Eglinton-Crosstown Corridor Debate

[Sir Novelty Fashion]

^ But how would that work in the above-ground sections? Surely they couldn't put a third-rail-powered system along an ROW that's at grade. Jaywalkers would be frying themselves daily, never mind the intersections. If they used SRT cars, the whole thing would have to be buried or elevated; could that possibly be affordable?

 

[Ansem]

^ But how would that work in the above-ground sections? Surely they couldn't put a third-rail-powered system along an ROW that's at grade. Jaywalkers would be frying themselves daily, never mind the intersections. If they used SRT cars, the whole thing would have to be buried or elevated; could that possibly be affordable?

elevated is way less expensive than underground

 

[EnviroTO]

I don't think it would need to be entirely elevated or underground. They could run at grade in the middle of the road with a fence (similar to Allen Expwy) and then dive under the intersections that remain open. Another alternative is to run it in a trench in the middle of the road which makes it easier to add pedestian bridges between main intersections. However if SRT type technology was used on Eglinton the city definitely wouldn't be very welcoming to anything other than a fully buried solution because it wouldn't help achieve the intensification of the avenues vision of urban and walkable neighbourhoods. I really see two outcomes possible. LRT on Eglinton and the SRT replaced with LRT in a fully isolated ROW... or SRT upgraded to Mark II cars and Eglinton fully buried (possibly in a trench west of Jane) with Mark II cars as well. Admittedly it would seem the first option is most likely... however the Ontario government has given Thales Signals R&D money and made the decision in the past that led to the creation of the SRT type technology in the first place.

 

[EnviroTO]

One other thing that seems strange to me is the idea that the upgrade to Mark II vehicles would require a much shorter period out of service. With the base case of Mark II vehicles there is a whole new Kennedy station, a rework of the Ellesmere tunnel, re-inforcing structures, and cutting back the platform at all stations. Surely in the time it takes to make a whole new Kennedy station the rest of the line can have tracks laid and catenary hung. Laying track and hanging wire seems like a task that takes a shorter period of time than building stations and tunnels to me.... although I suppose it depends on how many workers are assigned. There is no reason you can't lay track on different sections of the line at the same time but there is certainly an obstacle to installing drywall prior to installing electrical and plumbing and installing those before a basic structure exists, closing a passageway from the subway prior to a new one being opened, etc. What seems strange too is that the estimated time for SRT to LRT conversion is "up to 36 months" but SRT vehicle upgrades are "at least 8 months". Why is one in terms of "up to" and the other "at least". "At least 8 months" could end up being more that 36 months and "up to 36 months" could end up being 7 months.

 

[Second_in_pie]

I don't think it would need to be entirely elevated or underground. They could run at grade in the middle of the road with a fence (similar to Allen Expwy) and then dive under the intersections that remain open. Another alternative is to run it in a trench in the middle of the road which makes it easier to add pedestian bridges between main intersections. However if SRT type technology was used on Eglinton the city definitely wouldn't be very welcoming to anything other than a fully buried solution because it wouldn't help achieve the intensification of the avenues vision of urban and walkable neighbourhoods. I really see two outcomes possible. LRT on Eglinton and the SRT replaced with LRT in a fully isolated ROW... or SRT upgraded to Mark II cars and Eglinton fully buried (possibly in a trench west of Jane) with Mark II cars as well. Admittedly it would seem the first option is most likely... however the Ontario government has given Thales Signals R&D money and made the decision in the past that led to the creation of the SRT type technology in the first place.

Simply tunneling a subwayin the part that it's supposed to be tunneled right now, then running above grade like the Allen Expressway past Keele would work well. I don't really endorse continuing to use ICTS technology, and I think the slightly higher capacity of Subway will be needed on Eglinton.

 

[Dan416]

In Eglinton's case, Mk II technology seems to be the worst of both worlds. It has to be completely grade separated, like subway, meaning it's not very urban above ground, which means it would have to be buried to allow Eglinton to be urban. On the other hand, it doesn't have the capacity of a subway, so why bother building a fully-grade-separated Mk II line when you could just build it as a subway?

Honestly I don't see the need for the line to be continuous between its "underground" section (Keele to Laird or whatever it is) and the above ground portion (to the subway, to Kennedy station). I would just build a subway in the underground, and bus connections beyond.

 

[Second_in_pie]

Honestly I don't see the need for the line to be continuous between its "underground" section (Keele to Laird or whatever it is) and the above ground portion (to the subway, to Kennedy station). I would just build a subway in the underground, and bus connections beyond.

The best part about doing this is that it's long enough to be a subway in it's own right (about the same length as Bloor was originally) And has room for expansion when more funds are available. The Western Extension to the Airport be built above ground along the Richview corridor like the Allen Expressway. The first segment would in total be less expensive than building it LRT, and LRT isn't even needed along the entire route right now. Of course, the stop spacing should be similar to that on Bloor, but if it's not this idea's a sure winner to me.

Does anyone have a reason why they didn't decide to do this? (Other than the obvious Miller hates Subways reason) It seems like such a logical plan...

 

[kettal]

Simply tunneling a subwayin the part that it's supposed to be tunneled right now, then running above grade like the Allen Expressway past Keele would work well. I don't really endorse continuing to use ICTS technology, and I think the slightly higher capacity of Subway will be needed on Eglinton.

Turning Eglinton into a mini Allen? Please, no.

I couldn't think of a worse outcome.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

Turning Eglinton into a mini Allen? Please, no.

I couldn't think of a worse outcome.

Then turn the Richview area into another Yonge & St. Clair...how horrible that would be! A semi-trenched line with very shallow stations would be marvelously cheap but would yield actual improvements in terms of travel time and ridership.

 

[Second_in_pie]

Turning Eglinton into a mini Allen? Please, no.

I couldn't think of a worse outcome.

What's wrong with the way the tracks are laid out on Allen? Is it the stop spacing or the actual way the tracks aren't underground?

 

[jwill]

I think a subway could work here, considering the ends of the planned underground section would intersect with possible GO stations near Weston (georgetown/bolton lines) in the west and near Don Mills in the east (RH line/possibly midtown line).

Assuming GO electrifies and upgrades these two corridors to provide more reliable and frequent service they will anchor the subway line. Without this, you force another transfer on riders going downtown, which is the biggest problem with a partial route subway scheme.

 

[RedRocket191]

Assuming GO electrifies and upgrades these two corridors to provide more reliable and frequent service they will anchor the subway line. Without this, you force another transfer on riders going downtown, which is the biggest problem with a partial route subway scheme.

I'm not really sure how the number of transfers changes if eglinton were subway vs the current eglinton proposal...

 

[jwill]

if you wanted to get downtown from islington/eglinton (for example) you'd have to take a bus, eglinton subway, then YUS subway.

currently you only need to take the bus to the YUS
under the transit city plan you'd take the LRT to the YUS

if the GO connections were in place, you could take the bus to the station at Eglinton/Weston and go straight downtown.

I just dont think its worth putting more capacity along central Eglinton that may or may not be needed if it means forcing transfers at the ends of that subway.

 

[RedRocket191]

The eglinton line will run from Pearson Airport to Kennedy Station. There will be no change in number of transfers.

 

[jwill]

I was replying to second in pi who suggested a subway in the central section (keele-laird) and feeder buses at either end, which could possibly be built for the same cost as the whole pearson-kennedy transit city line.