Transit geek Posted November 14, 2017 Report Share Posted November 14, 2017 15 hours ago, Archer said: The building supports for the Hudson Bay Centre are on either side of the existing walls, so without a huge change to their foundations, it can't be done. Another possibility to consider would be to create a staggered platform layout. This would involve building a new platform opposite one of the tracks, only that it would not be placed directly across from the current island platform (similar to this Paris Metro station) as to not interfere with the HBC Centre's foundations. A problem would be where to place the new platform to minimize inconvenience between passengers. Since bored tube tunnels begin immediately east of the platforms, this would force any new platforms to be built to the west, but that would not be possible without severing the link to Lower Bay. Besides, the distance between the two stations is too close to warrant placing a new platform there - unless the platforms at Bay are replaced by those of a relocated Bloor-Yonge. In any case, due to the disruption reconstructing the platforms at Bloor-Yonge would cause, the relief line would need to be in service before anything could occur. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed T. Posted November 15, 2017 Report Share Posted November 15, 2017 I just noticed on the 123 Shorncliffe schedule: 315 EVANS-BROWNS LINE BLUE NIGHT SHORNCLIFFE To ROYAL YORK STN and ISLINGTON STN This is the 315 that totally, positively goes nowhere on, or even near, Shorncliffe Rd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lip Posted November 15, 2017 Report Share Posted November 15, 2017 3 hours ago, Ed T. said: I just noticed on the 123 Shorncliffe schedule: 315 EVANS-BROWNS LINE BLUE NIGHT SHORNCLIFFE To ROYAL YORK STN and ISLINGTON STN This is the 315 that totally, positively goes nowhere on, or even near, Shorncliffe Rd. Dont mind the schedule, the destination signs dont show shorncliffe. What I will say is that i'm surprised that the signs were updated to show Islington Station with the temporary 1 year detour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaun Posted November 16, 2017 Report Share Posted November 16, 2017 Could they not build the platform north of where the current station is in the open area? Move the tracks to the side and build an island platform with stairs going up. And then build a moving walkway to connect to the existing platform which can be closed off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TechnicaProductions Posted November 16, 2017 Report Share Posted November 16, 2017 5 hours ago, Shaun said: Could they not build the platform north of where the current station is in the open area? Move the tracks to the side and build an island platform with stairs going up. And then build a moving walkway to connect to the existing platform which can be closed off. Forcing that many people into a corridor even with moving walkways would be disastrous Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfitz Posted November 16, 2017 Report Share Posted November 16, 2017 On 13/11/2017 at 12:57 AM, Tom1122 said: Has TTC considered a second platform for the Yonge station on the Bloor Line like how they built a second platform for Union? An idea is to build a new platform for eastbound trains and use the existing platform for westbounds. They've been considering it for years. There was certainly discussion when they widened the Bloor station platforms, and I suspect they've been thinking about it, since they realized that there would not be the planned Yonge-University-Bloor and Yonge-University-Danforth services in 1967. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smallspy Posted November 16, 2017 Report Share Posted November 16, 2017 4 hours ago, nfitz said: They've been considering it for years. There was certainly discussion when they widened the Bloor station platforms, and I suspect they've been thinking about it, since they realized that there would not be the planned Yonge-University-Bloor and Yonge-University-Danforth services in 1967. In fairness... There really was never planned to be a Yonge-University-Bloor and Yonge-University-Danforth line. The track arrangement bears that out. Dan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Streety McCarface Posted November 16, 2017 Report Share Posted November 16, 2017 8 hours ago, TechnicaProductions said: Forcing that many people into a corridor even with moving walkways would be disastrous It would just force everyone to St. George Station. In all fairness, it might increase traffic on the University line, but it will inevitably lead to overcrowding at St. George. If anything, it will just mean they'll have to expand both platforms at that station. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed T. Posted November 17, 2017 Report Share Posted November 17, 2017 At least some 501L buses are looping at the west end using Fortieth, James, and (I presume) Forty First. I've seen a couple do that. But I'm not sure if all the 501L buses are doing that, or that they're doing it all the time. With sewer reconstruction starting on Fortieth, there are lane closures with "yield to oncoming traffic" during the days, so this seems to be a late evening/overnight thing (the buses I saw were at 11 PM Wednesday, and 6:15 AM today). But that's puzzing, too. There's no traffic interfering with looping via Forty-Second at those times. Of course none of this is in any service advisory.... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blue.bird.fan Posted November 17, 2017 Report Share Posted November 17, 2017 5 hours ago, Ed T. said: At least some 501L buses are looping at the west end using Fortieth, James, and (I presume) Forty First. I've seen a couple do that. But I'm not sure if all the 501L buses are doing that, or that they're doing it all the time. With sewer reconstruction starting on Fortieth, there are lane closures with "yield to oncoming traffic" during the days, so this seems to be a late evening/overnight thing (the buses I saw were at 11 PM Wednesday, and 6:15 AM today). But that's puzzing, too. There's no traffic interfering with looping via Forty-Second at those times. Of course none of this is in any service advisory.... Anything happen to Long Branch? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed T. Posted November 17, 2017 Report Share Posted November 17, 2017 4 hours ago, benz.citaro.fan said: Anything happen to Long Branch? The bus loop is closed for reconstruction, and buses can't use the streetcar loop because reasons (more reconstruction, though I haven't seen much going on). The diversions to deal with this have been changing, both on the TTC and MiWay, it seems weekly if not daily. (More on the TTC side, I think MiWay ops have figured it out.) Councillor Grime's newsletter has a construction notice #2 which does not yet appear on ttc.ca. Basically the 501 buses will be using Fortieth, James, and Forty First until watermain work on Forty Second is completed. No mention of the trunk sewer work that's starting up on Fortieth, mainly at the top end towards Lake Shore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfitz Posted November 18, 2017 Report Share Posted November 18, 2017 On 16/11/2017 at 9:51 AM, smallspy said: There really was never planned to be a Yonge-University-Bloor and Yonge-University-Danforth line. The track arrangement bears that out. I'm not sure what you are referring to Dan. Isn't that the configuration they ran for 6 months starting in 1966? I thought the word was that if TTC had even intended not to run the original onfiguration, they would have designed Bloor-Yonge differently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smallspy Posted November 18, 2017 Report Share Posted November 18, 2017 1 hour ago, nfitz said: I'm not sure what you are referring to Dan. Isn't that the configuration they ran for 6 months starting in 1966? I thought the word was that if TTC had even intended not to run the original onfiguration, they would have designed Bloor-Yonge differently. Look at the track arrangement, not the map. Despite the various curves that were built, it was always designed to allow for independent services to run. If they had properly designed it for interlined operation, they would have designed Bay and St. George differently, and wouldn't have required passengers to guess whether the next train heading out from downtown was arriving on the upper or lower level. Either there would have been 3 tracks at each station instead of 4, or they would have intertwined the tracks to have the outbound trains all arrive on the same level. Dan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blue.bird.fan Posted November 18, 2017 Report Share Posted November 18, 2017 15 hours ago, smallspy said: Look at the track arrangement, not the map. Despite the various curves that were built, it was always designed to allow for independent services to run. If they had properly designed it for interlined operation, they would have designed Bay and St. George differently, and wouldn't have required passengers to guess whether the next train heading out from downtown was arriving on the upper or lower level. Either there would have been 3 tracks at each station instead of 4, or they would have intertwined the tracks to have the outbound trains all arrive on the same level. Dan I don't think they had taken this into account when designing it, or else it would have been properly designed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Transit geek Posted November 18, 2017 Report Share Posted November 18, 2017 2 hours ago, benz.citaro.fan said: I don't think they had taken this into account when designing it, or else it would have been properly designed. Has there been any consideration of a cross-platform interchange at St. George? All that would need to be done is to reconfigure the tracks so that trains in each direction on the same line call at separate platform levels; then, say, a commuter from the west end could get off a line 2 eastbound train and walk across to the opposite platform to board a line 1 southbound train and vice versa. As with the Bloor-Yonge problem above, the trackwork required to make such a configuration would be too much of an impact on commuters. Too bad the proposed relief line hasn't been planned west of the University line yet and there is no timeline on when construction on that section would begin. But the problem at St. George has never been as serious as that of Bloor-Yonge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smallspy Posted November 18, 2017 Report Share Posted November 18, 2017 3 hours ago, benz.citaro.fan said: I don't think they had taken this into account when designing it, or else it would have been properly designed. It had been taken into account - that's why they built it as they did. 1 hour ago, Transit geek said: Has there been any consideration of a cross-platform interchange at St. George? All that would need to be done is to reconfigure the tracks so that trains in each direction on the same line call at separate platform levels; then, say, a commuter from the west end could get off a line 2 eastbound train and walk across to the opposite platform to board a line 1 southbound train and vice versa. "All that would need to be done"? If only it was that simple. And I can't see how the TTC has ever contemplated a cross-platform connection. The construction costs would be astronomical, and for what benefit? Not having to go up or down a set of stairs? The current station is built quite conveniently as it is. Recall too, the historical situation of the station. It was originally intended to be a terminal station for both lines, and the Spadina extension wasn't built until 15 years after the University line opened. Dan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTC4120fan Posted November 19, 2017 Report Share Posted November 19, 2017 (edited) My friend saw 4080 in rebuild and 4042 looking shiny at Hillcrest. Also 1402 has new doors at Hillcrest. Any body knows why they are down at hillcrest? Edited November 19, 2017 by Matthew TTC 4120 I forgot to add question mark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tramguy Posted November 19, 2017 Report Share Posted November 19, 2017 5 hours ago, Matthew TTC 4120 said: My friend saw 4080 in rebuild and 4042 looking shiny at Hillcrest. Also 1402 has new doors at Hillcrest. Any body knows why they are down at hillcrest? I assume they were repaired/painted at Hillcrest or Harvey shops? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTC4120fan Posted November 20, 2017 Report Share Posted November 20, 2017 43 minutes ago, Tramguy said: I assume they were repaired/painted at Hillcrest or Harvey shops? Yes they were located at Hillcrest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blue.bird.fan Posted November 20, 2017 Report Share Posted November 20, 2017 Anyone know why 5177 has weird interior numbers on one end of the car? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8860 Posted November 22, 2017 Report Share Posted November 22, 2017 Something Odd at 4:00 Am 8677:135 Gerrard From Eglinton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blue.bird.fan Posted November 22, 2017 Report Share Posted November 22, 2017 21 hours ago, 8628 said: Something Odd at 4:00 Am 8677:135 Gerrard From Eglinton Might have been one of the interlined routes, not exactly sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leylandvictory2 Posted November 23, 2017 Report Share Posted November 23, 2017 1 hour ago, benz.citaro.fan said: Might have been one of the interlined routes, not exactly sure. 70 interlinewith 135 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8860 Posted November 23, 2017 Report Share Posted November 23, 2017 37 minutes ago, leylandvictory2 said: 70 interlinewith 135 8784 was on the 135 at 3am when service doesn’t even start and later transferred to the 185 like 8677 yesterday. 70 and 135 Interline at night from 9:30 to 2am Not at 4am. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xtrazsteve Posted November 23, 2017 Report Share Posted November 23, 2017 11 minutes ago, 8628 said: 8784 was on the 135 at 3am when service doesn’t even start and later transferred to the 185 like 8677 yesterday. 70 and 135 Interline at night from 9:30 to 2am Not at 4am. Excuse me, are you reading this from nextbus or did you actually say the bus signed 135 at 3am? 1 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