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

[Westey]

You said it all.

I'm never good at compiling my thoughts. I often struggle on this forum as to how to put into words my frustration. But you've done a good job of summing up my sentiments.

It's not enough to just say "I hate Line 6 cause it's slow". I hate Line 6 because it's a manifestation of all the poor transit choices over the last 15-20 years made by city councilors and politicians who thought they knew better than the general public and refused to build subways.

- "Let's build an underground LRT instead."
- "Lets add more stations on the GO lines within Toronto"

Often times the pro-LRTs only argument against subways is that "they're expensive". Well of course they're expensive, they're the best form of mass transit a city can have.

Also, Line 6 is a classic example of how Metorlinx and transit planners in Ontario focus too much on the big things, and often neglect the little things. Congrats! You built an LRT! But you forgot TPS, and why are the tram doors being left open at every station? etc., etc. This makes it seem as if our transit systems are being planned, built. and operated by people who don't actually use transit.

Having taken two trips to London earlier this year and seeing how the trains, underground, Overground, Elizabeth Line, DLR and buses all work in tandem with each other really highlighted to me the sorry state of transit in Toronto. In fact, I find myself now becoming more interested with transit across the U.K. and other European countries rather than continue to follow transit in Toronto & Ontario as a whole because it just puts me in a bad mood.

This obsession Canadian cities have with trying to run low floor LRTs as light metros needs to come to an end! Line 5 will be an abysmal failure! Calgary seriously needs to reconsider their choice of using low floor LRTs on the future Green Line, and I don't even know what the hell Ottawa is suppose to do!

And yes, Ontario needs a new "Bill Davis". A Conservative who isn't afraid to think big.

It's a lot easier to be a "Bill Davis" type leader when the deficit is $2.9B (2.3% of GDP) and debt is $22B (15% of GDP). (I actually liked Frost and Robarts better).
When Harris came in, it was deficit of $10B (3.3% of GDP) and debt of $91B (30% of GDP).
When Harris and PC's left, deficit was 1.3% of GDP and debt 27.5%.
When Wynne and Liberals left, deficit was 0.9% of GDP and debt 40%.
(all #'s by AI, so they are not verified).
Ford seemed to ignore fiscal reality, and spend massively on things, including transit.
Likely the next Premier will have to clean up Fords mess so transit spending likely will reduce.

All in all, it seems that spending on transit and gov't spending are not correlated well. Whenever they spend, they spend frivolously.
And the best strategy is to be fiscally sound to be able to afford the things you need.

 

[Dan416]

The sad thing about transit spending these days is not getting good value-for-money.

 

[crs1026]

I know many are sick of the theme.... but bear with me for a little more history. I will stop now. But those with their half baked partisan conspiracy theories of how Toronto fell behind in transit planning ought to do a little fact checking. Those who do not study history etc.

And btw, the Toronto Public library's portal to archives of newspapers and city directories are imho one of the reasons why TPL is a first rate resource that the city should be prouder of. If our transit was as good as our library system....

- Paul

2002

 

[ssiguy2]

They are going to open in February as planned, transit priority if it comes will come at a later time. Remember EG LRT is grade separated from Mount Dennis till pretty much Aga Khan Station (except for the 1 light at Leaside) so even if transit priority were to be implemented, it would only impact the the very east end of the line from Wynford Station to Kennedy.

That's very true but rapid transit, like roads, are only as good as their weakest link and Eglinton has 9km of weak link.

 

[urbanclient]

Question: by posting crap like this, do you honestly think you legitimize your argument or cause people to take you seriously?

You didn't find an LRT fanboy (why the infantile caps lock and the spelled out words?), what you found is an adult skeptical of the Fordian doctrine that subways are the only legitimate form of rail transportation, and who is interested in a frank and adult exchange of ideas. If you want to be a child about it, a Discord subway fan server or Instagram group chat may be more your speed. There is no reason why being skeptical of subways to suburbia should mean people are subjected to insults and ageism just because they don't share your view points.

This goes for you and anyone else on this forum who thinks that insults are a replacement for discussion. If your argument was worth anything at all, you wouldn't need to childishly attack those who disagree with you.

@6ixGod 's long post got as many positive reactions as @T3G 's reply which shows how polarized this forum is on tram vs. subway.

Subway expansion over tram expansion for a city of its weight class is not a regressive, Fordian neoconservative doctrine or conspiracy to ruin transit. 8.3 million people, 100 skyscrapers downtown and growing, Toronto is top 20 in the world for total skyscrapers, easily top 20 for high-rise density in its downtown, and yet Toronto is far from a top 20 city in terms of rapid transit.

IMO for people with more extensive knowledge of how Toronto compares with other global cities and/or who have travelled extensively among said cities, the preponderance of evidence points towards Toronto having a very undersized subway all things considered: population density, total population, land area, regional GDP, regional GDP per capita etc... There is a reason why the TTC subway ranks among the best for ridership per km. It's because the system is very small for the population which it's supposed to serve. We're not saying trams shouldn't exist anywhere, but that trams don't work well for Toronto. Even if you save on upfront costs with trams, you lose big on marginal benefits.

Trams work great in many medium density, medium sized cities.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLzkcfGfnDg

Toronto today is not a medium density, medium sized city. It is no longer a small skyscraper downtown surrounded by disparate, unconnected suburbs and municipalities. Furthermore, Toronto's street layout and geography adjacent to downtown* are not conducive for more tram expansion. *where the nominal density may justify trams

The GTHA no matter how you classify it, is either a megalopolis or megacity, currently 8.3+ million up from 6.8 million in 2014, and easily approaching 10 million by 2040, the latter of which Metrolinx concurs [1]. If you were to look at the largest monocentric cities in Western Europe, Toronto would rank 3rd only behind London and Paris. Unfortunately, for the foreseeable future, Toronto is going to have a metro system 4 to 7 times smaller than Paris and London.

In an unlimited budget utopia, would Toronto have dozens of fast trams in low density suburbs instead of buses? Maybe. But considering the realities at hand, a limited budget, growing population, urban morphology, human geography....prioritizing futureproof subway expansion in denser areas just makes more sense.

Also, I don't think anyone is 100% guaranteeing that Line 5 will run into capacity issues in the short term, but it doesn't take some leap of logic to think that Line 5 will capture lots of latent demand for a city so starved of rapid transit. The demand projections for Line 5 were done off numbers from two decades ago when population growth rates were projected to be much lower [2]. To make matters worse, the advertised max 15,000 pphpd with 3 cars is unrealistic since it implies a >6 people m^2 crush load with 250 pax per 30 metre car and 0 flip up and multi-use seats used. A more realistic figure is 12,000 pphpd with 200 pax each for 3 cars, at 20 trains per hour.

https://urbantoronto.ca/forum/attachments/bombardier-flexity-freedom-brochure-2011-pdf.95184/

For Line 5 Eglinton, we must distinguish between low absolute cost and high long-term value. Selecting a cheaper technology that provides disproportionately lower utility is a false economy, as it represents a poor value proposition if the marginal benefit fails to scale with the city's growth. In contrast, a subway (even a light metro) yields a significantly higher benefit to cost ratio because its superior potential throughput will far outweigh the incremental increase in construction costs. In hindsight, it's unclear Line 5 would've even cost more as a subway of any kind since the per km costs of Line 5 as mixed-grade tram are around 2 times that of the Vaughan Line 1 extension.

1. "The expansion of transit in the GTHA is the largest in North America today, but our job is far from over. By 2041, over 10 million people will live in our region— comparable to Paris or London."
Metrolinx 2041 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN For the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area Draft Final

https://assets.metrolinx.com/image/upload/v1663237694/Documents/Metrolinx/20180308_BoardMtg_Draft_Final_2041_RTP_EN.pdf

2. In 2012 an updated case from Steer Davies Gleave was released. They predicted Eglinton would only need 9,000 pphpd by 2031 based on outdated population projections. (pg. 20/49)
https://assets.metrolinx.com/image/...etrolinx/Benefits_Case-Eglinton_Crosstown.pdf
In 2.4 (pg. 11/49) it says "The assumed employment and population forecasts used for the assessment are identified in ‘Places to Grow’ the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe area and is consistent with those used in the Regional Transportation Plan, The Big Move."
Places to Grow is from 2006. The Big Move is from 2008.

Big Move 2008 pdf:https://assets.metrolinx.com/image/upload/v1663240133/Documents/Metrolinx/TheBigMove_020109.pdf

The Big Move says, "The GTHA, located in southern Ontario, is Canada’s largest urban region. It is also one of Canada’s fastest growing urban regions. With a current population of over six million people, it is forecast to be home to 8.6 million people by the year 2031."

Without fully accounting for undercounted visas and overstays, the GTHA population is already estimated to be 8.3 million as of July 1, 2024 (StatsCan). The true population of the GTHA could very well be 8.6 million already when factoring in NPR undercount as predicted by Benjamin Tal from CIBC (https://economics.cibccm.com/cds?id=858756bd-a8fc-4920-8ea4-e1dcd1c104d4&flag=E).

Compare that with the original TTC/Toronto Crosstown Environmental Project Report (EA) from 2010: https://assets.metrolinx.com/image/upload/v1689691727/Images/Metrolinx/EA_complete.pdf

"2.1.2 Identification of Alternative Transit Technologies
The City of Toronto’s Official Plan forecasts a 270,000(10%) increase in the population of the City by 2031"
The City of Toronto's official plan numbers they are citing for this forecast dates back to 2002 at least, before the official 2001 census numbers were released, as part of Flashforward: Projecting Population And Employment To 2031 In A Mature Urban Area - Looking Ahead Part 1. edit, added source: https://www.toronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/9529-Flashforward-Looking-Ahead-Part-1.pdf

The city of Toronto has seen much more than a 270,000 increase in just the last 5 years, let alone since 2006.

StatsCan Population estimates:
https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1710015201

The prob

The problem has always been a lack of continuous contruction, planning and funding.

Even now with more projects being built simultaneously than ever before, we still don't know what exactly we're building next. Once a project breaks ground, the next phase, extensions or new projects should already be known to the public. Right now we're guessing. Will Line 4 be extended east and west? What about the Ontario Line? Are we going to finally build something on Jane? What about Eglinton East and so on?

With one off projects it's impossible to retain the knowledge and expertize that makes continuous construction possible. With a lack of consistent funding it's easy for the next government to whimsically cancel the previous government's projects/proposals.

IMO the problem is the P3 projects that proceed from ~50% design and rip off the taxpayers. Traditional procurement would probably get more built for the same budget. P3s blow through the budget, which leads to less projects being built, which leads to discontinuous construction etc... Not to mention Metrolinx is still grasping at straws about P3s apparently offering value for money when it clearly does not in Ontario. IMO the lack of retained institutional knowledge at the government level is less of a problem because even in traditional procurement, the design stage is outsourced to an engineering firm.

 

[Northern Light]

@6ixGod 's long post got as many positive reactions as @T3G 's reply which shows how polarized this forum is on tram vs. subway.

Subway expansion over tram expansion for a city of its weight class is not a regressive, Fordian neoconservative doctrine or conspiracy to ruin transit. 8.3 million people, 100 skyscrapers downtown and growing, Toronto is top 20 in the world for total skyscrapers, easily top 20 for high-rise density in its downtown, and yet Toronto is far from a top 20 city in terms of rapid transit.

IMO for people with more extensive knowledge of how Toronto compares with other global cities and/or who have travelled extensively among said cities, the preponderance of evidence points towards Toronto having a very undersized subway all things considered: population density, total population, land area, regional GDP, regional GDP per capita etc... There is a reason why the TTC subway ranks among the best for ridership per km. It's because the system is very small for the population which it's supposed to serve.

Trams work great in many medium density, medium sized cities.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLzkcfGfnDg

Toronto today is not a medium density, medium sized city. It is no longer a small skyscraper downtown surrounded by disparate, unconnected suburbs and municipalities. Furthermore, Toronto's street layout and geography adjacent to downtown* are not conducive for more tram expansion. *where the nominal density may justify trams

The GTHA no matter how you classify it, is either a megalopolis or megacity, currently 8.3+ million up from 6.8 million in 2014, and easily approaching 10 million by 2040, the latter of which Metrolinx concurs [1]. If you were to look at the largest monocentric cities in Western Europe, Toronto would rank 3rd only behind London and Paris. Unfortunately, for the foreseeable future, Toronto is going to have a metro system 4 to 7 times smaller than Paris and London.

In an unlimited budget utopia, would Toronto have dozens of fast trams in low density suburbs instead of buses? Maybe. But considering the realities at hand, a limited budget, growing population, urban morphology, human geography....prioritizing futureproof subway expansion in denser areas just makes more sense.

Also, I don't think anyone is 100% guaranteeing that Line 5 will run into capacity issues in the short term, but it doesn't take some leap of logic to think that Line 5 will capture lots of latent demand for a city so starved of rapid transit. The demand projections for Line 5 were done off numbers from two decades ago when population growth rates were projected to be much lower [2]. To make matters worse, the advertised max 15,000 pphpd with 3 cars is unrealistic since it implies a >6 people m^2 crush load with 250 pax per 30 metre car and 0 flip up and multi-use seats used. A more realistic figure is 12,000 pphpd with 200 pax each for 3 cars, at 20 trains per hour.
View attachment 705154

https://urbantoronto.ca/forum/attachments/bombardier-flexity-freedom-brochure-2011-pdf.95184/

For Line 5 Eglinton, we must distinguish between low absolute cost and high long-term value. Selecting a cheaper technology that provides disproportionately lower utility is a false economy, as it represents a poor value proposition if the marginal benefit fails to scale with the city's growth. In contrast, a subway (even a light metro) yields a significantly higher benefit to cost ratio because its superior potential throughput will far outweigh the incremental increase in construction costs. In hindsight, it's unclear Line 5 would've even cost more as a subway of any kind since the per km costs of Line 5 as mixed-grade tram are around 2 times that of the Vaughan Line 1 extension.

1. "The expansion of transit in the GTHA is the largest in North America today, but our job is far from over. By 2041, over 10 million people will live in our region— comparable to Paris or London."
Metrolinx 2041 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN For the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area Draft Final

https://assets.metrolinx.com/image/upload/v1663237694/Documents/Metrolinx/20180308_BoardMtg_Draft_Final_2041_RTP_EN.pdf

2. In 2012 an updated case from Steer Davies Gleave was released. They predicted Eglinton would only need 9,000 pphpd by 2031 based on outdated population projections. (pg. 20/49)
https://assets.metrolinx.com/image/...etrolinx/Benefits_Case-Eglinton_Crosstown.pdf
In 2.4 (pg. 11/49) it says "The assumed employment and population forecasts used for the assessment are identified in ‘Places to Grow’ the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe area and is consistent with those used in the Regional Transportation Plan, The Big Move."
Places to Grow is from 2006. The Big Move is from 2008.
View attachment 705173
Big Move 2008 pdf:https://assets.metrolinx.com/image/upload/v1663240133/Documents/Metrolinx/TheBigMove_020109.pdf

The Big Move says, "The GTHA, located in southern Ontario, is Canada’s largest urban region. It is also one of Canada’s fastest growing urban regions. With a current population of over six million people, it is forecast to be home to 8.6 million people by the year 2031."

Without fully accounting for undercounted visas and overstays, the GTHA population is already estimated to be 8.3 million as of July 1, 2024 (StatsCan). The true population of the GTHA could very well be 8.6 million already when factoring in NPR undercount as predicted by Benjamin Tal from CIBC (https://economics.cibccm.com/cds?id=858756bd-a8fc-4920-8ea4-e1dcd1c104d4&flag=E).

Compare that with the original TTC/Toronto Crosstown Environmental Project Report (EA) from 2010: https://assets.metrolinx.com/image/upload/v1689691727/Images/Metrolinx/EA_complete.pdf

"2.1.2 Identification of Alternative Transit Technologies
The City of Toronto’s Official Plan forecasts a 270,000(10%) increase in the population of the City by 2031"
The City of Toronto's official plan numbers they are citing for this forecast dates back to 2002 at least, before the official 2001 census numbers were released, as part of Flashforward: Projecting Population And Employment To 2031 In A Mature Urban Area - Looking Ahead Part 1.
View attachment 705174
The city of Toronto has seen much more than a 270,000 increase in just the last 5 years, let alone since 2006.

StatsCan Population estimates:
https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1710015201

IMO the problem is the P3 projects that proceed from ~50% design and rip off the taxpayers. Traditional procurement would probably get more built for the same budget. P3s blow through the budget, which leads to less projects being built, which leads to discontinuous construction etc... Not to mention Metrolinx is still grasping at straws about P3s apparently offering value for money when it clearly does not in Ontario. IMO the lack of retained institutional knowledge at the government level is less of a problem because even in traditional procurement, the design stage is outsourced to an engineering firm.

Two Words: Excellent Post!

 

[6ixGod]

I concur with everything @urbanclient has said. No need for me to add any more commentary. I’m going to save this post and just reply to anyone who insists on calling midtown Toronto as “suburbia”.

 

[Bojaxs]

PS - having said that, the growing realisation that TTC and City staff were inclined to just open the line without TSP, and let the whole line plod along in mediocrity.... gets me more angry with every passing day.

@crs1026 I know you try to be the more "even keeled" voice of this forum, but it should make you mad that the bureaucrats & TTC saw fit open Line 6 in it's current form, and gas light us into thinking this was going to be such a transformational thing for Toronto.

Make no mistake about it, if the response to Line 6's opening had been more positive, the politicians, Metrolinx, TTC would all have been content to leave the line "as is". Cut the ribbon, Congratulate & pat each other on the backs, and then take an early Christmas break (well, they did regardless).

As I'm typing this, people are standing at the ""shelters""" having ice pelted into their faces while they wait for a slow tram stopped at a red light while cars make a left turn. Did the folks who helped to design, fund, and build this line think this was okay? Did it ever cross their minds what a miserable experience this would be? Probably not. What do they care? They knew it would never be them standing on those platforms waiting for the tram.

Olivia Chow rushing TPS through City Council was a purely reactionary move to the line's negative reception. How many times did we hear the mayor, city council, Metrolinx or TTC even utter the word "transit priority signaling" before the lines opening?

Like I said before, you'll never catch any of these people riding Line 6 as a daily commute. It's too slow for them. But apparently it's fast enough for the rest of us. That there should tell you how much these bureaucrats truly feel about us.

When it comes to transit, we need to adopt the mentality that if it's not good enough for the people cutting the ribbon, than it shouldn't be good enough for us either.

The whole Line 6 opening feels somewhat like a "Let them eat cake" moment.

 

[Bordercollie]

@crs1026 I know you try to be the more "even keeled" voice of this forum, but it should make you mad that the bureaucrats & TTC saw fit open Line 6 in it's current form, and gas light us into thinking this was going to be such a transformational thing for Toronto.

Make no mistake about it, if the response to Line 6's opening had been more positive, the politicians, Metrolinx, TTC would all have been content to leave the line "as is". Cut the ribbon, Congratulate & pat each other on the backs, and then take an early Christmas break (well, they did regardless).

As I'm typing this, people are standing at the ""shelters""" have ice pelted into their faces while they wait for a slow tram stopped at a red light while cars make a left turn. Did the folks who helped to design, fund, and build this line think this was okay? Did it ever cross their minds what a miserable experience this would be? Probably not. What do they care? They knew it would never be them standing on those platforms waiting for the tram.

Olivia Chow rushing TPS through City Council was a purely reactionary move to the line's negative reception. How many times did we hear the mayor, city council, Metrolinx or TTC even utter the word "transit priority signaling" before the lines opening?

Like I said before, you'll never catch any of these people riding Line 6 as a daily commute. It's too slow for them. But apparently it's fast enough for the rest of us. That there should tell you how much these bureaucrats truly feel about us.

When it comes to transit, we need to adopt the mentality that if it's not good enough for the people cutting the ribbon, than it shouldn't be good enough for us either.

The whole Line 6 opening feels somewhat like a "Let them eat cake" moment.

At major stops they could have at least built something that has 3 sides so that you can hide from the elements. They can do it for VIVA stops they should be able to do it for LRT. Also waiting 20 minutes with ice pellets coming down is torchure. At least bus stops had shelter and it was faster and more frequent.

 

[crs1026]

@crs1026 I know you try to be the more "even keeled" voice of this forum, but it should make you mad that the bureaucrats & TTC saw fit open Line 6 in it's current form, and gas light us into thinking this was going to be such a transformational thing for Toronto.

Absolutely, I was thinking just as much about Line 6 when I wrote that. For that matter, I would also include the legacy tram lines such as 501 Queensway and 504 King, where similar signalling is possible but TTC and City staff are dug in in their apathy about pushing for faster service.

When I was picking up relatives on Christmas Day, I drove by Humber Loop and noted a line of four -yes, four - 501 streetcars sitting at the end of the line killing time. It's a minimum service holiday schedule, FFS, but it's so padded that the trams pile up at the end of the line and stand still.

The whole Line 6 opening feels somewhat like a "Let them eat cake" moment.

if you mean, it triggered a rebellion that led to a better and freer republic, I agree.

It's very fortunate that Line 6 came into service first and caused the embarrassment that tipped the Mayor's office into action... and gave transit riders the political high ground. Had Line 5 opened first, that might not have happened.

It's also fortunate, perhaps, that the testing and commissioning and then opening has been painless for motorists. Had the TPS been installed and turned on sooner, before any riders were being carried, the surprise and backlash from motorists might have led to pressure to turn it off. Now it will come in more preannounced manner, and I do think it will be harder for the auto faction to raise a grievance without looking a bit entitled and tone deaf. The result may be more balanced and less reactionary.

So maybe the Line 6 debacle is a silver lining that saved the day.

- Paul

 

[Bordercollie]

Absolutely, I was thinking just as much about Line 6 when I wrote that. For that matter, I would also include the legacy tram lines such as 501 Queensway and 504 King, where similar signalling is possible but TTC and City staff are dug in in their apathy about pushing for faster service.

When I was picking up relatives on Christmas Day, I drove by Humber Loop and noted a line of four -yes, four - 501 streetcars sitting at the end of the line killing time. It's a minimum service holiday schedule, FFS, but it's so padded that the trams pile up at the end of the line and stand still.



if you mean, it triggered a rebellion that led to a better and freer republic, I agree.

It's very fortunate that Line 6 came into service first and caused the embarrassment that tipped the Mayor's office into action... and gave transit riders the political high ground. Had Line 5 opened first, that might not have happened.

It's also fortunate, perhaps, that the testing and commissioning and then opening has been painless for motorists. Had the TPS been installed and turned on sooner, before any riders were being carried, the surprise and backlash from motorists might have led to pressure to turn it off. Now it will come in more preannounced manner, and I do think it will be harder for the auto faction to raise a grievance without looking a bit entitled and tone deaf. The result may be more balanced and less reactionary.

So maybe the Line 6 debacle is a silver lining that saved the day.

- Paul

Even when the combined queen and king car was diverted along Richmond and Adelaide streetcars had to wait for cars to make a turn resulting in terrible travel times. 4 streetcars lined up waiting for one person in a car to mta turn. Makes no sense.

 

[Dan416]

Absolutely, I was thinking just as much about Line 6 when I wrote that. For that matter, I would also include the legacy tram lines such as 501 Queensway and 504 King, where similar signalling is possible but TTC and City staff are dug in in their apathy about pushing for faster service.

When I was picking up relatives on Christmas Day, I drove by Humber Loop and noted a line of four -yes, four - 501 streetcars sitting at the end of the line killing time. It's a minimum service holiday schedule, FFS, but it's so padded that the trams pile up at the end of the line and stand still.



if you mean, it triggered a rebellion that led to a better and freer republic, I agree.

It's very fortunate that Line 6 came into service first and caused the embarrassment that tipped the Mayor's office into action... and gave transit riders the political high ground. Had Line 5 opened first, that might not have happened.

It's also fortunate, perhaps, that the testing and commissioning and then opening has been painless for motorists. Had the TPS been installed and turned on sooner, before any riders were being carried, the surprise and backlash from motorists might have led to pressure to turn it off. Now it will come in more preannounced manner, and I do think it will be harder for the auto faction to raise a grievance without looking a bit entitled and tone deaf. The result may be more balanced and less reactionary.

So maybe the Line 6 debacle is a silver lining that saved the day.

- Paul

For this to happen, I think the political pressure and the media attention to the slowness of line 6 need to be maintained and not let up until something is actually done about it. And I really hope they do end up doing it for all the streetcars, and not just line 6.

 

[smallspy]

We are past the point where some unknown issue blocked putting parts of the line in service before the rest.

At first glance - If we are now at the point where surface operation is the critical missing element, it seems possible to open the line from Mount Dennis to the first above ground turnback point. That might mean retaining the Eglinton East bus, but the west bus could be eliminated and some surface routes realigned. And public acceptance (delight) with the underground portion would flow.

But if that was the problem, why wouldn't they have opened the underground part of the line already? After all, the yard is connected to the tunneled section, not the open-air section.

And it doesn't account for the crews that still seem to be at work at the various stations.

It doesn't seem to be that TSP is the show-stopper here. There are other issues at play with the line. Which is incredibly frustrating considering the additional time that they've already had to resolve them.

Dan

 

[duty free]

That's very true but rapid transit, like roads, are only as good as their weakest link and Eglinton has 9km of weak link.

What would you do? Rebuild the eastern portion elevated?

 

[ssiguy2]

What would you do? Rebuild the eastern portion elevated?

Well that's what should have be done in the first place but it's too late now. That, however, does not mean this line cannot be salvaged as all it takes is some political will. First, get rid of some of these stops along the eastern portion. It should have the same, or even less, the stop distances as the underground sections. Second, give the line 100% street priority. With today's technology there is absolutely NO reason why any of trains should be stopping for any red lights. The only stopping should be to pick up passengers and everything else should be free flowing. Third, raise the max speed to 70 km/hr on street running sections. Remember these are separated lanes so that they can go faster than cars safely. That's the whole point of having them separated in the first place. If they have to go the same speed as the cars, they could have just painted a lane and been done with.