|
|
|
nfitz
Superstar
One there demand at Eglinton West is lower. Two is that there are already 2 platforms on Line 1, compared to 1 at Eglinton.
Johnny Au
Superstar
What a wasted opportunity to build a Spanish solution at Eglinton station.
BurlOak
Senior Member
Maybe you could read before posting.
And this would increase the capacity of the entire line too.
nfitz
Superstar
It says exactly what I thought it said.
You'd need to change the entire signalling system, all the pocket storage, reconfigure the yards, spend massive amounts of money expanding several stations, and then create huge bottlenecks at some shorter stations, with those in the back door filing in and out.
Please tell me that either your trolling, or you've been Rob Fording.
edmundoconnor
Active Member
Ahahaahahahahaha. Haahaha.
Ha.
That's funny.
What were these guys smoking when they came up with those numbers? I want some of it
Well back then, there was a certain guy in Etobicoke who could fix you right up.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
they were smoking huge job growth numbers for NYCC and STC, back then the city of Toronto assumed for some reason that most office employment growth in the GTA would continue to happen in the city of Toronto (this was the early 80's.. the 905 was just beginning to be a thing), and the anti development crowd downtown wanted all the growth in the burbs of Metro Toronto. Thus the huge job growth numbers. Through planning and bad politics, transport planners most job growth in Toronto would occur in 4 centre, NYCC, STC, Etobicoke centre (around Islington), and York centre on the Eglinton subway at the Kodak lands. Of those two, NYCC and STC were considered to be the larger two. While NYCC somewhat succeeded, its employment is still roughly 1/10th of what it is supposed to be at right now according to those 1980's plans, York centre doesn't exist, then Etobicoke and Scarborough Centre are barely anything more than a particularly large cluster of condos.
The job growth largely still occurred, just downtown and in the 905. Developers struggled to justify building in expensive urban centres (higher land costs, parking costs, etc.) when they didn't have access to the centralized access of downtown. It then became the option of cheap land with cheap parking costs out in the 905, or expensive land and little parking in downtown with easy transit access. The 416 was generally considered a no-go.
The job growth largely still occurred, just downtown and in the 905. Developers struggled to justify building in expensive urban centres (higher land costs, parking costs, etc.) when they didn't have access to the centralized access of downtown. It then became the option of cheap land with cheap parking costs out in the 905, or expensive land and little parking in downtown with easy transit access. The 416 was generally considered a no-go.
Last edited:
CITY_LOVER
Active Member
I'm sorry if this has been asked already (recently) but do we have any reasonable idea as to when the Eglinton line can potentially be extended westward to the Airport and eastward past Kennedy? I wish this was happening all at once so we would have a full-fledged cross-city train line right from the start......
innsertnamehere
Superstar
not for a long time, if ever. its not on any priority lists for funding and from my understanding doesn't have a particularly good cost benefit ratio. Its essentially dead along with the other transit city lines that didn't receive funding.
ehlow
Senior Member
Yes, especially if UPX gets a stop connecting to Eglinton at Mt Dennis. They'll just run a bus line on Eglinton West connecting the giant bus bay & mobility hub at Mt Dennis. Maybe they could run an Eglinton West Express bus as well, that drives into the airport?
At Eglinton they can extend/move the platform north relatively inexpensively because the space has already been excavated and is currently used for the pocket track. The Spanish solution would require excavating on either side of the tunnels. That just is not financially feasible. You would suddenly go from $100-200 million to $1 billion.
42
BurlOak
Senior Member
I am not sure what the most recent plans are (i.e. since the Scarborough Subway discussions were started), but with the Transit City plan (when the ECLRT and SRT/LRT were going to be built), there would be no possibility of extending Eglinton farther east of Kennedy.
1overcosc
Active Member
Which is a shame because it would be very useful for the Eglinton line to intersect with Lakeshore.
BurlOak
Senior Member
That is why I though ECLRT and SRT should be connected (since both are on west side of rail corridor) and B-D subway should be extended to Lakeshore East and maybe Kingston Road (since the tail tracks already go under the rail corridor).
Maybe some will say that B-D is already connected to Lakeshore FO at Main.
nfitz
Superstar
With the Transit City plan there was nothing that precluded the future extension of the Danforth line east of Kennedy. The station box and tail tracks are already set up to allow for a future extension under Eglinton. Nothing in what was designed for the Eglinton Line and SRT conversion precluded that.