Jump to content

Gil

CPTDB Wiki Editor
  • Posts

    2,898
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Gil

  1. Cross-posting from the Motorcoach forum: Directional error aside (that should read WEST side of Duke of York) does MiWay eventually hope to restore service along Duke of York once all of the Burnhamthorpe Water Project is complete? Its a short enough walk to get to the CCTT or the GO's Square One Terminal or a block over to Living Arts to catch the 6 CREDIT WOODLANDS or 8 CAWTHRA. I don't know what ridership demand is like in the area, but the 6 CREDIT WOODLANDS has to make so many turns in the area just to avoid the construction. Of course the regular road closures for events around City Hall mean detours for everyone (including new Flixbus)!
  2. Gil

    FlixBus

    The Toronto location is already fairly busy between condo deliveries, rideshares, Starbucks customers who couldn't get a spot on Queens Quay and tour buses (if they ever return). I wonder how the condo residents will feel having their front door become a Flixbus stop? Mississauga's stop should read WEST side of Duke of York in front of the Living Arts Centre. That street runs north-south, unless they meant the south side of Prince of Wales. I doubt the City of Mississauga would let them use the south side of Princess Royal which is the vehicular drop-off point for City Hall. It will be interesting to see what happens to service when they inevitably shut down Duke of York for various events throughout the year. Plus will the buses serve that stop in both directions? Will make for some interesting trips around the block. I guess they couldn't secure or didn't want to pay to use one of the surplus GO stops along Centre View? Since MiWay no longer serves Duke of York, GO has had that stop all to itself. Makes connections easy for the routes that go around Square One like the 19 and 21 (which it's partially competing with on the leg between Toronto and Square One), not so much for those that go directly to the "terminal" at Station Gate. Hopefully they catch the correct spelling of St. CathArines before programming it into their destos!
  3. A few links later: So instead of say diverting either branch of the 105 DUFFERIN into Maple and/or Rutherford GO YRT will opt for Mobility-on-Request, which requires an app and smartphone to use. From my previous post about Maple GO, how easy is it to access that station if you were to use conventional YRT services along Keele or Major Mackenzie? The FAQs: Frequently Asked Questions Who can participate in the pilot? Citizens who live within the service area and regularly travel to and from either the Rutherford or Maple GO stations are eligible to participate in the Mobility On-Request pilot. Participants must have access to a smartphone to be able to download the Mobility On-Request app. Take a survey to express your interest in participating. What is the expected length of this pilot project? The pilot will continue for approximately one year from the official launch date in May 2022, based on user demand. Where can I travel using the Mobility On-Request pilot service? The service is a curb-to-station pick-up and drop-off program that allows individuals to book trips from their desired address within the service area to either the Rutherford or Maple GO stations in the morning, or from these GO stations to a desired address in the evening. The service can be booked through the Mobility On-Request app, which will be provided for download to those who are accepted into the pilot program. What days of the week and times of day will the Mobility On-Request pilot service be available? The service hours will be weekdays, during the morning rush hour (6 a.m. until 9 a.m.) and evening rush hour (from 3:30 p.m. until 6:30 p.m.). These times may be reviewed and adjusted based on the initial survey to accommodate participants. At this time, no weekend service is proposed. However, weekend service may be added if there is demand or a special occasion that would benefit from the service being active on the weekend. How much does the ride cost? When you use your PRESTO card to pay for the GO train at the Rutherford or Maple GO station, the Mobility On-Request service is free. Additional information can be found on YRT’s Ride to GO webpage. A full YRT fare will be charged if you are not using a PRESTO card. I’ve been accepted into the pilot program – where can I find the Mobility On-Request app? The app will be shared with all registered pilot participants in advance of the service launch in May 2022. I’ve been accepted into the Mobility On-Request pilot program – how will I know what the YRT pick-up vehicle will look like? The vehicle will be a YRT-branded car driven by a YRT transit service operator. The driver will show identification upon arrival. I participated in the eligibility survey to join the pilot – how will I know if I’ve been accepted into it? Those who participated in the survey to join the pilot can expect to hear from the City of Vaughan within five business days, by email. What COVID-19 precautions are in place? To support the safety and well-being of passengers during the COVID pandemic: Vehicles will be limited to three passengers and a driver. Drivers and passengers are required to wear face masks while using the pilot service. Mobility On-Request vehicles are cleaned regularly. The precautions taken will follow York Region Transit’s COVID-19 protocols. Please visit COVID-19: YRT Response and Service Updates for any updated changes.
  4. BlogTO has a post with the renderings for 14 of the stations which came from the Metrolinx press package. What surprised me most about the announcement was that Transportation Minister Caroline Mulroney was actually there. In just about every other transportation-related announcement someone else was representing her. With the election coming up, time to bring her out of hiding?
  5. Caledon Enterprise: Caledon council asks to extend Brampton bus routes north of Mayfield Road As long as the bulk of the Caledon passengers are heading south into Brampton, then this doesn't seem like a big ask. If the passengers are trying to get to other places in Caledon then you run into problems. Currently the first east-west route spanning the area west of Hurontario is the 23 SANDALWOOD which provides links to Mayfield West with a bit of a walk to the Sandalwood Loop and the 81 MAYFIELD WEST and Bolton via the Voyago service along Queen St. Neither of which are convenient or quick. According to the article, Brampton is receptive to increasing the services into Caledon, if they are willing to help pay for the services, which they are currently looking into. Caledon will have to wait until Brampton Transit decides to implement service along Mayfield Rd. or go ahead and run it on their own to provide some additional service which would also connect the various routes running north into Caledon. Perhaps down the line they can work out a cost sharing with Brampton Transit. Is there something similar for the TTC service along Steeles or does the TTC bear all of the costs involved? There's also still the discussion about how far into Caledon Brampton Transit is willing to operate. Marginally to serve the developments on the north side of Mayfield? Or substantially to connect communities further north?
  6. My thinking is that the VIVA rapidways would only extend as far as Donald Cousens Pkwy. and then continue south down to the Cornell Terminal. Since Donald Cousens is a relatively new roadway, reconfiguring it for a rapdiway doesn't make a lot of sense. They could simply use curbside stops (at 9th Line, 16th Ave. William Forster and Hwy. 7) since there shouldn't be significant amounts of traffic on that section of the roadway. I don't know if the grass median is wide enough to eventually accommodate a rapidway, but there is room to put it between Donald Cousens and Reesor or to widen Donald Cousens into said space. I've wondered why they didn't just upgrade and incorporate Reesor instead of building a modern arterial right beside it. As for further extensions west, running all the way to Hwy. 50 would probably benefit residents in Bolton. Major Mackenzie doesn't really line up with anything in Brampton (it's so insignificant that Brampton Transit put their inset for the Züm routes running into York there) and currently it's just the CP Rail yard that would be of any interest to passengers. If it's possible to shift Maple GO south or improve access to Major Mackenzie it would ease that connection to future VIVA service. Rutherford lines up with Castlemore which Brampton does have plans for by extending the Bovaird Züm corridor east. A proper transit terminal will eventually be needed in East Brampton as the Gore Meadows Community Centre was likely only ever meant to be used as an interim measure. I don't know how long the land on the Brampton side of Castlemore and Hwy. 50 will be vacant or if provisions were put in place to allow for a transit terminal (the Brampton Transit map shows the lands as commercial). Maybe with YRT footing some of the bill? They did identify the Hwy. 27/Hwy. 50 corridor for long-term express service. Any stations on the future GO line to Bolton could work as well as I'd imagine they'd be a draw for East Brampton residents as well. It will only be a matter of time before the gap develops and fills in and there will be a need for additional connections between Brampton and Vaughan. Kleinburg-Nashville will probably start clamouring for regular service once things go back to normal after COVID. Going further west, Nashville/Countryside is probably a connection for consideration later with a Bolton consideration.
  7. From the Ontario Line ground breaking press release: I take it the dark blue lines are for LRT routes and the lavender/lilac lines are for larger subway-type lines? Metrolinx likes using that shade of purple for all of their under construction projects regardless of the technology. I guess the Eglinton line will count as the latter, while Metrolinx is still hoping (but with an unspecified completion date) for an extension of Line 4 to meet Line 2 at Sheppard and McCowan. If the 2030 completion date for the Ontario Line is still expected (or even if it slips) it should be long enough since the closure of the SRT late next year to recycle the number (Line 3) and possibly the colour? Though if Ford has any say in it, he'll probably want the line colour closer to PC (dark) blue than the existing light blue. The map is also obviously using placeholder station names since none of the lavender/lilac lines have been workshopped yet. Cedarvale makes some sense as does Osgoode, but to not refer to Yonge at Eglinton and Queen stations or Danforth at the Pape station seems odd to say the least. I didn't agree with renaming both stations to Sheppard-Yonge, citing Bloor-Yonge as a precedent. You can give each line a separate name and refer to the complex with the hyphenated name. The neighbourhood is known as Yonge-Eglinton after all! A single name for Sheppard-Yonge could have been Lansing since Princess Diana declined having the station renamed in her honour. Riverdale/Leslieville seems unnecessarily long if only because the line straddles the boundary (official or not) of the two neighbourhoods. I wonder what they'll come up with for Queen & Spadina and King & Bathurst? The Fashion District could apply to both since it skirts the periphery but I don't know how common that name is these days since the condo-ification of the neighbourhood. Could St. Mary (or Portugal Square) work at Bathurst with the church just up the street at Adelaide? St. Patrick's church is probably further from the namesake station or was it named after the old ward?
  8. I haven't been on the local Züm service on Hwy. 7 since the rapidway opened out to Woodbridge, but if the operation is like what's seen at the VMC VIVA stop/station, then yes they do operate along those lanes. I do hope they've incorporated the Züm schedule into the displays in the new VIVA stations. The last time I was out that way the curbside stops only displayed the next departures for the VIVA Orange. You had to call Brampton Transit's automated system to get the departure times for the Züm bus. Thankfully they had a Brampton Transit stop along with the number and stop ID (I'm not entirely sure that Triplinx was up and running yet for you to be able to check online). I did come across a recently revised rapdiway maps from the VIVA Next: Revised June 2021 Revised November 2021 The maps indicate the future VIVA Silver rapidway corridor along Jane will run from Major Mackenzie all the way down to Steeles instead of previously ending at VMC. Potentially with a connection to York U, but Pioneer Village is more likely. Who would be in charge of the BRT corridor along Steeles, or is this another one of those joint projects once a revenue-sharing agreement is worked out between the TTC and YRT? It's listed last with a TBD on it, so I presume that's YRT's priority in that order. Does Major Mackenzie warrant having two VIVA routes through Richmond Hill with both the Green and Silver? The eastward extension to Donald Cousens Pkwy. (are they building a terminal there? Would Mount Joy GO be a reasonable terminus point?) is a new addition. I presume if the old scheme is still in play that VIVA Green will run from Don Mills to the Cortellucci Vaughan Hospital Terminal, while VIVA Silver will run from York U/Pioneer Village to Donald Cousens/Mount Joy. The VIVA Orange branch to Finch is gone in light of the Yonge subway extension. With Brampton Transit looking to replicate the rapidways along its corridors, notably the Hwy. 7/Queen St. perhaps rejigging the VIVA network with Züm covering the section west of VMC. VIVA Purple extending west to VMC and restoring VIVA Orange to York U along the proposed VIVA Silver route. A rapidway corridor along Jane would address the additional connectivity, but would still miss the expanded coverage of a local circulator route as was discussed earlier.
  9. Along Hwy. 7 it operates like the VIVA service. I don't know why they simply didn't work out an arrangement with Brampton Transit and let Züm run their (more frequent) service instead of VIVA Orange. YRT could have marketed it as VIVA Red. But yes it's open door in both directions. As for the branches going to York U, it came off at Keele, went south to York then returned via Jane without stopping at Hwy. 407 station. Running the Züm route down to Hwy. 407 would have been somewhat beneficial. It would at least get BRT service into the station. It already serves VMC at the Rapidway, I'm not sure why it would need to terminate inside the SmartVMC terminal as well if not for ease of connectivity to the other YRT route and it's the closest turnaround point. York U still allows TTC and Brampton Transit onto campus, I don't know why they couldn't allow one YRT route to do the same. Their students were livid when YRT and GO service was eliminated from campus (some even do make the hike up to Hwy. 407). Maybe the VIVA Orange after serving VMC (and Hwy. 407) again giving service west of VMC to Züm? The service frequencies shouldn't be a problem if York U was concerned about bus traffic.
  10. The construction is taking place at Port Credit (or technically where the tracks cross over Hurontario east of the station), so theoretically they could run service between Union and Long Branch and Clarkson and West Harbour. The problem is that both Long Branch and Clarkson aren't really equipped to handle the number of GO buses needed to bridge the gap in service and Long Branch is also not an accessible station. It is a Sunday, so they could take over part of the parking lot for bus staging if they really wanted to. I don't know how GO feels about terminating train service at Long Branch for anyone who wanted access to Mimico and Exhibition from the Lakeshore East line. Any gaps within Toronto they've usually told passengers to take the TTC instead.
  11. VMC station is easier and closer to get to from Ikea/Dave & Busters, but if you're trying to catch a GO Bus, walking south to the Hwy. 407 station saves you having to pay an additional fare (whether or not it's eventually refunded when you board the GO Bus) along with the potential wait for either southbound service. If Hwy. 407 was designed with the eventual hope/intent for easy transfers from VMC to access the GO services, then it's doing it's job albeit with two (and until recently 3) fares involved. GO is routing all of their services into Hwy. 407 while everyone else is routing their services into VMC leaving either the subway or the 20 JANE to connect them. A terminal that size can certainly handle another local bus route, whether it's YRT or Brampton Transit to bridge the gap. I walked from VMC to Hwy. 407 faster than the next 20 JANE bus because of the need to access the GO service. Paying a full TTC fare for one stop on the subway seemed a bit much, but if the timing required it I would have paid. There should be another connecting route between the two until the TTC and YRT work out a transfer agreement. I don't think it's feasible for YRT to increase frequencies on the 20 JANE right now to cater to such a small segment of the corridor. Your circular route would work with a stop at Hwy. 407 if only to provide access to the GO services offered there. The industrial area is probably able to attract more employees as GO significantly expands the commutershed of the area. The first/last mile options from Hwy. 407 are terribly lacking (and until a fare/transfer agreement is reached punitive in cost) regardless of who is to blame.
  12. Standardized yes, perhaps an arrangement should be put in place for the occasional use of the terminal when needed. The alternative where YRT provides the service between VMC and Pioneer Village doesn't sound like something that would provide as much service as a TTC-operated shuttle would. Based on the photos and description, it looks like the TTC shuttles were running clockwise around the block of Hwy. 7, Millway, Apple Mill and Jane, putting them across the street from the SmartVMC terminal and halfway to the VIVA stop. If the bus stop for the shuttles is outside of the terminal due to jurisdictional issues, I can only imagine what passenger reaction will be once the area fills in and there's an unexpected need to implement shuttle service. I'm sure the neighbours would also be up in arms about having TTC buses lined up along the street when there's a terminal there. The Hwy. 407 station pedestrian access is a joke. With the lack of a TTC co-fare accessing the GO services from the north means either relying on the 20 JANE or walking. The few times I've done it I wasn't alone. The eliminated co-fare between YRT and GO might make a circulator shuttle between Hwy. 407 and VMC covering the quickly developing area worthwhile for passengers. Most of the pedestrians I noted were coming from the industrial areas south of Hwy. 7. It could also provide an alternative to the 20 JANE with additional links between the two stations. I'm sure there'd be some staff and patrons of Ikea and Dave & Buster's who'd use it!
  13. I've had to walk into Hwy. 407 station a few times needing to access the GO services. The legal pedestrian route is to follow the walkway around the terminal and down to the lower level by the parking lot/PPUDO and enter from there. I've been tempted to use the bus-only roadway off of Jane to access the bus terminal, but have simply resorted to walking into the terminal off the main entrance following the buses. True to TTC form both "shortcuts" include signage for no pedestrian access. The terminal itself isn't a fare-paid zone so I don't know why a shorter/easier pedestrian route isn't formalized. It would certainly simplify accessibility access to the bus terminal. The bus roadway I can understand as there isn't much room for a footpath (even if it is the most direct entry from the north). Given the apparent lack of walk-in traffic (though I'm never the only one whenever I do walk into the station), direct pedestrian access seems like an afterthought in the station design.
  14. Thought I'd ask here since I brought it up in the TTC thread, but when shuttle bus service is used for the Spadina line extension to VMC is there an assigned platform at VMC for TTC shuttle buses? It does make for a poor connection to the VIVA service if the TTC shuttles don't make stops between stations. Based on the terminal map there are 3 unused platforms at the moment. Is one officially allocated to the TTC shuttle, or is it more ad hoc/find an available platform? Based on the location of the Züm stop, I'm inclined to think Platform 1 would be for off-loading while one of the others (4 or 6) would be for boarding. The 20 JANE doesn't really need an off-loading platform since it's a through route and the 10 WOODBRIDGE and 26 MAPLE don't strike me as having the ridership necessary for one either.
  15. Found the shuttle map in the Spadina Subway Extension thread (page 23). If things haven't changed significantly northbound shuttles serve Hwy. 407 at Platform 4 while southbound shuttles serve Platform 3 (which may no longer be the case as that's the southbound YRT 20 JANE stop along with their Mobility On Request service). Seeing as the map is a little over 4 years old, perhaps they've tweaked the shuttle route? Then again, the Tuscan/St. Regis is an established bus route, so why mess with it?
  16. With the early shutdown this week in the evenings of Line 1 north of Wilson, shuttle buses are operating serving all of the stations to VMC. Is this the first time TTC shuttle buses will have operated on this segment of the subway since it opened? The routing isn't indicated, but I remember when the subway was extended to VMC that a shuttle bus routing was identified/discussed here. I presume at VMC the TTC will be entering the SmartVMC Bus Terminal which makes transferring to the VIVA service less than ideal given the distance between the two. I guess one of the unassigned platforms will be allocated to the TTC or (and perhaps this should be a question for the YRT thread) is a platform already assigned for this purpose or is it more ad hoc? There isn't a map or even a list of which platforms GO and Ontario Northland use at the Highway 407 station, so I don't know what the situation there would be like for the TTC. With GO's reduced service maybe they gave the TTC one of theirs? Though it's likely they used Platforms 4 and/or 5 (one of which I think is also used by Ontario Northland based on the signage I saw the last time I was there).
  17. They could add a branch to the 954 LAWRENCE EAST EXPRESS that would serve the new Lawrence East station (side question, will they transfer this name to the new station or will Metrolinx in their infinite wisdom think that it will confuse riders and opt for another name like Lawrence & McCowan, Scarborough Hospital or Bendale Park?). Why bother constructing a station with bus facilities if they're not going to use it? I've seen both Fall 2023 and Q3/Q4 2023. The switchover is contingent on a few other things like having acquired enough buses to implement the service change and reconfiguring both Kennedy and Scarborough Centre stations to deal with the service changes. Here's a timeline from one of Steve Munro's posts from last fall: I'm still digging, but I don't think they've cleared their first goalpost for 2022 of "Board Approval of preferred option, Jan. 2022". It came up in the February meeting, but no decision was made on the routing option for the connecting express bus service. That bit of creep can quickly snowball if it's not addressed in time to meet the other deadlines.
  18. There is the additional option, if the weekend GO passes continues for the foreseeable future of using that for a $10 round trip for a single day or $15 for the whole (long) weekend. The tradeoff being that you cannot access the free co-fare with those passes. Perhaps if they decide to make it permanent they can figure out a way to include them with the co-fare? It'd essentially be like showing the driver a transfer, as long as they (drivers) know what to look for to ensure that they're valid. For those who decide to get a season's pass for Wonderland, the $15 weekend GO pass is a deal even if you have to pay for the local connections separately. Or there'll be a steady stream of rideshares between 407 Station and Wonderland for those who can't be bothered to wait for the YRT bus! Reroute the 760 VAUGHAN MILLS/WONDERLAND into 407 Station or have weekend express on the 20 JANE (direct between 407 and possibly VMC Stations to Wonderland)?
  19. Right now it's a vague line drawn on a map with the hopes of upgrading it to some sort of rail-based system. Given that it's running in the 407 corridor, crossings will be more limited and even then I doubt every crossing of the corridor will get a station similar to how not every road crossing the 407 doesn't get an interchange (Islington, Steeles, McLaughlin). If we were talking about a completely grade separated transit corridor I don't know if there's much difference in terms of price for a station if it's a bus or a train/LRT of some sort. Oshawa to Burlington would be a long route, but it would provide an additional circumferential route through the GTA without having to go through Union Station/Toronto. HOV lanes along the 401 in Toronto if they could be shoehorned in (or simply given over) somehow would help with the GO buses that rely on it to access places like Yorkdale, Finch or STC. The map does indicate this possibility at least between the 427 and Yonge. The 407 Transitway is still shown on the map with the thin yellow dotted line, but it gets completely covered by the "Higher Order Transit Connection" in thick purple. So will we have two different technology corridors along the 403 in Mississauga and 407 in York/Durham? The Transitway corridor would essentially be the "local service" while the rail-based corridor would be the "express service". If the Mississauga Transitway design is extended, other local agencies can use the corridor based on available access points. The tricky part is getting both within the same corridor. With the Mississauga section there isn't a lot of room meaning you either build on top of or beneath the Transitway. The section along Eglinton may be tricky as it's also within the flight path of Pearson, but I doubt it'll be taller than any of the existing buildings in the area.
  20. I was talking more about 400-series highways. The non-freeway (for the most part) highways do have the tendency to cross over the freeway that superseded them, case in point Hwy. 2 as you mentioned. The 403/QEW are the only co-signed freeways. You do have the odd freeway/highway co-sign like the 401/6 and 403/6 and I think the 400/69 (since downloading from the 1990s the 410/7 no longer counts). All the other parties are campaigning against the 413. Whether or not it sways enough votes provincially, and more crucially, locally remains to be seen. It goes through some fairly solid PC ridings, but I don't know if there's been enough of a demographic shift to swing them in the even the PCs lose control of Queen's Park. The rail-based transit corridor along the 407 (upgraded from the originally planned bus Transitway) seems intriguing but there are still a lot of details that need to be worked out. It looks more like an election ploy that will be lucky if it get started before the next term draws to a close. Lines drawn on a napkin before an election rarely go as planned.
  21. MiWay had posted these detours which were supposed to take effect on March 21 for routes using the Transitway, but have removed them (accidentally?). Is the detour being deferred? So I'll have to use the info archived on Transit Toronto. In the first notice, the entrance to the Transitway is apparently going to be blocked due to work related to the Hurontario LRT meaning eastbound buses will need to detour between City Centre Terminal and Dixie Station. The detour doesn't explain how passengers can access the Transitway routes at Dixie Station since it's rejoining the Transitway EAST of the station. Presumably they can use the on-street stops for the 5 DIXIE, but it's not indicated or depicted. In the second notice, the eastbound station entrance at Dixie Station will be closed (presumably to complete repairs from last year) and passengers are asked to use a temporary pedestrian crosswalk from the westbound platform to access service. Given that for the first week there will be no eastbound service (perhaps this is why the notice was pulled?) shouldn't they have coordinated the notices? GO has mentioned the closure, but that no stops would be missed: Bus detour – Route 19, 29 and 40 Between March 21st and March 28th, part of the Mississauga Transitway will be closed due to construction. Route 19, 29, and 40 GO buses will detour, no stops will be missed. The routes do serve Dixie station, I presume they are simply going to follow MiWay's detour routing as well?
  22. I can't imagine that door placement will radically change in the future unless it's some for some crucial component in an upcoming model. There's probably a window for manufacturers to slightly adjust the door placement based on requests for say different door widths. MiWay has gone to the trouble to making their paved bus stop pads for regular bus stops the length between the front and rear (or second on an artic) doors for the sake of accessibility. I lost a freshly replaced tree on my boulevard due to this program - you'd think the two departments would have consulted each other and save the cost and labour! If door placement is radically changed across all manufacturers then they may need to re-examine their bus stops. Various agencies will simply screen out any bidders whose products don't conform to their needs, and hence may simply look elsewhere if their current manufacturer decides to go that route. (pun intended)
  23. At the risk of going further off on this tangent... Other than possibly the 403 in Mississauga, the other numbers I was discussing are what they SHOULD have been numbered based on existing adjacent highways and not what initially appears to be sequential (aside from the QEW) based on opening/planning. At some point, it seems MTO switched from one to the other with the highways taking on the number of a parallel or replaced highway (the 427 and eventual 410 being an example of both). I don't see the point in having two disjointed segments of the 403 if there are no plans for the gap filled in by the 407 to be changed. The segment of the QEW is co-signed with the 403 between the two segments and the exits in Mississauga were numbered based on the mileage of that routing. The number of highways was used at one point in promotional material for businesses looking to locate in Mississauga in the 90s and pains were made to distinguish the 403 from the 410 to up the highway count! The 403 is the only highway to 2 separate interchanges with both the 401 and QEW!
  24. If they seriously are going with that design, then the door need to line up with the openings. Unless the openings are slightly larger than the bus door for a bit of wiggle room for the driver. -28-
  25. I think the Guelph to Kitchener is a new alignment with controlled access like a freeway. The current Hwy. 7 will continue to exist for local traffic/businesses. I think the plan is to connect it with the Hanlon Pkwy./Hwy. 6 south to the 401. Is that Brantford-Cambridge highway a relatively new idea? For continuity sake, perhaps connecting it to the Morriston bypass? What would this highway be called, the 424? If Hwy. 6 was upgraded to full expressway status (it's doing so incrementally already) between the 401 and 403, it's going to need a different number since 406 is already taken. [Going off on a tangent] The 403 make more sense as the 405, while the 405 in Niagara should have been the 408 since it paralleled the final leg of Hwy. 8 to the US border. Hell, even renumbering the Mississauga portion of the 403 as simply the continuation of the 410 makes sense now that the 407 isn't the missing link between the two segments. Maybe then give the 406 the 403 title and complete it to Port Colborne and then everything's settled.
×
×
  • Create New...