Recent content by Jupiter

For those who are curious, Yonge's ridership justified a subway. It was the most heavily used streetcar in North America at the time, with 13-14,000 pph in the peak hour (apparently back then the peak hour was the evening rush for some reason). Taken from a 1949 HW Tate speech, former...

The collectors ramp is closed because it shares the ramp with the Queensway eastbound - 427 northbound ramp. When it is in use, the queensway ramp has to be closed.

This essentially IS the thesis. I asked York if I could do it in this format in order to try to promote the idea to the general public and they okayed it.

The map actually looks pretty similar to mine, IMO. The only difference in the east is a stop at Queen and Carlaw rather than taking the rail corridor, and a stop at Sherbourne, which seems incredibly close to Jarvis. It wouldn't be the closest two stations in the system, but I don't think it's...

Clearly we have the same thought pattern. It's not that Queen couldn't support a subway of some kind, it's just that it needs to have close stop spacings, so it wouldn't work for the DRL. If stop spacing is close, then street life should be fine (ie. Bloor). The concern would be during...

There is no room in the Lakeshore right of way. If there was, trust me... I would have used it to save a good chunk of cash. The goal isn't just to serve Union, it's to serve everything en route to that as well. You say "Union already has the best service in the city"... in fact, you've said...

Thanks for the comments. I know much of the criticism received is just constructive debate, and I think most forum members would think the site is still a positive in terms of getting the word out, but it's nice to hear some commendation with criticism to keep me from fearing the last 8 months...

I think I mentioned all these things specifically in my routing document. City hall: Served already by the subway Queen West: Close to Osgoode China Town: Not on Queen AGO: Not on Queen Eaton Centre: Two subway stops. It doesn't matter if it's a "24/7" destination, because the subway doesn't...

FWIW, the original 1985 plan only had stops at Gerrard and Queen too, and it took a longer route. There hasn't really been a lot of development north of Gerrard since then... But you're right, the residents would have to be considered. But so would those who want a faster trip.

Ugh. You can chalk that one up to incompetance. Time for find/replace...

Appreciate the comments. I considered that, but there's really nowhere north of Gerrard that deserves a stop, Eastern is only 300m or so away from Queen, so the only stop that you can make a case for as being "left out" is Dundas, but even then Dundas and the railway tracks are still within...

Thanks, I and some friends tried editing it, but some things will always be missed. I'll give some thought to the background, add the link to the history section, and fix the Dixon thing. The only way the rail corridor would be faster is if there are fewer stops, and then you have the question...

Yeah, I considered the depth of the stations when I decided on this. I talked with Rod McPhail about it, and he said you can tunnel under buildings without any real incident... the issue simply becomes depth. The added expense is something like $2 million per extra metre you have to go deeper...

My view on it is the people in North Etobicoke have terrible, terrible transit service. This gets them a lot closer to the subway and with the density along Dixon... it's not like it's going to be cutting through the middle of nowhere. Still... I'm well aware that the other stages are more...

Yeah, I think I did that fairly objectively, because going into it I really had no preference. I actually read every single page of that like 130 page thread or however long it was where people debated which route it should take... Once I started doing density calculations, I was just amazed at...