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

[Monarch Butterfly]

Oh happy days! We're getting one underground line on Eglinton! Our transit problems are solved with this one UNDERGROUND line.

And since going UNDERGROUND will be much, much, much more expensive, we'll solve the city's financial problems at the same time. Sorry, my head hurts trying to see the logic.

 

[Swarley]

In actual news, TTC has posted a tender for the construction of the West Launch Box. That means tunnelling could start by the end of the year I'm guessing...

 

[nfitz]

In actual news, TTC has posted a tender for the construction of the West Launch Box. That means tunnelling could start by the end of the year I'm guessing...

Mid-2012 for tunnelling according to the Metrolinx public meeting yesterday. Construction for launch site starts this summer.

 

[GenerationW]

Oh happy days! We're getting one underground line on Eglinton! Our transit problems are solved with this one UNDERGROUND line.

No one is claiming this will solve our transit problems.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but when Eglinton and the Spadina extension are under full-scale construction (i.e. digging) at the same time as they should be next year, won't that set a record for the number of simultaneous major local transit projects? Not to mention that Eglinton Crosstown will, I believe, also be the longest rapid transit project in Toronto history.

In actual news, TTC has posted a tender for the construction of the West Launch Box. That means tunnelling could start by the end of the year I'm guessing...

I went to the Eglinton information session at St. Clement's school last night, and that came up.

The digging of the launch area will start at Black Creek in July of this year. Digging and then assembling the TBMs will take approximately one year. In mid-2012 tunneling will begin and head east. The location of the east launch area has yet to be decided.

TTC Chair Stintz headed the panel, which also included Transportation Minister Wynne, four area Councilors, as well as representatives from Metrolinx and the TTC (whose names I can't recall). Chair Stintz began with a short presentation, followed by comments from each of the panelists, and then questions from the audience.

I should also say that two members of the Toronto Environmental Alliance (one of whom, to my amusement, looked like Trotsky) were in front of the school handing out flyers which basically extolled the virtues of surface LRTs. For some strange reason, the flyers made no mention of the T.E.A. Looked very amateurish. By comparison, representatives of Toronto public service unions were handing out their (far more impressive looking) literature after the evening events. They weren't hiding who they were.

Some highlights, subject to my memory:
-Eglinton will cost $8.2 billion based on 2010 dollars
-will create 82,000 jobs
-line is 25KM from Scarborough Centre to Black Creek
-trip from Kennedy to Black Creek will take 35 minutes
-it will take 6-9 months for Environmental Assessments of the Laird-Kennedy and Black Creek-Jane sections
-Black Creek and McCowan yards will be reviewed, as well as the Kennedy connection
-LRT will run under the Spadina subway
-a dedicated website to this project will be up soon
-City is on the hook for approximately $50 million spent so far
-tunnels will be large enough to convert to subway in the future if necessary
-3-car LRT will have a capacity of 12,500 per hour at peak

There were a variety of questions from the floor -- good, bad, amusing, and just plain rambling on and on. My favourites:
What if Dufferin and Eglinton caves in?
What will happen to my parkette at Chaplin?

There was a lot of amusement about why another E.A. will be needed for Laird-Kennedy since it was revealed an underground option was considered in the previous E.A. Councilor Mihevic seems to think there's a chance Laird-Kennedy will not be underground, but I think that ship has sailed. Besides which, since replacing the SRT is now a part of this project, I'm glad it's now all underground.

 

[klb86]

From Karen Stintz via twitter:
@TTCchair More info on #TTC Eglinton Crosstown LRT Meeting, including a PDF file of parts of the presentation: http://www.stintz2010.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Eglinton-LRT-April-2011-Presentation.pdf

 

[EnviroTO]

In actual news, TTC has posted a tender for the construction of the West Launch Box. That means tunnelling could start by the end of the year I'm guessing...

I'm no expert but that points to them using the original design which has the LRT coming out at street level on Eglinton just east of Black Creek Drive. So the plan is to have the LRT underground through the Golden Mile and at grade through Weston?

 

[Dan416]

I'm no expert but that points to them using the original design which has the LRT coming out at street level on Eglinton just east of Black Creek Drive. So the plan is to have the LRT underground through the Golden Mile and at grade through Weston?

Well they're doing the EA addendums

 

[Eug]

Are those trains articulated? I can't remember. The pictures suggest they are.

So, they are going to be digging Black Creek eastwards and the centre portion simultaneously, both starting mid-2012. Nice. When they do select that east launch site, does that mean they will dig westwards from there simultaneously as well? They do have 4 tunneling machines after all.

The tunneling machines run at 75 metres max per week. But what is realistic? 30 m a week?

The TTC schedule states it should take 38 mins from Jane to Kennedy. That's almost bang on. Pretty good. Will the Jane to Kennedy trip on the Eglinton Crosstown LRT be as fast?

The same or faster, but it will be inaccurate because I believe there is a 1km difference between Jane and Black Creek Drive, and the fact that the entire ECLRT will be underground excluding Kennedy and onwards.
I heard somewhere that since the Mark I trains were so loud that there had to be a 30 km/h speed restriction past 10pm. Will that be lifted once the LRT line is open?

The 35 minute travel time is slightly faster than the Bloor Danforth subway from Jane to Kennedy, but of course the Bloor Danfloor line isn't straight and as you said, it's longer. It's a 20 km ride over 38 minutes, as opposed to the Eglinton Crosstown LRT's 19 km over 35 minutes. However, even accounting for distance, that theoretically still makes the Eglinton line slightly faster.

Just a reminder though for the others that the train will be above ground at the Don Valley and at Black Creek.

I should also say that two members of the Toronto Environmental Alliance (one of whom, to my amusement, looked like Trotsky) were in front of the school handing out flyers which basically extolled the virtues of surface LRTs.

So, what was Trotsky's reasoning? I'm curious. Slower LRTs use less energy per unit time?

 

[gweed123]

The 35 minute travel time is slightly faster than the Bloor Danforth subway from Jane to Kennedy, but of course the Bloor Danfloor line isn't straight and as you said, it's longer. It's a 20 km ride over 38 minutes, as opposed to the Eglinton Crosstown LRT's 19 km over 35 minutes. However, even accounting for distance, that theoretically still makes the Eglinton line slightly faster.

I think the time savings comes from the fact that there aren't any downtown stations with station boxes really close together. I mean, when you think about it, you have Spadina, St. George, Bay, and Yonge all within about a 15 min walk of eachother. This stop go stop go stop go increases the travel time. I mean, there are the same number of stops between Spadina and Yonge on the B-D line as there are between Eglinton West and Eglinton on the ESLRT, only the two subway lines at Eglinton are 3x further apart.

 

[Eug]

True.

From Jane to Kennedy on the Bloor-Danforth I believe there are 26 stops.
That 26 number is the same for the entirety of the Eglinton line, including the old SRT portion.

Still, that's a pretty substantial speedup over the old Transit City Plan, for obvious reasons.

 

[nfitz]

Are those trains articulated? I can't remember. The pictures suggest they are.

The cars are articulated (5 segments making up a 30 metre car); but the trains aren't. So if you ran a 3-car train it would be 90-metres long, but with 3 separate cars. Compare to the current 6-car subway trains; each car is 23-metres long, so the train is 138 metres long (or 92-metres long on the 4-car Sheppard Line).

 

[sixrings]

ARE They being extremely conservative with the LRT speed number or is the LRT for whatever reason slower then a subway? I was under the impression that a LRT could actually accelerate faster then a subway... The reason Im asking is that this line is technically 1 Km shorter and a few stops shorter but is only 3 minutes faster. I would have thought that the 35 min number would have been from JANE to STC versus what it is from BLACK CREEK to Kennedy...

 

[gweed123]

The cars are articulated (5 segments making up a 30 metre car); but the trains aren't. So if you ran a 3-car train it would be 90-metres long, but with 3 separate cars. Compare to the current 6-car subway trains; each car is 23-metres long, so the train is 138 metres long (or 92-metres long on the 4-car Sheppard Line).

Out of curiosity, what's the capacity of one of the TC LRVs? I know the cars that Ottawa ordered are 150 for practical load, 200 for crush load. They aren't articulated in the same way though, but I'd imagine it would be somewhere in the same ballpark.

 

[nfitz]

Out of curiosity, what's the capacity of one of the TC LRVs? I know the cars that Ottawa ordered are 150 for practical load, 200 for crush load. They aren't articulated in the same way though, but I'd imagine it would be somewhere in the same ballpark.

That's the magic question - it seems somewhat subjective. And seems to depend on the bias of who gives the estimate.

Best thing to do is look at the actual spec's. Metrolinx released a document last year that had the dimensions of the existing CLRV, ALRV, and the new LRVs for the legacy streetcars, and Transit City: http://stevemunro.ca/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/LRV-Fact-Sheet.pdf

The length's seem a bit wonky (list 24 metres for ALRV, while TTC uses 23 metres - and has the Flexities at 28 metres and 31 metres, while TTC is using 30 metres), but it also gives the widths. 2.54 metres for all, except 2.65 for the Transit City LRV.

Assuming the TTC lengths are correct, and the Metrolinx widths are correct, then a CLRV has an area of (assuming it's a rectangle) of 38 m², an ALRV has 58 m², a legacy Flexity has 76 m², and a Transit City Flexity has 80 m².

Reported CLRV capacities are 102 normal, and 132 crushed (from Transit Toronto, and ALRV is 155 normal and 205 crush.

Scaling this, the Transit City LRV would have a capacity of 212 normal and 277 crush. (and the new legacy LRVs would be 203 normal and 266 crush - this is similiar to the 260 number being bounced around last year).

Conservatively then, I'd say the crush load is 270 per car on Eglinton (about 800 per train).

What has been ordered in Ottawa? This seems quite low - lower than a Toronto ALRV. Hmm, sounds like a Toronto ALRV ... used?

 

[gweed123]

That's the magic question - it seems somewhat subjective. And seems to depend on the bias of who gives the estimate.

Best thing to do is look at the actual spec's. Metrolinx released a document last year that had the dimensions of the existing CLRV, ALRV, and the new LRVs for the legacy streetcars, and Transit City: http://stevemunro.ca/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/LRV-Fact-Sheet.pdf

The length's seem a bit wonky (list 24 metres for ALRV, while TTC uses 23 metres - and has the Flexities at 28 metres and 31 metres, while TTC is using 30 metres), but it also gives the widths. 2.54 metres for all, except 2.65 for the Transit City LRV.

Assuming the TTC lengths are correct, and the Metrolinx widths are correct, then a CLRV has an area of (assuming it's a rectangle) of 38 m², an ALRV has 58 m², a legacy Flexity has 76 m², and a Transit City Flexity has 80 m².

Reported CLRV capacities are 102 normal, and 132 crushed (from Transit Toronto, and ALRV is 155 normal and 205 crush.

Scaling this, the Transit City LRV would have a capacity of 212 normal and 277 crush. (and the new legacy LRVs would be 203 normal and 266 crush - this is similiar to the 260 number being bounced around last year).

Conservatively then, I'd say the crush load is 270 per car on Eglinton (about 800 per train).

What has been ordered in Ottawa? This seems quite low - lower than a Toronto ALRV. Hmm, sounds like a Toronto ALRV ... used?

From the Environmental Project Report: "A generic set of Light Rail Transit technology vehicle specifications have been used as part of the study. A typical Light Rail Vehicle (LRV) will have a length of approximately 30 m and a width of 2.65 m. The passenger capacity is expected to be up to 200 per car, although for service planning purposes a capacity of 150 per LRV has been generally assumed. The line has been planned and designed to accommodate 6-car (180 m) trains, although it is likely that operation will commence using 3 or 4-car trains (90 and 120 m respectively)."

http://www.ottawalightrail.ca/media/pdf/Section6_2.5MB.pdf

I don't know why there's such a large variation, especially considering the vehicle lengths and widths are virtually identical to the Transit City vehicles. Interesting.

PS: I had to go digging like mad to try and find where I read that, haha. So many reports on the Ottawa LRT website!