[gweed123]

Some of the non-dedicated lines are faster than the dedicated lines.

Where do you stop?

Keep it simple. Don't add them. Stick to Line 1 through 4, and add Line 5 to 7 if and when they open. There's obvious reasons for adding the airport express bus. Anything else is unnecessary clutter.

I think it's only clutter if you start including things like station labels. If you simply add a thin red line with a little "512" at the terminus, I don't think it adds very much clutter as well.

As for where you stop, I'd stop at any routes that do not operate entirely in their own ROW, with the exception of the airport rocket. This would drop routes like Bathurst from the list. Spadina, Harbourfront, St. Clair West, and Airport, that's it.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Here are the renderings for Keele Station:

http://urbantoronto.ca/database/projects/keele-crosstown-station

Those aren't renderings of the final product - they are conceptual representations. The actual design hasn't been announced yet (in fact, I don't think the winning consortium responsible for, among other things, designing and building the stations is still under wraps).

AoD

 

[nfitz]

This would drop routes like Bathurst from the list. Spadina, Harbourfront, St. Clair West, and Airport, that's it.

And yet the Bathurst streetcar can be faster than the Spadina streetcar.

 

[gweed123]

And yet the Bathurst streetcar can be faster than the Spadina streetcar.

Yes, but it can also be much much slower. At least with a ROW you get a greater degree of consistency and reliability.

 

[nfitz]

Yes, but it can also be much much slower. At least with a ROW you get a greater degree of consistency and reliability.

You've not stood at Spadina station for 20 minutes recently with either a lack of streetars, or a line much to long to fit on streetcars recently have you ...

 

[gweed123]

You've not stood at Spadina station for 20 minutes recently with either a lack of streetars, or a line much to long to fit on streetcars recently have you ...

Not recently, but I've used the line plenty of times after a Jays game. The biggest issue with the line IMO is stop locations relative to lights, which I understand with the rebuild has been partially rectified.

In any case, those delays you speak of are service related, and aren't inherently due to the presence or lack of a ROW.

My point is simply that dedicated ROW streetcar routes are 'higher up there' on the transit ladder than your typical streetcar or bus route, and they should have some kind of recognition on the rapid transit map, even if it's just as a simple red line with no stations or anything. If designed properly, it shouldn't be visually cluttering or distracting at all.

 

[nfitz]

Not recently, but I've used the line plenty of times after a Jays game. The biggest issue with the line IMO is stop locations relative to lights, which I understand with the rebuild has been partially rectified.

On Spadina, no changes. On Waterfront? There's more lights than there used to be, and it's significantly slower than it used to be.

My point is simply that dedicated ROW streetcar routes are 'higher up there' on the transit ladder than your typical streetcar or bus route, and they should have some kind of recognition on the rapid transit map ....

Key words. "rapid transit map". Spadina isn't rapid. Nor is St. Clair which now has a slower scheduled time than it did before they started the conversion. The airport bus on the other hand is rapid, with a higher average speed of any of the subway lines.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

On Spadina, no changes. On Waterfront? There's more lights than there used to be, and it's significantly slower than it used to be..

IIRC, this is a temporary situation due to construction. Signal priority has't been implemented and there may be more traffic lights than before as a temporary measure. Once construction is complete the LRVs should move faster.

I read this on Steve Munro's blog.

 

[nfitz]

IIRC, this is a temporary situation due to construction. Signal priority has't been implemented and there may be more traffic lights than before as a temporary measure. Once construction is complete the LRVs should move faster.

It will be faster than it is now. But with more crossings and lights than before, it's not going to be as fast as it was before construction started.

 

[44 North]

I thought there was an unspoken rule about traditional transit maps which was that lines shown must be grade-separated. Or at least almost entirely grade-separate. I don't think Sheppard East or Eglinton East should be shown. And if they are, they should be shown as a line with significantly smaller width and no stations.

Didn't we have a short period where we showed Harbourfront, and public opinion forced its removal?

 

[sixrings]

I thought there was an unspoken rule about traditional transit maps which was that lines shown must be grade-separated. Or at least almost entirely grade-separate. I don't think Sheppard East or Eglinton East should be shown. And if they are, they should be shown as a line with significantly smaller width and no stations.

Didn't we have a short period where we showed Harbourfront, and public opinion forced its removal?

I don't like this rule you speak of. It will just encourage more so the subways subways subways crowd and will make LRT seem even more inferior. Bad idea for a city which needs more transit not more debates.

 

[nfitz]

I thought there was an unspoken rule about traditional transit maps which was that lines shown must be grade-separated.

There's lots of unspoken you've broken in your whimsical DRL proposals ... so why start now?

Toronto's current subway map already shows non-grade separated lines.

The London Tube map shows the London Overground line (and has shown variants of it on and off for decades), which still isn't entirely grade-separated.

Didn't we have a short period where we showed Harbourfront, and public opinion forced its removal?

Public opinion forced it's removal? Where do you get this stuff? Are you pulling it out of your imagination?

 

[44 North]

There's lots of unspoken you've broken in your whimsical DRL proposals ... so why start now?

Toronto's current subway map already shows non-grade separated lines.

The London Tube map shows the London Overground line (and has shown variants of it on and off for decades), which still isn't entirely grade-separated.



Public opinion forced it's removal? Where do you get this stuff? Are you pulling it out of your imagination?

Whimsical? Oh right, a bridge and short elevated section...what a crazy concept!!! For a supposed transit aficionado, you're quite closed-minded when it comes to transportation infrastructure. And what does that have to do with this discussion? Or are you merely trolling again?

There are a few variations of London's official transit map. But regardless, if you had the patience to actually read my post you'd see I wrote "at least almost entirely grade-separate". But patience is a virtue - one in which you recently admitted are lacking. I'd concur.

 

[44 North]

From TransitToronto:
http://transit.toronto.on.ca/streetcar/4107.shtml

When the Harbourfront line opened, the TTC attempted to market it as a rapid transit route, displaying it on their maps as if it were a subway route (the orange line) and giving it a rapid transit route number (604 -- the TTC formerly used 601 to officially designate the Yonge-University-Spadina subway, 602 for the Bloor-Danforth subway and 603 for the Scarborough RT).

If anyone has a map of this, definitely share it. I can't see one on the Transit Toronto website.

Edit: This article has a bit more info on this subject: http://www.blogto.com/city/2012/03/how_the_ttc_sullied_the_reputation_of_lrt_part_i/

Here's a map, but not a standard transit map w/ black background

 

[wopchop]

The system map that they display on the subway doesn't display enough of the network. It does nothing to help people understand what sort of connections they can make from the subway (except to other subways, or the Airport Rocket). IMO, they should show the entire streetcar/frequent service network in relation to the subway (in a way similar to this) but with a thinner lineweight. The system map should help people understand where they are in the system and how to get where they are going in the system, and not worry too much about arbitrary separating of "types" of transit.

Obviously you couldn't as easily do this in the spot above the doors, and would need to either make an effort to put the maps on the platforms or on the advertising boards on the walls of the trains themselves.