nfitz
Superstar
We don't have to go to other countries - the GO/VIA line from Pape to the Don River was also at-grade, and later raised to be grade-separated, by the construction of an embankment.
|
|
|
robmausser
Senior Member
Yes
Subway is $300-400 Million per KM and LRT is $60-100 million per KM. Depending on many factors but those are averages.
Therion
Senior Member
Drove through Eglinton and Leslie yesterday, and it appears that Eglinton will be permanently one lane over the Sunnybrook ravine on the westbound portion. At least I don't see how they are squeezing in another lane without expanding the bridge and keeping the sidewalk. Is that actually the case?
cplchanb
Senior Member
What makes it 4x the cost?!
The ect tunnel is the same diameter as the subway and have the same type of track and ATC system. The only difference I can see is third rail but surely that won't be worth $300m per km?!! Is this factoring in stations as well?
robmausser
Senior Member
Maybe confused: $60-100 million for at-grade (above ground LRT) $300-400 million per km to tunnel for anything. Heavy rail metro ("subway") or tunneling for an LRT (which is also a subway)
We really screwed up allowing the vernacular for a heavy rail metro system to be called a "subway". Subway just means its tunneled underground. The Eglinton LRT has a subway, when it goes underground. Thats a subway. But its not a heavy rail metro.
Ironically in Montreal they call it the Metro when it just so happens to be entirely underground. Even they aren't that stupid to call it a subway and the whole thing is literally a subway.
Voltz
Senior Member
I hope not, but I'm sure I would have noticed that in the planning if that is the case.
H4F33Z
Active Member
It'll be tight, but two lanes will fit. Although, the bike lane will temporarily merge on to the sidewalk over the bridge.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
Or put the pedestrians and cyclists on their own attached bridge next to the roadway.
tnarduzzi
Active Member
The bridge will be tight and gross feeling for all users but technically it will work. I was referring to the CP underpass just up the hill, east of Leslie…
It’s just as tight if not slightly tighter than the bridge over the branch of the Don. But. The eastbound road lanes are also going to do a super awkward “jog to the left” after the LRT platform in the short uphill distance to make it into position before the underpass. Add the bike lanes and IMO it’s a total clusterf**k. They should have splurged to widen the CP bridge. Or. They should have diverted the sidewalks/bike lanes into separate new tunnels on either side of the existing road allowance. But alas. This is Toronto what was I expecting. Half assed will suffice.
Honestly I am not impressed with the fit and finish of the Eglinton LRT to date. Lots of awkward design. Too many silos and discreet contracts if I had to guess. I’ll save my final comments for completion but the final result streetscape looks a total mess in the areas that seem done. Your pretty grass medians won’t fool me.
Edit. Small example of my complaints about fit and finish. Examine the traffic lights in the middle of the road on the Eglinton east sections. You will see they are awkwardly protruding into traffic lanes beyond the LRT curb line. Like the lights have their own little concrete islands… you’re telling me people/plows aren’t going to just destroy those? It’s awkward. Like why not mount the lights on the nice enamelled centenary supports? Nah eff it. Those were a different contact. We are just gonna put them “here”. Lol. Silos. Then there is a ton of other small crap that bothers me. Poor concrete pours. Mismatch on concrete mix. Poor lane alignments. Poor sight lines. Poor everything really. It feels super super budget at each and every corner.
Last edited:
Voltz
Senior Member
They should have told the community group that fought against extending the tunnel to Don mills road, and then later complained about surface construction here, to get lost.
JSF-1
Active Member
Probably would have been better to have the line come to the surface after Laird and cross the valley on its own bridge next to Eglinton Avenue before diving back underground before Don Mills. We really shouldn't be digging under ravines *cough Richmond Hill Extension *cough*
Voltz
Senior Member
Extending the tunnel to Don Mills was more because it would have easier to launch the TBM's from there with no increase in cost, and that is a shallower ravine, the tunnels had been designed, no issues that were brought up that I saw.
ARG1
Senior Member
From what I know this isn't true. The tunnel under the ravine still would've been in the ball park of 40m deep - which would've killed the idea of a station at Leslie. Really all that should've been done was they widened the bridge like they did, but put the tracks on the south side of Eglinton, rather than the median.
robmausser
Senior Member
Unfortunately the reason this is what we got is because this was the original plan that was reversed to after Rob Ford put the whole eastern segment buried underground. Council barely won the motion to reverse that decision so that it was at-grade again like this.
The concern was that by opening up the transit decisions at council to bury this section to Don Mills, would give Rob Ford, who was still mayor, an opportunity to again have the entire eastern segment buried again, reversing the reversal.
So the decision was to leave it as is rather than risk more debates and delays. It was obvious it was not a good plan, and most initial plans get modified as time goes on and its obvious something won't work well, but they didn't want the entire eastern section buried at great cost and delay, and so it was decided to just leave it.
robmausser
Senior Member
This is something that Toronto cannot fathom to do. I believe it has to do with our history of streetcar tracks in the middle of the road. Other places put LRT's on one side of the ROW and roads on the other, often also putting bike lanes in their own dedicated 2 way strip as well. We can't seem to figure this out. It makes way more sense this way and is safer for everyone, rather than mixing cars, LRTs and bike lanes on each side.
The big advantage to this too, down the entire strip of at-grade, is that LRT's are less impeded by traffic. You can have cars turn left and right at the intersection on one side while the LRT can still go through on the other. You don't have the issue of left hand turn lanes taking up space. Its easier to install crossing arms for the LRT as its only crossing one road and have much more dedicated service. It results in less collisions. People dont have to wait at stops that are in the middle of the roadway and potentially can get hit by a car while crossing etc. Bikeways can be put on the other side of the LRT, well away from traffic, where its much safer.
To make matters worse, the south side implementation of the 509 Harbourfront route was a disaster with little to no protections against pedestrians wandering into the streetcar ROW. Ontop of the fact that its a heavy tourist area. So this poor implementation simply solidified the TTC's stance that LRTs should be in the median.