doady
Senior Member
Hydro corridors aren't healthy places to be in either...
|
|
|
reaperexpress
Senior Member
I have no idea about how all the technicalities would work. It is a fantasy map after all. My thinking is that there's already a TTC busway in the Hydro corridor, and an LRT line isn't that much different. If the electrical systems do turn out to be an issue, then simply change the Finch line from LRT to BRT.
The intention for the line is for it to be used largely by people transferring from other routes. Most trips do not start and end on the same street, so this line allows people to switch between north-south bus/subway routes very quickly. It also serves to distribute people from major point generators such as Pearson Airport, Humber College, Seneca College and North York Centre.
For instance, I would use the line to go to the airport: take a short bus ride from my house down to the Finch Hydro corridor, then the LRT the rest of the way.
I would go as far as to say that the majority of transit users from Humber College would use the LRT.
Besides, there are a reasonable number of trip generators within 300m of stations, including:
- Pearson Airport
- Collections of Hotels at Carlingview and Dixon
- Etobicoke North GO station
- Humber College
- Father Henry Carr Secondary School
- The Albion Centre
- Collections of apartments at Rumike and Weston
- Yorkgate Mall and some very large apartment buildings at Jane. (the Jane-Finch mall is 500m away)
- Collections of apartments at Tobermory and Sentinel
- Keele-Finch subway station
- Northview Heights Secondary School
- Large collection of office towers and condos (also known as North York Centre) plus the Finch subway station at Yonge
- Collection of apartments at Bayview
- Old Cummer GO station
- Four large apartment buildings at Don Mills (all within 300m)
- Seneca College
- Malvern Centre (mall and condos)
I agree that there isn't much along the Scarborough portion, but bus routes in Scarborough have surprisingly high ridership considering the density, so I would expect the same here.
Last edited:
Dan416
Senior Member
Proof?
Asterix
Active Member
Which still doesn't address the geographical issue in the corridor to the east of Dufferin.
reaperexpress
Senior Member
Indeed, the reservoir does pose an engineering challenge. I'm thinking that the line should veer to the south a bit and cross it on a bridge where it's more narrow.
Is that why they frequently put kids' soccer fields in hydro corridors? Pretty sure that if they were THAT unsafe, someone would have raised that issue already...
Asterix
Active Member
Like where to the south?
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&sou...984,-79.463832&spn=0.010722,0.014935&t=h&z=16
reaperexpress
Senior Member
See how the reservoir is narrower near the bottom? That's where.
Asterix
Active Member
That's not exactly a narrow hop:
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&sou...=SmlihAucAXBhy5LN3i5feg&cbp=12,27.39,,0,-4.44
So, assuming they go with your LRT in the corridor suggestion, you've got the line coming east towards Dufferin, merging on to Dufferin heading south, either to Finch or to its northern side, turning east again and either crossing the ravine on the existing Finch embankment (just like the planned Finch LRT!) or on a hugely expensive bridge.
Once you've crossed this obstacle, then what? Cut right through that existing neighbourhood to jog back north to the corridor? Or continue on Finch itself (just like the planned Finch LRT!)?
Really, if you are going to be making up convoluted engineering plans for getting across the reservoir, I'd strongly suggest you go and have a look at the lay of the land in person, and not just draw lines on a map or satellite image. You really need to see the whole picture.
reaperexpress
Senior Member
Before you get all riled up, just understand that you're not understanding the I'm trying to say. I'll try to make this as straightforward as possible.
No it most certainly isn't. However it is more narrow than simply proceeding straight across the reservoir. Google Earth indicates that the bridge would be approximately 260m long. If you went straight along the path of the hydro corridor it would be 400m long.
No. I do not have the line merge onto Dufferin. It would cross Dufferin perpendicularly either in an underpass or at grade.
Once on the other side, it turns SLIGHTLY south. NOT a 90 degree turn. At it's southernmost point, it would be 200m north of Finch. The bridge would be more or less in line with the middle straight section (not the one right north of Finch, the next one west) on Robert Hicks Dr.
The bridge would indeed be expensive.
Let's take a worst-case scenario.
The Milau Viaduct is an immense bridge (343m tall, 2.4km long) in France that was built for a cost of around 400 million euros, which is about $560 million CAD, according to Google's Currency Calculator. Since the bridge is 2460m long, that works out to a cost of $227million per km.
Even in the worst case scenario the cost per km is lower than a subway, so I don't see why the cost is so outrageous. After all, the hydro corridor LRT would achieve subway speeds, unlike the LRT running in the middle of the street.
Once the line has crossed this obstacle, it curves north to the Hydro corridor AROUND the houses.
My knowledge of the reservoir is quite sufficient, thank you very much. I have driven past the reservoir thousands of times (that is not an exaggeration), biked in the park around it a few dozen times, and wandered around on foot 3 times.
I didn't realize proposing a bridge was a "convoluted engineering plan". I knew Toronto wasn't big on large infrastructure projects, but I wouldn't have thought proposing one would be so offensive.
No it most certainly isn't. However it is more narrow than simply proceeding straight across the reservoir. Google Earth indicates that the bridge would be approximately 260m long. If you went straight along the path of the hydro corridor it would be 400m long.
No. I do not have the line merge onto Dufferin. It would cross Dufferin perpendicularly either in an underpass or at grade.
Once on the other side, it turns SLIGHTLY south. NOT a 90 degree turn. At it's southernmost point, it would be 200m north of Finch. The bridge would be more or less in line with the middle straight section (not the one right north of Finch, the next one west) on Robert Hicks Dr.
The bridge would indeed be expensive.
Let's take a worst-case scenario.
The Milau Viaduct is an immense bridge (343m tall, 2.4km long) in France that was built for a cost of around 400 million euros, which is about $560 million CAD, according to Google's Currency Calculator. Since the bridge is 2460m long, that works out to a cost of $227million per km.
Even in the worst case scenario the cost per km is lower than a subway, so I don't see why the cost is so outrageous. After all, the hydro corridor LRT would achieve subway speeds, unlike the LRT running in the middle of the street.
Once the line has crossed this obstacle, it curves north to the Hydro corridor AROUND the houses.
My knowledge of the reservoir is quite sufficient, thank you very much. I have driven past the reservoir thousands of times (that is not an exaggeration), biked in the park around it a few dozen times, and wandered around on foot 3 times.
I didn't realize proposing a bridge was a "convoluted engineering plan". I knew Toronto wasn't big on large infrastructure projects, but I wouldn't have thought proposing one would be so offensive.
Last edited:
Asterix
Active Member
Google Earth doesn't give you a true representation of the way the terrain beyond Finch and/or Dufferin falls off.
I'm pretty sure you can't just take a proportional cost of a longer bridge in determining your cost. Do you have a cite for that method of price calculation?
I'd be willing to bet if you got a real engineering estimate, your bridge cost/km would be at least that of subway, if not more. Which would also happen to be close to 10x the cost per km of surface LRT running in its own center of road right of way (so able to move better than surrounding private auto traffic).
A bridge such as you propose in that location is convoluted and pretty unnecessary. It is that kind of gravy train spending I have a problem with.
Woodbridge_Heights
Senior Member
The thread title says fantasy maps. I had no idea that fantasy maps required such detailed justifications and estimates.
Asterix
Active Member
Can you clarify by what the intent of the thread is?
My interpretation, and I believe that of those who are commenting that some presented maps are 'good', is that they are ideas that people hope might one day be implemented.
Or instead, is the thread really about maps that look pretty, use nice colours, have an attractive font and have no real bearing on reality?
If the latter, then why not draw a map with a Finch hydro corridor LRT and then say it will cross the reservoir through levitation technology? Practical concerns are irrelevant.
Woodbridge_Heights
Senior Member
Surely one can discuss the relative merits of a fantasy map, however are minutia such as construction costs really of any value?
Asterix
Active Member
What is the real point then of having fantasy maps if one isn't remotely interested in whether there is any substantial merit to the designs?
Having to bridge the reservoir and associated ravine goes a long way to making the whole concept of a hydro corridor LRT (or even BRT) line a non-starter due to costs and engineering requirements.
If we are to ignore such fundamental issues when it comes to 'fantasy maps', then why do anything piecemeal and just have someone produce the mother of all maps with subways under every major concession (double that in downtown) with twice that in LRT lines on the lesser arterials and BRT on all the roads in between with elevated lines providing express service everywhere?
There, end of thread since anyone else's map will just be a weak partial implementation of this scheme. We don't need to worry about minutia or any practical concerns.