News   Apr 19, 2024
 217     0 
News   Apr 19, 2024
 508     2 
News   Apr 19, 2024
 855     3 

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

As long as the stop spacing within the tunneled section is conducive to future subway operations, I'll be happy with it. A stop at major intersections is sufficient. I'm not sure where the tunneled section would be, but stops at Renforth, Martin Grove, Kipling, Islington, Royal York, Scarlett, Jane, (Weston/Black Creek), Keele, Caledonia, Dufferin, Allen Rd, Bathurst, Avenue Rd, Yonge St, Mt. Pleasant, Bayview, Laird, Don Mills, Victoria Park, Warden, Kennedy would be fine I think. I'm just basing that looking at a map though, I don't know Toronto Eglinton very well. Much more familiar with Mississauga Eglinton.
 
As long as the stop spacing within the tunneled section is conducive to future subway operations, I'll be happy with it. A stop at major intersections is sufficient. I'm not sure where the tunneled section would be, but stops at Renforth, Martin Grove, Kipling, Islington, Royal York, Scarlett, Jane, (Weston/Black Creek), Keele, Caledonia, Dufferin, Allen Rd, Bathurst, Avenue Rd, Yonge St, Mt. Pleasant, Bayview, Laird, Don Mills, Victoria Park, Warden, Kennedy would be fine I think. I'm just basing that looking at a map though, I don't know Toronto Eglinton very well. Much more familiar with Mississauga Eglinton.

The tunneled section is very unlikely to be conducive to future subway operations, in fact the tunnels will likely be narrow, and the stations smaller than our standard subways.

I would prefer that even if they did not do the full (North American) subway operation, that they would consider a smaller vehicle type operation such as the London/Paris underground operations (tunnels and platforms smaller).
 
I would prefer that even if they did not do the full (North American) subway operation, that they would consider a smaller vehicle type operation such as the London/Paris underground operations (tunnels and platforms smaller).

Why is it that N. America, despite the lowest transit ridership in the world, consistently opts for the largest subway cars?
 
I humbly suggest that everyone should open up Google Maps or Google Earth, and measure how far from your house you have to walk down the street that you live on to go 400m. Now ask yourself if you would consider that to be too far to walk to a subway/LRT stop.

The maximum walking distance is 400m only if you assume that all people in the Eglinton corridor live right on Eglinton itself.

But unlike the Transit City corridors, much of Eglinton is reasonably dense and urban already, and they could get away with such far distance between stops that, in my opinion, would not be possible for the other lines. However, the proposed above-ground sections of the line would not run through the dense and urban parts of Eglinton....
 
Rainforest

It seems crazy that we should put stops closer together where there are fewer people.

It is OK, as long as the central sections get a complementary surface bus.

The LRT stops will be closer together in the outer sections, and then passengers boarding there will have a semi-express ride through the central section.

Those living near the central section have the advantage of living closer to major destinations. That, together with the surface bus, will even out the benefits of transit service.
 
Coxwell to Woodbine is about 900 metres. Woodbine to Main is about 900 metres. We normally consider this spacing to be pretty good. 800 metres on a tunnelled section of Eglinton seems excellent spacing. There is no bus service on Danforth between Coxwell and Main - and I doubt there would be much demand. Service only starts between Main and Victoria Park, which is about 1,500 metres apart).

Sheppard/Yonge to Bayview is 1,900 metres. Now here's somewhere we need a station in between!

We keep joking that Bessarion and Leslie are close together, but it's still about 800 metres.
 
From: http://network.nationalpost.com/np/...-rail-plans-as-part-of-6-billion-project.aspx
__________________________________
TTC to unveil light-rail plans as part of $6-billion project
Posted: August 14, 2008, 9:07 PM by Barry Hertz
City, TTC, Politics

By Allison Hanes, National Post

It’s not the new subway line that was once started and then cancelled, but proponents think a proposed partially buried light-rail line along Eglinton Avenue would be the next best thing.

In a series of public meetings over the next week, the Toronto Transit Commission is unveiling its plans to build a light-rail line between Kennedy subway station in the east to Martin Grove Road in the west, and possibly all the way to Pearson International Airport. It is part of the city’s $6-billion Transit City plan, announced in March, 2007, which also includes light-rail lines on Don Mills Road, Jane Street and Sheppard Avenue.

The $2.3-billion Eglinton line includes a significant portion through midtown Toronto — from Laird Avenue to Old Weston Road — that will be below ground.

The underground portion won’t be a subway in the traditional sense, said Stephanie Rice, the TTC’s project co-ordinator for the Eglinton LRT, but it won’t operate all that differently.

“I would describe it for lack of a better term as a mini-subway,†she said. “There’s an advantage that we don’t have to contend with any traffic at all. Where we’re underground we’re on a fully segregated right of way and we can operate at higher speeds.â€

Councillor Joe Mihevc (St. Paul’s), who serves as vice-chairman of the TTC, said the full subway line that was killed by then-premier Mike Harris in 1995 would be optimum if cost were no object.

“In this particular case, the cost of burying the whole thing and having a full subway would at least triple the price,†Mr. Mihevc said. “What we’re trying to do there is stretch the transit dollar as far as we can.â€

However, he pointed out that the buried tunnel will be dug with dimensions that would allow Toronto to transform the light rail line into a subway in the future.

The big question mark hanging over the Eglinton project, scheduled to start construction in 2009, is financing.

“We as a city cannot afford to pay for the capital costs of it,†Mr. Mihevc said. “What we’re relying on and what the province has actually supported, is that Transit City would actually come out of provincial dollars and the province is looking to have the feds pay a third of the cost as well.â€

So far the federal commitment to the Transit City plan isn’t as solid.

“How do I put this nicely? They’re not transit enthusiasts,†Mr. Mihevic said of Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Conservative government, although it has loosened the purse strings lately on infrastructure funding.

But the city is not waiting. Although the project construction isn’t budgeted for, the design, engineering and environmental assessment work has been and is well underway.

“We can hit the ground running once we do have the money,†Mr. Mihevc said.

The main difference between a subway and light rail underground, Ms. Rice said, is the amount of infrastructure and the design of the stations.

Instead of paying at a collector’s booth and going through a turnstile, passengers would simply walk down the stairs and board the train as they would a streetcar.

The exact design is still up for discussion, she said, but a good comparison is the Queen’s Quay stop at Harbourfront leading to the Toronto Island ferry, where people can even cross the tracks.

Mr. Mihevc said light rail, which once dominated public transit before falling out of favour three decades ago, is making a huge comeback.

Not only does it not consume expensive fuel, it most often avoids traffic gridlock and provides a much more “elegant†and comfortable ride.

“Now, what transit authorities are finding, not just across North America but across the world, is that people are coming back to light rail in very, very big numbers,†Mr. Mihevc said. “Every single time tat they’ve put in light rail, not only do they meet their passenger objections, but they
always exceed passenger projections.â€
 
I was at the meeting last night and couldn't pass up a chance to speak with Toronto's best councillor while there.

Questions still to be answered:
- alignment west of Martin Grove. The Eglinton West subway EA actually was approved all the way to Renforth (I had no idea it was approved for that far!). So orginally the line was to go there, until they decided that the airport was a logical terminus.

- Airport rail links. At least people there acknowledged that the purpose of the Eglinton LRT going to the airport was to add one more trip generator, not the ultimate one-and-only rail link to Pearson, and would be especially useful for people not coming from downtown. As for Blue 22, the original plan is "dead", but they still have to make a deal with the dev-I mean SNC Lavalin. I was told they are right now on the idea of a semi-express service, with stops in Weston, either Eglinton or St. Clair and possibly Parkdale, but still "not a $3.00 ride" - what the TTC route would be. It would be more like 30 minutes, rather than 22. I suggested a more public-oriented P3 like Canada Line or Viva, with GO type fares and some fare coordination with Presto. It could be a possibility, something that is an option.

- Location of western tunnel portal. It would either be where the line climbs the hill out of the Flats on the west side, or near the York Civic Centre west of Keele.

- Detailed design. Saw a very basic underground station design, either as a "shallow" stop, or a "deep" station with a mezzanie. Would have escalators and elevators.

Stop spacing:
(Renforth/Airport area still up for review)
Martin Grove
Lloyd Manor
Kipling
Wincott
Islington
Russell
Royal York
Mulham Place
Scarlett
Emmett (problematic, and TTC staffer admitted as much due to long walk up the hill and what would happen with 32D)
Jane (this is subject to study wrt Jane LRT)
Weston
Keele
Caledonia (question how to serve both 47B,C and possble GO stop and neighbourhood on west side)
Dufferin
Oakwood
Eglinton West
Bathurst
Chaplin
Avenue Road
Yonge
Mt. Pleasant
Bayview
Laird
Brentcliffe
(east portal)
Leslie
Don Mills (5 bay terminal)
Ferrand
Wynford
Swift
Bermondsey
Victoria Park
Pharmacy
Lebovic [shudders at the thought of this name on a transit stop]
Warden
Birchmount
Ionview
Kennedy Station
 
Quite a number of those stations could be dumped, including:

Lloyd Manor
Mulham
Emmett (what is this, a stop on the 9th hole of Scarlett Woods?)
Oakwood
Brentcliffe
Ferrand
Swift
Lebovic
 
I totally agree with Emmett, Brentcliffe, Ferrand, Swift (Jonesville would make more sense!) and Lebovic. I would keep the others you mention, but I would dump Leslie and send the Leslie bus to the terminal planned for Don Mills and Eglinton.

The other point is that they're not going to take advantage of the Richview corridor, it's going to be centre-of-the-street through there, when it isn't even necessary.
 
They would have to cut them down anyway to widen the road for the ROW.

not really. in some parts, they can widen the south side of the road, in other parts, they can widen the north.
 
proposal to dump:

Lloyd Manor
Mulham
Emmett
Oakwood (underground)
Brentcliffe (underground)
Ferrand
Swift
Lebovic

...hmmm, never heard of the surface stops
--what if stops were built PROVIDED the locals approve nearby transit-friendly development (where physically possible)
--Oakwood is a busy place to consider omitting, although it would still be served (as a connection to EgW) by frequent Ossington buses
--folks up in York region are bandying about $60m per stop on the Yonge north subway -- I thought it was around $100 for a full stop w/ collector booths, etc.
-- and for a pre-metro $top?
 

Back
Top