|
|
|
- Thread starter W. K. Lis
- Start date
SaugeenJunction
Senior Member
Called it
ViewerOfToronto
New Member
Here’s a progress update.
INTz
Active Member
November CLC slides are up: https://assets.metrolinx.com/image/upload/v1699545601/Images/Metrolinx/CLC_November_2023.pdf
ViewerOfToronto
New Member
I’ll post this here.
Dan416
Senior Member
Look at that. Another useless station name. Finch West station on the Finch West LRT lol. Metrolinx (or their consultants, probably) clearly wasn’t blessed with logic. At least they put Keele Street below but that won’t help clarity on the apps.
So they’ll rename a station after a tree (Old Elm) or after a community no one has heard of (Cedarvale née Eglinton West) but won’t rename stations that should be renamed for clarity (e.g. Eglinton to Eglinton-Yonge and Finch West to Finch-Keele).
EastYorkTTCFan
Senior Member
It's named for the subway station it connects to which is named for the street which is Finch West Avenue.
Dan416
Senior Member
No shit, Sherlock.
nfitz
Superstar
Dan416
Senior Member
I don't have an issue with the naming scheme, generally. Last I checked, there's no rapid transit on Lawrence which would necessitate a name change to make the location of Lawrence East more clear.Wait until he hears about Lawrence East station
I actually thought the old interchange naming method (Bloor was the name of the Yonge line station, and Yonge was the name of the Bloor line station) to have some measure of sense, but from a network perspective it makes more sense to have a singular name for that station, in which case "Bloor-Yonge" makes sense. Similarly, it made sense to rename Sheppard station to "Sheppard-Yonge" for clarity. Why that common sense approach was thrown out by Metrolinx and its consultants makes no sense to me.
Another one that irks me a bit is "Jane and Finch" station. Even though it's not an interchange station, if you're going to use the format of the cross street names, shouldn't it follow precedent and follow the same format? Shouldn't it be "Jane-Finch"? but then would you need to rename existing Jane to "Jane-Bloor"?
EnviroTO
Senior Member
Unfortunately there is too much politics to have clear guidance on station naming. When it was decided Eglinton West was to be renamed Cedarvale the people in charge of that decision likely would have regurgitated a bit at the thought of Durham College Oshawa station. At that time there was some guidance on goals with one leading goal being to not have confusion when communicating a station name. However, that goal is not met if you say meet me at the Durham College GO and one person is waiting at the GO bus stop on campus and the other is at the GO station. Old Elm is in the middle of nowhere, the local landmark is a tree, the station name is not duplicated in the GTA. Mount Pleasant is an exact match in the GTA, keeping Finch West is a bit of a problem but not equivalent to the problem Cedarvale solved because Eglinton West neighborhood is accepted as being around Oakwood.
drum118
Superstar
Nov 5
Lot more up on my site
Lot more up on my site
yrt+viva=1system
Senior Member
Putting down the base layer today.
11.11.2023
11.11.2023
Last edited:
Rainforest
Senior Member
In my view:
- Station at Finch&Keele where the LRT meets the subway, indeed should be called Finch&Keele. Better for the LRT riders, and for the subway riders as well since the subway crosses both streets rather than following one of them.
- Jane station &Bloor can be called just Jane at this time, just for the historical reasons. For the bus riders, word "subway" in "Jane subway station" differentiates this place from all other stops on Jane.
But if Jane Street eventually gets its own rail line, that would be a good time to rename the station into "Jane&Bloor" and thus prevent any confusion.