TransitBart said:
The gates should be electrified like an electric fence. No touch.:)
Click to expand...

The things are dangerous as they are now. I got scolded by a black coffee when an open gate suddenly closed. The sensors are crap on them, when you walk through an open gate they time out and close if someone else just walked through.
 
Richard White said:
The things are dangerous as they are now. I got scolded by a black coffee when an open gate suddenly closed. The sensors are crap on them, when you walk through an open gate they time out and close if someone else just walked through.
Click to expand...

DiamondAd.original.jpg
 
TransitBart said:
Once again. Some leaping to conclusions after six days....

But taking the comments below in three groups, some thoughts thereupon.

1. Outperforms. But we don't have optimal conditions for ridership yet. A good thing can be better.
i) VMC - YRT bus terminal not finished yet.
ii) York U is on Christmas break - let's see what it looks like when everyone is back at school. Let's also take another look next September when - for example - someone living in the city can say - would I rather take the subway to UofT St George campus, or subway to Ryerson U, or subway to York U ? Now the choices are apples-to-apples. Faced with a long bus ride, I'd have gone to Ryerson or UofT any day. I'd have written York off. I always considered it in the middle of nowhere. We're all going to have to change our attitudes about this because it ain't in the middle of nowhere any longer.

2. Average.
i) Pioneer Village. Let everyone get used to this. It's a huge bus terminus. Again, school's out.
ii) Finch West. Sub-optimal conditions. Can't wait to see another interchange station on the growing network in the city. When the FWLRT is funneling riders both ways through this station, I doubt anyone will have to worry about it. Mark this - check in 2022. Argh - to the date at least.

3. Needs Improvement..
i) Hwy 407 - connections in GO's court. TBD. Could be a Jane LRT terminus. Shovels in the ground everyone.
ii) Downsview Park- GO Station open December 30. Great. Barrie AD2W coming... Remember everyone. If you thought nothing of taking the train to Union to your downtown job. Why shouldn't you be able to take the train to Downsview, go down to Cedarvale and then arrive at your midtown job? I think this opens a world of possibilities as the GO network deposits people in only (mostly if we are going to quibble about Danforth and Kipling) one location (downtown) up until now.

In March, I will have been reading the threads here for two years. Allow me one paragraph. We need to gain some rapid transit momentum here. With zero additional meaningful transit options for two generations (call that 30 years - if you grow up with it, and take it through high school the pattern is set), the car has been the only practical choice for much getting around.

The logjam has been broken - 8.6 km of subway helps. Nineteen km of Eglinton helps more. The concept of a network needs to be built out - and the populace has to see it in practice. Although there has been a subway for 60 years, there has been little more than a rudimentary hub and spoke structure. The very first meaningful network piece is Eglinton. The integration of GO to the TTC with a co-fare in 2018 is huge. As is the coming ability to access GO rail in a place other than Union station - nowithstanding Danforth and Kipling which never really registered for me. Bring on Mount Dennis and Caledonia.

I think I wrote the preceding paragraphs because on its own the Spadina subway may not be considered much by some. But linked into a much stronger rapid transit and regional rail network, all of the baloney about 'failure' and 'subway to nowhere' can probably be done away with. The focus on building out the rest of the network needs to remain strong, and the timelines need to accelerate or another generation will view the car as a (the) primary transit choice when it is but one.
Click to expand...
Bring on the interchange and intermodal connections...

Intermodal.png
 

Attachments

  • Intermodal.png
    Intermodal.png
    23.7 KB · Views: 436
Hopkins123 said:
I was just trying to highlight the fact that one of these of the two designated washroom areas could have been converted into public facilities if they wanted to. A station as busy as the York U stop (at least in contrast to the rest of TYSSE) kind of justifies this.
Click to expand...
Too small
 
Guys, we just went like 10 posts without talking about bathrooms. Are you sure you want to continue like this? ;)
 
To change the topic away from washrooms, I wonder why there's a crossover at Finch West station when there's a centre track also? Are pocket tracks better for short turning trains at non-terminal stations to minimize interference with through trains?
 
Transportfan said:
To change the topic away from washrooms, I wonder why there's a crossover at Finch West station when there's a centre track also? Are pocket tracks better for short turning trains at non-terminal stations to minimize interference with through trains?
Click to expand...

Whenever I got turned back at Islington which has both a center track and crossover they used the crossover. It may be easier to use the crossover than it would be to set up the center track on both ends.

Center tracks are good for storage but that's about it. Even at Eglinton they turned trains back via the crossover and not the pocket track at the far end.

When they turn trains back they trains behind and in front hold while they turn the trains. Usually they are turning them to insert them into a gap. When I was passing through Victoria Park around 12:45 this morning we got held just west of the station while they turned a train to fill a gap. My understanding was that they were bunching in the area and turned the train in front of us.

If they use a pocket or center the track to turn trains it is likely because they want it to sit tight for a bit, that or it is as a place like Chester, Ossington, Broadview or Christie where there is only a center track.
 
TransitBart said:
The logjam has been broken - 8.6 km of subway helps. Nineteen km of Eglinton helps more. The concept of a network needs to be built out - and the populace has to see it in practice. Although there has been a subway for 60 years, there has been little more than a rudimentary hub and spoke structure. The very first meaningful network piece is Eglinton. The integration of GO to the TTC with a co-fare in 2018 is huge. As is the coming ability to access GO rail in a place other than Union station - nowithstanding Danforth and Kipling which never really registered for me. Bring on Mount Dennis and Caledonia.

I think I wrote the preceding paragraphs because on its own the Spadina subway may not be considered much by some. But linked into a much stronger rapid transit and regional rail network, all of the baloney about 'failure' and 'subway to nowhere' can probably be done away with. The focus on building out the rest of the network needs to remain strong, and the timelines need to accelerate or another generation will view the car as a (the) primary transit choice when it is but one.
Click to expand...

Totally agree. I think that this is at the centre of the transit ethos for a lot of us. But, on that note, let me just register that GO-subway-LRT integration -- iow, dedicated-ROW transit -- is still nutty in a lot of ways:
  • Physically: the years-old promise to physically integrate Leslie-Oriole is nowhere; a similar opportunity with Wynford/RHGO appears destined for MIA.

  • Fare-wise: a co-fare is fine. But with crowded buses zooming across the northeast to carry passengers to and from Eglinton, Bloor, and downtown via Finch subway, I cannot fathom why we'd make it a penny more expensive to let those riders shift their travel to a GO route if they're willing.

  • And, maybe hardest to fathom, at least for me: those big transit maps sitting in every subway car don't show GO routes or GO interchanges. Like, I get it that the TTC has no institutional incentive to do so. But there is an awfully strong incentive from the greatest-good standpoint. It shouldn't take uploading the TTC to Metrolinx just to achieve maps that show all dedicated-ROW opportunities and the opportunities to transfer between them.
</rant off>. This probably fits better in another thread, but following on from the discussion of how the Spadina extension will help strengthen the overall network, it's hard to divorce that fundamental point from the rest of this. Like, how does it make sense to show the Spadina extension, but not the Barrie GO opportunities with which it not only interconnects but overlays?

(For that matter, how does it make sense to still call these lines GO Barrie and GO Richmond Hill, after their terminii, when the most significant transit loads and opportunities they represent are along the way to those terminii? If we want people to make better use of low-hanging-fruit transit opportunities, and to put more pressure on politicians to fare-integrate so as to stop dampening rational passenger behaviour sooner, we don't just need maps that paint a picture -- we need names that do, too.)
 
Disparishun said:
Physically: the years-old promise to physically integrate Leslie-Oriole is nowhere; a similar opportunity with Wynford/RHGO appears destined for MIA.
Click to expand...

In isolation, building the Leslie/Oriole interchange sounds like a fantastic idea. But given the countless other deficiencies in our network, I can't say its a particularly high priority. Especially when the Relief Line will supposedly be running very close to there in the not too distant future (supposedly).

Disparishun said:
  • And, maybe hardest to fathom, at least for me: those big transit maps sitting in every subway car don't show GO routes or GO interchanges. Like, I get it that the TTC has no institutional incentive to do so. But there is an awfully strong incentive from the greatest-good standpoint. It shouldn't take uploading the TTC to Metrolinx just to achieve maps that show all dedicated-ROW opportunities and the opportunities to transfer between them.
Click to expand...

GO Transit shouldn't be shown on the subway maps because it doesn't provide subway-level service, nor does it operate under the fare structure of the TTC. However, GO Transit is shown on the TTC System Maps, which is good enough. When GO RER is a thing, and when GO Transit has reasonable fares, then the TTC should reconsider its position.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top