Cobra
Senior Member
I tried so many times to bring it up to Metrolinx and gave up. Perhaps since they are renaming "Science Centre" to "Don Valley" - this could be a good time for us to collectively push them to rename Eglinton to Eglinton-Yonge?
|
|
|
Milaisacat
New Member
I'm still sour that Translink named the SkyTrain station serving Simon Fraser University "Production Way-University". The buses serving the University of British Columbia aren't called "University". The future UBC Extension SkyTrain line isn't called "University" Extension...
Vortex112
New Member
This has been brought up so many times. The station is named after the village of Eglinton which the station serves. It’s not just named after the intersection and I don’t see any reason why we would want to rename it as such.
mrgrieves
Active Member
lol maybe because no has ever heard of the Village of Eglinton, which also happens to share its name with the entire stretch of the EGLINTON crosstown line which runs on EGLINTON avenue. anyway this line has bigger problems than the names of the stations
kev1n1m
Active Member
This would be like insisting Spadina Station be pronounced SPA-DEE-NA because it's located north of Bloor and that's the original pronunciation of Spadina Road. Historically accurate, but nobody would be stupid enough to insist that be the case.
T3G
Senior Member
This reminds me of how I was once told Yorkdale is not a commercial name, because the nearby neighbourhood that few people have heard of was also called Yorkdale.
The fact that the station came 14 years after the mall with a coincidentally identical name was apparently not relevant...
The fact that the station came 14 years after the mall with a coincidentally identical name was apparently not relevant...
Mind_the_gap
Active Member
And before people start commenting on Queen's Quay West or Sumach/Cherry...
It was my understanding why we couldn't do this was because of Rob Ford's underground proposal, and the City's desire to push this through as planned.
@robmausser is right. If we hadn't been so quick to push Line 5 forward to oppose Ford, we could have had a dedicated ROW between YYZ/Renforth/Mount Dennis and whatever Don Mills calls itself...
Not to beat a dead horse, but the South Side-alignment was correct, and we'll be paying for this in decades to come, especially if every other train turns back at Laird.
Look at all the bus routes terminating at Don Valley...
I'll already be punished with a linear transfer at Sheppard (51A/151).
robmausser
Senior Member
Yes the understanding I have is that in order to realign the track to the south, the city had to yet again reopen the file, and you have to accept other proposals as well, which would have given Rob Ford another chance to try and force the whole line to be buried. So they just decided to leave it as is.
I believe it actually would have been possible to have a completely grade-separated line all the way to Bermondsey, if you did the south alignment of the Leslie section, and then rebuilt the DVP ramps, and simply disallowed a small road to not cross the LRT. The rest of the line until Bermondsey in the east doesn't interact with a single intersection, because there are on/off ramps for several streets in anticipation of the Richview Highway.
ShonTron
Moderator
Nothing to do with the Richview Expressway, which was only intended to link the 401/427 interchange with the Highway 400 extension somewhere around Black Creek & Eglinton.
It was simply a high speed arterial built by Metro in the 1950s to connect two previously disconnected sections of Eglinton between Leaside and the Golden Mile, which did not cross the Don Valley.
Transportfan
Senior Member
That name choice is particularly striking given Metrolinx' overboard insistence on avoiding confusion, considering that in other cases they used odd names where confusion would be unlikely anyways, such as the on-street stops, where people would just see them as analogous to bus or streetcar stops, even for the Hurontario LRT, which is not even in Toronto.
Richard White
Senior Member
Did someone rename this thread or am I on drugs?
reinventingthewheel
Active Member
Yes the Crosstown moniker was dropped though I cannot speak to the latter.
Kyle Campbell
Senior Member
Would it be so bad to just embrace duplicate station names, the exercise in avoiding it is just going to get harder and harder over the years, and names will become more and more obscure historical references
New York, Chicago and Paris seem to do fine with duplicates, although Chicago's duplicates on the same line is a bridge to far in my books.
crs1026
Superstar
Totally agree. The whole business of obsessing over naming conventions is a bit nerdy and pedantic in my view. It leans to overthinking and unnecessary perfectionism. Very much like railcar paint schemes, locomotive horn selection, and GO cabcar spotting.
The most important things to appreciate about station naming are
a) any naming protocol is inherently likely to have contradictions and logical inconsistencies, that defy solution, so good is good enough - there is no perfect answer
b) real users especially those with regular repeat routes quickly learn and grow accustomed to odd place names that have no intuitive meaning, so arbitrary place names mostly work fine
c) real tourists don't memorize naming conventions, nor does the naming convention from the last city they visited assist them when visiting the next city - so they mostly do know how to read maps and figure things out on their phones
d) place naming decisionmaking is a gold mine for high priced consulting, usually with only marginal value added, so while irresistible to ineffective bureaucracies like ML, is something best avoided
- Paul
Last edited:
felix123
Active Member
Every time I've ridden the L and they announce Cicero for the 5th time, I think of this:
Last edited: