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

[ARG1]

No, they said that using letters for GO Lines is an option... but the preferred solution is "train line lozenges".

View attachment 320909

Either way though, it still signifies that they want to at the very least reserve the letters for the GO trains.

 

[tsm1072]

London ... Ontario?

Can't get any better than this.

 

[turini2]

You'll see more new signs with the application of Metrolinx's new Wayfinding Standard across all their projects. To make matters worse, the other agencies haven't signed on to Metrolinx's program, meaning that the region's wayfinding will only get more complicated.

Metrolinx (according to their Wayfinding Standard) doesn't think you should know the line # until you're inside the station. I know, it's ridiculous.

At least the MX Wayfinding standard is okay with using the TTC font at platform level - but agreed with above posters that it looks nice at TTC station entrances, and a shame its omitted.

 

[Johnny Au]

Cedarvale station on May 17, 2021:

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Late and over budget, who would have thought?

Wasn't one of the reasons for LRT was that it was more affordable and easier to build? I guess that theory has been blown out of the water. Elevation is far easier and faster to build and far less disruptive on local roadways because, unlike median running LRT, elevated rail usually goes along the side of a roadway.

After all this time and money Toronto will be getting a rather slow, unreliable, and lower capacity system than if they had built the damn thing grade separated in the first place.

Elevated has more risk factors at play than at-grade, and underground even more than elevated. I'm largely in favour of elevated transport, but this certainly is not a selling point.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Don’t forget Ml’s equally embarrassing outcome when it took Bombardier to court alleging failure to deliver on its LRV contract.

More recently, Ml’s approach to P3 for GO RER expansion went back to the drawing board when bidders balked at ML’s proposed way of doing things.

This is an organization that just doesn’t want to be accountable for anything, and especially not for project management.

- Paul

It's an organization full of middle managers.

 

[ARG1]

Elevated has more risk factors at play than at-grade, and underground even more than elevated. I'm largely in favour of elevated transport, but this certainly is not a selling point.

Really? Most of the issues that can arise are engineering challenges. You don't risk having a car ram into the LRV in the middle of an intersection when elevated, which is a very big concern in Toronto.

 

[Rainforest]

You don't risk having a car ram into the LRV in the middle of an intersection when elevated, which is a very big concern in Toronto.

How often does that actually happen?

Looks like a very rare occasion, and shouldn't be a factor in choosing the transit alignment. If the danger from rogue cars was a significant factor, then all mixed-traffic buses would have to be shut down long ago, as those buses are exposed to that risk all the time.

Elevated transit has its advantages, but the ability to run and hide from cars isn't one of them.

 

[ARG1]

How often does that actually happen?

Looks like a very rare occasion, and shouldn't be a factor in choosing the transit alignment. If the danger from rogue cars was a significant factor, then all mixed-traffic buses would have to be shut down long ago, as those buses are exposed to that risk all the time.

Elevated transit has its advantages, but the ability to run and hide from cars isn't one of them.

It seems to happen several times a year. The difference though is that mixed traffic busses aren't trying to be Toronto's 2nd primary East West link. When you're building a rapid transit line, reliability is key. Right now we already have a problem on Lines 1 and 2 where something happening like someone in the middle of the tracks is enough to stop the lines from running temporarily and cause serious service disruptions. Now imagine a line as important as Eglinton being shut down because of an accident somewhere along the line. We currently have an underground western extension being built, and an extension north east to Malvern being planned. With such a huge line, a service disruption along any point of the line can cause huge delays throughout the line, which means a car accident at meadowvale could negatively impact service in Richview, Even if we play smartly around it like using crossovers to cut the line short to minimize disruptions won't be enough because at some point you're going to have a crowd of people trying to get on a replacement bus service, which will slow down the line even more. If a car crashes into a bus, busses can easily be diverted and at worst you have a slight inconvenience. If a car crashes into an LRV, especially for a line as important as Eglinton, the ramifications and impacts are enormous.

 

[KhalilHeron]

How often does that actually happen?

Looks like a very rare occasion, and shouldn't be a factor in choosing the transit alignment. If the danger from rogue cars was a significant factor, then all mixed-traffic buses would have to be shut down long ago, as those buses are exposed to that risk all the time.

Elevated transit has its advantages, but the ability to run and hide from cars isn't one of them.

Forget a car actually hitting a train, think of how much slower a train or a bus has to go to make sure a car doesn't hit them. Pretty much all disadvantages of non grade-separated transit stem from the dangers of sharing spaces with cars.

 

[NoahB]

How often does that actually happen?

Looks like a very rare occasion, and shouldn't be a factor in choosing the transit alignment. If the danger from rogue cars was a significant factor, then all mixed-traffic buses would have to be shut down long ago, as those buses are exposed to that risk all the time.

It happens at least once a month for the dedicated lane-d ION. Also, your argument about busses is weird. Buses do get in accidents too. But that doesn't shut down bus routes as it does for rail. Buses can swerve and stop quickly to avoid collisions. Trains can't.

Elevated transit has its advantages, but the ability to run and hide from cars isn't one of them.

Do you know how absurd this statement is? Grade separating transit by elevating it from the road is a tried and true thing to do for centuries... I cant even...

Here is an old post of mine about the crashes:
**************
From The Record: 35 collisions with trains since Ion began running in Waterloo Region

There have been collisions every month since the service started in June 2019, but the worst month for crashed was September 2019, with eight collisions. For the past six months, the rate has been just one crash a month.

The collisions usually happen when cars are travelling in the same direction as the Ion tracks, and a car turns right or left into the train’s path. Because the trains are generally moving pretty slow in those situations, collisions haven’t caused serious damage — the train is usually back in service within a couple of days, and repairs such as panel replacements typically cost less than $10,000.

In most cases, the crashes led to charges being laid against the driver of the car that struck the train.

Collisions are the single biggest cause of delays for LRT trains, said Peter Zinck, director of transit services at the Region of Waterloo.

Some changes have led to a reduction in crashes, Zinck said. Crashes and near-misses have gone down at Ottawa Street and Mill Street, now that traffic lights stop vehicles in all directions whenever the train is going through the intersection. The Region also banned right turns from King Street West onto Victoria Street, where cars and trucks cross over the LRT tracks.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Crosstown gets at least 1 car crash delay per month based on how it is going in Kitchener. TTC Streetcars have had 549 crashes in 2017, or 45 per month on average.

Kitchener uses crossing arms, alarms, and turning all lights to red in some sections. Toronto is not implementing any of that.
****************

Also from The Star:

Buses, which make up the vast majority of the TTC’s fleet of surface vehicles, accounted for 3,187 collisions last year, while streetcars were involved in 549, and Wheel-Trans vehicles in 265.



The TTC determined 1,135 of the 4,001 collisions, or more than one quarter, were “preventable,” a term the agency uses when it believes the transit employee operating the vehicle was at fault. That was 109 more preventable collisions than the year before.

The bottom line is there will be crashes, and there will be riders stuck in the cold/heat waiting for shuttles, and it will happen at least once a month and probably more.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Late and over budget, who would have thought?

Wasn't one of the reasons for LRT was that it was more affordable and easier to build? I guess that theory has been blown out of the water. Elevation is far easier and faster to build and far less disruptive on local roadways because, unlike median running LRT, elevated rail usually goes along the side of a roadway.

After all this time and money Toronto will be getting a rather slow, unreliable, and lower capacity system than if they had built the damn thing grade separated in the first place.

Elevated has more risk factors at play than at-grade, and underground even more than elevated. I'm largely in favour of elevated transport, but this certainly is not a selling point.

Really? Most of the issues that can arise are engineering challenges. You don't risk having a car ram into the LRV in the middle of an intersection when elevated, which is a very big concern in Toronto.

Do you know how absurd this statement is? Grade separating transit by elevating it from the road is a tried and true thing to do for centuries... I cant even.

To be clear, I was talking about the risk factors in design, engineering and construction. @ssiguy2 claimed, “Elevation is far easier and faster to build”. This is not true, when compared to at-grade construction. There is simply more that can go wrong with elevated construction (vs. at grade), which means a higher probability of delays and cost overruns. Notice how none of the Crosstown LRT’s delays have been driven by the at-grade portion.

Improvements in operations offered by elevation are another discussion. Its plainly evident that elevation allows for generally better operations.

 

[W. K. Lis]

If Toronto motorists and pedestrians will be that dumb driving or walking, we can expect to see barrier level crossings soon after both Line 5 and Line 6 open.

 

[ARG1]

If Toronto motorists and pedestrians will be that dumb driving or walking, we can expect to see barrier level crossings soon after both Line 5 and Line 6 open.

Kinda hope this happens. Would definitely help improve speeds on the line at the very least.

Unfortunately noise might become an issue in this case, and the locals might get a bit to rowdy as a result.

 

[ssiguy2]

This is why I think ML is going to have to divide the line in 2 basically requiring a transfer at OSC to go from one rain to the next. This means that the slow and accident prone at-grade section won't inhibit the much faster, reliable, and frequent central/west sections.