News   Apr 16, 2024
Windbreak Work
 241     0 
News   Apr 15, 2024
An Aerial Tour of Construction at The Residences at Central Park
 1.2K     0 
News   Apr 15, 2024
Proposal Across from St James Park Grows to 65 Storeys
 2.4K     6 

Toronto Crosstown LRT | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx | Arcadis

Ozman said:
Also, to clarify a myth about the stop at Leslie (Sunnybrook Park stop): It wasn't Leaside residents who pushed to include this stop. (They would never walk all the way down the hill from Brentcliffe to use such a stop anyway). It was a few residents from the condos on Leslie (north of Toyota on the Park) that pushed to retain the stop. Ironically they would probably not walk half a kilometre down Leslie to use it anyway (especially in winter) when the Leslie 51 bus stops at their door and would take them directly to Laird station where they could could wait for the LRT underground (warm and dry). The media got hold of the story and pushed it like Leaside residents pushed for the Leslie stop but that was totally false and wouldn't make any sense if one thought about it at all.
Click to expand...
The reason why Leaside gets pegged into this is because the Leaside Residents Association (LRA) and the local city councilor for Leaside (John Parker) were among those supporting the condominium owners on Leslie in lobbying for the Sunnybrook Park stop.
 
WislaHD said:
The reason why Leaside gets pegged into this is because the Leaside Residents Association (LRA) and the local city councilor for Leaside (John Parker) were among those supporting the condominium owners on Leslie in lobbying for the Sunnybrook Park stop.
Click to expand...

I could never figure out why Parker and the LRA lobbied for the Leslie condo owners. Those condos are not in Leaside and Parker was not ever the councillor for that area which is in the former North York. Unless they had friends (or former Leaside residents) who lived in those condos... It was an odd one. Most Leasiders couldn't have cared less if there was a Leslie stop but there's no question that a south-side surface alignment of the Crosstown would have been the best plan. This would be better for drivers (intersection unchanged), for LRT users (no conflict with car traffic at Leslie) and for the overall operation of the LRT. (ATC straight to Don Mills).

Alas, we are left this short stretch of on-street LRT right before one of the busier (and future interchange) stations.

P.S. They're starting to rebuild the south side of Eglinton east of Brentcliffe now and the new street light poles are already installed which shows the expanded width of the street. The first two street light poles for Glassworks Drive appeared in the last 10 days so I imagine the intersection with Eglinton will be built over the next few months.
 
Honestly it sounds to me like we are overthinking a solution to a problem that really doesn't exist, in a sense.

We don't need interchanges, street closures, etc.

Lets break down the root of the problem:

"LRT needs to stop at light"

Thats the only issue here, that a streetcar needs to stop at the intersection.

So, what do we want to solve"

"LRT doesnt need to stop at light"

Well, we always want to find the easiest solution to a problem, not the hardest.

The easiest solution is as such:

"Put signal priority in place that never allows Eglinton lights to turn red when LRT is X distance from lights, and turn Eglinton lights green if red and LRT approaching"

This can all be solved by proper signal priority.

This is 100% a government legislation and bureaucracy issue. We need to change the structure of our city government so that the Toronto Transportation Authority cannot be making decisions that negatively affect a provincial project.

Where is the province on this? They seem to be ok with screwing with our wards and trying to steal our subway system. But when something actually negatively affects us here, where are they?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
robmausser said:
The easiest solution is as such:

"Put signal priority in place that never allows Eglinton lights to turn red when LRT is X distance from lights, and turn Eglinton lights green if red and LRT approaching"

This can all be solved by proper signal priority.
Click to expand...

Indeed, that maybe the sufficient response.
 
Until a traffic accident occurs at Leslie and Eglinton, shutting down the Crosstown Line at rush hour, of course.

And to those who say it happens rarely enough so it is insignificant, well, it won't seem so insignificant once you cost out the delay in terms of lost working hours over thousands of affected passengers.

Also, there is a network issue here as well, as ideally you want trains double-turning at Don Mills, not Laird, especially with the future build-out of the Ontario Line.
 
robmausser said:
Honestly it sounds to me like we are overthinking a solution to a problem that really doesn't exist, in a sense.

We don't need interchanges, street closures, etc.

Lets break down the root of the problem:

"LRT needs to stop at light"

Thats the only issue here, that a streetcar needs to stop at the intersection.

So, what do we want to solve"

"LRT doesnt need to stop at light"

Well, we always want to find the easiest solution to a problem, not the hardest.

The easiest solution is as such:

"Put signal priority in place that never allows Eglinton lights to turn red when LRT is X distance from lights, and turn Eglinton lights green if red and LRT approaching"

This can all be solved by proper signal priority.

This is 100% a government legislation and bureaucracy issue. We need to change the structure of our city government so that the Toronto Transportation Authority cannot be making decisions that negatively affect a provincial project.

Where is the province on this? They seem to be ok with screwing with our wards and trying to steal our subway system. But when something actually negatively affects us here, where are they?
Click to expand...
I agree they should have done more but it's not as easily to set the lights to green whenever a train approaches, especially when they have to take in account of left turn phases.

First of all, the light would have to be green well in advanced of a train's approach. Maybe 10-15 sec. to give the operator enough time to break in case it doesn't turn green and for left turning vehicles to clear the intersection. A 60m train would need 8 seconds to pass through a 30m wide intersection at 50 km/h. If it's slower, than 10-15 sec. That would put the average green time at ~25 sec. When they increase the train length to 90m, they'll need 50% more time. Now if the train in the opposite direction approaches the intersection once this train clears, they'll have to keep the green signal for over one minute. They would also have to take in account of the gap time between the two directions. They can't give green time to the side street for 15 sec cause another train is approaching. Pedestrians can't cross the road.

To what point is it acceptable? The more priority for the LRT, the more everything else would suffer. It'll take people a lot smarter than this city's traffic department to figure this one out.

Although they should never have to make a train wait for a side street and don't activate advanced green with a LRV waiting. They can wait another cycle.

Even without priority, proper green wave timing using estimated dwelling time at each stations and average travel time could significantly reduce hitting a red signal and even have the peak direction receiving all green signals if the operator drives according to schedule. Even if a train gets caught on a red, it should push the train to the next green wave and should hit a string of reds. This will really depend on how well the city can time the signals according to the service period (AM, midday, night, etc) and would need to be tweaked regularly. Excess dwelling at every station would lead to missing every green.
 
H4F33Z said:
So Caledonia gets a bus loop but not Laird? :(
Click to expand...
It was planned from the start that the 47 would connect to Caledonia Station with a bus loop which is 200m west of the actual road. The idea of a bus route terminating at Laird was not in the initial plan. Unlike Line 2, there is barely any bus terminals at all.
 
"Crosslinx Transit Solutions, Metrolinx’s builder responsible for bringing the Crosstown project to life, is not building the Caledonia GO station. Construction on that will start after the Crosstown is complete. "

I guess no Go station connection there until years after the Crosstown opens...
 
NoahB said:
"Crosslinx Transit Solutions, Metrolinx’s builder responsible for bringing the Crosstown project to life, is not building the Caledonia GO station. Construction on that will start after the Crosstown is complete. "

I guess no Go station connection there until years after the Crosstown opens...
Click to expand...
You can read more about Caledonia GO here
 
H4F33Z said:
So Caledonia gets a bus loop but not Laird? :(
Click to expand...
It'll have a bus loop but no fare paid area...Figures
Steve X said:
It was planned from the start that the 47 would connect to Caledonia Station with a bus loop which is 200m west of the actual road. The idea of a bus route terminating at Laird was not in the initial plan. Unlike Line 2, there is barely any bus terminals at all.
Click to expand...
Add Fairbank/Oakland (depending on where the 90 terminates) and Chaplain to the list of stations that should have gotten terminals.
 
Streety McCarface said:
It'll have a bus loop but no fare paid area...Figures

Add Fairbank/Oakland (depending on where the 90 terminates) and Chaplain to the list of stations that should have gotten terminals.
Click to expand...
It'ls like Old Mill station, a bus loop and an entrance. Fare paid zone isn't a good idea for these small loops anyways, people walk in easily. I believe Keelesdale is in a similar case. Only Mt Dennis and Science Centre are getting fare paid zone bus terminals.

The 90 is fine with it's own on street looping. Both the 14 and 90 doesn't warrant a bus loop. What Fairbanks should have gotten is bus bays for the 29. It looks like they'll just stop in traffic lane without any queuing lane.
 
WislaHD said:
Until a traffic accident occurs at Leslie and Eglinton, shutting down the Crosstown Line at rush hour, of course.

And to those who say it happens rarely enough so it is insignificant, well, it won't seem so insignificant once you cost out the delay in terms of lost working hours over thousands of affected passengers.

Also, there is a network issue here as well, as ideally you want trains double-turning at Don Mills, not Laird, especially with the future build-out of the Ontario Line.
Click to expand...
If Left turns remain allowed at Leslie and Eglinton they will have to be during a fully protected left turn phase which would not be active while trains have permissive signals to travel through the intersection. In that case if you are turning left into an oncoming train you'd be running a red light.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top