News   Dec 16, 2025
Galleria III Nears Completion at Dufferin and Dupont
 720     0 
News   Dec 16, 2025
37-Storey Rental Tower Proposed near Glencairn Station
 581     0 
News   Dec 16, 2025
Eglinton Line 5: On Track to Fail?
 2.9K     9 

Toronto Eglinton Line 5 | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx | Arcadis

I would add my tentative support for reducing local stops, on the grounds that people should be satisfied with a 5-10 minute walk to a transit stop. Yeah, it's not to your doorstep, but it is one mode as part of your commute/travel, and it is active; more walking needs to be encouraged for those that are able; and more accessible pathways need to be provided for those living with a disability.

My only hesitation is the street configuration of some of these blocks. The city should also be striving to provide more direct pathways to/from/between winding streets and cul-de-sacs, reducing walk time to a Crosstown stop.
 
DonValleyRainbow said:
I would add my tentative support for reducing local stops, on the grounds that people should be satisfied with a 5-10 minute walk to a transit stop. Yeah, it's not to your doorstep, but it is one mode as part of your commute/travel, and it is active; more walking needs to be encouraged for those that are able; and more accessible pathways need to be provided for those living with a disability.

My only hesitation is the street configuration of some of these blocks. The city should also be striving to provide more direct pathways to/from/between winding streets and cul-de-sacs, reducing walk time to a Crosstown stop.
Click to expand...

The sidestreets along Eglinton Avenue West in Etobicoke are mostly 1950-1960's style of cul-de-sacs and crescents. They were supposed to be "people" friendly, but turned out not to be "pedestrian" friendly. It's okay if one stays on their own street, but it's terrible if one wants to walk to the store, school, or transit stop.

Having a transit stop only at the arterial roads, means even more walking distances to and from the stops. More walkways would have to built, if they can create one. Don't think some cul-de-sac homeowners would like to be selected to have a walkway built either next to them or their home demolished to put one in.
 
Hopkins123 said:
Yipee! They're cutting the useless Renforth Drive (not to be confused with Renforth Gateway), Rangoon and Russell/Eden Valley stops. I would have kept the East Mall though. Now if only Lloyd Manor, Wincott and Mulham would get the axe; then we'd have a true subwaylike service on Eglinton West.
Click to expand...
so why has mulham and wincott and Lloyd Manor not been cut
 
Why a stop at Mulham is so badly needed is a mystery to me considering the 73B Royal York which presumably would still cater to all the apartment buildings in-between Royal York and Scarlett Rd post-Crosstown West expansion.

Widdicombe/Lloyd Manor is very close to Martin Grove and I'm assuming the Martin Grove stop will be situated to the east of the intersection.

Likewise Wincott/Bemersyde is equidistant from either Kipling or Islington and whether those stops have secondary exits (100 metre platform), it probably wouldn't be more than a 5 minute walk for most people.

And let's not forget the 405 Etobicoke community bus route already adequately serves all these aforementioned places:
 
Hopkins123 said:
And let's not forget the 405 Etobicoke community bus route already adequately serves all these aforementioned places:
Click to expand...

Community buses do not serve anything adequately. They run an extremely limited schedule on an extremely infrequent headway with extremely small vehicles. They are designed to serve a very, very particular - and limited - segment of a very local travel market, and not applicable to any sort of regular route.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.
 
Hopkins123 said:
At the very least Bellamy/Eglinton GO, the transition from Eglinton Ave E to Kingston Road, Guildwood GO and the entry onto UTSC campus from the Morningside Park bridge should all be grade separated. They could also trim down the number of stops required from 17 to 10 and use the cost savings from that towards grade-separation.
Click to expand...

The planned stop spacing for the Crosstown East line, not that it stands a good chance of being built anyway, is already fairly wide. including some sections of 800m or more. And those grade separations could be done but are not really worth doing, the intersections at the GO stations are fairly minor, At Eglinton and Kingston the line follows the predominant flow of traffic and only crosses traffic on Kingston Road Westbound that has not turned onto Eglinton, and at UTSC the line is already separated from north of the bridge over Morningside Park to the stop at UTSC.

And I can't imagine any worth while amount of money would be saved from eliminating surface stops, they are little more than a strip of concrete sidewalk with a shelter over it.
 
salsa said:
If you consider 5 buses per day to be adequate then sure.
Click to expand...

They could always increase the frequency if needed. What's worse adding some additional bus trips or building 3 unnecessary Crosstown stops that'll slow down the commute times for the majority of riders?
 
smallspy said:
Community buses do not serve anything adequately. They run an extremely limited schedule on an extremely infrequent headway with extremely small vehicles. They are designed to serve a very, very particular - and limited - segment of a very local travel market, and not applicable to any sort of regular route.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.
Click to expand...

I'm envisioning a sort of regular route replacing the 405. This could be tied into the planned new route 170 Emmett. So a continuous route from Mt Dennis or Jane-Eglinton to Widdicombe perhaps with every 30 minutes frequency.
 
Hopkins123 said:
Why a stop at Mulham is so badly needed is a mystery to me considering the 73B Royal York which presumably would still cater to all the apartment buildings in-between Royal York and Scarlett Rd post-Crosstown West expansion.

Widdicombe/Lloyd Manor is very close to Martin Grove and I'm assuming the Martin Grove stop will be situated to the east of the intersection.

Likewise Wincott/Bemersyde is equidistant from either Kipling or Islington and whether those stops have secondary exits (100 metre platform), it probably wouldn't be more than a 5 minute walk for most people.

And let's not forget the 405 Etobicoke community bus route already adequately serves all these aforementioned places:
Click to expand...
Who would want to take a bus that goes up and down? It's either east or west or no commuters are going to ride it. The 405 only operates 9am-3pm at 90 min headway with no tracking making it super useless for the regulars. Not many people know it can be flag down and boarded at regular TTC fares either. It absolutely cannot replace the regular 32. I also made this comment here before that people don't live at the corner of those midblock stops. They already walked 300-500m and don't need to walk another 500m to get to the new LRT stops.

Hopkins123 said:
I'm envisioning a sort of regular route replacing the 405. This could be tied into the planned new route 170 Emmett. So a continuous route from Mt Dennis or Jane-Eglinton to Widdicombe perhaps with every 30 minutes frequency.
Click to expand...
They can still run the proposed 176 Princess Margret route looping on Martin Grove, Eglinton, Islington and Princess Margret seen the the ST plan if heavy rail was used on Eglinton. Cut the 46 Martin Grove back and terminating at Eglinton with rush hour service serving Kipling Station. The 46 runs pretty much like a shuttle outside rush hour, especially weekends with majority of the riders boarding north of Eglinton or as an alternative to the 45 Kipling.
 
Hopkins123 said:
They could always increase the frequency if needed. What's worse adding some additional bus trips or building 3 unnecessary Crosstown stops that'll slow down the commute times for the majority of riders?
Click to expand...

Well the consultants who actually did the studies say that those stops should be included, as long as it's feasible to operate the LRT as a request-stop service in order to reduce unnecessary delays for other riders.
 
crs1026 said:
At the end of the day, Crosstown was was a line drawn to collect two end points and its role in serving the area it will run through is pretty insignificant, except for those main-route transfers.

- Paul
Click to expand...

This understates in a significant way the importance of a second east-west higher order transit connection north of Line 2. Had it been there in the summers I lived with my parents when at university, I'd have taken ECLRT to Mount Dennis and then GO/UPX downtown, or taken it to Cedarvale (Eglinton West) and then Line 1 to Union. Instead I had a meandering ride on the Royal York 73 and then the ride to St. George on Line 2 etc, etc.

Toronto is too large a city to be happy with a public transit connection to the airport which is a bus called the rocket. We know how many airport employees are 905 residents. There is a reason. You cant't get there easily from the city which is absurd. Mount Dennis and St. Jamestown could use employment opportunities. Lets's connect people with jobs.

Finally. We are building a "subway". Ignore the form factor if you will. We want to move a lot of people faster than the Eglinton bus. The point is probably to move then rapidly between major nodes.

Eglinton is a great thing any way you slice it and Toronto has a super local bus network. It's the heavy backbone that is sorely lacking.

I lived a lot further from Royal York as a kid than Widdicombe is from Kipling (Av. at Eglinton, not Station). People will find a way to get to the nodes.
 
Last edited:
We were talking about the airport at Tuesday Night Hurontario LRT PIC and it is a dog breakfast.

Since Toronto only wants to fund the line to Renforth and expect someone else pay for the extension to the airport, are they prepare to have riders pay an extra fare to get there??? Will TTC riders use this line that could cost two fare to get to the airport without TTC running a new line from the Renforth Terminal to the airport or will they do what they do today?? What happens to the express from Kipling to the airport once this line opens??

There are a number of ways to do this, but who will lead the charge as well pay for it??

We know the people mover is useless for any expansion to the point something else is need to replace it. We can extend the LRT to the airport, depending on location as well how will it service the employers around the airport to get workers to them.

We can go back to the idea that surface years ago, that is building another people mover from Renforth to the Woodbine station by the airport. This would have to be funded by the GTAA with no fares require to use it.

We can go back to the idea of extending the LRT not only to the airport, but to a central location that will service the local business. This would be a TTC Fare. At the same time, Mississauga would use the ROW to move their riders as well charge their fare. This would have to be a 3-5 way funding split to built the ROW. If GO Transit wants to use this ROW as well, they will have to kick in extra money since they will provide more service than TTC and Mississauga. GO will cause more wear and tear on the ROW and why they will have to kick in more funding to maintain the ROW.

At the end of the day, there needs to be better transit to the airport by the various transit system. Most cites in Europe have buses/trams, buses/subways, trams/subway/rail/buses and so on. A few have buses only, but most have some type of rail as well.

If Toronto let Metrolinx build the extension as original plan years ago before funding was deferred, then there is no cost to them like it is under Tory plan today.

Tory wants one thing, but not prepare to pay for it.

Maybe this line extension will be up and running by 2035 at the rate things are going.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top