Eglinton-Crosstown Corridor Debate

[kEiThZ]

We need to keep in mind that not so long ago the plan was only for an Eglinton West subway. There was no push to have an Eglinton crosstown route. From that perspective, the Eglinton LRT is a step up. I'd rather have that then only an Eglinton west subway. What's important is to make sure that the line is built to HRT standards so that we can switch over in the future with minimal expense if needed.

 

[Brandon716]

Here are some other resources, including a Transit City comparison by a Canadian transit enthusiast that I'm not sure posts here at all.

http://lrt.daxack.ca/Pittsburgh/index.html

Here are some good photos of the T:

http://www.lightrail.com/photos/pittsburgh/pittsburgh.htm

Here is the 42 train going through Dormont, where its separated from traffic, but still crosses intersections.

Dormont is an old and urban community, about 9,000 people per sq mile.

Housing in the Mt Lebanon stop area:

The point of posting these photos is that I think that LRT cars can handle suburban Toronto intersections okay so long as priority signaling is strongly used.

 

[taal]

They could just use articulated buses.

40 articulated buses = $30 million

Eglinton LRT = $4.6 billion

Hmm... they are going to pay an awful lot for more capacity.

This seems to me a general argument against LRTs ... according to you what current lines merit an LRT or a subway for that matter?

 

[Rainforest]

The speed increase is not that little, that 22 km/h figure is from the all surface sheppard LRT, the final speed figure for eglinton will be higher because of the underground section that will operate just as fast as any subway, and because the stop spacing on the surface sections is wider than sheppard. I doubt any speed simulations have been done for eglinton, so everyone is just using the figure from sheppard.

Besides that, busses will not be able to handle the future demand on eglinton.

Yes, they produced that 22 km/h figure from simulations on Sheppard LRT (which will run in street-median ROW), and then started quoting it for all other TC lines, including Eglinton, without much thinking.

If more than 1/3 of Eglinton line is tunneled and the speed in tunnel may be as high as the speed of subway (30 km/h), we can expect the average of about 25 km/h for the whole line. Even a little better than that, in case the opt for using Richview corridor.

It should be noted that Eglinton buses might be reaching 18 km/h average off-peak, but during the peak hours combined with bad weather, they can be crawling at 5 km/h or worse through the central sections. I would not be surprised if the average for the whole route is 10 or 12 km/h in those times.

 

[kEiThZ]

^ If it does hit 25kph that means the ride from Kennedy to the airport would be about an hour and 15 mins. That fairs quite well to taking the bus from Kipling today....and there's no need for a transfer.

 

[Amphibius]

The trip would be around 55 minutes were Eglinton-Crosstown made as a subway line instead.

The areas beyond the proposed tunneled mid-section could still function with a metro comprising kilometre apart spacing gaps without much need for a parallel bus route: 6 stations eastwards~ Wynford, Bermondsey, Eglinton Square (exits facing both VP and Pharmacy), Warden, Birchmount, Kennedy; and 6 more westward~ Scarlett, Royal York, Islington, Kipling, Martin Grove, Highway 27 with LRT routes branching off from the terminal points.

 

[kEiThZ]

The trip would be around 55 minutes were Eglinton-Crosstown made as a subway line instead.

The areas beyond the proposed tunneled mid-section could still function with a metro comprising kilometre apart spacing gaps without much need for a parallel bus route: 6 stations eastwards~ Wynford, Bermondsey, Eglinton Square (exits facing both VP and Pharmacy), Warden, Birchmount, Kennedy; and 6 more westward~ Scarlett, Royal York, Islington, Kipling, Martin Grove, Highway 27 with LRT routes branching off from the terminal points.

And the obvious question is ... how much would that cost?

It would either require significantly more investment or we would end up with a truncated line. The latter scenario would obviously rankly Metrolinx which has supported the line in large part because of the line's potential as a regional service.

Conversely, if we are going to spend more there are opportunity costs. What are we willing to give up in return for the Eglinton line employing tunneled HRT the whole way?

 

[Prometheus The Supremo]

What are we willing to give up in return for the Eglinton line employing tunneled HRT the whole way?

false dichotomy. it doesn't have to be a question of this or that. it could be a question of this and that. this isn't just some frivolous spending. this is a material asset that will serve a purpose and be around for a long time. even if the debt is passed on to the next generations, they will have something for it. it will have to be done one day anyway. the longer we wait, the more it will cost and the more debt it will cause for future generations.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Before Transit City, there was an attempt to build a third lane HOV or buses-only lane in each direction on Eglinton Avenue West, from Black Creek to Renforth Avenue. That project met with opposition from the area residents, including me. With Transit City's Eglinton Crosstown LRT, it has been met with better acceptance.
At least with the LRT, the bottlenecks and traffic jams the current 32 Eglinton West buses face in the west end will be bypassed. I hope that during the construction phase, that with the available width in the Richview corridor, that slowdowns will be limited, except for the "roadside supervisors".

 

[doady]

Buses are an additional cost to the city because of the toll they take on the roads and the cost to keep them fueled up. These are solid arguments to move forward at least with the LRT.

Are you suggesting that LRT lines do not need maintenance or energy?

Don't get me wrong, I am in no way suggesting sticking with bus or building BRT, most of the reasons people state for building LRT are not good reasons at all.

The Eglinton LRT could have much higher capacity if it was completely grade-separated. This line would serve the Airport, it should not be operating on the street.

For $4.2 billion you should have a completely grade-separated line. $4.2 billion for an on-street line is madness. They could probably build the entire Eglinton West Subway for less money and it would be far more useful.

 

[Brandon716]

Every one of you are bringing up valid points, but do remember LRT can be upgraded with its own rights of way at a later date if the system becomes too overloaded. The problem is that it'll take several billion worth of capital spending again, which may be hard with a future government that may not be transit friendly.

I think the rationale for Eglinton Crosstown as LRT has come down to finances: to build the entire system and not be stuck with a stubway that can't be completed because of future government gridlock in a post-McGuinty era.

The memories of Eglinton Subway's ditches being filled in are very fresh, despite that it should have been built in the 90's.

 

[lordmandeep]

Even if Dalton wins a 3rd time, I am certain a fiscal conservative Tory will get elected once Dalton leaves.

 

[Dan416]

If Dalton wins? Dalton doesn't even have anyone running against him. Both his rivals quit. A lot of people don't like Dalton, and I don't understand why. He responds to what the public wants, and then they say he's a pushover and just looking for votes. Well yeah, he's a poltician. And a realist.

That said, I do think this is a LOT of money for a on-street ROW. Why not do a comparison of how much a subway would cost versus fully grade-separated LRT versus tunnel + on-street LRT. And what about using the Richview corridor for HRT?

I just don't feel like all the options have actually been looked at. Especially if we're building a whole network, the costs per km should come down.

 

[kEiThZ]

^ That's what the EA is for.

 

[Amphibius]

And the obvious question is ... how much would that cost?

It would either require significantly more investment or we would end up with a truncated line. The latter scenario would obviously rankly Metrolinx which has supported the line in large part because of the line's potential as a regional service.

Conversely, if we are going to spend more there are opportunity costs. What are we willing to give up in return for the Eglinton line employing tunneled HRT the whole way?

Not that much more, really. It all depends on the method the subway line would take to get across the city. I couldn't give you an exact estimate but if it were a mix of underground/above-grade sections, costs are definitely lowered somewhat. Through Etobicoke, the DVP region and possibly the Golden Mile; the line could run on an elevated guideway grade-separated from the street below. Such construction would prevent having to alter the intersections where the ROW crosses all that much where pedestrian and motorist traffic could pass underneath. At Kennedy the line could be integrated into the existing Kennedy SRT platform area, thus saving capital costs from not having to construct a brand new station facility.

What you've highlighted about Eglinton being intended by Metrolinx for its interregional importance is one of the cheif reasons Eglinton should be HRT, sooner rather than later. Multiple LRT lines could shoot out of the transit hub I'm recommending for the Hwy 27 terminus, one heading towards Woodbine Live/Humber College/Woodbridge(?); another towards Pearson/Malton GO/Westwood Mall; and another still continuing west along Eglinton pass the Airport Corporate Centre and beyond.

Lastly, I don't think it is at a lost to advocate for better modes of transit that would have long-term sustainability written all over it. Unlike Sheppard, the Eglinton corridor is central to the entire 416 and the only through-thoroughfare south of Finch Ave. Eglinton would factor into a greater number of passengers' daily commutes, as a bulk of N-S bus routes intersect the corridor. If some Transit City LRT lines are deemed expendible due to this upgrade in customer service, maybe that's a sign that said line(s) fail to be all that suitable for LRT operation in the long run and probably should be amended to BRT/Rocket express bus type services instead.