News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.2K     0 

denfromoakvillemilton said:
That's the best idea. Would that fly politically?
Click to expand...

Not now, but after Eglinton opens, people may be more receptive when they see that there isn't really a difference between underground LRT and subways. Not long after Eglinton opening, people will start to ask questions as to why they have to transfer at Don Mills and Sheppard to continue westward, when they don't have to do so at Don Mills and Eglinton.
 
gweed123 said:
Not now, but after Eglinton opens, people may be more receptive when they see that there isn't really a difference between underground LRT and subways. Not long after Eglinton opening, people will start to ask questions as to why they have to transfer at Don Mills and Sheppard to continue westward, when they don't have to do so at Don Mills and Eglinton.
Click to expand...

It's like a lightbulb going off in their brains. A westward extention of sheppard as LRT would look and sound much better as well.
 
denfromoakvillemilton said:
It's like a lightbulb going off in their brains. A westward extention of sheppard as LRT would look and sound much better as well.
Click to expand...

And may actually be justifiable from a cost-benefit perspective. Also, as a subway project, it would have a hard time competing for resources with other extensions (once the DRL is built I suspect that it will have the loudest calls for extensions on both ends). However, if it's an LRT project with a relatively modest budget, it may be able to sneak in under the radar at the same time, much in the way that the East Bayfront LRT has, in the sense that it has been largely shielded from the City Hall transit flips.
 
Electrify said:
Retrofit the subway so that LRVs can operate through it. Through running from Yonge to Morningside.
Click to expand...

Or just abandon that freaking stubway (but keep don mills and yonge stations). Replacing it with a surface LRT would be ideal since you can add several more stops, and not have to descend into a cave to catch the train. I don't know how much this option would cost, but the retrofit is not as cheap and simple as it seems according to Steve Munro.
 
Either extend the subway, or convert it to LRT has always been the two ideal options here.

salsa said:
Replacing it with a surface LRT would be ideal since you can add several more stops, and not have to descend into a cave to catch the train.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure stopping more, and having to wait outside are exactly selling points.
 
salsa said:
Or just abandon that freaking stubway (but keep don mills and yonge stations). Replacing it with a surface LRT would be ideal since you can add several more stops, and not have to descend into a cave to catch the train. I don't know how much this option would cost, but the retrofit is not as cheap and simple as it seems according to Steve Munro.
Click to expand...

Um, NEVER going to happen.
 
denfromoakvillemilton said:
It's like a lightbulb going off in their brains. A westward extention of sheppard as LRT would look and sound much better as well.
Click to expand...

You'd have to keep it underground all the way to Bathurst at the very least since Sheppard is too narrow. For such a short distance and the potential of having the Wilson Yard serve a future Richmond Hill extension, might as well just build it.

Why not do like London, Paris or New York??? Instead of people calling for a retrofit or closure of the line, just make it a branch. That would boost the ridership as people would have more choices
 
gweed123 said:
And may actually be justifiable from a cost-benefit perspective. Also, as a subway project, it would have a hard time competing for resources with other extensions (once the DRL is built I suspect that it will have the loudest calls for extensions on both ends). However, if it's an LRT project with a relatively modest budget, it may be able to sneak in under the radar at the same time, much in the way that the East Bayfront LRT has, in the sense that it has been largely shielded from the City Hall transit flips.
Click to expand...

Might even lose less money!
 
It's funny to me how council killed the Scarborough LRT when they went out of their ways to kill Eglinton Crosstown's eastern tunnel who merged with Scarborough...

Off course, they'll never admit it...
 
Solid Snake said:
It's funny to me how council killed the Scarborough LRT when they went out of their ways to kill Eglinton Crosstown's eastern tunnel who merged with Scarborough...

Off course, they'll never admit it...
Click to expand...

Imagine if they kept the SRT connection with Eglinton, but then continued the Danforth line eastward. It wouldn't even have to follow the current path to STC, could just continue it east to the Eglinton GO station. Perhaps from there, it could follow the rail corridor east to Guildwood to create a hub between TTC, GO, and VIA trains. It could pretty much run at grade, as there is only one level crossing along this stretch. While it wouldn't do anything to keep Yonge and Eglinton from choking, it would help to ensure that the Danforth line doesn't become underused.
 
TOareaFan said:
Another study courtesy of an England based transit consultancy group.

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/tra..._has_no_real_benefits_report_author_says.html

According to them we could have converted Sheppard to ALRT, extended it STC and beyond and linked it with a converted RT (also to ALRT) for $1.8 billion.
Click to expand...

True. I would support that since it would look like London's DLR LRT. Unfortunately, people are obsess with the current Transit City format which (I posted in the Transit City thread) was demolished by their study. Still waiting for someone to call them "trolls"

They make it clear that Transit doesn't work for Toronto
 
I don't think anyone on these boards is stupid enough to call this document off without any analysis. You also shouldn't look at it as the holy gospel, as the view the report took on transportation is the exact opposite reasoning behind the LRTs, which of course makes them look "useless"
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top