44 North
Senior Member
Wow, this thread moved a lot in the last two days. Frankly, I was a bit underwhelmed with Metrolinx's YRNS report. I was anticipating it for quite some time, but I guess I was hoping there'd be a bit more meat on it. A couple things: why does Metrolinx continue to present the RH corridor as an option to be rejected, when everyone is in unanimous agreement that the RH line is almost useless with its current alignment. Whether it's DMU or EMU, the line is a circuitous slow trip through the valley with no stops between Sheppard and Union. On top of that, I don't think it could even work as electrified RER due to it being in a floodplain. Obviously it's going to have low ridership and be rejected.
Another thing is the LRT option. What exactly is that? And how on earth can a trip from Don Mills/Sheppard to Union take 20mins? Is it an extension of the 504 north of Danforth, a Transit City Phase II DMLRT? Or what?
I'm with WislaHD and Gweed in that Metrolinx should very well examine an RH-RER-DRL. Whether it's with the abandoned Don Branch and Leaside Spur, or a formal DRL alignment - it seems so logical that it should at least be looked at and presented as an option. However, my guess is any improvement/realignment of the RH corridor won't be looked at for the sole reason that it lessens the case for extending Yonge north of Steeles.
Another thing is the LRT option. What exactly is that? And how on earth can a trip from Don Mills/Sheppard to Union take 20mins? Is it an extension of the 504 north of Danforth, a Transit City Phase II DMLRT? Or what?
I'm with WislaHD and Gweed in that Metrolinx should very well examine an RH-RER-DRL. Whether it's with the abandoned Don Branch and Leaside Spur, or a formal DRL alignment - it seems so logical that it should at least be looked at and presented as an option. However, my guess is any improvement/realignment of the RH corridor won't be looked at for the sole reason that it lessens the case for extending Yonge north of Steeles.