drum118 said:
There are no plans at this time to extend Kariya Dr to Central Parkway as well extending Webb Dr to Kariya Dr. The extension are in the master plan, but at some future date down the road and after the LRT opens.

There is a big backlash over the removal of the current 8 route and it has been deferred at this time for the plan 2020 changes. Route 53 doesn't deal with the ridership that is carry by 8 today. With the removal of the current 8 route, students will be spending more time on the bus and having to transfer to the Transitway.

I have recommended years ago for a new route on Cawthra that runs from the Lakeshore to Derry Rd servicing the Transitway and by the way of 410 to Courtneypark Dr The option is open as to what road is to use to get to/from Derry Rd. The ridership on Cawthra to the Transitway has never been there since the 2004 EA. You are lucky to see 12 cars at the Cawthra Station which is more than the Dixie Station.
Click to expand...

Yeah, to be fair, when 53 was taken out of the terminal, the 10 replaced it as an alternative. But I don't think the ridership is there for a new route on Cawthra, especially one that spends so much time on the 410. It's either Cawthra station or CCTT, and I think it should be Cawthra station. 8 needs to directly connect with 20, 26/76, and the transitway.

drum118 said:
Having 28/66 as a straight north-south route would take pressure off the current 19 route as well being faster since it would bypass CCTT, but look for a backlash for 28 being remove from CCTT. Route 61 is a better route going to Dundas and then to the GO Station than the combining 66/28.
Click to expand...

28/66 needs to connect to the transitway routes and GO, so I don't think removing it from CCTT would be a good idea. Just a unified service would make it much easier for 28/66 riders connect to 1/101, 26, 35 and other east-west routes. If they want a grid, 28/66 just need to be one route.

Mavis buses are busy enough that they can add a new route that connects to Burhamthorpe and Dundas, and keep the 61 to CCTT. They deleted the Mavis transitway station from the plans so the buses will have to serve CCTT.
 
The current CCTT is built with an underground station for the Transitway and is partly use as the current entrance and washrooms.

The tunnels were always part of the plan, but eliminated due to the extra cost of building the first phase and Hazel crying the the city was on the hock for an extra $60 million to build it. The cost of the tunnels was over $20 million when construction was started and were removed to what we have today as part of so call cost saving..

Based on 2004 EA cost, I said in my 2004 opposition to the BRT system that the cost was under estimated close to $200 million. The final cost was over that $200 million along with all cost cutting that took place to keep the cost low. Based on numbers for ridership, it was better to go to an LRT system from day one, but the numbers turn out to be for GO whole network for CCTT once construction was started.

The CCTT was out dated before being built as it was built for a city of 250000 with a daily ridership of 25,000. The city was close to 400,000 when it was built.

According to the City, the current location was all the city could afford at the time as well OMERS wanted the terminal to be in that location. It was just like the Hersey Centre that was supposed to be built where the Cineplex is now, as the city wasn't will to pay an extra million for the land. Cost saving has screw the city in more ways than enough.
 
Allandale25 said:
Is that an error in the Urban Toronto article? Where is it confirmed anywhere publicly that it'll be a split service? This sentence doesn't have a source or reference.
Click to expand...
We've removed that sentence and added a note at the bottom of the article.

42
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
The entire Rathburn transit terminal area is a mistake - undersized and clobbered together on the cheap piecemeal.

AoD
Click to expand...
Even though this is true, this kind of terminal would be a blessing in places like Hamilton with their even more pathetic downtown "terminal".

Nevertheless, the whole terminal layout (including the GO Bus "terminal") needs to be rethought. The whole layout is a laughable joke which makes transferring between routes extremely inadequate.
 
Amare said:
Even though this is true, this kind of terminal would be a blessing in places like Hamilton with their even more pathetic downtown "terminal".

Nevertheless, the whole terminal layout (including the GO Bus "terminal") needs to be rethought. The whole layout is a laughable joke which makes transferring between routes extremely inadequate.
Click to expand...
I would expect that when the Playdium lands get redeveloped, the terminal could be consolidated there with mixed use on the south side and a tunnel connection to SQ1. Makes it easy to construct out of the way of the current terminal and allows the City to Masterplan the whole north side. Does anyone know if there are plans for that area? It would also spur more Transit oriented development to feed the LRT.
 
The current Square One GO terminal is only temporary. It is meant to be replaced by a transitway station in the future. With a complete transitway, most of the GO buses would be using the transitway anyways. The only thing needed is a pedestrian tunnel to connect the transitway and the City Centre terminal. To build huge terminal on the north side of Rathburn and block the construction of a future transitway is just backwards.
 
doady said:
The current Square One GO terminal is only temporary. It is meant to be replaced by a transitway station in the future. With a complete transitway, most of the GO buses would be using the transitway anyways. The only thing needed is a pedestrian tunnel to connect the transitway and the City Centre terminal. To build huge terminal on the north side of Rathburn and block the construction of a future transitway is just backwards.
Click to expand...
Where do you see the Transitway Terminal for GO going, as all plans had the Transitway feeding into CCTT???

The current talk is a new transit terminal is to be built on the north side of Rathburn for both GO and miWay combine on one of side of Station Gate site. I don't care which side, but must be able to handle 150,000 daily riders by 2035 or sooner, depending on the white Elephant Sq One in the so call downtown area, as well development for the surface parking lots. OMERS is already requesting parking standards on all their lands to be reduce from what we see today.

The plan is to use Duke of York to get over the 403 for the Transitway that will be raise over City View Dr and run along the north side of 403. You need to use Rathburn to get the Transitway over the 403 and City View. You have OMERS who owns the lands and is calling the shots related to Transit, as they don't want it interfering with cars coming to Sq One. There was a plan to close Rathburn Between City Centre and Duke of York for a Transit Mall only, but OMERS shot it down.

Because of cost cutting and no real planning, the location for the Transitway sucks from day one, let alone a major transit terminal location.

If OMERS wants less cars on their lands, the city needs to beef up transit by 50% so people can get to the mall and what coming down the road for the lands. Transit should have been beef up 15 years ago.

At the end of the day, the Transitway is a GO Thing who will be carrying the bulk of the ridership, with miWay playing a small role on it.
 
drum118 said:
Where do you see the Transitway Terminal for GO going, as all plans had the Transitway feeding into CCTT???

The current talk is a new transit terminal is to be built on the north side of Rathburn for both GO and miWay combine on one of side of Station Gate site. I don't care which side, but must be able to handle 150,000 daily riders by 2035 or sooner, depending on the white Elephant Sq One in the so call downtown area, as well development for the surface parking lots. OMERS is already requesting parking standards on all their lands to be reduce from what we see today.

The plan is to use Duke of York to get over the 403 for the Transitway that will be raise over City View Dr and run along the north side of 403. You need to use Rathburn to get the Transitway over the 403 and City View. You have OMERS who owns the lands and is calling the shots related to Transit as they don't want it interfering with cars coming to Sq One. There was a plan to close Rathburn Between City Centre and Duke of York for a Transit Mall only, but OMERS shot it down.

Because of cost cutting and no real planning, the location for the Transitway sucks from day one, let alone a major transit terminal location.

If OMERS wants less cars on their lands, the city needs to beef up transit by 50% so people can get to the mall and what coming down the road for the lands. Transit should have been beef up 15 years ago.
Click to expand...

Transitway terminal for GO? Transitway feeding into CCTT? What are you talking about? Transitway would be a seperated road, likely below the street, below the current terminal. GO buses using the transitway would stop at the transitway station just like 100/107/109/110 would. Why would they need to build another terminal or expand the bus terminal to accomodate these buses? Why would they ever think about havng transitway buses entering CCTT? CCTT was built as two levels to accomodate transitway and pedestrian connection underneath it. CCTT was never designed to be part of the transitway system itself. It was always designed to be separate.

Seriously I'm just baffled at all of the responses here. You can see in Toronto they have subway stations below and bus terminals above them. Transitway and CCTT was always planned to be the same concept. The transitway station will be located between Chapters and Playdium, replacing the GO bus terminal. Transitway buses will stop in the transitway station below, and non-transitway buses stop in CCTT above. Why do they need to build a single terminal to handle 150,000 riders? Why are people so obsessed with the idea of a humongous terminal for every single GO bus, MiLocal bus, MiExpress bus, and LRV in the city centre?

It is so much easier to have transitway buses and non-transitway buses using separate facilities. There is no need to combine them at all. Two separate facilities has more capacity than one facility. GO/100/107/109/110 can use the transitway station, and all other buses use CCTT. To take buses off the transitway onto the street and into a terminal or worse not bother to build a transitway at all for the sake of having all buses using the one terminal is just so backwards.
 
Having the HuLRT running along the one side of Rathburn is perfect because it allows a future transitway tunnel along the other side, keeping them that close to each other will be perfect for line transfers. Consolidating all of that in one spot is ideal because it sets up the Playdium parking lot as an adequate location to develop a large surface-level bus terminal to replace the SQ1 terminal. I think a big enough terminal would be able to handle Transitway, HuLRT, and conventional bus demand all at once without a problem, it'd definitely have to be easily the size of the VMC bus terminal, if not larger.

Here's a fun mockup I made of a potential U-shaped terminal with some office tower use, I might refine it in more detail later:

9v5ahOFh.jpg
 
Last edited:
It’s insane that Metrolinx wants to construct a hulking, dangerous transformer in the centre of a thriving residential and commercial neighbourhood. We constructed our model to show just how large and overwhelming this monstrosity would be. It makes no sense on any level. We’re determined to stop it.

Resident group planning to protest part of upcoming LRT in Mississauga
Click to expand...

Oh no, a transformer!

Kingsbridge Matters is still hoping to convince Metrolinx to build a station in their area, arguing that Kingsbridge is one of the most densely-populated communities along the route with a population of more than 10,000.
Click to expand...

"LRT good, necessary LRT infrastructure bad"
 
tmlittle said:
Oh no, a transformer!



"LRT good, necessary LRT infrastructure bad"
Click to expand...
The people who are opposing the transformer aren't neceessarily the same ones who are calling for an LRT station. There are thousands of people in these buildings.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top