turbanplanner said:
What other cities made a 4 stop subway line?
Click to expand...
I only wish the Waterloo and City line had 2-more stations added, to become a 4-stop line.

Also Line 4 in Montreal could do with a 1-station extension to put a stop around Place-Ville-Marie (it would be quite the curve) to alleviate the transfers at Berri.

And why don't the extend the 2-stop NYC subway train (S) between Times Square and Grand Central station - a third stop at PABT and a fourth stop at Penn station would have been great.

And then there's the 4-stop Paris metro line between Gambetta and Porte des Lilas (3bis).

I'm hard-pressed to think of a big city that doesn't have a 4-stop (or less) subway line. Except Toronto - our shortest is five stops - unless you count the UP Express or the Airport LINK.
 
MisterF said:
Some sort of transitway in the 407 right of way makes sense and already kind of exists in the form of GO buses in mixed traffic, which essentially always moves freely. A heavy rail subway is much harder to justify. Every disadvantage of the part of Line 1 in the Allen median is much more of an issue asking the 407, from the built form to the width of the greenbelt it goes through to the lack of destinations. Subways are best in dense urban environments, and the 407 is the opposite of that.

All of the destinations you mentioned are already better served by existing or planned subways and RER.
Click to expand...
There are significant delays from buses needing to drive off to stops. A transitway allows more intermediate stops to be made than buses.

The transitway can be heavy rail, light metro without being a subway. Exhibit A, the REM.

Yes, these destinations will be served by subway and Go trains. But that adds to the benefit of connecting through these locations with an orbital line. It adds a lot of ridership potential to interchange with all these routes. And great places for local bus networks to feed into.
 
chrisw said:
There are significant delays from buses needing to drive off to stops. A transitway allows more intermediate stops to be made than buses.

The transitway can be heavy rail, light metro without being a subway. Exhibit A, the REM.

Yes, these destinations will be served by subway and Go trains. But that adds to the benefit of connecting through these locations with an orbital line. It adds a lot of ridership potential to interchange with all these routes. And great places for local bus networks to feed into.
Click to expand...
A transitway is typically for buses rather than trains. There's no indication that there will ever be demand for more than that on the 407 corridor. A transitway on Highway 7 also exists, flawed as it is.
 
One thing to consider when looking at the 2051 GGH Plan is that it outlines conceptual network level connections. Actual operations will differ based on feasibility and demand. Just because it's labelled as one/two lines does not mean that it will be a through service with the same frequencies. It highlights a need for a link, and provides a conceptual routing, roughly based on where there is space.
 
EastYorkTTCFan said:
don't forget they are addidig a stop when the crosstown opens at mount denis so it will be five stops.
Click to expand...
There will be an allowance for a stop at Liberty Village but likely won't open with it operational. And if Line 6 gets extended to the coming Woodbine GO station, it is quite likely we will find a stop there too for the UPX.
 
MisterF said:
A transitway is typically for buses rather than trains. There's no indication that there will ever be demand for more than that on the 407 corridor. A transitway on Highway 7 also exists, flawed as it is.
Click to expand...
Recall it is not just the 407 anymore. The preferred alignment instead follows the 403 to MCC south of Pearson rather than going to Brampton via the 407. This alignment likely will generate far more ridership given Brampton will have a parallel BRT and Kitchener GO Line anyhow. It offers a rail link from MCC to Pearson (which itself can probably be justified fairly soon) along with the various York hubs as well.

I have mentioned it in the past that this 'core' section from MCC to Markham Centre likely will have the demand necessary, and perhaps sooner than a 2051 horizon. This can be illustrated quite easily; extrapolate the current 15-minute frequencies observed on the 403/407 'trunk' for GO buses today, and realize that demand will eventually exceed what is financially feasible to provide with buses. At say, sub-5-minute frequencies, upgrading to rail is certainly a fiscally responsible move. Pressure between Kipling and Pearson will likely materialize sooner than this, even. The Hwy 7 BRT also will likely need the parallel rail service to siphon regional-level trips off of what is a more local line.

We can argue that the proposal isn't very thorough, but in principle, it advocates for much faster travel between key nodes, supports existing trip patterns between cities with rapidly growing ridership bases, and will be amplified by projects being built today.
 
JasonParis said:
There will be an allowance for a stop at Liberty Village but likely won't open with it operational. And if Line 6 gets extended to the coming Woodbine GO station, it is quite likely we will find a stop there too for the UPX.
Click to expand...
Isn’t the line 6 extension to woodbine something like 20 years ago sadly?
 
JasonParis said:
And if Line 6 gets extended to the coming Woodbine GO station, it is quite likely we will find a stop there too for the UPX.
Click to expand...
If I recall correctly, this one won’t technically be an additional stop, rather a replacement stop for Etobicoke North. I only mention in the spirit of the former topic on 4 stop lines.

turbanplanner said:
Isn’t the line 6 extension to woodbine something like 20 years ago sadly?
Click to expand...
A cheap ~2.5km extension certainly seems conceivable in the next 20 years. At grade or on an elevated guideway west of highway 7, about 3 stops, maybe even Woodbine Entertainment could chip in for a stop outside their complex (since the GO station will still be a relatively far and ugly walk away).
 
reinventingthewheel said:
If I recall correctly, this one won’t technically be an additional stop, rather a replacement stop for Etobicoke North. I only mention in the spirit of the former topic on 4 stop lines.


A cheap ~2.5km extension certainly seems conceivable in the next 20 years. At grade or on an elevated guideway west of highway 7, about 3 stops, maybe even Woodbine Entertainment could chip in for a stop outside their complex (since the GO station will still be a relatively far and ugly walk away).
Click to expand...
Yes, it will, but I'm talking about additional UPX stops in particular. Although, I also think Weston could be closed as it doesn't connect with any east-west routes and will have much more regular GO service anyway.
 
JasonParis said:
Yes, it will, but I'm talking about additional UPX stops in particular. Although, I also think Weston could be closed as it doesn't connect with any east-west routes and will have much more regular GO service anyway.
Click to expand...
Oh just wait until you hear the uproar of the UPX stop being removed at Weston from the local community, and that they'll be "forced" to make a transfer at Mount Dennis. I cant see such a move going well at all.

The Weston stop was always intended to be a stop-gap measure, but the problem is as soon as you put a train stop somewhere people have the expectancy (right or wrong) that the stop will be permanent. It doesnt help that Metrolinx has screwed the Crosstown up so bad to the point that who knows when Mount Dennis will open.
 
nfitz said:
It's like 2 stops ...

But at the rate the Woodbine redevelopment is going, the Woodbine GO (or whatever they call it) is about 20 years away ... still ... :)
Click to expand...
Amare said:
Oh just wait until you hear the uproar of the UPX stop being removed at Weston from the local community, and that they'll be "forced" to make a transfer at Mount Dennis. I cant see such a move going well at all.

The Weston stop was always intended to be a stop-gap measure, but the problem is as soon as you put a train stop somewhere people have the expectancy (right or wrong) that the stop will be permanent. It doesnt help that Metrolinx has screwed the Crosstown up so bad to the point that who knows when Mount Dennis will open.
Click to expand...
I wonder what the UP ridership to union is like there? I feel like airport traffic won't be that affected but it might be a way for people who actually live in the area (as I almost did) get to downtown faster or when GO isn't running.
 
Amare said:
Oh just wait until you hear the uproar of the UPX stop being removed at Weston from the local community, and that they'll be "forced" to make a transfer at Mount Dennis. I cant see such a move going well at all.

The Weston stop was always intended to be a stop-gap measure, but the problem is as soon as you put a train stop somewhere people have the expectancy (right or wrong) that the stop will be permanent. It doesnt help that Metrolinx has screwed the Crosstown up so bad to the point that who knows when Mount Dennis will open.
Click to expand...
If GO frequency is at 15 minutes, does it even matter that much if the UP skips them though?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top