H4F33Z
Active Member
I cannot process what you're trying to explain, this is the reason why the TTC closed Bay lower, it's just too confusing..
|
|
|
44 North
Senior Member
Things are already kinda like on our system to begin with. Such large volumes, such high frequency, but on an almost entirely two-track system. One hiccup reverberates, clearly. And the original post was that Yonge is getting so long (and being only a single service, two-track line), these 'mess ups' already happen and will continue to do so.
Easier to grasp when looking at a track diagram. It is still neat to think that we have the infrastructure in place to put in a more dynamic subway alternative to the status quo relatively easily. Two lines and two services into three lines and five services. Give a seamless core-bound ride to those using Line 2, at the expense of the lower volumes using the Spadina section of Line 1. Not completely off base, but yes not very optimal due to infrastructure limitations, and our high volumes/frequencies.
micheal_can
Senior Member
Listen, if this is the fantasy page, why not simply put in 2 new tracks for express service on Line 1? It could stop at only stations that are interchanges. It would alleviate the congestion and would make the system more robust.
Hopkins123
Senior Member
Is it really all that much of an inconvenience to have the trains serve the minor stops (North York Centre, Summerhill, Rosedale and Wellesley)? Assuming 60 second dwell times, that's only 2:40 added to a trip from Finch to College southwards. Express trains sound good on paper but in the grand scheme of things doesn't help things much.
Hopkins123
Senior Member
What you're suggesting reminds me of this classic fantasy map from the mid-2000s that proposed spitting the YUS Line into two at Union:
micheal_can
Senior Member
It is not about convenience, it is about crush loading. Most people are trying to get to/from one of those interchange stations. By having express between them, the local train could stop being so congested.
Johnny Au
Senior Member
Midtown Urbanist
Superstar
I had kind of an out-there thought about how to solve the Airport Corporate Centre employment region last-mile problem.
Extend the Eglinton Crosstown and make ACC one giant loop. The stop-spacing is on average ~450m. Stations are more or less cheap St. Clair style streetcar stops. Service would be surface level and St. Clair street-car like, which I think is sufficient for the low-density built-form.
I made a 5-minute drawing to explain it (so excuse questions on alignment through 401/427 interchange). Not sure how to integrate the Mississauga Transitway (does it even need integration aside from the terminal station? They serve separate uses). Edit: Can't believe I didn't think of it, but along Eglinton they could actually even share the Transitway corridor without much problem, no?
Extend the Eglinton Crosstown and make ACC one giant loop. The stop-spacing is on average ~450m. Stations are more or less cheap St. Clair style streetcar stops. Service would be surface level and St. Clair street-car like, which I think is sufficient for the low-density built-form.
I made a 5-minute drawing to explain it (so excuse questions on alignment through 401/427 interchange). Not sure how to integrate the Mississauga Transitway (does it even need integration aside from the terminal station? They serve separate uses). Edit: Can't believe I didn't think of it, but along Eglinton they could actually even share the Transitway corridor without much problem, no?
Woodbridge_Heights
Senior Member
This would preclude the Crosstown from serving the Pearson Transit Hub. I would much rather have the route serve that ridership base than this one. Done right the Person Transit Hub would serve both airport travelers, AND those who work at the offices surrounding this. While the ACC would only serve workers. As an alternative, a local line connecting to the Transit Hub and/or Renforth gateway could accomplish the same thing you are trying to do here.
Midtown Urbanist
Superstar
Counter-argument: With the completion of the Crosstown, those along the Eglinton Corridor can access the UPX at Mount Dennis. Why is it important for the Crosstown to go to Pearson as well?
Also, I want to question the logic of prioritizing the employment at Pearson Airport over the employment at ACC as the right decision. Specifically, I question if whether it would be better for economic growth in the region overall if the (more white-collar) jobs located at the firms in ACC were more accessible to labour pool of Toronto. Pearson Airport is already served by the UPX and 192 Kipling Rocket.
That said, this idea should have some thought towards a greater local connectivity strategy with Pearson Airport. I'm not sure what the future of the Link Train is with the Pearson Transit Hub, but maybe it can serve as a shuttle to the Renforth Gateway.
JasonParis
Moderator
The line could also split with both ACC and YYZ as terminuses.
Midtown Urbanist
Superstar
With say 5-minute headways on each branch, or 2.5-minute headways between Renforth/Martin Grove and Laird.
Also, I was thinking that Metrolinx could probably purchase one of the lots at ACC to store and provide maintenance to Crosstown vehicles rather easily, should they see the need.
Last edited:
north-of-anything
Active Member
It's been a hot minute since I've posted something here.
While I personally think that building a subway line on King is kind of a waste and that Queen is the better option if we plan to enhance waterfront service, I wanted to see what a relief line along King could possibly look like, plus some northwards extensions on either end. I don't like how this line doesn't have a good connection to Liberty Village but I don't think one was possible.
Translude15
Frank the Tank
I'd put a station in LV to connect with the proposed GO station in the rail corridor. Frankly, I'd loop a King subway north on Dufferin towards Eglinton so it can service the outer portions of western old Toronto. A second downtown subway would then travel along Queen, beginning in the Beaches in the east end and terminating at Roncesvalles in the west. The Queen line could then travel north towards Bloor or continue west to Humber Bay depending on demand and development patterns at that point in time.
Last edited:
north-of-anything
Active Member
Based on the discussion surrounding the proposed development at Lake Shore and Park Lawn, I thought of another way to connect the neighbourhoods south of Bloor to downtown.
The red line is a Waterfront LRT - beginning at Dundas West station, due south until Queen before it maneuvers southeast and follows the Gardiner to Exhibition Place. From there, it assumes much of the existing streetcar routes. Here I drew the route re-connecting with the Relief Line at Sumach Station and proceeding north along Parliament, but I see no reason not to take a different route beyond the end of Queen's Quay.
The blue line is the Queen line in TTC stock. I'm really not sure if it would be a true subway along the entire route, or if a transfer to LRT would be necessary at Roncesvalles or earlier. Regardless, this configuration would allow a one-seat ride to the northern business district from Humber Bay, and reduce the reliance of the waterfront communities on Union Station.