How is that a more "logical" alignment? The only benefit seems to be saving maybe 1 minute in train travel time, at the cost of more underground construction (higher cost), stations located further away from most new development, and a much worse transfer to the RH GO line.I didn't argue against connecting Line 1 at RHC.
I realize everyone doesn't remember everyone's posts on these subjects; its been a rather long thread! But its a bit frustrating to see people misreading what I'm saying in light of my record on the subject.
I'm suggesting Yonge Street should be a people street.
It should be narrowed, just as will happen in North York Centre.
To me, this is a more logical alignment.
Note, that I am not suggesting going to Major Mack at this point, but show that to illustrate where I think the line will end up.
The dots are not suggested stations, but merely distance points.
View attachment 367936
And how is whether or not Yonge is a 'people street' relevant? Nothing about shifting the line east to the rail corridor precludes a future extension, either continuing along the RH GO line (which is the better alignment IMO, much much cheaper) or going back underneath Yonge.
What exactly are the benefits of this 'more logical' alignment? Other than that it looks straighter on a map?