Toronto Eglinton Line 5 Crosstown West Extension | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx

sixrings said:
I was on Highway 7, finch, Sheppard driving for today all during rush hour. Each road was basically gridlock. The real benefit of the lrt is that the train will have its own dedicated Lane so it won't have to sit in traffic. I can't stress how much that will speed things up for transit users plus I find it infuriating standing in a crowded bus with no air conditioning in gridlock while looking down at all the single occupancy vehicles.
Click to expand...
Signal priority too.
 
Adjei said:
In the report it says the 4.7 billion figure is only for the portion up to Renforth. I thought someone mentioned here that it included the Pearson portion. If so then it's very expensive if its just up to Renforth.
Click to expand...

You can now bet that the section to pearson airport will add much more cost and make council and government reconsider their choices although if it the plan actually got approved how exactly would the lrt connect with the airport: Underground, Elevated, At-Grade? and would it be possible?
 
As a regular transit user, intuitively I would not regard Finch LRT as rapid transit.

And yet, it will be a helpful line: faster than the bus, protected from traffic congestion, and having higher capacity / more spacious vehicles. Not every transit line has to be rapid in order to be useful.

Term "rapid" is vague and means different things for different people. Intuitively, I feel like calling a transit line "rapid" if it is:
a) Fully grade separated, or
b) Has a sizeable fully grade-separated section, and the rest of it is in street-median but not in mixed traffic.

Based on that, subways and GO lines are obviously rapid. Eglinton LRT will be rapid transit too, because of the sizeable central section in the tunnel.

Finch LRT will not be rapid because it has no sizeable fully grade-separated sections, but it will be useful nevertheless.
 
alexanderglista said:
Kinga seems to say the EWLRT will be buried from Royal York to Martin Grove. I don’t think this alignment lines up with previous studies, but read into it what you will.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1118301750488907784
Click to expand...

It does not, it sounds like an even more paired down version of Option 4.

181789
 
Last edited:
robmausser said:
It does not, it sounds like an even more paired down version of Option 4.
Click to expand...

Which makes sense. I thought the City kept it underground a bit too long to jack up the price of Option 4.

- Use the parkette at the end of Richview Rd for staging. And the natural slope there to bring it from above grade to below.
- work with Plant World redevelopment plus the wide ROW all the way past Islington to build via cut and cover (with low amount of traffic disruptions). And at same time sell off remaining Richview ROW with developers also digging out parking garages...less shoring required
- Wincott to East Mall via TBM (expensive!)

[edit...your proposed map is good...but there are ramps to the 427....likely underground to the East Mall]
 
muller877 said:
Which makes sense. I thought the City kept it underground a bit too long to jack up the price of Option 4.

- Use the parkette at the end of Richview Rd for staging. And the natural slope there to bring it from above grade to below.
- work with Plant World redevelopment plus the wide ROW all the way past Islington to build via cut and cover (with low amount of traffic disruptions). And at same time sell off remaining Richview ROW with developers also digging out parking garages...less shoring required
- Wincott to East Mall via TBM (expensive!)

[edit...your proposed map is good...but there are ramps to the 427....likely underground to the East Mall]
Click to expand...

I think really, the part from Royal York to Wincott should just be trenched in the Richview Corridor. And then anyone wanting to build over it can deck it like the St.Clair/Summerhill area on Line 1.
 
Rainforest said:
As a regular transit user, intuitively I would not regard Finch LRT as rapid transit.

And yet, it will be a helpful line: faster than the bus, protected from traffic congestion, and having higher capacity / more spacious vehicles. Not every transit line has to be rapid in order to be useful.

Term "rapid" is vague and means different things for different people. Intuitively, I feel like calling a transit line "rapid" if it is:
a) Fully grade separated, or
b) Has a sizeable fully grade-separated section, and the rest of it is in street-median but not in mixed traffic.

Based on that, subways and GO lines are obviously rapid. Eglinton LRT will be rapid transit too, because of the sizeable central section in the tunnel.

Finch LRT will not be rapid because it has no sizeable fully grade-separated sections, but it will be useful nevertheless.
Click to expand...

From link:

Are LRVs slower than subways?
  • LRVs run at an average of 27km/h, slightly slower than subways which average 32 km/h, and faster than buses and streetcars that travel in mixed traffic (17 km/h). LRVs run at speeds similar to subways when they are underground (as with much of the Eglinton LRT line)
  • The main reason for the speed difference between subways and LRT is that LRVs have more stops. Subway stations are also more expensive to build, so fewer stops are built with longer distances between them.
Click to expand...

201003-162341.jpg

(Note: figures above are in mph. )
From link.
 
robmausser said:
I think really, the part from Royal York to Wincott should just be trenched in the Richview Corridor. And then anyone wanting to build over it can deck it like the St.Clair/Summerhill area on Line 1.
Click to expand...

On the other hand, the local residents will not be delighted to have all this greenery destroyed.


181881
 
Since Doug Ford is so emphatic about having the light rail grade separated from automobile traffic, wonder if that includes bicyclists. Should the existing bicycle path be grade separated at the intersections along Eglinton Avenue as well?

 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top