Comment 111886

By ScreamingViking (registered) | Posted May 30, 2015 at 17:34:45

Kudos to all who have advocated for this for so long, especially Ryan. Your consistency and steady knowledgeable approach to making the case is admirable, and a great example of citizens engaging in a cause they believe in.

Some thoughts on a few aspects of the plan:

  • It looks like they've eliminated the LRT bridge over the 403, which was originally meant to be the connector between King and Main St. West. This must be a substantial cost savings (even considering a slightly longer detour on King and Paradise) and likely won't have much impact on performance.
  • I love the idea of the Hughson St. pedestrian connection. It would be great to see an improved pedestrian and cycling access to the Innovation Park as well. And I'm glad the King corridor remains the plan, because it more directly accesses the new stadium and I think King between Gage and Wellington offers the most opportunity for land use transformation.
  • Incremental expansions once this is built (and there's no reason they cannot be planned concurrently with construction) are a good way to expand systems like this, rather than trying to do it in major chunks. I've always wondered what Toronto's subway system would look like today had they continually made shorter expansions starting in the 1970s. I think they're less disruptive, any political issues are not as big or widespread, they're more budget-friendly, and there's a natural advantage to building onto an established service.
  • I really don't see an issue with operating the James North spur or the section in the International Village in mixed traffic. While speeds may be slower, I don't think they or the typical traffic levels are an impediment. I do think a pedestrian zone would work in the IV, however.
  • I'm interested to see how the James spur will operate. Will it be a true diversion that all EB and WB vehicles make, will just some of the LRVs take the diversion (e.g., every other one), a diversion for either WB or EB services but not both, or have transit vehicles that run dedicated service from the switch at King to West Harbour GO, with a transfer to EB/WB service. The latter may be the best option from an operational standpoint, even if it's just during peak periods, as it would be more optimal for E-W service that will likely represent the bulk of the travel demand on the system. Not that operations will be static - it can be changed as passenger flows dictate to maximize efficiency and service.

Comment edited by ScreamingViking on 2015-05-30 17:47:28

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools