News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.7K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.5K     0 

u
BurlOak said:
I show a detail of the LSE Interchange. I am assuming that the LSE can handle 4 tracks. The conflict are shown where trains need to cross other paths - which I haven't really thought if it is workable.

Just West of this interchange, there will be (at peak hour)

RER/SmartTrack
10 Trains per hour from Markham
10 Trains per hour from Malvern
10 Trains per hour from Pickering
total = 2 minute frequency.

GO
5 Trains per hour from Markham
3 Train per hour from North Pickering
10 LSE GO Trains (maybe a high estimate)
total = 3+ minute frequency.
Click to expand...

You didnt forget about Via, did you?

I think you ought to assume a flyover/under at this location. Four tracks on LSE with the two south tracks feeding the 'under' track to the new double-track northwards. High speed switches are desirable.

- Paul
 
sixrings said:
I was brought up in Scarborough but I thank God everyday I had the sense to leave that transit nightmare. The suburb itself is ok. But LRT would have done wonders on Eglinton,Sheppard and the RT conversion. Now it's basically going to be all Smart track. My goodness Rob Ford and everyone who helped him F up the LRT in scarborough screw up this area of town.
Click to expand...

The Sheppard LRT, SRT, SmartTrack and Scarborough-Malvern LRT combined would have brought 25% of Scarborough residents within walking distance of higher order transit. This is up from about 4% today. The percent of businesses within walking distance would have been even higher. These initiatives would have revolutionized transit for Scarborough residents, since more than half of trips starting in Scarborough also end there.
 
crs1026 said:
u

You didnt forget about Via, did you?

I think you ought to assume a flyover/under at this location. Four tracks on LSE with the two south tracks feeding the 'under' track to the new double-track northwards. High speed switches are desirable.

- Paul
Click to expand...

Yes, I did forget.

I had the two RER/ST tracks on the north so that they could easier veer off to a downtown tunnel.
I think I will change the interchange so that the RER/ST is the middle two tracks and GO on the outside two. This means that probably only the Richmond Hill line would use that (future) tunnel.
 
So given what we know now, and picking from the two Devils, does the sheppard subway make more sense than at this point than extending line 2? For two billion dollars, is it possible to extend the sheppard like to Kennedy? After all that one will be in Scarborough we all so our friends in the east will still be getting a subway, eglinton lrt, smart track, and whatever they end up doing with the SRT.
 
UD2 said:
So given what we know now, and picking from the two Devils, does the sheppard subway make more sense than at this point than extending line 2? For two billion dollars, is it possible to extend the sheppard like to Kennedy? After all that one will be in Scarborough we all so our friends in the east will still be getting a subway, eglinton lrt, smart track, and whatever they end up doing with the SRT.
Click to expand...

Bringing it to Agincourt and connecting it with SmartTrack should be viable.
 
BurlOak said:
Yes, I did forget.

I had the two RER/ST tracks on the north so that they could easier veer off to a downtown tunnel.
I think I will change the interchange so that the RER/ST is the middle two tracks and GO on the outside two. This means that probably only the Richmond Hill line would use that (future) tunnel.
Click to expand...

the optimal would be for each track off the Scarborough line (from force of habit I still find myself calling it the Uxbridge Sub) to emerge between two of the LSE tracks....the 'westboubd' between LSE tracks 1 and 2, ad the eastbound between Tracks 3 and 4. Then you have a high speed switch that diverges so trains can be routed to either track going west, and from either track going east. Gives the greatest operational flexibility and not really more costly than a simpler design. I have seen jcts of this sort elsewhere.

The limiting factor for managing conflicting movements at a junction is how far in advance the route must be set to prevent the train from getting signal indications that will force it to slow down. The signalling between Scarboro and Union will have to be upgraded to handle this volume of traffic. (it was only just rebuilt.....there goes money down the drain! Hopefully what's there was designed with an eye to adding intermediate blocks someday.) using high speed turnouts throughout at Scarboro Jct is desirable so each movement exits the zone quicker, enabling the next route to be set.

- Paul
 
Honestly, at this point the subway extension should be 1 stop at STC only, and then pick the cheapest most efficient route. It seems that the vast majority of people only care about the STC link.

That option might be cheap enough to fund an extension off the Eglinton LRT through most of the same area this subway line would be covering.
 
Dammit I wish they'd just build the damn thing. McCowan was approved. Let's build it.
 
UD2 said:
So given what we know now, and picking from the two Devils, does the sheppard subway make more sense than at this point than extending line 2? For two billion dollars, is it possible to extend the sheppard like to Kennedy? After all that one will be in Scarborough we all so our friends in the east will still be getting a subway, eglinton lrt, smart track, and whatever they end up doing with the SRT.
Click to expand...
You'd probably still need a line 4 going to STC (perhaps using the existing SRT ROW between Midland and STC - and elevated, even at-grade might work), smart track with an interchange to line 4 at Agincourt, then a BRT going either from STC and/or Agincourt to Malvern.
 
Last edited:
bobbob911 said:
Honestly, at this point the subway extension should be 1 stop at STC only, and then pick the cheapest most efficient route. It seems that the vast majority of people only care about the STC link.

That option might be cheap enough to fund an extension off the Eglinton LRT through most of the same area this subway line would be covering.
Click to expand...

The SSE needs to go the Sheppard. The reason why is that a large percentage of SSE's ridership is because of people from Markham using the subway. If you terminate the line at STC, people from Markam will have less insensitive to use the line, making the extension even less viable.
 
Smart Track, if built as proposed, will capture far more Markham traffic than a SSE ending at Sheppard would.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top