Missing Links: Short-Sighted Transit Planning
Vložit
- čas přidán 2. 01. 2023
- Far too often, when building new transit lines, gaps are left that reduce the convenience & connectivity of the overall transit network. In today's video, I talk about why this is such a problem and discuss some particularly annoying examples. Enjoy!
As always, leave a comment down below if you have ideas for our future videos. Like, subscribe, and hit the bell icon so you won't miss my next video!
=PATREON=
If you'd like to help me make more videos & get exclusive behind the scenes access and early video releases, consider supporting my Patreon! Every dollar goes towards helping my channel grow & reach more people.
Patreon: / rmtransit
=ATTRIBUTION=
Epidemic Sound (Affiliate Link): share.epidemicsound.com/nptgfg
Nexa from Fontfabric.com
Map Data © OpenStreetMap contributors: www.openstreetmap.org/copyright
=COMMUNITY DISCORD SERVER=
Discord Server: / discord
(Not officially affiliated with the channel)
=MY SOCIAL MEDIA=
Twitter: / rm_transit
Instagram: / rm_transit
Website: rmtransit.com
Substack: reecemartin.substack.com
=ABOUT ME=
Ever wondered why your city's transit just doesn't seem quite up to snuff? RMTransit is here to answer that, and help you open your eyes to all of the different public transportation systems around the world!
Reece (the RM in RMTransit) is an urbanist and public transport critic residing in Toronto, Canada, with the goal of helping the world become more connected through metros, trams, buses, high-speed trains, and all other transport modes.
"The next best time is now" sounds so obvious but it's actually excellent insight in the world of transit planning, where "well we didn't do it when we should have so now we just won't do it" seems to be the prevailing approach to things.
While true, the problem with this mindset is it ignores core finance principles. The larger a project, the more debt the project will have.
While debt can increase the future returns of the project, it also increases financial risk for the city. In America we typically spend ridiculous amounts on projects and it destroys the credit ratings of our cities, then the costs of financing increase for future projects.
What I'm trying to say is, every single dollar spent on transit needs to have a high return (>0 Net Present Value) and American cities need to adhere to this more. Too offen we start projects with goals of "equity", giving a politician a ribbon to cut, or making something flashy that isn't useful. We need to pay more attention to maximizing our returns on transit infrastructure as opposed to some immeasurable philosophical or political goals.
This isn't theory either, NYC spends ridiculous amounts on the second ave subway and LIRR when the don't even have a rail link to LGA. Chi is spending billions on the red line extension and probably won't upzone the corridor past a few streets of mid rise affordable housing. At the same time the cta could extend the brown line to Jefferson Park to connect Albany park, build the Western/Ashland brt, start the circle line, or turn the south shore line into an El route. All of these could be done for cheaper and provide more value but we would rather take on a ton of debt so that we can "complete" the red line.
These projects are all needed, however, finance dictates that "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush" so you really gotta examen what you get with each dollar spent, the cost of financing, and opportunity costs.
@@johnflorance4356 This is a bizarre USA issue. Being addicted to using debt for transit projects. I presume because of corruption: the fees and interest on the debt benefits people who are politically connected. The rest of the world seems to have figured out this thing called "taxes" that can be used to finance transit projects (and other things also!). In Ontario, approximately zero municipalities (particularly Toronto) have used debt to build projects.
There is a LOT of status quo bias in transit
The “best time is now” is usually not correct. There are often very good financial and engineering reasons why projects stop where they do. It may be great for a Transit fan to have a project that does all things for all people but the scope creep to get there means the project doesn’t get off the drawing board.
@@kevinlove4356 In the US most people see transit as a welfare program for the poor, and those who are not poor believe they do not benefit from it (or will actually be harmed). So funding it through taxes is a big ask. In most other countries it's treated as a public good that anyone might use.
The video does not mention an important class of missing link: The deliberate missing link. This is usually the case where two different governments or levels of government are constructing transit and feuding with each other. The example in Toronto that drives me crazy is the lack of connection between the Leslie subway station and the Oriole GO station. In a rational world, the GO station would be moved 250 metres up THE EXISTING TRACK and co-located with the subway station in order to make for an easy transfer. But we do not live in a rational world.
Another example is the Bloor GO Station, to the east of Dundas West Station - of course, the added problem there is Crossways Mall between both stations, that *could* provide a decent underground connection, but probably will never happen.
Also, there is Danforth GO and Main Street Station, but that one was more a problem of proximity between the two stations...one being the location of (I believe) York Station on the Grand Trunk Railway, and the other having been a streetcar loop just north of Danforth Ave. Mind you, if/when the quad-track is installed, the GO station is set to be moved further to the east, with the main entrance being closer to Dawes Rd. with a connection still at Main St. but still a bit of a walk down the platform now.
(I was also reminded this week that there used to be a streetcar stop for the 506/Carlton Car at the top of the bridge, right by the old stairway, but that was removed when I was a kid.)
They are moving the Oriole station btw, its just not high up in priority.
@@robmausser Good to hear. Do you have a source for that?
if you cant walk a few blocks to the next station, I am supposed to feel sorry for you?
@@BertGraef No, I do not really expect you to feel sorry for my arthritis. Because that would involve having a heart.
"The next best time is now."
Nice one 🙂
Have a nice day 🖐👴
a similar thing happens with cycling infrastructure, two high quality bike lanes/paths come very close but there's no connection between them.
so people have to ride in traffic or walk along the sidewalk to get between them
Omg.. Right..
Southern California is rife with these mixed connections imho, besides the obvious LAX one:
-The Silver Line El Monte miss
-The Green Line Norwalk/Norwalk Santa Fe Springs
Los Angeles’ Green line not going to LAX was a major fail.
The cabbies' unions squelched it, as they did in NYC with a subway line to LaGuardia. Also, consider how the Green line falls a few miles short of reaching Norwalk/Santa Fe Springs Transportation Center at the other end.
@@1978dkelly That too is a major issue.
At least this is finally being fixed with interlining with the K Line.
MAYBE they just Lie.. And say earthquake safety
Not just a major fail. The lack of rail to LAX is THE ultimate transit failure. Like, you have one mission- to connect your metro seamlessly to the primary point where people enter.
I'm a simple man, RM Transit Posts and I watch
I appreciate it!
@@RMTransit For many years there's been a proposal for passenger service from Scranton to NYC.
Either being NJ Transit or Amtrak.
Looked at a recent video showing a map with proposed line connecting Binghamton with western NY.
But no line connecting Binghamton to Scranton!
A problem I know with the existing freight line from Scranton to Binghamton is they removed the second track long ago. But also the bridge over Keyser Ave was replaced with a single lane bridge around 15-20 years ago.
This topic reminds me of the battle NJ TRANSIT had to go to in my childhood hometown growing up to connect two commuter lines that were separated by only a quarter mile (Bay Street on the then Montclair Branch, and the Boonton Line just east of Walnut Street Station, to create today's Montclair-Boonton Line). Decades of NIMBYs, lawsuits, the settlements to get less than 1,400 feet of track built...and then the NIMBYs who claimed that extending catenary electrification by five miles beyond the connection point would *checks notes* give everybody cancer, plow down hundreds of historic shade trees, and require the use of Agent Orange to prevent vegetation from growing anywhere near the tracks. None of these happened, and the connection opened in 2002. Was quite proud to ride the first train of the new electrified service in.
It should not have to be this difficult, and it was not this difficult when competing modes got built (granted, sometimes for terrible reasons in the USA). If we're going to adapt to the 21st Century and climate, we need a way to get these kinds of connections built in a few years, not a few decades.
I'm quite frustrated by the hand the Sierra club, of all organizations, had in opposing electrifying the Coast Line further south. It's utterly absurd there's a 15 mile stub at the end of an electrified branch of the NEC where you need diesel to operate, if for no other reason than the extra rolling stock required.
The icing on the cake being many of the same NIMBYs involved in that ALSO demanded NJT stop fueling diesel engines in Bay head. A more reasonable request, if they hadn't also fought for stopping the wires.
Boston has to be the world capital of “missing links”, the Red Line-Blue Line connector and the North Station-South station connection are among the most needed… of course, the MBTA is actively collapsing so it’s going to be a long time before these rail links are actually built…
One example here in Chicago: the Brown Line, which ends at Kimball, just short of the Jefferson Park Blue Line station. Extending the Brown Line to Jefferson Park would make getting to O'Hare a lot easier for many Chicagoans.
Absolutely! I used to live in Lawrence, and my options to get to O’Hare were take the brown line all the way to the loop and transfer to the Blue, or take the super slow Lawrence bus that stops every block. I used to fly to Detroit a lot, and I literally would spend longer in the bus than in the air
Also green line has to be extended to the 63rd St Metra Electric. It's the tiniest missing link in Chicago but makes traveling around the south side much more difficult.
@@hugomorrison4520 From what I understand, the Green Line actually used to go that far, but neighborhood opposition caused the line to be truncated to Cottage Grove.
It’s 2.61 miles by the way the crow flies. That is not, “just short” of Jefferson Park. For any km people, that is 4.2 km. Anyone who says this is a close connection apparently walks at warp speed. It definitely would be a useful connection, allowing North Siders to get to O’Hare easier and vice versa. But it’s not even at the very least 1 km
Yep, a great example
It's not widely known but the two "missing" stations north of Cote Vertu station on Montréal's Orange Line - Poirier and Bois Franc - were in the original project but were halted by the Quebec Government to rein in costs. Parts of the tunnel are reportedly already excavated. In the late 80's this would have provided a connection to the CN's Deux Montagnes commuter line but now, of course, such a connection would provide access to all the lines of the REM.
They should build the orange line extension now. The blue line extension to Anjou is great, but the orange line extension to Bois-Franc (which was deprioritized in order to go ahead with the blue line extension) might be even more useful because of the connection to the REM.
This one makes me so frustrated. It's such a no brainer!
@@ethandanielburg6356 they even had the tunnel boring machine down there to extend the tunnel to the new metro garage on Poirier. It would have cost only slightly more to at least complete the boring of the tunnel to Bois Franc about 1 km away. Even if they finish it later with tracks, lighting etc...
But getting the boring machine back in place now will cost so much more. And they'll never do it just for a short extension. These kinds of stupid decisions are what make people hate governments.
@@kb_100 I believe the tunnel to the new Côte-Vertu garage was excavated using drilling and blasting, which is how most of the tunnels of the Montreal metro were dug (although a few sections of the original metro built in the 60s were built cut-and-cover). I imagine the plan is to build the remaining portion of the orange line to Bois-Franc using drilling and blasting, rather than using a tunnel boring machine. I think using TBMs over short distances tends to not be economical.
The REM tunnel to the airport was actually the first rail tunnel in Montreal excavated with a TBM. The blue line extension is also going to use a TMB between Pie-IX and Anjou but use the traditional drill-and-blast method between Saint-Michel and Pie-IX.
But yeah, part of the tunnel between Côte-Vertu and Bois-Franc is already dug and there’s only about 1km left to dig (after which they would of course have to also build the two new stations).
I feel like Zagreb is one of the kings of missing links in Europe. The last time a tram line has been built to connect to a train station was in 1892 and was never done since. As a result, besides Zagreb-west (connected in 1891.) and Zagreb main station (connected in 1892.), every other railway station in the "tram zone" is rather close to a railway station, but it just isn't close enough.
Train station "Kustošija" is close to "Črnomerec", "Maksimir" is close to "Borongaj", "Trnava" is close to "Dubrava" (there is even already a depot access track halfway to the train station), and "Sesvetska Sopnica" and "Čulinec" are both close to "Dubec". This is not to mention the line that goes south from the main station that doesn't have any stations in the "tram zone" whatsoever.
Missing links in Delhi Metro:
- Upcoming Silver Line terminating at Aerocity instead of Terminal 1
- Upcoming Magenta line extension terminating at RK Ashram Marg instead of and Central Secretariat.
- Lack of Dwarka-Gurugram connection
- Yellow line not reaching DTU
- Red line not reaching Ghaziabad Railway Station (1 km away)
- Grey line not extending to NSUT
I've noticed some more missing links near Indira Gandhi International Airport for the Delhi Metro because there is a suburban railway right beside the west of the airport and there is a station close to the airport (Shahabad Mohammadpur) yet neither the Blue Line or Delhi Airport Metro Express have a direct interchange with it (which could have potentially enabled that station to be upgraded and the suburban railway service to improve), even though the Airport Express directly runs underneath that station and the Blue Line runs almost beside the suburban railway line in that area. There is also the fact that the Airport Express doesn't directly connect with Terminal 1 or have a direct interchange with the Magenta Line to enable better terminal connections in the airport and I've also noticed the Magenta Line directly crosses the same suburban railway line I earlier mentioned at Palam but has no direct interchange with it. Just more examples of the Delhi Metro's poor integration with other rail transport modes & some other Metro lines even though it is one of the best Metro systems in the world (and still the best in India).
@@broman178 the Delhi metro, while being an amazing success in such a short time has completely ignored the existence of Delhi Suburban railway to the extent the most of the Delhiites don't even know a suburban network exists. There could have been so many interchanges in with the system but the system was never revived and it continues to stay in ruins with dilapidated stations and outdated rolling stock.
@@broman178 bro i lived in palam. I never knew palam was part of suburban railway.
Even the distance between Aerocity to cyber city guru gram, via mahipalpur, the distance isn't much but it sees massive traffic.
These stretches must be extended to fully create a network that's going to solve the traffic problems at the entry points of delhi.
Even on the east end, noida 62, to red line and Vaishali to red line, each are less than 5 km, yet no progress is being made except speculation.
Dwarka and rohini were supposed to be the new hub yet they have no direct link to guru gram,
Rrts though is being build at very quick pace which makes the slow pace of delhi metro even more frustrating to witness.
This is applicable to bike/ped and other active transportation networks too. Every city should have a network gap closure program.
Boston has another missing link beyond the blue/red interchange: A north/south route does not currently exist. There is no single ride between north station and south station, which increases expense and time for commuters coming from the north to the financial distract, or those coming from the south to access northern routes.
I’m glad you mentioned Boston. The Red/Blue missed connection is the most glaring but there are others. In general, the connections between the Commuter Rail and the subway could be better.
The Green Line Extension that just opened runs adjacent to the Lowell Line of the commuter rail. But you can only transfer between them at North Station in Downtown. This means anybody from the suburbs trying to get to Somerville would need to go all the way to downtown before heading back out. The Green Line should have been extended to West Medford or an infill station should be built on the Lowell Line. 11:11
Similarly, the northern terminus of the Blue Line (Wonderland) is just a couple hundred feet from the Newburyport/Rockport Line. But the commuter rail doesn’t stop there, so you can’t connect.
The connection between the Ashton-Mattapan trolley line and the Mattapan commuter rail station leaves a lot to be desired.
Riverside, the western terminus of the Green D line, is very close but not connected to the Auburbdale commuter rail station.
The even more godawful one is the proposed purple eastern route station in Revere in a ploy to avoid extending the Blue line to Lynn with a transfer that is too long to walk, and too short for a shuttle bus. Multiple mode breaks and asynchronous schedules. Don't forget the recently restored rail lines that stop short of the commerce centers in parking lot wastelands.
The Union square branch of the green line should also have continued to Porter Square to provide connections with the red line. It's only like a 0.5 mile
Yeah, if I recall there has been renewed conversation on adding a CR station along the GLX Medford branch. It came up recently because its just way too obvious + the new construction allowed for areas to potentially host new CR platforms. I think another missed opportunity was to finally add catenary infrastructure above the renovated Lowell tracks on the medford leg.
And let me add, I think right now the mot feasible location for a CR stop would be at Gilman Square. Not only is it a pretty centralized spot, but there's ample space to minimize construction costs for a proper elevated platform for CR.
The other glaring missing link in Boston is between South station and North station, though that's Amtrak's issue, not Boston's... idk...
It's as though they do it on purpose, just to spite people who use public transport (or might dare to think about using public transport). It's as though it's some sort of elitist power play.
The Los Angeles C line is right next to LAX, but they never bothered to connect it all the way. The Los Angeles B line is like a mile from Burbank airport and the Burbank Metrolink station, but they never connected it all the way. The current purple line extension only goes to the VA hospital and doesn't make it to the ocean. It's pretty infuriating because they simply don't think about the bigger picture in Los Angeles.
The C should finally connect with the LAX people mover when the K Line is finished (sharing tracks). The end of the B is more like 2 or 3 miles from the Burbank Metrolink and it obviously already connects at Union Station. As for the "Subway to the Sea", that was probably never going to happen. Expo Line already serves the beach, and there's not that much of note between the ocean and the VA hospital. Things like the Sepulveda Line are much more important to spend limited monies on.
@@Geotpf That's a non-network oriented way of looking at it. In order to take the Expo line to the sea, you need to be at the Expo line. That isn't very useful to people on Wilshire boulevard. I think you're thinking about funding in the wrong way. We need a 200 to 300 billion dollar subway expansion in LA. We need a massive expansion. Los Angeles is one of the richest cities in the world. The United States is the richest country in the world. I always hear poverty oriented arguments from Americans when talking about transit. If poorer countries can do it America can too.
In Los Angeles, the C (green) Line ends 2.8 miles away from Metrolink's Norwalk/Santa Fe Springs station which serves some of Metrolink's busiest lines. A direct connection would provide people in OC/IE a very easy option to get to/from LAX.
Of course, there was (and still is, for now at least) a missed connection to the airport on the other side of the line. The Green Line, of all of Metro Rail lines, really kind of goes from nowhere to nowhere, and sub-par ridership demonstrates this fact. In many ways, it was something tacked on the 105 freeway project to make that "greener" than a well thought out transit line. The fact that the aerospace industry downsized their offices at the actual west end of the line hurt too.
yeah, I always like taking the green line shuttle from LAX because flyaway was a little unpredictable for me but there's plenty of green line shuttles. But it's sad to see it so empty. Virtually no one wants to take the green line shuttle then the green line then transfer to silver line (BRT) to go into downtown LA.
Indeed that is a horrible missing link. LA Metro has been trying to close it for over 15 years but the City of Norwalk opposes any connection that isn't tunneled and doesnt want to provide any money. Really disappointing how we plan regional transporation around the local desires of a few residents.
walking a few miles a day would actually benefit most of you whiners.
@@BertGraef If I was just commuting to work, then sure, I can walk a bit. That's not feasible with luggage.
San Francisco just built the "Central Subway," a short tunnel for the Muni Metro going through downtown (instead of around). It greatly improved the the existing light rail system and provided the quickest connection between BART and Caltrain, which were previously only connected in the suburbs. This would make transferring between the systems in Downtown SF much quicker. Of course, it would be great if these two systems were directly connected, but this is definately an improvement, especially since the existing Caltrain station at 4th and King will likely become one of the Northern termini of the California HSR.
I always found it strange that BART/MUNI were nowhere near Caltrain and there wasn't an easy way to transfer between them in downtown SF. Good that they remedied that.
In Paris, the new Line 12 terminus at Mairie d'Aubervilliers is staggeringly stupid. The tunnel continues until it nearly crosses the RER B and A1 highway viaduct (the end of tunnel shaft is just in front of it), a few hundred meters of more tunnel could have allowed to build a station and its turning around/train storage facilities... And 500 meters to the North, the under construction station of La Courneuve 6 Routes of the Grand Paris Express will also only give transfer to the tram where Line 12 could have been served as well. The project is regularly discussed but has no chance ot being funded anytime soon.
Same goes for Line 7 from La Courneuve to Le Bourget, there was a project to build two new stops to serve the Air and Space museum as well as the RER station in perfect alignement... the extension to at least the RER station that will feature the Grand Paris Express is discussed but since Covid and the economic crisis, no money left and the Line 17 going to the Musuem also would make it redundant on the second station.
There are many other examples in the Paris area alone. Most of them are due to physical obstacles such as the River Seine on the West making it difficult to extend metro lines 3, 9 and 10 to the West and some high relief making Line 3 nearly impossibile to extend (cheaply at least) to the East.
Line 14 extention to the North at St Denis will feature a tunnel arriving in front of the St Denis Stadium RER B station... no one thought to add platforms to serve the stadium on match days? (unless given the violence of some of the sport public attendance, it would probably be better if Stadium had NO public transit whatsoever... One of the numerous critiques on the ring tram in Paris is that id won't serve the last link (the 16th District) just because its mayor doesn't want it (posh neighbourhoods just prefer their cars and don't want dirty people to come on their doorsteps with public transit, they didn't like the metro back then already), plus one other argument was given by the Police Prefect who didn't want tram sets to be damaged during match days in the Parc des Princes stadium... So the tram ring is for now at least condemned to not be finished and terminate at the Economics University Campus of Dauphine... The rest will be covered by an overpriced gadgetbahn ultra posh bus. something that will cost nearly as much as a tram for no reason at all...
Paris mayor is very fond of those "Wireless and Rail-less trams" as they like to call those...
Politics used to say that war is too important to be left to the military... I say that public transit is too important to be left to politicians.
In the city centre, Milan’s new M4 will cross existing M3 halfway between the Missori and Crocetta stations without direct transfer to either. A long surface pedestrian path will be created instead between Missori on M3 and Sforza Policlinico on M4.
One reason could be that in the central section planners chose to make the line follow the filled-in bed of the ancient Navigli canals to avoid interference with buildings under the narrow medieval streets of the historic centre, even in areas where this meant missing a connection or a place of interest.
In Toronto another missing link that’s just frustrating is line 4 not extending to at least Sheppard West…it would make it so much easier for people in the east of the city to get to places like York U, Yorkdale, Vaughan, etc
i was thinking the same thing they could run a extra track down to yorkdale or run it north and or run a loop around whole system
Line 4 is literally a twig sticking out of the Line 1, and it's baffling how much missed potential is there. It could have extended either way, but it's just this short route that seems like an afterthought of a subway line. To make things worse, one of its platforms at Sheppard-Yonge is just... out of commission???
think of them as health inducers, not missing links. It actually wouldnt hurt for many of you to hike a few blocks to the next station.
@@HDFlood_ the original plan for Sheppard was to run from Vic Park to Dufferin. It got trimmed down before construction began due to the recession in the early 90s and was nearly cancelled after Mike Harris took office in 1995. At one point, due to budget constraints, I believe there was talk of building the tunnels but not laying the tracks until some undetermined point in the future. In the end we got the truncated Sheppard "stubway". The platform at Yonge was built as it is to allow for increased capacity in the event the line is ever built through to at least Sheppard West.
As a side note, it's my understanding that all of the existing platforms were designed to allow for easy expansion in the event that ridership ever justifies the use of 6-car trains.
The Battersea Power Station extension of the Northern line in London crosses the Victoria line (underground, above or below), but it was decided not to build an interchange station. It was also decided not to extend from Battersea Power Station to Clapham Junction. This National Rail station has more trains passing through than any other in Britain. Trains from Waterloo pass through the station, as well as trains from Victoria going south (not southeast). Those two main lines are not connected by rail. It is also a terminus for a London Overground line. It was decided that these projects would overload the tube lines.
In my opinion it makes sense to have no interchange with the Victoria as it would slow down both lines and the Northern offers more interesting connections than the Victoria (Waterloo, London Bridge, Bank, KSP).
However I agree not going to Clapham Junction is a big mistake.
Battersea power station was built with provision for extention to clapham junction, but it won't be viable until they can split the northern line to boost frequency.
A little longer of a connection, in the Twin Cities of Minnesota they built a first commuter rail line that ended in a small town, instead of extending it to St. Cloud, MN which would have allowed a much larger population that would ride it. St. Cloud was their first plan, but it needed to get shortened to get federal money to be able to build it!!
Here in Augsburg there are two that I think are quite glaring. Line 1 stops quite randomly, just 1.3km short of connecting with line 6 and 1.5km before connecting to the Hochzoll regional rail station. Even worse, line 6 stops ~1.2km short of Friedberg and 1.5km short of Friedberg regional rail station, ending in the middle of nowhere, instead of connecting to the city proper and all the bus lines going out to the different villages.
Still amazed they never extended the Sheppard Line from Sheppard to Sheppard West (Downsview). The awkward trip if you have to travel around Fairview Mall and then to York University... bus, train, bus, train... in the same city.
I would do that trip as train, train, bus, train. Sheppard line to Yonge, Yonge line to Finch Station, 939 Finch West Bus to Finch West Station, and then one stop north on the Spadina line to York University.
Yeah its really not great
I can think of 3 in California:
Berryessa/North San Jose to San Jose Diridon station on BART
LA Metro C line from its terminus at Norwalk to the Norwalk/Santa Fe Springs Metrolink station
The northern stations of the San Diego Blue line extension to the Sorrento Valley COASTER station
The big missing link in the San Francisco Bay Area is the extension of Caltrain from Fourth and King (in San Francisco) to the Salesforce Terminal, which is now the world’s most expensive bus terminal.
One example I would like to mention about a "missing link" is the North Philadelphia complex. We have FOUR separate stations within three blocks: N. Phila of the NEC, N. Phila to Chestnut Hill W, N. Phila of the Broad Street subway, and North Broad. Building the complex and allowing people to interchange among the regional rail lines, the BSL, and Amtrak will be an amazing time-saver for traveling between the northern suburban area and other cities on the NEC since we won't need to take a detour to the center city. The Keystone and Pennsylvanian trains won't have to do the ridiculous reverse at 30th Street as well. This place used to and will have unimaginable potential, but it's nothing different from an abandoned station now - we even have overhead wire over nothing at all!
Eliminating the reverse move (then at Broad Street station) was in fact the reason the PRR built North Philadelphia in the first place. And given how much of a disgrace the NEC/Chestnut Hill station facilities are right now, any kind of major rebuild would be very welcome.
I'm surprised by the lack of mention of the gap between the Blue/Expo and Gold Lines through Downtown Los Angeles. Previously one had to transfer twice using the Red/Purple lines, creating huge pedestrian bottlenecks at 7th Street and Union Station. The regional connector is finally opening this year and will make it so that there are two continuous lines from Santa Monica to East LA and Pasadena to Long Beach respectively, with no fewer than five same-platform transfer stations. Weirdly, the very same problem existed in the Pacific Electric days, with there being no direct connection between the terminals at 4th/Hill and 6th/Main, only five blocks apart.
The regional connector being nearly done is the main reason I don't mention. I also think the lines will still suffer from a lot of issues.
In the London Underground new lines MUST interconnect at every station of other lines in the under surface-tunnel core area. The Victoria and Jubilee Line Extension were required to by the UK national Treasury as a 'cost benefit analysis'. Most recently the rule applied to the Elizabeth Line on the same basis, ie it interconnects with every Tube station it passed by. However, this gives rise to major local political arguments where the line passes but there are no stations planned because there is no station present; the two examples of recent date were the demand for a station on the Victoria Line at Pimlico, uniquely no interconnection and Southwark and Bermondsey on the Jubilee LE.
Have you got a link to that? As far as I'm aware each station would be looked at on a case by case basis as part of its business case, a connection may or may not help the case (Northern Line extension to Clapham Jcn didn't due to crowding concerns).
Lizzy doesn't call at Holborn so there's no connection with Piccadilly even though it must pass very close to it. And I don't understand your references to Pimlico, Southwark and Bermondsey - they were built because business cases showed they'd be viable.
It doesn't interconnect with Oxford Circus either despite Bond Street, Oxford Circus and Tottenham Court Road being in a straight line (likely due to overcrowding at Oxford Circus)
@@theobrigham Ah - yes. For some reason I thought Oxford St connected into one end of TCR Elizebeth line, but it's miles away. So yeah, other than Bakerloo, Victoria and Piccadilly, the Lizzie connects to all lines it crosses...
It also doesn't stop at City Airport despite passing under the site.
@@theobrigham the trains are so long that they would hardly move between tcr, oxford circus and bond st.
Melbourne has had a major missing link for 50+ years and it’s our route 59 tram it terminates in airport west. 5.9kms short of the international airport itself
The current terminus is a bit industrial and has low ridership. Extending the tram track the 6kms to the airport would have been a major trip generator. It’s so close!
Not to mention the closest rail station Jacana is only 6kms away from the airport. Both are so close!
FYI the "airport" in airport west refers to the suburb west of Essendon Fields airport, which the line runs right next to. Not Tullamarine, the international airport.
It actually terminates right next to a shopping centre which should generate lots of trips, but the access is very pedestrian unfriendly.
Before I watch this,the most short sighted one for me is the missing connection of the Red Line to the Blue line for the MBTA. You have the space at Charles/MGH Station,why do I have to leave the station,walk 2 blocks,and hop on at Bowdoin Staion? Or hop on a different line and get onto the Blue Line? It makes my commute take longer and I have to take 3 trains instead of 2. I hope with Maura Healey being elected governor last year,she owns up to her promise of fixing the MBTA,but I have little hope
Edit:thank you so much for talking about this,it really puts a damper on my commute from Quincy to the Airport
Why doesn't the MBTA Silver Line (South Station to Airport) solve the Quincy to Airport commute for you? That's a single transfer, with no additional fare, in one station, running directly to all Logan terminals, with nice luggage racks, and I've used it for years, with and without luggage. Granted, it doesn't get you to the remote hangars near the Blue line, if that's where you actually work, but I'm constantly amazed how this existing connection is overlooked by Reece and his audience, in spite of its good fit for the many travelers who live along the Red Line. Before this line existed, Red Line airport passengers had to triple connect, hauling luggage up and down stairs and on and off overcrowded shuttle buses, the misery of which was designed (yes, designed!) to push people into taxicabs clogging the tunnels.
@@ydhirsch good question! The Silver Line goes right towards the main terminal,what you see when going into our out of Logan International,but where I work at is right next to Airport Station on the blue line,which would mean I take the shuttle from where the silver line is to the Blue line,it really is 6 in one hand and half a dozen in the other
@@ydhirsch Not OP but while the silver line is useful, it’s very slow and gets stuck in crushing traffic due to horrific design decisions. It’s BRT at its worst. Even with the airport shuttle (if one were going to the airport from RL), a red blue connection would be miles faster. Also, the lack of red blue connection doesn’t just mean bad airport commutes for those along the RL. More important imo is the lack of access to job centers in Cambridge (Kendall Sq primarily) for (predominantly EJ) communities along the BL.
@@elefante8572 interestingly the Silver Line is NOT complete as it was designed. The underground busway was supposed to have a portal past South Station to unify all the branches but officials couldn’t settle on a location. I hope they one day handle this outpoint. Having said that I think the one of the biggest issues the T faces is the lack of a Red-Blue connection. I hope this new Governor will be true to her word and find matching funding with Mass Brigham and finally extend the Blue Line to Charles/MGH.
@@DDELE7 definitely, although I don’t think SL phase III (which would be super expensive, and was partly cancelled due to that) would really fix the issues with it (mixed traffic running). Alas, I don’t think light rail will happen anytime soon. Hopefully washington street gets something better at some point.
Definitely want to be hopeful about Healy!
There's an example on the London Underground which highlights a few issues I don't think you mentioned: the new Northern line extension to Battersea Power Station Station maddeningly terminates there instead of a short distance west at the major rail interchange Clapham Junction.
The problem is that making the connection is almost too good an idea, the already complicated and congested Northern Line would be totally overwhelmed by commuters.
Elizabeth Line skipping Oxford Circus also comes to mind
@@theobrigham Because of the humungous Crossrail platform lengths, it is less a question of inserting an additional station, rather than one of interposing a (moving) walkway from the mezzanine of-capacity expansion needing-Oxford Circus over to Elizabeth's Hanover Sq approach.
Not to mention a potential Victoria Line interchange at / south of Vauxhall and the (also officially voiced) overcrowding/congestion (amplification) worries concerning that line.
Clappy J would need a London-Bridge-style rebuild to make this a reality, I feel - no point tacking on Northern line connectivity and making an imperfect situation even more complicated; best to redo the entire station and build in capacity for the Northern line (and/or Crossrail 2?) at the same time.
In Amsterdam, the ring line akwardly stops at Isolatorweg. If they add 3 extra stops to connect Isolatorweg to Central station, the line would be 10x more convenient
I’m glad you mentioned the Dorval one. The people living south of the 20 in dorval already have an underground pedestrian tunnel under the 20 to access the bus hub and train station easily. And they are currently starting to build denser in this area even though the transit is limited. Extending the rem there should’ve been a no brainer. They could’ve had the station align perpendicular to the 20 (under it). With the back end of the station providing an exit to the buses and the train. Meanwhile the front end provides access to dorval residents south of the 20
Same here. The timeline for this is so frustrating too in terms of lack of engagement. People have been asking for it since the time the REM was announced. In 2019/2020 a study was commissioned by Marc Garneau and was super-delayed. It's finally out in August-2022 and shows definite ridership benefits over other types of connections. Plus with the potential Rapid Rail Corridor and even and the potential Lachine Tramway also going out to Dorval. It would be an absolute no brainer in terms of long term interconnectivity. So many missed opportunities to make something good really great! So frustrating. I've been trying, but it's like fighting the wind.
6:13 - A GTA one, the Hurontario LRT and the Kitchener line. Because the Brampton City Council has spent so long infighting about what route the Connection should take that they’ve just gone ahead and are building it without the connection.
Its not great, but neither was LRT on that route
@@RMTransit What should they have done instead along that route in your view?
For sure trains will have a reemergence in the near future when people will actually realize that the car is more tiresome than just going to a train station and just sit down and enjoy your day but governments really need to make the train more comfortable so that people will use trains instead of cars.
@Zaydan Alfariz I Agree,If they want the people to switch to trains then they should ride trains like an average joe.
@Zaydan Alfariz Not just an average Railfan BUT A SUPREME RAILFAN.
@Zaydan Alfariz Respect Level 1953%
One of the biggest sticking points is frequency: if you have to wait an hour to make a connection or as the penalty for a missed train, that's a huge obstacle.
In Singapore, the Downtown Line makes a loop around the CBD, but along the western part of the loop, it crosses the North-South and East-West Lines without any connection. This is especially inconvenient with the North-South Line where you need to go in the opposite direction back out of the loop to connect outside the CBD. It also goes really close to Dhoby Ghaut, which is a HUGE interchange hub with three other lines. If DTL stopped at Dhoby Ghaut, it would be so convenient for so many people making so many different trips. But LTA (Land Transport Authority) and SBS Transit (DTL operator) probably had a good reason to not connect.
This reminds me of the 7 Train extension to Hudson Yards here in NYC, they didn't build a station at 10th Avenue between Hudson Yards and Times Square
I feel like a 7 train station at the Port Authority Bus Terminal would have also been very useful.
It was considered, but dropped to... you guessed it... save costs.
Indeed, a real missed opportunity
@@RMTransit if I had Elon Musk money I would throw it at public transit instead of rockets for billionaires
London: I wish they'd build a big interchange where the East London Overground crosses under the Southeastern mainline, it would allow so many ways to get round South London without having to go via London Bridge.
Also, the Northern line extension would be awesome if it went to Clapham Junction, but it would also overcrowd the Northern line. If they could find a way to increase capacity at Camden Town, then maybe they could split the line in two and a Clapham Junction extension would be more viable!
Also, im still seething that there is no City Airport station on the Elizabeth Line.
A major missing link is the east end of the green line in Los Angeles which doesn’t connect to the Lossan commuter rail corridor. The city of Norwalk sued so the 105 freeway didn’t go to the 5, and this cut short the green line which has always been under used.
obligatory "chicagoan here" but as a chicagoan, the way the brown line doesnt link up with the blue on the northwest side is insane to me. and the lack of a true crosstown feels like a something of a missing link, too
I also can't understand why there is no L link connecting the major commuter train stations.
The situation in Auckland, prior to Britomart's opening, was that passenger numbers were in sharp decline, so they had to move the city's main station back to a more central location. The previous station was in a poor location; around 1 kilometre from the city centre.
From what I gather, there was originally an above-ground station at the foot of Queen Street, but when the Beach Road station opened in 1930, a new post office was built on the site of the old station. Curiously that former post office building was incorporated into the new Britomart station.
If you ever do an explainer on the Auckland suburban network, I'd be happy to provide some of my footage from that system.
The building of the Chief Post Office on Queen Street preceded the construction of the Beach Rd railway station by about 20 years. The CPO was built on part of the former above ground Britomart railway station which severely reduced its operational capability causing the NZ Railways to begin planning a new station for both long distance and suburban trains at Beach Rd, 1 km away from the bottom of Queen St. Unfortunately only stage 1 of the project was eventually built, with Stage 2 which was a tunnel under the University and central business district for suburban services being cancelled due to the Great Depression.
Good video, but what it misses is that sometimes connections are missed on purpose because they would cause too much traffic. A good example on the London Underground is the recently opened Nothern Line Battersea extension which seems to have a missed the opportunity to connect to Clapham Junction. This would have been a huge connectivity opportunity to a very busy station that has no existing connection to the London Underground. The problem is that the connectivity would have been so good, the additional traffic would have overwhelmed the branch and possibly the rest of the Northern Line. The Northern Line already operates 20 tph and is largely full in the core area, so connecting it to a station that sees 100 to 180 trains *per hour* would just overwhelm the system. This isn't a case of a missing link, but deliberately avoiding adding too much traffic to an already busy system.
3 trains *per minute* ? That is a huge success.
The Toronto equivalent of this is Toronto City Council denying to the provincial government permission to extend the Yonge subway to Richmond Hill until the Bloor/Yonge interchange is upgraded. Same reason: the extra traffic cannot be handled by the existing system until it is upgraded.
Unfortunately, there are many locations across Melbourne's tram network with tram terminuses that comes near railway stations, but are still too far away for any viable transfers. Most of them could be done with only 1-2km extensions of the tram tracks, without any massive excavations etc.
Yeah this is a particularly crazy example!
Paris also has a missing link: Line ends one kilometre south from the RER B station “La Courneuve Aubervilliers”. There is already a tunnel to this station, but it’s only used to store trains.
Even there could be a further extension to mairie de La Courneuve for an extension to the T1 but bref haha
Paris actually has several more missing links, including:
-M3 between Pont de Levallois Bécon and Bécon Les Bruyères
-T5 to Basilique de Saint-Denis
-M7 to Le Bourget
-M7 from Mairie d’Ivry to Ivry-sur-Seine (RER C)
-M9 from Pont de Sèvres to Musée de Sèvres on T2
-M10 from Boulogne Pont de Saint-Cloud to Saint-Cloud (connecting to T2 and to Transilien L & U)
-M11 from Mairie de Lilas to Rosny (which is currently being built)
-M9 from Mairie de Vincennes to Montreuil-Hôpital (to connect to the M11 extension)
-M1 from Château de Vincennes to Fontenay (which is planned)
-Future T10 from Clamart-Place du Garde to Gare de Clamart (which might be planned?)
-T1 extensions to the east and west which are under construction or are planned
@@jandron94 Il me semble que l’arrêt du T3 à l’Avenue de France est aussi à quelques minutes à pied de la gare de la bibliothèque François-Mitterand. Sinon, c’est effectivement possible de marcher dehors entre deux stations qui sont à quelques centaines de mètres l’une de l’autre, mais c’est moins agréable (surtout s’il ne fait pas beau dehors) et moins de gens sont susceptibles de vouloir faire une correspondance comme ça.
Par contre, avec le prolongement de la ligne 14 et la construction de la ligne 15, il sera bientôt possible de faire :
-M7→M14 (Tolbiac)→RER C (Bibliothèque F-M)
-M7→M15 (Villejuif Louis Aragon)→RER C (Les Ardoines)
Mais je sais pas si ce serait vraiment plus pratique que de marcher dehors pendant quelques minutes quand il fait beau.
One thing I've seen done in Portland is the introduction of frequent service/express bus lines to connect different areas that really should be connected by train, but can't because it would have to plow through existing development
It's one thing to look at lines on maps and see a small gap that really seems like it shouldn't be there, but where there's something in between (a neighborhood, a natural feature) there are other options to connect these things that may be less effective, but will also have a lesser impact on the existing landscape.
There's a lot of moral and economic discussions to be had here, and I'm really glad to see this video, it's a great introduction to some of the issues and shortcomings that are often seen with implementation of new transit lines! I found you via nebula, and I look forward to seeing what you make in the future.
Missing transfer: Line 53 of the Amsterdam Metro literally passes underneath Duivendrecht Station, but doesn't stop there.
Yes, that's one that irritates me a lot! Duivendrecht is an important station and there's plenty of room down there to build the Line 53 station, but nooooo.
I guess one problem is that the platform would be curved a lot
@@nicolasblume1046 There's room to straighten the track.
I often get frustrated with the Northern Line extension in London… had they just bridged the gap between Battersea power station and Clapham junction it would have provided so much more access
I’ve heard it said that there’s a socioeconomic reason here. Battersea is posh and rich, but Clapham is less so. Those rich people don’t want to mix with their poorer counterparts, so this line will never be built. Not sure how much truth there is in this, but it’s an intriguing question that needs to be explored.
At the moment it's mostly down to Overcrowding - if the Northern served Clapham Junction it would quickly get swamped as even more people would change trains there, as things stand the commuters from the South and South West suburbs (which are not poor areas in a lot of cases - it is known as the Stockbroker belt) would overload both Clapham Junction (which is already struggling) and the new Northern Line - by missing Clapham Junction these crowds are spread over a few stations and lines - Long Term there were plans to rebuild Clapham Junction Station along with the now abandoned Crossrail 2 and at this point it was planned to extend the Tube to Clapham Junction - Provision has been made and the tail tracks at Battersea are oriented to serve Clapham Junction in the future - @@DBailey635
Another good example on the Washington DC metro are Farragut North and Farragut West stations which run right next to each other under the same plaza. To transfer, you have to take the escalator all the way to the surface and then go down again, all while paying another fare!
You don’t have to pay another fare! The Farragut Crossing is a great alternative to transferring at Metro Center. Of course a tunnel would be better, but it’s no big deal when the weather is nice. A single Farragut Square station was originally planned but the National Park Service wouldn’t allow construction on the park. WMATA has conducted studies on adding a tunnel and it could happen in the not-so-distant future.
You do not have to pay another fare. If you transfer at Farragut North/West with a tap card your second journey is calculated as a continuation of the first.
@@patrickshelton169 this is true but it still makes transferring more time-consuming and limits the usefulness of the free transfer. Anyhow this is making me think of being in high school back when you still had paper farecards and getting off at Dupont Circle to get to GWU for my internship instead of going all the way round. to MetroCenter and doubling back.
anyhow as long as we're complaining about NPS and metro shout-out to their veto of a train bridge through Rock Creek Park pushing the red line annoyingly deep underground and killing an Adams-Morgan station.*
*Yes I know Woodley Park-Zoo is called that, sorry if you have to walk 15 minutes across the bridge to get there it does not count.
If it weren't for the fact that subway construction here is crazy expensive, I'd love it if the Montreal Metro Green Line extended through Lasalle, Lachine and to a new terminus at Dorval station. That would give 3 rail lines/modes merging near the airport.
There is a lot of bus service in Lasalle to to get people to Angrignon station, but it's an 85K borough with no rapid transit within it. Lachine with about 50K doesn't have easy access to the metro.
Going the reverse way by extending the REM to connect it to Angrignon would be much cheaper & I support it, but as a user who lived in that part of the city for a long time, I think the metro extension would be more convenient to use.
I also love the idea of REM-ifying the Exo line (not necessarily handing over the operation of it, but electrifying, automating, and boosting its frequency). Construction would be needed to buy or bypass CN lines which is a bottleneck now, and also to remove all the level crossings with over/underpasses which won't be tolerable if a train is going by every 5 minutes in each direction.
Milan Metro will soon have a missing link between M3 and the new M4. M4 at station Sforza-Policlinico crosses M3 halfway between Missori and Crocetta. So, because an underground walking path would have costed too much, here we go with a on-ground/sidewalk transfer of 300-400m (plus going through two gate lines, up and down). Level of connectivity: below zero
A REM extension to Dorval would integrate well with future HFR as well. Since there are no international flights from Ottawa, travelers could book direct flights from Montreal and get there by rail without the need for a connecting flight.
I’m pretty sure there’s still time to do this extension but I haven’t a clue if there’s political will. Time to call my provincial representative (I live nearby).
@@darcy_1 yes please do. I have been trying to push this with both the Federal MP and Provincial MNA for some time now. Ultimately it falls onto the federal jurisdiction more than provincial because of the airport and rail (VIA)... though there are some provincial and municipal aspects too (EXO, Bus). There has been a study out (lookup dorval intermodal study transport canada), but again seems to be falling flat. People all should mobilize on this because it so close, yet seems very unlikely to happen in the short mid/term.
Absolutely. There is so much potential here and I fear the more this gets pushed asides, as was stated here, the more complicated it will become to implement in the future. The YUL REM station is now only slated to open in 2027. This should be ample time to plan to continue to Dorval. Then in the Lachine tramway connects to Dorval as suggested by some studies, it would really close the loop.
@@anthonysipos1002 They already removed the tunnel boring machine so I think it is unlikely.
@@mathieulessard1970 . Yar... I know about the removal of the TBM, but oddly the study mentions that reusing the original TBM would be more expensive than a new one? I am questioning Transport Canada about this because it does not make sense, but have not received answer yet. Have a look at and search for "dorval intermodal study transport canada" and you will find the study with the options (you can download it). This study focuses on connecting the potential future rapid rail station to the airport using various options including the REM/Light Rail. The study was commissioned in 2020 but only really took place in 2022...
Line 3 In Madrid is being extended south to reach and connect to line 12 in Getafe, a 1 station 3km extension that will end one major missing link in Madrid Metro, that will increase the connectivity for 1million people. Scheduled to open end of 2023/beginning of 2024
Very exciting for Madrid! See my Madrid Metro video if you have not ;)
I was disappointed when the new Quebec City Tramway didn't connect to the airport. Overall, the alignment does a good job of connecting the densest parts of town, as well as giving people in the suburbs an option to take public transit into town. But it would have been a very short extension to continue to the airport. My understanding is that they plan to make this extension in the future, and I hope they do!
I still find it even more frustrating that the downtown portion doesn’t connect directly to the Gare du Palais. Tram extensions are relatively easily to build (although I guess nothing is that easy to build nowadays in Québec for political reasons). But I feel like not having a direct connection to your main train and intercity bus station along the route would be more difficult to fix.
Or IMO more importantly to the trains!
Yes was just gonna write : to the train! Why it doesnt connect to Gare du Palais, baffles me!
What complicate things is the airport is on a quite steep hill. The rail line just South is about 30 meters above the sea, while the airport is about 70 meters. It's OK for road trafic, but I'm not sure it would do for trains, unless they either do lengthy detour (more expropriations and a lot more trees to cut down) or tunnel their way under the airport (which would make the cost of the project skyrocket). The same problem arose when people asked why to East branch doesn't go all the way up to Charlesbourg... it's the same slope which run West to East from Neuville all the way to Montmorency falls, there's no way around it.
Another missing link on the REM is the westernmost branch. The Anse-à-l'Orme terminus sits north of the highway close to, well, nothing. It vould very easily have continued for 500m through a large industrial area (so, lots of jobs), to the Baie-D'Urfé train station.
It would have connected a whole lot of the West Island together without detours downtown, which could have been great!
Instead we get a larger park-and-ride...
When the Luas tram system opened in Dublin, Ireland, it had a missing link between the red lines and the green line. This was due to a new grovement getting in, and change the orginal plans, that would have seen tree lines being built, and meeting together on O'Connell street.
The two lines opened in 2004 with a 15-20 minute walk between them, and eventually was connected together 13 years later in 2017. The interchange still isn't great though, about 5 minutes walk. I think we're bad at interchanges in general, some proposed metrolink and dart underground stops seems purpose designed to avoid each other sometimes. That's if Metrolink ever gets built!
Paris has many, MANY, missing links. The most frustrating has to be the northern end of M12, with sidings extending all the way to the RER B at La Courneuve but the last stop being nearly 1km south. Other face-palm-inducing missing links include (clockwise from M12 north):
- M7 north at Le Bourget (currently RER B, M16/17 being built)
- M3 east ending in the middle of a highway interchange
- M1 east (ongoing political battle)
- M5 south which stops INSIDE Paris, it's insane (IMHO it should take over one of the two M7 branches)
- T6 east should have been extended to T3 or M4
- M12 south to T2 or RER C or Transilien N
- M8 south but it's not obvious where to
- M9 and M10 should cross the Seine and connect to T2 (M15 will cross the river though)
- M2 west could be extended to Puteaux or Surennes (maybe a bit overkill)
- M3 west to Bécon-les-Bruyères (Transilien L, M16 being built)
- M3bis and M7bis, just for kicks
You forgot line 3 which won't connect with line 15 at Bécon-les-Bruyères. Same goes with line 12 which stops at Mairie d'Issy, only 700 m or so from line 15.
It's a shame connections with existing lines were not included as part of the Grand Paris Express program.
The Warsaw Metro has several annoying missing links, due to a lack of coordination with existing rail networks. It doesn't go to the main railway station, Warszawa Centralna; or the important East Station (Warszawa Wschodnia), where Line 2 diverts away to connect instead to a pointless terminus station (Warszawa Wileńska) on a line that could easily have been rerouted to the east-west mainline rail tunnel, to allow most commuters to reach downtown. The WKD rail line to the west also does not connect directly to the Metro. The Metro also avoids the main tourism areas, notably the Old Town. And Line 2 circles backwards to end at Bródno station, just a few hundred metres short of Toruńska commuter rail station.
Dublin's Luas Green Line and Red Line we're not linked between 2004 (opening of both) and December 2017, when the "Cross City" expansion of the green line finally addressed this comes to mind.
However, as the green line crosses the red at grade on O'Connell Street /Abbey Street/ Marlbrorough Street, it limits the capacity of both by creating a new conflict.
Our "Metrolink" project (currently in planning) also ends north of Swords at a P & R when there's a few km of open countryside north-east of it where it could meet the Northern Line railway at Donabate or Rush & Lusk....
I totally agree with what you said. "The next best time is now", is so true, especially for "small" missing links which are easy to make from the beginning. This made me think about a video topic : "How to properly scale your transit project?". I bet it's not an easy question to answer but this is critical. You'll always need to balance between the service your project should offer and the time it gets to reach this level of service. Too small ambitions are not great but too big and not properly framed ones may lead to just no project at all.
I'm most familiar with Toronto's transit system and there are 2 missed connections that bother me. The first one is the fact that Line 4 Sheppard doesn't extend West to connect to the Sheppard West station. It would have provided much benefit to travelers to have that as an option and would have made commuting downtown easier if there was a shutdown or delays on the Yonge side. The second one is the fact that the original build of the line 5 Eglinton Crosstown (if it ever opens...) doesn't include Pearson airport. I know an extension to the airport is being discussed and planned but to me it would have made things so much easier to find the additional funding and just go all the way there in the first place rather than building it after. Like you said, it's easier to just do it when everything is already under construction instead of stopping and then starting again later to extend it. Who knows now when that will ever get done. Interesting to see that this isn't just a result of poor planning in Toronto, that it also happens with transit systems all over the world.
Sometimes it's better to build in stages, rather than all at once. Both line 1 & 2 were built in stages. This allows the core section to be in service sooner than waiting for the outer sections.
Ah yes, Berlin and the surrounding area is a real offender to this problem... A lot of these are really short missing connections and you can get around them by changing lines a little more often, but they still make everything much less convenient . Here are just some examples that I personally really hate:
U3 from Krumme Lanke to Mexikoplatz (S1) - 850m
U1/U3 from Warschauer Straße to Frankfurter Tor (U5) - 1.2km
U5 from Berlin Hauptbahnhof to Turmstraße (U9) - 2.1km
U2 from Ruhleben to Rathaus Spandau (U7, S3, S9) - 3.4km
U1 from Uhlandstraße to Adenauerplatz (U7) - 1.3km
U9 from Osloer Straße to Wollankstraße (S1, S2, S25, S26) - 1.9km
U7 from Rudow to Berlin Brandenburg Airport (S9, S45) - 5km
U4 from Innsbrucker Platz to Friedenau (S1) - 1km
M2 from Heinersdorf to Pankow Heinersdorf (S2, S8) - 1.1km
and my personal hate:
RB27 from Schmachtenhagen to Oranienburg. The Gap is 6.7km long, but the rails ALREADY EXIST. they just have to reactivate them, then the currently really unused Line would have a FAR bigger purpose.
Anyway, the video mentioned "various points on the Berlin U-Bahn Network" aaaaand as you can see, he isnt wrong.
U7 to BER has been rejected by Brandenburg
U9 via Wollankstraße to Pankow Kirche they started planning
U4 to Friedenau was actually planned to extend there, but in the 1970s they built the A100 making a southward extension of the U4 impossible without removing the A100
Are these gaps there because of the Berlin Wall?
@@szoszk Typical german reaction, autobahn over trains. Typical.
@@lavillenouvelle not really, but the construction and planning of a lot of lines in Berlin were influenced by it, so some Situations exist indirectly because of the wall.
@@lavillenouvelle Some of them are this. Warschauer Straße is the most obvious one since the border went parallel to the Spree and there is a sudden cut between it and the tramway. Others, however, are merely bad planning (e.g. the U2 to Spandau since Ruhleben and Spandau are both in the west).
In DC the new streetcar on H street is just 3 or 4 blocks away from Union station where it drops you off in the middle of a 6 lane road on a bridge with small sidewalks.
In my hometown Munich, missing links have been avoided in recent times as far as I can tell. Some examples that stem from long ago:
- Tram 17 has its terminus at Amalienburgstraße, 1.4 km away from Obermenzing station, in the midst of nowhere. The tram loop was constructed in 1962 when the railway station already existed (served by the S-Bahn since 1972). There have been initiatives to extend the tram line, but failed due to concerns the trams would impede private transport on the already congested street. (the irony ...)
- Obersendling metro station (U3) and Siemenswerke (S-Bahn and regional rail) are 0.4 km away from each other -- a walkable, but not very comfortable interchange. The U3 line was built in the 1980s and cut the rail line between two stations. However, building the the metro station at Siemenswerke would have meant a detour for the metro between Aidenbachstraße and Thalkirchen on its way into the city.
- U4 ends at Arabellapark, 2km away from Englschalking S-Bahn station
- U5 ends at Laimer Platz, 4km away from Munich-Pasing (major railway station and transit hub), construction on the extension has begun this year though.
- U6 ends at Garching-Forschungszentrum, 6 km away from Neufahrn S-Bahn station. This extension would mean a much better connection between the airport, Freising, and northern Munich. U6 is already running at full capacity though, so adding more passengers might not even be a good idea here.
Some positive examples are the links between U5 & S7 at Neuperlach Süd (opened 1980), U2 & S1 at Feldmoching (opened 1996), and U3 & S1 at Moosach (opened 2010).
also at Kreuzstraße, why not do simply a loop and unite S3 and S7?
@@petermatyas4834 Or at least extend S7 to Holzkirchen, as Kreuzstraße is in the midst of nowhere :D
But I guess it's complicated since both S7 and Mangfalltalbahn (the railway which the section Holzkirchen-Kreuzstraße is part of) are single-track. This might need a second track for Holzkirchen-Kreuzstraße and different passing loops on the S7 part, or everything would have to be scheduled around the limitations.
@@23nine that would be largely the same as what I say :) I just noticed that according to the mp, there already is a loop line, even if single track.
@@petermatyas4834 Yes there is a railway connection, it's a part of Mangfalltalbahn which is served by regional trains. It also serves as a backup for long-distance trains in case of closure of the Munich-Rosenheim railway.
Instantly thought of the Boston red blue connection when I saw the title, will there be an explainer video on Boston at some point?
It's possible
This sounds a lot like in Boston where the new MBTA Green Line that only goes to Union Square when it could have been extended 0.5 miles to Porter to allow for easy transfers to the Red Line.
I've thought long and hard about this one and I think it's because that connection already exists via the commuter rail. Perhaps they didn't want to overload the Union Square branch with commuters trying to take a shortcut
The Union Square branch of the new extension is such a strange little appendix.
Please consider making a video on pretty viaducts vs ugly viaducts and what cosmetic options there is in viaducts
Age.... 😉👍
The older ones are the nicer ones... 😉
Yes! Part of the fear of elevated rail probably comes from bad experience with elevated freeways. So a video going into all the design details of a good elevated guideway would be great!
Perhaps! Not a bad idea
Can you please do a transit explained segment on San Francisco Muni, I would love to see your view on the pros and cons of my home transit agency
Another missing link in Sydney will be the gap between the under construction Parramatta Light Rail station at Carlingford and the joint Sydney Trains/Sydney Metro station at Epping.
Building Beautifully has a great video on this topic
@@abiramen Yeah I saw that video a month or so ago, probably what subconsciously made me remember this example
Absolutely yeah!
I'm still pretty impressed that the Tallawong Schofields missing link managed to get a mention. Building Beautifully also made mention of it in his video on the Richmond line I think. How the relocation of the Schofields station 800m South concurrently with the construction of the Metro was the perfect opportunity to future proof the new Schofields Station.
Judging by the comments though, it seems missing links are more the norm than the exception, which makes you wonder why after over a century of building a Railways, most of the world keeps getting it wrong?
Moscow: lines 8 and 8A are intended to be parts of one line, they’re even numbered this way and are both yellow on the map. But connecting them requires difficult construction in the dense city center, so it is always postponed, and instead, long lines are constructed in the now-nowhere (as they yield more kilometers and other big numbers that can be proudly reported). To be fair, line 6 and line 7 were also each split into two before being joined in the center, but not for that long, and these were Soviet times anyway.
Also importantly missing are interchanges to Polyanka from line 6, Kitay-Gorod from line 3 and Dostoyevskaya from line 5 (circle), but the last one is under construction (again, after years of freezing and unfreezing it, but this time it all feels unexplainably more certain).
In the Bay Area (Oakland), there is a missed connection between BART's 4 SF lines and 3-4 Amtrak Routes (Capitol Corridor, San Joaqins, Coast Starlight, California Zephyr(the trains already travel here on their way to and from the yard)) at I-880 and 7th st. It would provide Amtrak riders quick, direct access to both San Francisco and Oakland.
The worst part about the Boston one is that this missed connection between Red and Blue lines USED TO EXIST. We demolished it back in the age of scaling back streetcar services.
In Amsterdam you have the local famous missing link between Islolatorweg Station (Terminus lines 50/51) en Amsterdam Centraal. First proposed as a neat circle line for Amsterdam, the terminus falls now about 5km short, and as a result Islolatorweg Station is now in the "middle of nowhere". Various studies are now underway to complete this circle.
What I find most perplexing about this situation is that years _after_ line 50 was built, with full knowledge of the original plan for a circle line, they decided to connect line 52 at Amsterdam Centraal to the existing platform for lines 51/53/54 via transfer walkways that are _directly in the way_ of extending line 51 westward. 🤯
@@jelmerterburg3588 did not know that, but that makes this an even weirder situation.
I thought the toronto example wouldve been the new Line 5 Crosstown which terminates in the east at Kennedy Station on Line 2 instead of extending 2.7km more to the east to the Eglinton go station on the Lakeshore East Go line. I think the potential connection between Line 5 and the go line would be incredible for Scarborough and Durham region. Yes they connect later at danforth but that is very far away and no longer in central Scarborough or Scarborough at all.
This is why I'm so happy that the Broadway Subway extension is underway now in Vancouver.
Here in the DMV, I've thought that the WMATA Red Line could form a complete loop connecting the Glenmont and Shady Grove ends. It would face massive NIMBY opposition but would create new trip opportunities for cross Montgomery County Travel (Rockville to Sliver Spring), and relief/alternatives if problems arise on either portion of the Red Line "U".
The red line is so bizarre to me. Are there depots at either end of it, or just one? Can it even function as 2 separate lines? Also, is there any way for trains to jump from the main network to the red line at Fort Totten? I have never been that far out on the Red/Green/Yellow lines.
That is not the only missing link here in Maryland. When the Western Maryland Railroad disappeared, so did the direct passenger link from east to west. The funny thing is none of the trip opportunities it created really disappeared with it. In fact, the Western Maryland College expanded in spite of it being less convenient to come there.
@@nitehawk86 there is a one track connection at Ft. Totten from the outbound RD to the outbound GR/YL track. In the 90s when the GR line was under construction through DC, the portion from Ft. Totten to Greenbelt was actually finished and detoured onto RD using that one track (and the switches on each line) to end at Farragut North. They called it the Green+ Rush Hour Service or something to that effect until GR was finished through the city. WMATA could theoretically revive that service as a new line color, but since the connection is only one track, it would likely cause some issues.
There's also another one of these from OR/BL/SV to RD around the Farragut North and West stations. It connects the Westbound OR/BL/SV to northbound RD.
Melbourne Metro Tunnel and the lack of a station at South Yarra, to connect with the existing one. Also the multiple Melbourne tram lines that terminate agonizingly short of rail station, due to historical reasons!
Missed connection I'd say
I'd say one of the easiest ones would be connecting the upfeild line to the Craigieburn line. Both Craigieburn and Roxxie are so overcrowded, and allowing alternatives to get into the city on one of the lowest commuter lines seems still like a massive oversight!
@@aussiejjdude3066 there’s just so many
NYC missing link: Metropolitan Av M train connecting up to the EFMR in Queens, especially given that there's already a freight rail line going along the same path. As it is, it takes a ridiculous number of transfers to get from Ridgewood/Glendale/Middle Village to the rest of Queens.
In Rome, there are two kind of missing links.
1) the new Metro line C runs close to several different tramway lines, but there is no direct interchange between Metro and tramways. The easter terminal of lines 5 and 19 is just a few blocks away from two different stations of the Metro, but there is no proposal to move it closer to one of these stations. And another tramway corridor, who had a perfect interchange, was cut short and now has a 500 m gap.
2) There are two missing links between the Metro and regional rail, at Ponte Lungo/Tuscolana and Libia/Nomentana. In both cases, the Metro and Regional rail stops are 1-2 blocks away, but there is no direct link between them.
In Berlin we have a subway line, what terminates on Kurfürstendamm, instead to go to the next subway station, that people can change to another line.
In Berlin the situation around Kurfürstendamm/Bahnhof Zoo is awkward in general. Lots of U-Bahn lines, but still you might have to walk quite a bit because the line you are on just misses where you need to go.
In Vienna, Austria there's a new subway line (U5) being constructed. And there too they first planned to finish the line at "Elterleinplatz", 1,5 kilometers short of the connection to a S Bahn line (S45). But gladly they changed the plans (and presumably got some additional funding) so it will be built up to the connection Point.
Admittedly S Bahn line ("Vorortelinie") currently isn't the most important in Vienna, only serving about 10 Minutes frequency at peak time but it has great potential
Though much more important to the whole project u2/u5 is the new connection at Matzleinsdorferplatz to planned 2,5 minutes frequency through running suburban S Bahn trains (Stammstrecke)
Looking forward 👍
NYC has so many weird gaps, but my least favorite is the weird gap between the J/M and the G train. The G train's Broadway station is right between 2 J/M stops - only like 2 blocks from each - and has no free transfer between the two. there used to be a free transfer but that was just for the L-pocalypse. both J/M stops are also a little too close to one another, frankly it would be better to just close Hewes and Lorimer and build a new stop right over the G's Broadway station.
The East River crossings to Brooklyn really make it clear that these used to be separate competing systems.
To some extent the discussions make it clear that the more extensive your transit system is, the more missing connections you'll see--so some of the systems being complained about the most are the best ones. But there are always cases like this one that just stick out.
What an amazingly articulate young man you are. .You are refreshing.
Happy New Year, Reece. One theme you touched on here but I think deserves highlighting is that rapid transit planning has tended to shortchange regional rail connections. This is partly, I think, because existing regional/commuter service can be so infrequent. But you can see another great example of this shortsightedness in LA, where the C (Green) Line stops just short of the LOSSAN (/future high speed rail) corridor. That corridor is now the rail spine of Orange County, and that gap has been depriving OC residents of a link* to LAX for decades (*via shuttle due to a missed connection on the other end, although this is in the process of being rectified).
Came here to say this. It seems to be a widespread phenomenon, also in Berlin with the missing U-Bahn - S-Bahn connections and many other that were mentioned here. Probably it is also that different agencies are responsible for planning regional rail and rapid transit so they just don't care or maybe don't really know about it.
I was just about to mention the missing link to Norwalk/ LOSSAN corridor in later comments. That little gap in the C/Green line has been driving my transit map enthusiast self just a bit insane ever since I learned about the LA metro
Hamburg might also have a missing link in the future: It is planned to build a new S-Bahn tunnel to the west, reaching the Osdorfer Born (more than 20,000 people live there I think). But, first of all, the S-Bahn is doing the job of a metro there, second, it will end at a very unfortunate end, where any additions will end on some fields, third, the town of Schenefeld, just outside of Hamburg, will be missed, where P+R could be built, fourth, it will also miss Lurup, a part of Hamburg with about 30,000 people (also, the planned U5 will miss it too). Then you continue next to a wooded area, back into the city, and you'll squeeze right between the stations of Diebsteich, future station for long distance trains, and Altona, a major bus hub and current ending station for many trains. So people will have to change to regional or long distance trains at either Dammtor, where not all trains are stopping right now, or at the main station, which is overcrowded and will be even more in the future.
And then theres the U5, a metro line which is currently under construction (at least a tenth of the total length, for more than one billion euros). It starts kind of in the nowhere, in Bramfeld, far away from the U1 and the under construction S4 in the east, crosses the S1 line to the airport without a stop, and then meets the western branch of the U1 (the U1 has a rather odd shape), which you can take to get to the S1. It will continue southwards, missing the U3 station Mundsburg by about 200m maybe, and then it hits Hauptbahnhof, where barely any people will have left the train, and the platforms are even considered too small. Then it will go on until it reaches the ending station: Arenen (stadiums), where not too many people will exit during weekdays, just short of Lurup (see above). At least you got another stop at an S-Bahn station.
And no, theres no such thing as a Tram.
tldr: S32 not reaching Schenefeld, Lurup, Diebsteich or Altona; U5 not reaching S4, U1-East, S1, U3, S32.
The north end of the LA Red Line not going all the way to BUR has never made sense
Absolutely!! - I wonder if there is a kind of intertia in the brains of transport designers, which leads them to design only what is in their comfort zone, rather than looking at what passengers want, or will want when the system is opened. Great video
There's one pretty "outrageous" missing link in Paris that is getting some traction, in the sense that the public starts to really question it :
It's the North end of metro line M12 at Mairie d'Aubervilliers (which will be a connection with M15) as the tunnel continues on for about 900 meters, serving as the terminus backstation and train storage.
It extends *exactly* in the direction of La Courneuve - Aubervilliers station on RER B situated 1km from M12 North current terminus, meaning there's maybe not even 100 meters missing to connect with RER B, so approximately the length of a metro station platform...
Some locals are being quite vocal about that gap, as such a connection would be very useful and practical and the tunnel is already dug and fully equipped for 90% of the distance.
One other big missing link that will certainly raise loads of questions when the lines concerned by that "oversight" will open is the La Plaine - Stade de France RER B and M15 station :
The M16/17 lines' tunnel runs under the North tip of the plaza in front of the RER station, and the end of line M14's tunnel sits right between M16/17's tunnel and the current RER B station.
This plaza will also host a station of tram T8 South extension and the M15 station.
This spot is already the main transit access point to the Stade de France, regularly overflowing RER B with hordes of stadium goers.
So why on Earth wouldn't they put a station on lines M14 and M16 / M17 too, as the tunnels are already there, to alleviate the load on RER B and future M15 & T8 by spreading it on 3 more metro lines ? It's beyond me...
The plaza being of triangular shape, you could have separate entries, each serving primarily a particular line and *greatly* helping to separate traffic flows *above* ground.
The Western side of the plaza triangle could have an entry serving mostly line M14 (*), the Northern corner of the plaza could be the entry mainly dedicated to M16/17, as the Northeast side is reserved for T8's station and the Southern side is dedicated to RER B and M15.
This precise layout would follow the tunnels and existing & future, under & above ground stations' current disposition.
I heard the justification that they want to split the human flow with the further West station complex of Saint-Denis Pleyel (M14, M15, M16, M17) and Stade de France - Saint Denis RER D.
But that's wishful thinking as we all know what stubborn crowds do : they go to the closest access point and clog it or use the shortest path, despite the best possible indications.
We recently had an exemplary demonstration with the monumental chaos that occurred before a soccer match when RER B was having problems : crowds diverted to RER D, saturating it and concentrated on the closest stadium access, a secondary one not designed to handle so many people, instead of the slightly longer main indicated path to the much larger main access point.
They averted catastrophe by a very very very thin margin but it sparked quite a scandal.
Without M14 and M16/17 Stade de France station, all those that would want to catch these lines will inevitably saturate M15 for a one station Westbound ride instead of walking well over a kilometer, crossing the large railyard.
(*) > [ Have a look on Maps sat view and cartometro, you'll see it couldn't be better placed :
The building site immediately touching the South side of the RER B station is for line M15's station, the building site on the Northwestern side of the RER B station and right across the street to the West of "Place des Droits de l'Homme" plaza (a 180m x 150m x 150m triangle) is line M14 tunnel's end and TBM exit. Lines M16/17's tunnel runs under the Northern corner of the plaza's triangle. ]
One solution could be that this hypothetical M14's Stade de France station would only be open on the days and hours when the stadium is used while on other days the tunnel after Saint Denis - Pleyel would keep its current use as back station and train storage.
So I'm pretty sure we will hear criticism about these Stade de France missing links in the near future as I'm far from being the only one questioning that choice of not putting a station here for M14 & M16/17.
There are several other gaps, mainly between the upcoming (already heavily connected) line M15 and the different ends of metro lines, especially in the West.
Namely : M10 between Boulogne - Pont de Saint Cloud and Saint Cloud.
M3 between Pont de Levallois - Bécon and Bécon les Bruyères.
And M9 which is connected to M15 but not with T2.
That is going to be a massive bottleneck when M15's South trunk opens as all the passengers from M15 to La Défense will walk across the bridge and take T2.
Jamming traffic in the area and saturating T2 which is already overcrowded on peak hours.
Sadly, these 3 metro lines will probably never see an extension on this West side (at least not in the near future) as they all terminate shallow underground right next and perpendicular to the Seine river and building such extensions would either require them to surface and use a bridge or dive much deeper underground meaning their current terminii would have to be rebuilt at a greater depth.
One other Parisian missing link is the absence of M14/M2 connection at M2's Rome station, even though M14's tunnel runs only meters away from M2 Rome station ; so there's no stop here for M14.
It wasn't deemed essential enough, M14 having other connections with M3, M9, M12, M13, RER A & E at the nearby Haussmann - Saint Lazare complex, and with M8 at Madeleine ; even if M2 carries quite a lot of traffic and the only other connection to the "inner loop" lines is at Bercy with M6.
There are several plans being studied by IDFM and the region, that are heavily supported by local mayors and transit user groups for possible extensions in the East and Southeast to "plug the gaps" :
M9 Eastern extension to connect with T1 and M11 Eastern extensions.
M10's quite long Southeastern extension to connect with M6 at Chevaleret, M14 and RER C at Bibliothèque François Mitterrand, T3a at Avenue de France / Bruneseau, then through Ivry and Vitry down to M15 and RER C at Les Ardoines - Vitry sur Seine station.
Several other Eastern side missing links are under different stages of development :
M11 will soon open an extension to M15 & RER E Rosny Bois Perrier station, doubling its length. (It's currently being tested with the new, longer MP14CC rolling stock)
T1's East end is being extended South to connect with above mentioned M11's extension and further Southeast to Val de Fontenay current RER A & E stations and future M15 & M1 stations.
M1 East extension to Val de Fontenay is in the advanced planning stage and will start building as soon as the opposition between the state and the region / IDFM on details is resolved, which will probably be this year.
There are also several gaps to fill in the tram network but this comment is already a way too long wall of text. 🤣
Missing links are quite possibly the most frustrating aspects of urban transit, especially in massive networks where it feels like a glitch on a masterpiece.
Happy new year !
It always frustrated me how San Diego is a light rail city without airport connections. The trolley literally goes right next to the airport but if you want to actually take transit to the aiport, you would need to hop off the trolley and take a bus.
Happy New Year from Berlin! I'm just back from Berlin (and Warsaw) and the connections are amazing between Ubahn and Sbahn. I found the system great to use and yes there were some very odd connections, in particular, the region around Ostkruez, which was east Berlin, so much has been done but still, some baffling missing links that anyone would think to be obvious early fix. Warsaw has only 2 Metro Lines and a fantastic tram Light rail system. Looking forward to your review of this system that is being steadily constructed
Stockholm has soooo many of these examples of bad integration between the subway and commuter rail, which to be fair wasn't really a thing when the subway was built in the 60s. So: a branch of the green line ends at Hagsätra instead of the major commuter train hub Älvsjö (~1.6 km), after actually crossing a commuter rail line without a stop. Farsta Strand has both subway and commuter rail, but with a quite annoying walk (~300m) between them. The commuter rail station Södra Station is 600m from the green line at Medborgarplatsen, and 500m from the red line at Mariatorget. And both northern branches of the blue line end 1-2km from a commuter rail station.
But on the bright side, a lot is improving. The tram line Tvärbanan interconnects lots of lines and is also being expanded, the commuter rail line got city center tunnel'd with a new station with the subway at Odenplan, and a branch of the blue line is being extended to Barkarby. And in the south, Spårväg Syd will be providing lots of interconnections.
Just came back from Berlin, those gaps in the U-Bahn make it very frustrating to use even when the waiting times are sometimes every 2 minutes. Disappointing from a city with such a great S-Bahn. The system makes you rely on buses, which to be honest are kinda trash in Germany. You need one to go to the big universities in the city center for some reason
Sounds kind of like the argument that the Phase 2 of the NYC Second Avenue line should be extended past 125th Street and Park Avenue (connection to Metro North at one end and the 4/5/6 down Lexington Avenue at the other if they build the station in between both avenues as planned), but have the line run all the way over to Broadway (to connect to the 1), which will allow for 2 stations in between for connections to EVERY line that runs uptown (Malcom X Blvd for the 2/3, and St. Nicholas Avenue for the A/B/C/D). This is not possible without a bus transfer, a long walk, or riding into midtown and then going back uptown.
Yes! A crosstown under 125th would improve connectivity in upper Manhattan immensely. Also a crosstown along Gun Hill Rd in the Bronx.
Hey, Reece! Congrats for your work, keep it up!
Could you maybe one day do a video on the subway of Nuremberg, Germany? Given it's not the biggest city, the more interesting I think it is that they have their own Metro. Which of course is rather small in length, but still, not an unimportant thing.
Cheers and thanks in advance!
Eventually yes!
Nuremberg is the capital of Franconia. The Weisser Turm station is interesting, one of it’s entrances is in a old tower.
And it is the only one on Germany to be automated!
I also think the Dresdner Bahn is also a case of a missing link but on a larger scale scale: It's one of the lines which goes south of Berlin and as implied, it goes from Dresden to Berlin but was largely deactivated within the border of Berlin except for the S-Bahn. For such an important connection, there was no direct way so all the trains have to drive on the outer ring to get to Dresden. It's in the process of getting ractivated, though, which is why there is so much construction on that line.
During the construction of Beijing Subway Line 2 and Shanghai Metro Line 4 (both circle line), some transfer nodes for future planned routes were reserved, but due to the rapid development, some newly added lines needed to transfer with Beijing Line 2 and Shanghai Line 4, but they cannot be heavily re-constructed cause it's in downtown Beijing and Shanghai, resulting in the situation of super-long transfer walk like Beijing Xi'erqi and Shanghai Yishan Road station
I'm skeptical than being downtown precludes reorganization. It has happened many times in London for example.
@@RMTransit For example, Beijing Line 2 was completed in 1984, and this line basically ran along Beijing's Second Ring Road, which was transformed into an elevated urban expressway in 1992; Shanghai Metro Line 4 passes through Lujiazui in Pudong, a financial center that has gone from a wasteland to a skyscraper-strewn city in 20 years, and it also passes through the dense residential buildings and other elevated expressways of Shanghai, and also shares a section with Line 3. Although major renovation is still possible, but for these two lines the cost is unacceptable. There are plans for renovation and construction of some newer lines, but not changing these older lines itself. In fact, there are examples in Shanghai and Beijing where existing lines were renovated, such as the Shanghai South Railway Station on Shanghai Metro Line 1, which was initially an above-ground station located on the north side of Shanghai South Railway Station with no interchange, but due to the upgrading and complete redevelopment of the railway station itself and the opening of Metro Line 3 south of the station, just ten years after the opening of Metro Line 1 on 2004, the above-ground station on Line 1 was abandoned and a better located underground station with direct interchange between Line 1 and Line 3 was rebuilt. But at that time the ridership of the Shanghai metro network was not as exaggerated as it is today, and the surrounding buildings had to be built together, so the cost was reasonable. The situation was very different from other lines.
@@imwsss726 Beijing's Second Ring is a sunken urban expressway. It passes below most other traffic.
Line 2 makes all connections(except line 19). It doesnt miss anything, but like many of Beijing's interchanges, the connections are extremely poor.
Many missed connections have been rectified, like the PEK airport line being extended to Beixinqiao, a new station being added to line 10 for Zhichunlu, and the Fahngshan line being extended to line 16.
Beijing's subway has a lot of problems(and gets a lot right though) missed connections arent one of them.
What has been bothering me for a long time is the Amtrak terminal for San Francisco Bay Area is at Emeryville, a place with no other connections other than buses. The ideal case is to extend across the San Francisco Bay to the new Salesforce Transit Center in downtown San Francisco. If that is not possible, at least it should be extended to Oakland and connect to the BART subway system
I thought the major Amtrak terminal for Bay Area is Oakland Jack London Square. At least that's where the Coast Starlight stops to drop off trash and pick up supplies. Which Amtrak train uses Emeryville for its terminal? And yeah, the lack of connection between railroad and BART is laughable in Alameda County. At least it's been rectified in SF.
The California Zephyr to Chicago uses Emeryville for its terminus and doesn't go to Oakland Jack London Square
I remember developing my own transit map for a fictional city (just for fun) and had a 'missing link' between stations. I put myself in the eyes of a commuter that lived on one side and needed to go to the other, but had to take a large journey that took them out of their way. I designed a shuttle service between the two stations as it would better connect this fictional city, and it just made sense.
I'd like to suggest a video about weekday peak services, as I don't really know how beneficial or not beneficial they are, and it could clear up confusion about it. DART has a weekday peak service and some of my friends are always saying "they should extend the Orange Line up to Parker Road with the Red Line" even though the ridership doesn't justify it.
Great video RMTransit! Keep these videos coming.
I swear the fact Boston hasn’t extended the blue line to connect to the Red line is just so frustrating
Also it should be extended to Lynn.