FW36
Active Member
I'm unsure if the subway should go to the STC or continue on Sheppard to Malvern
|
|
|
- Thread starter denfromoakvillemilton
- Start date
sixrings
Senior Member
respect for scarborough riders says it better go to STC.
Neutrino
Senior Member
*Why not both*
OneCity
Senior Member
Continue to Malvern and connect to the EELRT. The current SSE is set up to terminate at McCowan.
I see benefit to dropping he Sheppard line down from Agincourt to SCC and adding a North-West stop around the Centre, but taking he subway to Markham/Sheppard (or Milner) would be amazing for the Malvern area
robmausser
Senior Member
Its one transfer from Sheppard West to Downsview Park, really NBD.
Hopkins123
Senior Member
This is okay enough, but to critique a few points:
Instead of Pearson, have the western terminus be Westwood Mall. Too much redundant duplication to have it serve Pearson, whereas Westwood is a major hub. Serve Kipling/Albion directly for easy access to the Albion Centre and the Finch bus. Your line seems to deviate south along Westhumber.
Have the line follow the path of the SRT east of Agincourt. So a new Midland/Progress Stn, then SCC, Bellamy, Progress Campus, Milner Business Ct, Sheppard/Progress, Malvern Town Centre, Morningside/Old Finch then following the Seaton rail corridor terminates at the Zoo.
This winning alignment would serve over half a million residents across the northern 416, not to mention all the 905 commuters that commute down to such a line.
Leo_Chan
Senior Member
Taking a bus from the 905 to a line that’s not 1 or 2? That’s unheard of!
Bureaucromancer
Active Member
In the east I have a real problem with an alignment that sticks to the noeth. You're precluding Centennial College, Rouge Valley and UTSC station while making Pickering GO more of a challenge. My argument really would be for STC with the intention of an Ellesmere alignment for extensions, and this plays nicely with the Premier calling for a Pickering subway.
Mid you, given the choice I'd salvage the SRTs viaduct for this and build as LRT, with less than fully grade separation east of STC likely covering the cost of converting the Sheppard line.
Mid you, given the choice I'd salvage the SRTs viaduct for this and build as LRT, with less than fully grade separation east of STC likely covering the cost of converting the Sheppard line.
Last edited:
Neutrino
Senior Member
Can we resolve to never use the words "Pickering subway" ever again please LMAO
Streety McCarface
Senior Member
Can Pickering Regional Rail or Pickering HRT work instead?
Bureaucromancer
Active Member
Pickering Rapid Transit would be my take since I'd really like to see light rail STC to Pickering. The above sound like what we're already getting on Lakeshore, which doesn't address what this (and the Pulse extension to STC) are trying to, namely that Durham absolutely has demand for reasonably speedy connections to points not downtown or directly on the Lakeshore line.
FW36
Active Member
would it be cheaper to build an elevated subway
The Sheppard subway should run underground from Shepperd west to Victoria Park
after victoria park, it should be elevated above Sheppard ave from warden to Markham rd
The Sheppard subway should run underground from Shepperd west to Victoria Park
after victoria park, it should be elevated above Sheppard ave from warden to Markham rd
BurlOak
Senior Member
I calculated a while back that it take a long distance (750m? if I recall correctly) for a subway to switch from being below ground to above ground. It starts 4m+ underground with a tunnel roof, and becomes 7m+ high when the height of the bridge is accounted for. It must transition from a flat alignment, to an incline, to flat again. This all take distance in which it is not possible to go under it.
FW36
Active Member
the distance between Victoria park and warden is about 932.28 m
going by your calculations it seems possible
the only problem is pharmacy ave would no longer be able to cross Sheppard
BurlOak
Senior Member
Not quite.
Imagine if this is in the median.
- Just east of Victoria Park, the top of the subway breaks through the surface - it starts being in a trench.
- It stays in an ever decreasing depth trench until Pharmacy (about 300m away) when the top of rail is finally at/near street level. No through traffic can cross Sheppard in this distance because of the trench.
- 250m farther away, the top of rail would be about 4 to 4.5m above road. This distance would either be an embankment or a bridge structure (or combination), but traffic couldn't go under since there is not enough clearance.
- For the next 200m, the height of rail above road increases to about 7m. Counting the support system (rail, ties, balast, deck, supporting beams) the clearance is increasing from about 2.5m to 5.0m over this length. Enough for a car to pass under (barely), but not close to meeting the design requirements of 5.0m vertical clearance.
- Beyond this point (750m beyond Vic Park), the tracks are high enough that there is room below them for the support system (rail, ties, balast, deck, supporting beams) and clearance for traffic.
Thus, in this example, you would have to close Pharmacy, and have no through traffic on Pharmacy and no left turns onto Pharmacy.
There might be just enough space between Pharmacy and Warden, but it would still mean that all left turns from the businesses and side streets would have to be banned between Pharmacy and Warden.