Looking good! A few questions/comments:
1) The names of some of the DRL stations are quite unique. I'm wondering how you came up with those.
2) I think, navigation-wise, it would be helpful to add the number/letter bubble at the terminus points of the line on the actual map, instead of simply referring to the legend. Here's how the MBTA does it:
http://www.mbta.com/images/subway-spider.jpg
3) Curious as to why the North Yonge extension isn't shown on your map, considering it's often paired with the DRL in terms of timelines.
4) Also curious as to why you terminated the Pearson Express Bus at Richview instead of continuing it down to Kipling, as it currently does.
5) Interesting that St. Clair and the QQW & QQE lines are on the map, but Spadina isn't. Is that an omission, or done on purpose?
Overall, great map though!
Thanks, Re the Qs: 1. I’m glad you noticed those stations. Basically I don’t care for generic station names. Queen East or something is a tad boring, and IMO we’d be selling ourselves short. Unlike post-war areas, or municipalities using numbered streets or blocks - Old Toronto has a rich and interesting history to draw from. Trefann (I misspelled it as Treffan) is a small street around Queen/River, but Trefann Court is also an area neighbourhood with its own long history. I’m not sure the origin of the name, but it seems interesting enough.
Scadding is a small street around Lower Sherbourne, but the Scadding family was quite well known in TO over the last two centuries. If I’m not mistaken, he owned a good chunk of the land around there. And I believe I saw an old map not too long ago showing that he owned a toll bridge at Queen. But basically I’d much rather an obscure name like Scadding than, say, “Sherbourne Southâ€.
2. Good point about the letter bubbles. I wanted to add them, particularly after seeing the TTC prototype include them. But I felt my map may’ve been getting too cluttered. I think without a large subway network including branches or express/local service, it should be easy enough to get by without it.
3 Long answer: there are a few projects I didn’t include like Jane LRT, Don Mills LRT, Waterfront West, Scarb-Malvern, etc. They seem to have fallen off the radar somewhat, and I tend to lump Yonge North with them.
Short answer: I don’t agree with extending Yonge, and didn’t want it on my map. I believe the projections are grossly inflated, and extending Yonge is both unwarranted and a mistake. I’m still holding out hope that Metroinx will come to their senses and offer a DRL-Richmond Hill line hybrid this Spring, and mothball plans for Yonge North. How current ridership along that corridor can supposedly make a ten-fold or more quantum leap in twenty years is preposterous, and just another example of the flawed logic used to continually extend our scant few lines (while ignoring real priorities).
4 I just fig’d it’d be logical for TTC to offer Airport Express service from Kipling/Eglinton if there’s SmartTrack in place, instead of Kipling/Bloor. Not that I believe in SmartTrack’s oddball Eglinton section. But it seems a good station to have an Airport bus.
5 Short answer: I couldn’t fit it in without moving lines and changing the placement of station names on Line 1. But I justified this with the fact that Spadina isn’t all that fast, and maybe shouldn’t be on the map (even though I’d prefer to have it there).
If ROW streetcar lines are almost identical to LRTs, and if we accept that LRTs provide identical service to subways, then by the transitive property, we can conclude that streetcar lines are identical to subways.
But seriously, **the LRT lines do not provide similar service to ROW streetcars**. Our streetcars have very close stop spacing, exactly the same as our bus routes.
The average speed of ROW streetcar routes is no faster than the speed of suburban busses or downtown streetcars that don't operate in ROW. In fact, ROW streetcars are significantly slower than suburban bus routes.
Conversely, our LRT lines operate with stop spacing similar to that of Line 2. Average speed of the LRTs will be slightly slower than many sections of our subways.
So I wouldn't include the streetcars on the map. Nor would I differentiate between modes of rapid transit, as I don't see them increasing the utility of the map (I can't envision a situation where people would need to know vehicle types and mode when planning routes).
But a lot of this is relative. I mean, things move faster in the suburbs because of lower densities, longer blocks, highway-like roads, etc. Perhaps a suburban bus moves faster than a downtown subway..but it’s still a plain jane bus. And if that subway was running in the suburbs, it could be faster than a GO train.
Another thing is that I don’t believe the projected speeds for the in-median TC lines. It’s easy to fudge numbers/stats to get the desired results. The City, Prov, TTC, etc has managed to do this for sixty years with the DRL. Lowball routes that aren’t wanted (e.g DRL), inflate those that are (e.g every suburban subway project since 1954). Or make some speeds higher, others lower (e.g Scarb Subway debate). Fudging numbers for desired results is a fact of life in TO.
As well, with in-median LRT there are still unknowns. Will the service operate as promised, with full priority? Seeing our history with Spadina or Harbourfront, probably not. Will traffic (both vehicular and pedestrian) increase, thus warranting longer light cycles? Probably yes. Will new developments (condo, retail, office, etc) warrant new stops / intersections / traffic signals? Possibly. This is what has happened with East Bayfront. Even downtown new traffic lights and intersections are added to already small blocks...this will happen in the suburbs, too. In-median isn’t like a heavy rail subway. Stops are cheap, and probably will be added to new grocery stores or major developments.
