News   Nov 22, 2024
National Housing Day: City of Toronto and Riverdale Co-op Open Affordable Homes
 173     0 
News   Nov 22, 2024
Bauhaus Condos Rising in Toronto's Old Town
 534     3 
News   Nov 22, 2024
49-Storey Waterfront Tower Proposed at Spadina and Queens Quay
 1.4K     4 

Metrolinx: Sheppard East LRT (In Design)

WislaHD said:
I still don't have an understanding of how they intended on making an LRT work on Jane with the changes in grade elevation along that corridor.

Meanwhile, the most obvious, straightforward, needed, and smartest-designed LRT project along the Waterfront is stuck in planning purgatory.
Click to expand...

I personally think the Crosstown (in full, with West and East extensions, Airport to Morningside) was and is the best LRT project. And im glad it was started first and going to happen.

Waterfront is "LRT" with air quotes. Its an upgrade of the existing streetcar project. Its a very good idea and necessary, but I dont really see it as a true LRT project like Finch or Eglinton.
 
robmausser said:
I personally think the Crosstown (in full, with West and East extensions, Airport to Morningside) was and is the best LRT project. And im glad it was started first and going to happen.

Waterfront is "LRT" with air quotes. Its an upgrade of the existing streetcar project. Its a very good idea and necessary, but I dont really see it as a true LRT project like Finch or Eglinton.
Click to expand...
The only reason why I don't put Eglinton up on that pedestal is because I am concerned that the central portion of the line will be at capacity day one (well maybe COVID-19 mitigates that but that is an extraneous factor), and it had terrible design decisions (at-grade in Scarborough, double-turning trains at Laird, central median at Leslie (and finally cheap surface station shelters and failure to develop on-top of Metrolinx stations but that is unrelated to transit operations)). I'm not convinced that the Eglinton Crosstown as designed was the best value-proposition, but I am fully supportive of the project when it comes to political realities of transit planning in Toronto. Something is better than nothing.

Eglinton Crosstown made sense as an LRT when Crosstown East and West was billed as cheap at-grade extensions. Now that the province is forcing tunneling in large parts of Etobicoke, and the reality in Scarborough has changed significantly as development pressures is forcing a small city to build up along the Golden Mile, it is clear to me that Eglinton should've have been built as a higher-capacity subway.

As for the Waterfront LRT, the definition of an LRT is a fruitless debate. If it moves people effectively, it works! :p I think Waterfront would be an LRT as opposed to a streetcar (like St Clair) simply because the stop spacing would be much further apart.
 
WislaHD said:
The only reason why I don't put Eglinton up on that pedestal is because I am concerned that the central portion of the line will be at capacity day one ...
Click to expand...
All the Eglinton projections remain well below capacity. I'd think we'd need a second Yonge line before Eglinton capacity is a real issue. And if it is 50 years from now ... then build corridors along Lawrence and/or St. Clair as well.

ARG1 said:
SELRT really was the stupidest plan in Transit City
Click to expand...
The only issue with SELRT is where you transition from subway to LRT. I always thought that Victoria Park was better than Don Mills. Even under the most optimistic scenario, there won't be subway east of McCowan, let alone Morningside. Even with the current optimistic plans, there won't be a Sheppard subway extension until 2040 or so. A quarter-century after the original plan was to have the LRT open to Meadowvale.

What's sad, is that we've been having the same debate here for 12 years now - while plans keep getting cancelled, 10-years after construction on the LRT started.

Coolstar said:
I think the Don Mills LRT was much worse.
Click to expand...
Was it? Most of the LRT was north of Eglinton. It was pretty clear during the consultation on the EA, that LRT south of Danforth wasn't feasible, which is why the studies stopped there. And it was also clear that they weren't taking higher-order transit between Eglinton and Danforth off the table, because LRT might not be sufficient.

Surely we still need LRT from Sheppard to Markham and Richmond Hill. And perhaps even as far south as Eglinton, based on ridership.
 
nfitz said:
All the Eglinton projections remain well below capacity. I'd think we'd need a second Yonge line before Eglinton capacity is a real issue. And if it is 50 years from now ... then build corridors along Lawrence and/or St. Clair as well.

The only issue with SELRT is where you transition from subway to LRT. I always thought that Victoria Park was better than Don Mills. Even under the most optimistic scenario, there won't be subway east of McCowan, let alone Morningside. Even with the current optimistic plans, there won't be a Sheppard subway extension until 2040 or so. A quarter-century after the original plan was to have the LRT open to Meadowvale.

What's sad, is that we've been having the same debate here for 12 years now - while plans keep getting cancelled, 10-years after construction on the LRT started.

Was it? Most of the LRT was north of Eglinton. It was pretty clear during the consultation on the EA, that LRT south of Danforth wasn't feasible, which is why the studies stopped there. And it was also clear that they weren't taking higher-order transit between Eglinton and Danforth off the table, because LRT might not be sufficient.

Surely we still need LRT from Sheppard to Markham and Richmond Hill. And perhaps even as far south as Eglinton, based on ridership.
Click to expand...
Don Mills LRT had the same problem as the Sheppard Line. You already have a subway corridor (the DLR) going that direction, why not just extend Relief Line north towards Sheppard, or if you want something cheaper, something akin to the Ontario Line (which is exactly what we're getting). Same exact thing with the Eglinton Line, it really should've been something similar to the REM/Canada Line.
 
ARG1 said:
Don Mills LRT had the same problem as the Sheppard Line. You already have a subway corridor (the DLR) going that direction, why not just extend Relief Line north towards Sheppard, or if you want something cheaper, something akin to the Ontario Line (which is exactly what we're getting). Same exact thing with the Eglinton Line, it really should've been something similar to the REM/Canada Line.
Click to expand...

Whatever the Ontario Line will use as vehicles, we should look at converting and joining Line 4 Sheppard as a continuation of the Ontario Line, and continue it west to Sheppard West Station on Line 1.
 
ARG1 said:
Don Mills LRT had the same problem as the Sheppard Line. You already have a subway corridor (the DLR) going that direction, why not just extend Relief Line north towards Sheppard, or if you want something cheaper, something akin to the Ontario Line (which is exactly what we're getting).
Click to expand...
All the way to Richmond Hill? I don't think the demand is there ... not this century at least.

ARG1 said:
Same exact thing with the Eglinton Line, it really should've been something similar to the REM/Canada Line.
Click to expand...
Why would going for lower capacity like the Canada Line be of use? The REM LRT might be closer, but why spend the extra money for grade separation?
 
nfitz said:
All the way to Richmond Hill? I don't think the demand is there ... not this century at least.
Click to expand...
The Outer extents of the Bloor Danforth Subway, and the North York Sections of Line 1 did not have the demand to justify a subway 30 years ago, yet here we are now.

With the huge boom in development throughout the city and shifts in how we move as a society, expecting transit demand to remain stagnant for a century is extremely shortsighted.
 
Streety McCarface said:
The Outer extents of the Bloor Danforth Subway, and the North York Sections of Line 1 did not have the demand to justify a subway 30 years ago, yet here we are now.

With the huge boom in development throughout the city and shifts in how we move as a society, expecting transit demand to remain stagnant for a century is extremely shortsighted.
Click to expand...
We should wait and see what effects GO RER has on transit between the 416 and the 905, constructing routes like Jane and Eglinton East in the meantime. Don Mills is not a great corridor north of Finch, since it turns into Leslie - which threads between the city centres of Richmond Hill and Markham.
 
Streety McCarface said:
The Outer extents of the Bloor Danforth Subway, and the North York Sections of Line 1 did not have the demand to justify a subway 30 years ago, yet here we are now.
Click to expand...
I used to live up north of Sheppard/Yonge over 30 years ago, and the demand on Line 1 was huge even back then. Kennedy seemed pretty busy too.

I'm not sure I believe that claim.
 
nfitz said:
All the way to Richmond Hill? I don't think the demand is there ... not this century at least.

Why would going for lower capacity like the Canada Line be of use? The REM LRT might be closer, but why spend the extra money for grade separation?
Click to expand...

The Canada Line has the same maximum capacity as the Crosstown at 15k. But it is more reliable, more frequent, and was cheaper to build. (a recent example is building the Capstan elevated station is costing only 30 million, and got completely funded by development charges) The REM can go up to around 24k (and might be expandable) but is more expensive than The Canada line. (but cheaper than a Toronto Subway project)
 
Voltz said:
Yes, it should have been LRT from the beginning..
Click to expand...
Nah it shouldn't have. If North York kept control over zoning laws, they easily could've upzoned the corridor to support the subway, the exact same thing they did with the Current North York Centre when they built the extension to Finch.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top