[Sauga89]

For instance, you could have the light metro divert from the corridor to have a direct interchange at Sheppard-McCowan and a better connections to Line 2/4, rather than forcing everyone to walk 400-500m like at Main Street-Danforth.

I was looking at the Sheppard-McCowan plans the other day, though not in regards to light metro. I was wondering if it would be possible to lay heavy rail tracks on what is now the north lanes of Nugget Ave. Yes, I know that would block access to businesses on the north side of Nugget Ave. But I was thinking, maybe you could build a road on the south side of CPKC's Agincourt yard to provide access to those properties? Then the backyards of those industrial buildings would become their front yards. With GO tracks on what is now Nugget Ave, you'd be almost on top of the north end of the Line 2 platforms. And maybe the still under design line 4 extension could be pulled north a couple hundred metres, rather than being directly under Sheppard itself? But I'm not an engineer, so maybe I'm missing something.

 

[ahugepotato]

In theory a light metro would allow more flexibility for the route to veer off to serve important destinations and provide better connections, whilst saving on operations and maintenance costs in the long term. For instance, you could have the light metro divert from the corridor to have a direct interchange at Sheppard-McCowan and a better connections to Line 2/4, rather than forcing everyone to walk 400-500m like at Main Street-Danforth. Building such infrastructure with BiLevels in mind would significantly increase the capital costs for any such diversions.

Exactly this. Leaving this proposal for a REM-style ALM on the midtown/Milton corridor here: https://fernkhahn.com/midtown

 

[chrisw]

An interesting diversion to interchange with Science Centre Station.

 

[WB62]

An interesting diversion to interchange with Science Centre Station.

View attachment 630862

Where did you find this?

 

[chrisw]

@Willybru21 It's all fantasy but, it's from the post @ahugepotato linked. They had maps for 6 diversions from the corridor. "In this context, however, the advantage of metro lies in the ease of diverging from the corridor to serve nodes and connect with other lines. Small metro trains can handle sharp curves on light viaducts and small tunnels, stopping at simple stations."

Exactly this. Leaving this proposal for a REM-style ALM on the midtown/Milton corridor here: https://fernkhahn.com/midtown

 

[micheal_can]

Exactly this. Leaving this proposal for a REM-style ALM on the midtown/Milton corridor here: https://fernkhahn.com/midtown

REM is not compatible with the rest of the network. Case in point,if it weren't, Via could still use the Mont Royal tunnel. REM style isn't a bad thing, but it is not compatible with the existing GO network.

 

[6ixGod]

Here’s a map I made that shows the proposed station locations and connections from this iteration of the Midtown Line:

View attachment 630688

Yes, I like this map.

 

[CapitalSeven]

The eastern half of the midtown corridor is also the best option for HFR/HSR. Closing it off as a REM-style corridor would just be repeating the Montreal tunnel misktake, wouldn't it? Better to leave it as an electrified heavy rail corridor and get any required flexibility required through the selection of vehicles and potential spurs. Doesn't have to be bi-levels and huge locomotives. EMUs would be a compatible solution.

 

[smallspy]

An interesting diversion to interchange with Science Centre Station.

View attachment 630862

It may look pretty on a map, but 30 seconds scoping out the area would tell you that it's also hugely improbable to impossible.

Dan

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

For all the fantasy talk, I would say that I would much rather dump money on these GO expansions than on HSR if given the choice.

 

[Sunnyside]

For all the fantasy talk, I would say that I would much rather dump money on these GO expansions than on HSR if given the choice.

Ironically HSR is what would enable these projects. You could not get the Milton line and the midtown without HSR-level dollars.

Totally unrelated…. I really like the idea of calling the Belleville sub/midtown our “eastern mainline” if we do ever get our hands on it. Has a nice ring to it.

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

Ironically HSR is what would enable these projects. You could not get the Milton line and the midtown without HSR-level dollars.

Totally unrelated…. I really like the idea of calling the Belleville sub/midtown our “eastern mainline” if we do ever get our hands on it. Has a nice ring to it.

Most of New York City's railway stations are located NOT in the "downtown", but in midtown Manhattan. For example, Grand Central Station and Penn Station.

 

[micheal_can]

For all the fantasy talk, I would say that I would much rather dump money on these GO expansions than on HSR if given the choice.

GO expansion is needed, but changing it to other technology, such as REM would be a bad idea.

 

[Bojaxs]

Exactly this. Leaving this proposal for a REM-style ALM on the midtown/Milton corridor here: https://fernkhahn.com/midtown

No! As has been stated by other posters. Converting the Midtown & Milton corridor to metro would be repeating the same mistake as Montreal made with the Mount Royal tunnel.

EDIT: Converting the Milton/ Midtown line into a London style, Cross rail would be more ideal vs a Montreal style, REM.

 

[nfitz]

No! As has been stated by other posters. Converting the Midtown & Milton corridor to metro would be repeating the same mistake as Montreal made with the Mount Royal tunnel.

I must have lost that with all the fantasy and map discussions.

The issue in Montreal was that there was only a 2-track ultimate capacity through the tunnel, and both were lost to the REM LRT. I believe the CP mainline can support 6 tracks.