News   May 25, 2020
 266     0 
News   May 25, 2020
 2.8K     0 
News   May 25, 2020
 950     3 

Eglinton West LRT | Metrolinx

BurlOak

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 7, 2011
Messages
6,063
Reaction score
1,641
The advantage of LRT is the ability to run on-street in portions. The down-side of on-street operation is reduced capacity. The solution is to have a common grade-separated portion with on-street segments at the end.
The plan is (was) to end the grade-separated portion at Brentcliffe. How can you have on-street branches from here?

Maybe it could have been underground to Don Mills, and then one branch along Eglinton and the other up the DVP and across on Lawrence.
More logical would have been grade-separated to Kennedy. Then 1 branch could have gone up the SRT corridor and the other along Eglinton towards Kingston Road.
Maybe grade-separated to Eglinton/McCowan with branches along McCowan and along Eglinton.

We have to admit that the decision has already been made that this $8B (?) transit line will not satisfy what was actually required.
 

Steve X

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 16, 2016
Messages
1,745
Reaction score
1,054
The advantage of LRT is the ability to run on-street in portions. The down-side of on-street operation is reduced capacity. The solution is to have a common grade-separated portion with on-street segments at the end.
The plan is (was) to end the grade-separated portion at Brentcliffe. How can you have on-street branches from here?

Maybe it could have been underground to Don Mills, and then one branch along Eglinton and the other up the DVP and across on Lawrence.
More logical would have been grade-separated to Kennedy. Then 1 branch could have gone up the SRT corridor and the other along Eglinton towards Kingston Road.
Maybe grade-separated to Eglinton/McCowan with branches along McCowan and along Eglinton.

We have to admit that the decision has already been made that this $8B (?) transit line will not satisfy what was actually required.
Surface branch routes would be a better idea than putting all eggs in one basket and tunnelling one low ridership portion. Many European tram/light rail network work like this. Eg east of Don Mills to Kennedy has far less ridership growth potential than Eg West. Even for Eg West, they could send a branch up Scarlett and west on Dixon to the airport. That'll attract significantly more riders than a 3km link between Renforth and Pearson for pretty much nobody to ride.
 

BurlOak

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 7, 2011
Messages
6,063
Reaction score
1,641
Surface branch routes would be a better idea than putting all eggs in one basket and tunnelling one low ridership portion. Many European tram/light rail network work like this. Eg east of Don Mills to Kennedy has far less ridership growth potential than Eg West. Even for Eg West, they could send a branch up Scarlett and west on Dixon to the airport. That'll attract significantly more riders than a 3km link between Renforth and Pearson for pretty much nobody to ride.
Eg. east of Don Mills (to Kennedy) has a redevelop-able Golden Mile. The only reason the #'s showed fewer riders was because the plan forced everyone off their train and onto another mode. The Eglinton-Scarborough Crosstown studies showed that the Don Mills to Kennedy ridership was actually almost the same as the Don Mills to Yonge.

Agree with Dixon Road being an option. The big problem is that they screwed up the East part so what to do with the west. Should we do similar to what the right thing was in the East, or just say screw it and put it down the middle of the road.
 

micheal_can

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 24, 2016
Messages
1,885
Reaction score
1,125
We still don't know if a continuous Line 5 through Kennedy is happening. It's up to ML to decide. Majority of the riders won't ride through Kennedy. So why not just split at Kennedy as originally planned?

Given the fact that TTC line management sucks and that they decided to run all trains to Vaughan on Line 1 during PM rush, a short turn at Laird seems increasingly unlikely during most times of the day. The Spadina Line itself (north of St George) has significant less ridership than Yonge side and yet they don't short turn any trains at SCW. It is pretty easy to get a seat north of SCW in PM rush.

A short turn branch will happen if they need to run more frequency service that the surface section doesn't support but not in the foreseeable future. A switch to 3 car trains would be more ideal.

We also cannot predict ridership on Eglinton West. Unlike the east end where Lines 2 and 5 meets, Line 2 is 15-25 minutes (depending on bus route) south of Line 5 in Etobicoke. Significant riders could make the switch. If Eg West is built grade separated beyond Martin Grove, having a short turn branch between Martin Grove and Laird wouldn't be a bad idea. Plus TTC could reduce bus service between Lines 2 and 5 if people start using Eg West instead.
A split at Kennedy sound slike the better plan. At least it is already a major interchange station.
 

NoahB

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jun 10, 2019
Messages
92
Reaction score
188
Vancouver's people cower in fear every time they see one of their elevated stations. We should learn from their experience becoming the ugliest and most dangerous city in the country. /s

Sarcasm aside, Vancouver's elevated stations really showcase how beautiful the city is. And their system is completely grade-separated and has relatively cheap construction costs. I wish Toronto followed their example...

The Langley extension will cost 3.12B for 16km/8 stations of completely grade separate & automated rail that uses the 'overbuilt' station designs people on this forum and the city of Toronto don't like.
1572986972676.png
 

Northern Light

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 20, 2007
Messages
5,932
Reaction score
6,084
Location
Toronto/EY
Vancouver's people cower in fear every time they see one of their elevated stations. We should learn from their experience becoming the ugliest and most dangerous city in the country. /s

Sarcasm aside, Vancouver's elevated stations really showcase how beautiful the city is. And their system is completely grade-separated and has relatively cheap construction costs. I wish Toronto followed their example...

The Langley extension will cost 3.12B for 16km/8 stations of completely grade separate & automated rail that uses the 'overbuilt' station designs people on this forum and the city of Toronto don't like.
View attachment 213641
While there may be some excess hyperbole on elevated stations at times; there do need to be a few finer points added to your comparison.

1) Vancouver has much nicer weather (temperature wise anyway) for outdoor stations that lack heating.

2) Vancouver's costs are partially a factor of smaller stations and shorter trains, with the attendant lower capacities.

3) Vancouver has invested heavily in its public realm and in the quality of many of its transit stations; a quick glance at the SRT would not leave one wondering about whether Toronto had a similar track record (it does not)

4) The rendering shows a 2-track elevated structure while through Leslieville we're discussing six tracks and perhaps 7, plus platforms.

All of that is not to say Toronto couldn't do elevated lines in select locations and do them reasonably well.

Rather, it is to say that the province has not laid out a budget or plan commensurate with achieving such an objective; and in fairness, due to weather and higher capacity and construction costs, such a line would not be at the price point
of a Vancouver project.
 
Last edited:

Northern Light

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 20, 2007
Messages
5,932
Reaction score
6,084
Location
Toronto/EY
Outdoor subway stations don't have heaters. I don't see the need. Buy a better jacket and wear a hat with mitts.
I don't believe I said they did.

I suggested that this climate makes un-heated outdoor stations less attractive than in Vancouver, which I think is entirely accurate and fair.

I hasten to add, however, that if you have ever found yourself at Victoria Park Station late at night on a cold winter's evening with a 10 minute plus wait for a train, you might reconsider whether its design was reasonable.

I would at least argue for heating the mezzaine and enclosing the stairs/escalators as is the case at Union Station (York Concourse)

I will further note, that after a lovely walk through the ravine system on the weekend, I exited at Eglinton Avenue (Leslie) to grab a bus. There was no shelter at the temporary stop.

Despite wearing thermals and having a parka on, in the wind, gusting to 30 it was rather chilly, and that's with a temp just above zero, not at minus 10. I also had to wait almost 20 minutes for a bus; if that's indicative of what people at the outer edges
of the Eglinton West LRT can expect, I would consider heating a necessity.
 

NoahB

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jun 10, 2019
Messages
92
Reaction score
188
1) Vancouver has much nice weather (temperature wise anyway) for outdoor stations that lack heating.

2) Vancouver's costs are partially a factor of smaller stations and shorter trains, with the attendant lower capacities.

3) Vancouver has invested heavily in its public realm and in the quality of many of its transit stations; a quick glance at the SRT would not leave one wondering about whether Toronto had a similar track record (it does not)

4) The rendering shows a 2-track elevated structure while through Leslieville we're discussing six tracks and perhaps 7, plus platforms.
1)Keele, High Park, and Old Mill, etc all are relatively/completely open to the outdoor winds and temperatures. And for the most part, people don't mind it if it's sheltered from snow and rain as far as I can tell. I dont think the weather is as much as a factor when people just accept the city's weather as is.

2)True about the length. But remember, we are discussing the Eglington grade separation in this thread.

3) All I cans say is that their stations look very barebones inside out. The city, in general, is well kept but not necessarily around the stations. I haven't visited and have only seen photos though. Not enough info on my part to comment further.

4)As in point #3, we are discussing the ECLRT extension through Etobicoke here, and not the Ontario Line. I will concede that in the Ontario Line's case the 6 tracks might be too much, but in general, I think the residence should just 'suck it up'. As homeowners, they probably can just sell to just move somewhere else. (Not the best argument. But let's not cancel a huge project just to please a few.)
 

NoahB

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jun 10, 2019
Messages
92
Reaction score
188
I don't believe I said they did.

I suggested that this climate makes un-heated outdoor stations less attractive than in Vancouver, which I think is entirely accurate and fair.

I hasten to add, however, that if you have ever found yourself at Victoria Park Station late at night on a cold winter's evening with a 10 minute plus wait for a train, you might reconsider whether its design was reasonable.

I would at least argue for heating the mezzaine and enclosing the stairs/escalators as is the case at Union Station (York Concourse)

I will further note, that after a lovely walk through the ravine system on the weekend, I exited at Eglinton Avenue (Leslie) to grab a bus. There was no shelter at the temporary stop.

Despite wearing thermals and having a parka on, in the wind, gusting to 30 it was rather chilly, and that's with a temp just above zero, not at minus 10. I also had to wait almost 20 minutes for a bus; if that's indicative of what people at the outer edges
of the Eglinton West LRT can expect, I would consider heating a necessity.
Agreed on all fronts. Adding heated or climate-controlled sections would be a big help. especially if they put train arrival times there too like they do in GO stations.
 

MisterF

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
3,198
Reaction score
1,518
2) Vancouver's costs are partially a factor of smaller stations and shorter trains, with the attendant lower capacities.
Smaller stations and shorter trains are just fine on lines that don't need the capacity of a 6 car subway. Like Eglinton, Jane, the waterfront, Finch, etc. There's no reason that the whole Transit City network couldn't have been designed like the LRT/light metro systems in Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Ottawa, or Montreal. We have no shortage of examples right here in Canada of how to do rapid transit in a pragmatic way.

1)Keele, High Park, and Old Mill, etc all are relatively/completely open to the outdoor winds and temperatures. And for the most part, people don't mind it if it's sheltered from snow and rain as far as I can tell. I dont think the weather is as much as a factor when people just accept the city's weather as is.
I'll add that the recently opened Confederation Line in Ottawa has lots of open air stations and deals with more extreme weather than Toronto. I don't see the weather as an issue.

Not to mention that elevated stations don't need to be exposed to the elements. Like this.


https://rem.info/en/albums/rem-architectural-renders

4) The rendering shows a 2-track elevated structure while through Leslieville we're discussing six tracks and perhaps 7, plus platforms.
Certain sections need tunnels while others don't. The SkyTrain goes underground in areas where it makes sense to. I agree that the Relief/Ontario line should be underground through a tight, dense urban area like Leslieville. On a suburban section of Eglinton, not so much.
 
Last edited:

Top