen it implemented on any maps, so I'm not sure exactly how it would fit in.

The diversion to MCC also makes sense, good idea. I've been toying in my head with a few small changes to the map:

1) Maybe push the local service on Lakeshore West 1 stop further to Port Credit.

2) Maybe push the local service on the Richmond Hill branch 1 stop further to Old Cummer.

3) Maybe denote some kind of a DMU service running parallel to the peak hour routes beyond where the electrified routes end. Maybe in a dark grey or something. Not sure how to show that without it getting too confusing though.

 

[car4041]

Very nice map. Hopefully this catches on and we start seeing lots of GO fantasy maps rather than subway fantasy maps (maybe unlikely...)

Thanks guys! Is the North Toronto line the one that runs along the corridor just north of Steeles? From where to where would you suggest it run? I haven't seen it implemented on any maps, so I'm not sure exactly how it would fit in.

The North Toronto Sub is the line that goes from the Junction to Leaside passing by Dupont and Summerhill (the location of North Toronto station, now the LCBO). Useful map: http://www.proximityissues.ca/Maps/RAC-2004-Toronto_sub.pdf

 

[ShonTron]

I like the map ideas, but it does need some tweaks.

Weston would be outraged to find itself off the map, for all the sound and fury over the airport rail link.

Brampton ends up with rather poor service levels (worse than any other REX line) if it finds itself on a branch shared with Woodbridge. It should be paired up.

Port Credit would be the logical end of the double service area rather than Long Branch; the MCC diversion really is a worthwhile idea.

The Newmarket service should go as far as the next (unshown) stop, East Gwillimbury, as that's the logical jump-off point for points to the northeast (Queensville, Sutton) and northwest (Bradford, Barrie, Alliston). Richmond Hill Rex service should go to downtown RH, not "Richmond Hill 'Centre'"

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

There have been some discussions about the electrification and increased service on GO lines. Some comparisons have been drawn to the S-Bahn in Berlin. To articulate this in visual form, I've decided to make a map that focuses on GO expansion. To be more precise, how I think it should unfold.

View attachment 8767

There are 3 overlapping services that make up GO REX:

1) Electrified Express Rail: Running from major suburban hub to major suburban hub, through Union. Maximum 15 min service outside of peak, higher frequency during peak.

2) Local Electrified Rail: Runs specifically inside the 416, or to areas immediately outside it. Overlaps the Express Rail within Toronto to provide higher frequencies. Will be especially useful during peak hours, when these lines can basically be used as subway lines.

3) Suburban Peak Rail: Will be non-electrified to begin with, but electrification will be gradually pushed further out (will start out with just the Local service being electrified, pushed out eventually to the Express terminuses). Meant to provide a larger reach into the far-flung suburban areas. These trains do not stop inside the 416, except at Union and a couple other major stations.

Add in a mid-town and up-town crosstown line originating from Pearson and ending in, or around, Markham and I think you have a winner.

 

[gweed123]

Very nice map. Hopefully this catches on and we start seeing lots of GO fantasy maps rather than subway fantasy maps (maybe unlikely...)

The North Toronto Sub is the line that goes from the Junction to Leaside passing by Dupont and Summerhill (the location of North Toronto station, now the LCBO). Useful map: http://www.proximityissues.ca/Maps/RAC-2004-Toronto_sub.pdf

Thank you. And I thought initially that you were referring to the York and Halton Subs (what I would consider to be North Toronto, haha).

But yes, the Crosstown definitely does make sense.

I like the map ideas, but it does need some tweaks.

Weston would be outraged to find itself off the map, for all the sound and fury over the airport rail link.

Brampton ends up with rather poor service levels (worse than any other REX line) if it finds itself on a branch shared with Woodbridge. It should be paired up.

Port Credit would be the logical end of the double service area rather than Long Branch; the MCC diversion really is a worthwhile idea.

The Newmarket service should go as far as the next (unshown) stop, East Gwillimbury, as that's the logical jump-off point for points to the northeast (Queensville, Sutton) and northwest (Bradford, Barrie, Alliston). Richmond Hill Rex service should go to downtown RH, not "Richmond Hill 'Centre'"

I did miss a couple stations, didn't I? Haha. I'll add those stations in on my revised version.

RE: Brampton: I figured that rather than halving services further up the line where it branches, I would rather have service double down the line from where they branch. If each of them is running 15 mins off-peak, south of the merge it would be 7.5 minutes.

RE: Newmarket service: That makes sense. I'll add East Gwillimbury too.

RE: Richmond Hill: What station would downtown RH be? How far do you think the rush hour service should go?

Add in a mid-town and up-town crosstown line originating from Pearson and ending in, or around, Markham and I think you have a winner.

I was thinking of running the Midtown from MCC to Malvern. Thoughts?

Still a work in progress! Haha

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

Thank you. And I thought initially that you were referring to the York and Halton Subs (what I would consider to be North Toronto, haha).

But yes, the Crosstown definitely does make sense.




I did miss a couple stations, didn't I? Haha. I'll add those stations in on my revised version.

RE: Brampton: I figured that rather than halving services further up the line where it branches, I would rather have service double down the line from where they branch. If each of them is running 15 mins off-peak, south of the merge it would be 7.5 minutes.

RE: Newmarket service: That makes sense. I'll add East Gwillimbury too.

RE: Richmond Hill: What station would downtown RH be? How far do you think the rush hour service should go?




I was thinking of running the Midtown from MCC to Malvern. Thoughts?

Still a work in progress! Haha

Re. Midtown line. In order for the Midtown Crosstown line to serve MCC it would have to switch to the Milton corridor (or stay on) at the Junction would it not? I envision a few lines heading out of the Airport Centre much like they do with Union. However a compromise may be to branch the line in the Junction and have one branch serve MCC, and another serve the Airport Centre/Brampton. In this way you can multiple services for the Brampton region, riders heading to the midtown area ride the midtown line and riders heading for downtown ride the Union line.

 

[adeel]

im not sure i understand the map...what is the difference between the solid (lighter coloured lines) and the dashed lines

 

[gweed123]

Re. Midtown line. In order for the Midtown Crosstown line to serve MCC it would have to switch to the Milton corridor (or stay on) at the Junction would it not? I envision a few lines heading out of the Airport Centre much like they do with Union. However a compromise may be to branch the line in the Junction and have one branch serve MCC, and another serve the Airport Centre/Brampton. In this way you can multiple services for the Brampton region, riders heading to the midtown area ride the midtown line and riders heading for downtown ride the Union line.

Interesting idea. That would also solve some of ShonTron's concerns.

At the Junction, is the Midtown to Milton line not a straight line? Isn't it actually the Milton line that changes tracks?

im not sure i understand the map...what is the difference between the solid (lighter coloured lines) and the dashed lines

The solid lines are electrified lines running all-day service. The dashed lines are non-electrified (at first) lines running rush hour express service from the 905 (and the 519) into Union, bypassing all stations inside the 416. Pretty similar to the express trains that run today.

 

[Dan416]

gweed123 it looks like on the Milton line you replaced both Lisgar and Dixie with Dixon lol

Also wouldn't it make more sense to use the lines' individual colours rather than reassigning them for no good reason? Why make Georgetown orange instead of its traditional green? And Milton purple instead of its traditional orange?

 

[adeel]

The solid lines are electrified lines running all-day service. The dashed lines are non-electrified (at first) lines running rush hour express service from the 905 (and the 519) into Union, bypassing all stations inside the 416. Pretty similar to the express trains that run today.

Could you explain how your system would work ideally using the Stouffville line (the only one im familiar with) as an example. I'm trying to understand the difference in stops made between non-electrified express and all day service (Toronto vs non-Toronto).

gweed123 it looks like on the Milton line you replaced both Lisgar and Dixie with Dixon lol

Also wouldn't it make more sense to use the lines' individual colours rather than reassigning them for no good reason? Why make Georgetown orange instead of its traditional green? And Milton purple instead of its traditional orange?

Isnt that really symantics at this point LOL. I used to use the Stouffville train fairly often and the colour difference its not something I even noticed

 

[gweed123]

gweed123 it looks like on the Milton line you replaced both Lisgar and Dixie with Dixon lol

Late night copy and paste that wasn't changed, haha. Just made those changes.

Also wouldn't it make more sense to use the lines' individual colours rather than reassigning them for no good reason? Why make Georgetown orange instead of its traditional green? And Milton purple instead of its traditional orange?

I originally chose those colours when I was doing my whole system map, because they weren't used by any other lines. The main colours are very bright colours, which on a whole system map really draws your eyes to them. I kept them on just this map for consistency within all of my maps.

Also, I don't think people associate the colours of the GO lines with the lines themselves nearly as much as they do with the TTC subway map. I haven't heard of anyone refer to Lakeshore West as "the red line". On the other hand, I've heard a lot of people refer to YUS as "the yellow line".

Also, because they're being used as through lines at Union, some of the lines are going to have to change colour. Might as well not show preference and keep none of them the same colour, haha.

 

[gweed123]

Could you explain how your system would work ideally using the Stouffville line (the only one im familiar with) as an example. I'm trying to understand the difference in stops made between non-electrified express and all day service (Toronto vs non-Toronto)

The way it would work is that the central stretch (from Agincourt to Union) during rush hour would have 3 overlapping routes. The first would be the main route (solid line, light colour). This would be an electrified route running from Markham to Union, which would be about 5-10 minute frequencies during rush hour, and 15-20 in non-peak.

The second route is a non-electrified route running from the far-flung areas into Union. It would use the current bi-levels. It would stop at all suburban stations (905), but bypass all stations inside of Toronto except for Union. Very similar setup to the current express trains. Frequencies would vary from line to line.

The third route is an electrified route that stays exclusively in Toronto (or goes 1 station beyond). This is so that Toronto riders don't have to board already full trains, as they would have their own dedicated trains during peak. Frequencies would be 5-10 minutes during peak, 15 minutes off-peak.

The end result is the Toronto sections of the line would have two overlapping electrified routes, which would be double the frequency in Toronto. The result would be subway-like frequencies during peak, and about every 7.5 minutes outside of peak. Definitely a huge paradigm shift from the current GO service.

The fourth service (which isn't shown in this version, but that I will show in the next version) is a DMU service that would run off-peak from the electrified terminus stations to the far reaches of the line (in the case of the Stouffville line, from Markham to Uxbridge). It would just be one O-Train-like DMU running back and forth all day outside of peak. Small trains, but there wouldn't be much demand.

Hopefully this clears it up a bit. If you have any more questions just ask!

 

[adeel]

The way it would work is that the central stretch (from Agincourt to Union) during rush hour would have 3 overlapping routes. The first would be the main route (solid line, light colour). This would be an electrified route running from Markham to Union, which would be about 5-10 minute frequencies during rush hour, and 15-20 in non-peak.

The second route is a non-electrified route running from the far-flung areas into Union. It would use the current bi-levels. It would stop at all suburban stations (905), but bypass all stations inside of Toronto except for Union. Very similar setup to the current express trains. Frequencies would vary from line to line.

The third route is an electrified route that stays exclusively in Toronto (or goes 1 station beyond). This is so that Toronto riders don't have to board already full trains, as they would have their own dedicated trains during peak. Frequencies would be 5-10 minutes during peak, 15 minutes off-peak.

The end result is the Toronto sections of the line would have two overlapping electrified routes, which would be double the frequency in Toronto. The result would be subway-like frequencies during peak, and about every 7.5 minutes outside of peak. Definitely a huge paradigm shift from the current GO service.

The fourth service (which isn't shown in this version, but that I will show in the next version) is a DMU service that would run off-peak from the electrified terminus stations to the far reaches of the line (in the case of the Stouffville line, from Markham to Uxbridge). It would just be one O-Train-like DMU running back and forth all day outside of peak. Small trains, but there wouldn't be much demand.

Hopefully this clears it up a bit. If you have any more questions just ask!

Ahh I see. I think i understand now.

Currently Stouffvilles Markham morning/evening service does not stop at some of the minor stops in Toronto - would that change under your idea? I think I read electrification would allow for more stops? (I imagine it should for the inToronto electrified line). I ask because one of the gripes with GO is that your very limited in where you can go - adding a couple of stops (that the train already goes through) would add a bit more flexibility. (Not everyone in Markham is heading to either Kennedy or Union all the time).

What kind of cost generally speaking would your entire plan entail?

 

[gweed123]

Ahh I see. I think i understand now.

Currently Stouffvilles Markham morning/evening service does not stop at some of the minor stops in Toronto - would that change under your idea? I think I read electrification would allow for more stops? (I imagine it should for the inToronto electrified line). I ask because one of the gripes with GO is that your very limited in where you can go - adding a couple of stops (that the train already goes through) would add a bit more flexibility. (Not everyone in Markham is heading to either Kennedy or Union all the time).

What kind of cost generally speaking would your entire plan entail?

Yes, electrification does open the possibility for more stops, mainly from the fact that electrified trains can accelerate and decelerate faster than the current GO trains can (think of how fast a subway car accelerates vs a GO train).

Under this plan, there would be roughly double the number of GO stops inside of Toronto, conveniently placed at either subway stations, LRT stations, or along busy bus routes. However, the suburban express trains wouldn't stop at any of the Toronto stops except for Dundas West and Kennedy, so there wouldn't be an increase in trip length for the suburban rush hour commuters.

As for the cost, it's difficult to quantify, because some sections of track need more upgrading than others. With some stretches, all that needs to be done is the actual electrification. In some other places, new tracks have to added, new grade separations need to be added (ex: Sheppard East is happening right now), and in some cases some stretches of track need to be bought. If anyone has any more insight on a good way to quantify the costs of this plan, it would be greatly appreciated.

 

[doady]

1) Electrified Express Rail: Running from major suburban hub to major suburban hub, through Union. Maximum 15 min service outside of peak, higher frequency during peak.

I think if GO REX is to be the GTA's version of Berlin's S-Bahn, it should just be this. No peak-only or otherwise limited service. True rapid transit service only, which means frequent service all day. The lmited peak-only service GO Train service should be separate from GO REX service.

For my my map, I did not have any REX service to Georgetown because Halton Hills' ban on local transit. I think not all existing GO Train service can be REXed. Not all places or corridors currently served by GO Trains can support true rapid transit express rail service. If a place has no local transit, certainly there is no point at all for it to have rapid transit service. I also think the Barrie Line cannot support a REX level of service.

GO "REX" (Regional Express) is a catchy name. It was form Metrolinx document. It's pretty catchy, meaningful, sensible, etc. Hopefully they come up with a similar name for "LRT" because "LRT" is just dumb and makes no sense. I used "Tramway" because it fits with subway and busway. The problem of course is that the term "streetcar" is used in Toronto instead of "tram". Maybe something like "Metrocar" or "Streetcar RT" or something.