[Railization]

It's a subtle reminder to stand to the side and let people get off the train first before getting in. It's amazing how much more etiquette there is for public transit in that city. People line up and are generally very patient.

It's similar in Tokyo. Different graphic symbols (they use circles as markers), but the same principle.

 

[T-Squared]

It's a subtle reminder to stand to the side and let people get off the train first before getting in. It's amazing how much more etiquette there is for public transit in that city. People line up and are generally very patient.

up til the late 80's and early 90's, there was a lack of public transit etiquette at MTR, it was so bad that it prompted MTR to show ads of pigs pushing and shoving into the cars, insinuating people are like pigs.

Along with the markers on the ground, patrol officers were stationed to patrol the passenger activity to ensure the markers were followed. Its amazing how all these measures ultimately resulted in proper public transit etiquette.

 

[BMO]

True on garbage/track fires and ATO (hopefully the re-introduction of garbage bins at platform level helps deal with the former), but I don't think the environmental control argument is worth its weight - none of the TTC stations are heated or air-conditioned, they are only venilated. Given that, with the exception of trips 3 stations or less, the vast majority of passengers spend (much) more time on the train than on the platform, it isn't really of any benefit to have the heating and air-conditioning of platforms, as the subway system is run frequently enough that people generally won't be on the platform long enough to care. There's no incentive for the TTC to spend the money in both capital and maintenance (on both platform doors and HVAC systems) to heat/cool their stations, it lacks a business case.

I know that sheltered waiting areas are often cited as an element people appreciate about subways over surface routes, but I think that has to do with 2 things:
1. It comes back to frequency; surface routes have less frequency than the subway... that's a fact, so people spend more time, on average, waiting for surface vehicles than for subways.
2. Wind Chill, which you won't get at most subway stations since wind doesn't get underground. Humidity is also less pronounced in sheltered [underground] stations in the summer. This leads to the impression that it is warmer in the winter and cooler in the summer anyway, without heating and air-conditioning.

As for the rush of air created by when a subway enters the stations, I really wouldn't consider that as significant. I know the effect you're talking about, but I have never heard of passengers complain about it. The air temperature they are pushing is generally already about the same temperature as the station it is entering anyway.

I actually think subway platform doors would be very useful on many of the outdoors stations like Rosedale for instances or many on the spadina line wihch get huge drafts from the outside, it would block the wind and snow a bit better even if heating isn't implemented.

 

[greenleaf]

A couple of ideas to float for the eastern leg of the core line:

-A subway/streetcar hub at Carlaw & Queen. If the Shoppers at the corner is taken out, there is currently plenty of open space just north of it to include as part of a streetcar hub a la Broadview Station. This could be a natural point to break up the Queen Streetcar into smaller legs.

-If the line runs along Front, what if there were a station below the North St. Lawrence Market, which currently has plans to be renovated in the near future?

 

[Railization]

I actually think subway platform doors would be very useful on many of the outdoors stations like Rosedale for instances or many on the spadina line wihch get huge drafts from the outside, it would block the wind and snow a bit better even if heating isn't implemented.

I wonder how they're going to keep the platform doors from freezing shut at Rosedale? Maybe HEATING?

 

[Railization]

-A subway/streetcar hub at Carlaw & Queen. If the Shoppers at the corner is taken out, there is currently plenty of open space just north of it to include as part of a streetcar hub a la Broadview Station. This could be a natural point to break up the Queen Streetcar into smaller legs.

I agree with this line of thinking, although I've got a difference of opinion on location. I think something can be squeezed in without expropriation by using the rail corridor and Degrassi street for a loop. Same with Gerrard, where the Carlton car can loop along the southeast edge of the railway for what could be a very attractive loop sandwiched between the railway and the park, with trees shading the streetcar bay (the streetcar overhead catanery needs to be kept clear/separated from the trees though), and loop back to Gerrard via Carlaw (single track on Carlaw as part of the loop). I can envision similar for Cherry St. as well (possibly putting the space below the Adelaide DVP On-Ramp to good use!).

 

[greenleaf]

They are planning a loop on Cherry Street immediately north of the current tracks.

I can't see your idea for Degrassi happening because it takes out park space! My plan merely takes out a parking lot.

 

[Railization]

They are planning a loop on Cherry Street immediately north of the current tracks.

I can't see your idea for Degrassi happening because it takes out park space! My plan merely takes out a parking lot.

That loop for Cherry at the rail corridor is for the first phase of operation (Cherry south of the rail corridor is to be built later), and may also be used for service to a future GO station there. I'm envisioning a loop at King/Cherry, which was actually part of the original study (although I'm making a slight revision to it ). Previous conceptual networks for the East Waterfront also showed a 567 Cherry LRT from Union that terminated at King/Cherry.

As for Degrassi, it wouldn't take up any park space. I've checked. You only need the part of Degrassi that is parallel to and right beside the tracks, that's it. The park at Wardell would not lose any space. No expropriation needed, period.

 

[jks]

If (oops, I mean when) the DRL is built, the Cherry "LRT" should definitely go to the Cherry subway station instead of dragging all the way to Union. That would also eliminate the need to rework the Queen's Quay Ferry Docks station intersection.

 

[Railization]

I think the ultimate terminus for the Cherry LRT is the Portlands, but that development is still a ways off. There's supposed to be a loop later at Cherry/Unwin, I think. Queen's Quay East cars would run to Commissioners/Donway, as I understand it.

 

[wyliepoon]

 

[JasonParis]

Wylie kindly gave us permission right in his first post. "Permission hereby granted to use any of my DRL renderings for free for your DRL advocacy with proper credit."

Woops, I somehow missed that. They are up now!

 

[jamesbow]

I just have to say that these renderings are fantastic. Can you do them for the other stations as well? Can you do them for stations which are outside, for instance?

Queen East could be one of those, if it's perched atop the CN rail embankment near Queen and Degrassi. I see side platforms there to try and take up less space, and also for making it easier for passengers to access the transferway with the Queen streetcars. I could see the TTC doing something here similar to the Bloor-Danforth transferway at Bloor station when the Yonge line opened in 1954.

The TTC is already planning a loop in a parking lot near the Queen-Broadview intersection. If you could add a west-facing loop at Queen and Carlaw or possibly at the park, you could still split the Queen streetcar at this point. Queen East cars drop their passengers at the transferway, then head west to Broadview to turn around, come back and pick up eastbound passengers, while Queen West cars drop their passengers, head east, turn around and come back. It would save space at the station itself.

Or maybe you could render "Jethro" station on my own subway fantasy map.

...James

 

[Railization]

I don't think a Bloor St. Transitway option is realistic on Queen because of the narrower width of Queen St. in this area. If we were talking Soho St. or Spadina, we'd have it made, but unfortunately most of Queen isn't as wide as that.

I didn't know about the Queen/Broadview loop... where did you hear that?

 

[jamesbow]

The Queen/Broadview loop, through a municipal parking lot, has been on the TTC's books for a while; they just need to free up some capital for it.

Back in 1996, they had intended to restore Parliament loop, so that King streetcars could have a short turn loop on the east end of the downtown, so they could improve reliability through the core. This project was cut due to budget cuts, however, but was never removed from the books.

Eventually, the city wanted to develop the property, and so convinced the TTC to back off its claim on the loop. In exchange, the City gave the TTC rights to property near the Queen/Broadview intersection to build a loop once capital expenses allow. This loop, I think, could be accessed from all directions, offering short turn service to cars coming down Broadview as well.