Denis T Posted February 20, 2012 Report Share Posted February 20, 2012 This thought just came across my mind and it really got me thinking. Currently, the Y-U-S line has 32 stations, with the extention from Downsview north to Vaughan, it would have 38 stations, and IF it ever gets extended from Finch to Richmond Hill according to the current station plans, it would have 44 stations across the whole line. It has me wondering, would this make the line way too long and more of a nightmare to manage? Now, if the line went in a straight line across the city like the B-D line and the upcoming E-S-C LRT, at least it would have a valid point of connecting one area to another that are very far distances from each other. In the case of the Y-U-S line though, it is shaped like a U, and having the line be very long like this, it just really does not make any sense what-so-ever, considering that aside from transit fans and other people interested in subways and trains in general, ordinary folks would not travel from Richmond Hill Centre or Finch to Vaughan Metropolitan Centre the whole distance of the Y-U-S line. Having said that, I would like to know your ideas on this and solutions, like for example splitting the line into 2. Fire away any thoughts and ideas you guys may have on this! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C. Chau Posted February 20, 2012 Report Share Posted February 20, 2012 Well, for one thing, riders can utilize Viva from RHC to VCC, and using crosstown bus routes from Finch to Finch West, and then take the TYSSE to VCC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D. DeLarge Posted February 20, 2012 Report Share Posted February 20, 2012 The point about people travelling the entire length of the line is moot. Many people probably don't travel the entire length of the YUS as it exists today. There is, however, going to be a lot of people going from the endpoints downtown, and from midpoints along one part of the "U" to midpoints along the other part. Splitting it would cause a transfer somewhere, and deciding where to split it would be even more of a messy decision. The logical point would be Union, but given all the space constraints putting in an extra set of platforms to end one line would be a no-go. Using only one platform for each split line would create bottlenecks during peak times. Splitting anywhere else would cause that extra transfer for people going downtown. Other logical points for a split would be St. George or Bloor, but again, space constraints, plus the extra confusion of being a main transfer station. Methinks splitting the line would cause more trouble than it's worth. I don't know if there's any internal issues with managing the line the way it is, but it seems to run fairly reliably (discounting incidents at track level of course). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skyfirenet Posted February 20, 2012 Report Share Posted February 20, 2012 I'm still surprised that Toronto hasn't yet passed a bylaw limiting just how far north the TTC can extend the YUS line. I mean, while some may think that Tobermory and Moosonee would make great end points for the line, there really needs to be a point when we can tell York region that if they want more subways, they must build, operate and maintain them themselves. That said, I agree that splitting the line wouldn't be worth it. Probably the best thing would be the old idea of completing the loop at the north end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turtle Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 Methinks splitting the line would cause more trouble than it's worth. I don't know if there's any internal issues with managing the line the way it is, but it seems to run fairly reliably (discounting incidents at track level of course). Ignoring delays from illnesses/injury or mechanical problems, the only real problem with the line is the end terminals, or backups at St. Clair West with the turnbacks in the morning. The backups at a turnback location like St. Clair West could be reduced by having staff on the platform to help check the trains, or relaxing the rules to allow the odd stubborn/sleeping passenger to be taken into the centre track for a couple minutes with the train until it goes back south. They are planning on moving the turnbacks to Downsview eventually, with Glencairn in the short term. The new track to the north buildup at Wilson is supposed to help with delays related to run-ins. There again, a little offloading help from staff on the platform could speed things up a little. More crossovers, like the ones they put back in at St. Clair and College, and are putting back at King, give more options for turn backs if the line gets split by an impassable delay, like something where a train cannot move from a station for whatever reason, and is blocking the line. That said, I agree that splitting the line wouldn't be worth it. Probably the best thing would be the old idea of completing the loop at the north end. A great idea which would have reduced some bottlenecks, and possibly added different ones (think eglinton how it is used now). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D. DeLarge Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 That said, I agree that splitting the line wouldn't be worth it. Probably the best thing would be the old idea of completing the loop at the north end. Something like running it along under Highway 7....but, I'm not sure the density is there to actually support a subway. It's no Yonge Street. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenster102.5 Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 I think they would need to put in small overhauls to existing stations accessibility wise to take on the increase flow of patrons when they add the stations. Also some people are going to not like it when their property becomes a tunnel emergency exit. I would wait for development and traffic to increase from the Eglington Lrt before more north/south stations. Everything will just feed into a broken back of a subway line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skyfirenet Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 Something like running it along under Highway 7....but, I'm not sure the density is there to actually support a subway. It's no Yonge Street. Actually, I was thinking along Rutherford because there you don't have the 407 and a hydro corridor killing any chance of future development. I know the density is nowhere near enough to justify it. However, it's to be viewed mainly from the perpective of improving opperations along the entire line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawker Siddeley 4 Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 I'm still surprised that Toronto hasn't yet passed a bylaw limiting just how far north the TTC can extend the YUS line. I mean, while some may think that Tobermory and Moosonee would make great end points for the line, there really needs to be a point when we can tell York region that if they want more subways, they must build, operate and maintain them themselves. Indeed. York Region can't just expect the subways to come to them. Toronto taxpayers pay for subways in Toronto, not York. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Articulated Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 Indeed. York Region can't just expect the subways to come to them. Toronto taxpayers pay for subways in Toronto, not York. York Region is paying for 1/3 of the construction costs north of Steeles. Toronto is only paying for 1/3 of the construction costs for the segment south of Steeles. How again is this not fair? Toronto is paying for the costs of the subway only as far as Steeles, which is originally how far the subway was going to go until York Region/Vaughan stepped up and got it extended. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skyfirenet Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 How again is this not fair? Who's covering the operating costs once it opens? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D. DeLarge Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 Who's covering the operating costs once it opens? I presume it will be similar to how TTC routes operating in York Region currently operate, with York Region "contracting" the TTC to operate the subway north of Steeles. Appropriate operating, staffing and equipment costs will be calculated and billed to York Region (although York Region might be able to take care of the station staffing and cleaning themselves). How the fare boundary will work however, is anyone's guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wil9402 Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 I presume it will be similar to how TTC routes operating in York Region currently operate, with York Region "contracting" the TTC to operate the subway north of Steeles. Appropriate operating, staffing and equipment costs will be calculated and billed to York Region (although York Region might be able to take care of the station staffing and cleaning themselves). How the fare boundary will work however, is anyone's guess. With Presto they could have passengers tap out when exiting at stations north of Steeles which would then charge them the YRT fare on top of the TTC fare they paid when they got on (the opposite can be done when coming south into Toronto). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawker Siddeley 4 Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 How again is this not fair?. People from York Region will be able to come into Toronto without paying a second fare and vice versa. I haven't heard anything about there being any sort of fare boundary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Articulated Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 People from York Region will be able to come into Toronto without paying a second fare and vice versa. I haven't heard anything about there being any sort of fare boundary. Back in the zone fare days, the subway crossed into Zone 2. Stations within Zone 2 had the bus terminal outside of the fare paid zone. From the drawings I've seen, this is the same arrangement that Steeles West, Highway 407 and Vaughan Centre stations will have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oc4526 Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 How the fare boundary will work however, is anyone's guess. With Presto they could have passengers tap out when exiting at stations north of Steeles which would then charge them the YRT fare on top of the TTC fare they paid when they got on (the opposite can be done when coming south into Toronto). I`m thinking the same way its set up in Longueuil and Laval with the Metro in Montreal (cash fares staying the same but only certen fare media accepted) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBfellow Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 Back in the zone fare days, the subway crossed into Zone 2. Stations within Zone 2 had the bus terminal outside of the fare paid zone. From the drawings I've seen, this is the same arrangement that Steeles West, Highway 407 and Vaughan Centre stations will have. The designs have them in one building to improve accessibility, but the actual bus platforms are not "TTC fare paid areas". Something like the current Finch station, but with a closer walk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dowlingm Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 Apparently there is some talk of reducing hours of service to allow trains to get in and out of Wilson. Certainly any extension north of Steeles should require York to find land for a yard, one big enough to accommodate Sheppard trains rather than sending them to Greenwood as at present. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Volvo Super Olympian Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 Apparently there is some talk of reducing hours of service to allow trains to get in and out of Wilson. Certainly any extension north of Steeles should require York to find land for a yard, one big enough to accommodate Sheppard trains rather than sending them to Greenwood as at present. don't the Sheppard trains go to Davisville Yard? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Articulated Posted February 21, 2012 Report Share Posted February 21, 2012 Apparently there is some talk of reducing hours of service to allow trains to get in and out of Wilson. Certainly any extension north of Steeles should require York to find land for a yard, one big enough to accommodate Sheppard trains rather than sending them to Greenwood as at present. The Wilson yard expansion is to accommodate for the extension. Its expansion would have to occur regardless of whether the line went to Steeles or Vaughan Centre, as capacity at both Wilson and Davisville are at their maximum now. What's already been discussed is that any Yonge extension to Richmond Hill will require a yard (I've heard large enough for 26 sets), and that's well documented and known. This side of the line will benefit much more from a new yard than the Spadina side, as trains can be released southbound on Yonge for rush hour instead of having to send them out of Wilson and around the line to Finch before rush hour frequency starts on southbound Yonge. Greenwood will only maintain the Sheppard line trains when the YUS becomes entirely TR equipped; it makes no sense for Davisville (or any other yard along the YUS) to tend to occasional maintenance on Sheppard's T1 fleet when there is no parts commonality with the fleet at Davisville. Also please explain to me why York Region has to subsidize the Sheppard line's train requirements??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dowlingm Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 Because if York wants it's "fair share" of subway it has to have some of the infrastructure too. They can't just have to have the nice bits like trains and stations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nname Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 Think of which, the YUS line is quite similar to the Millennium Line here in Vancouver - 29 stations, 42.1km, and 57min end-to-end travel. Although they are going to break the line into two (27.8km, 25.4km) in 2016.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dowlingm Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 While I'm sure the T1s will need to go to Greenwood from time to time for heavy work, it seems mad that at least some work couldn't be done at a nearer depot rather than pathing them all the way from Sheppard round Union to the Danforth Line at a massive cost in deadheading time over the course of the years - achieved either via the new yard or in the event of an western extension of the Sheppard Line with a non-revenue track connecting to Wilson Yard from the line terminus at Allen/Sheppard with the space there being achieved by storing more TRs at the Richmond Hill yard. As for YUS, is there a reason why for instance a change in the turnback at St. Clair West would be total? Are there crew changes at St Clair West which would mean turning back some trains there and some at Glencairn would be operationally inefficient? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skyfirenet Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 While I'm sure the T1s will need to go to Greenwood from time to time for heavy work, it seems mad that at least some work couldn't be done at a nearer depot rather than pathing them all the way from Sheppard round Union to the Danforth Line at a massive cost in deadheading time over the course of the years - achieved either via the new yard or in the event of an western extension of the Sheppard Line with a non-revenue track connecting to Wilson Yard from the line terminus at Allen/Sheppard with the space there being achieved by storing more TRs at the Richmond Hill yard. To be honest, it would probably be easier to just knock down the temporary walls and convert the Sheppard subway to TRs rather than to make room for heavy work on the Sheppard T1's at Wilson or the future Richmond Hill yard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBfellow Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 While I'm sure the T1s will need to go to Greenwood from time to time for heavy work, it seems mad that at least some work couldn't be done at a nearer depot rather than pathing them all the way from Sheppard round Union to the Danforth Line at a massive cost in deadheading time over the course of the years Someone correct me, but are trains allowed to go "full speed" through platforms even though the stations are closed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now