It is a wonder why trenched wasn't proposed. However ignoring costs of options and focusing on the planning aspect, I think trenched would be the absolute worst. Yes a 4-storey high station seems suspect, but at least it allows pedestrians midblock to cross the street freely and can be landscaped well. That's arguably better than at-grade in-median. Now compare that with a long deep trench. Would require a bridge to cross it, bisects neighbourhoods, and renders the adjacent roadway expressway-like.This is a new rendering of the Humber College stop on the Finch LRT, which will be grade separated as an open trench on the side of the road.
I just want to know, why wasn't this solution considered for Eglinton West? How is it that the only grade-separated alternatives the city could come up with were either an overbuilt subway-style station with escalators and concourses, or this ridiculous 4 storey high elevated station at Islington?
Notice that the FWLRT render fails to show the lengths of guardrail and chainlink fencing along this chasm? They actually show people walking at the edge of the precipice. Elevated is a win in comparison.
Feel like a key problem is that we already ordered the trains years ago. And these trains are low floor and designed specifically for roadway operation. So in a way the deck is a bit stacked against using any other option. Not sure, but maybe that's a reason we didn't consider more grade-separations.Bingo, somebody somewhere at the City or Metrolinx want this to be at-grade the whole way. Probably for noble reasons like saving money, but it's apparent that this project is using a bunch of subjective parameters to skew the results toward at-grade. Like I said in the crosstown thread, the fact that Urban Strategies is the main proponent of the study with HDR as a subconsultant speaks volumes. We're getting an urban design study not a transportation planning study.