Toronto Crosstown LRT | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx | Arcadis

[kettal]

I had a idea on this. Really the only time the LRT will be subject to traffic is at intersections. Why not have the LRT dive under the intersection and then dive back up on the other side. Just really a small tunnel to bypass traffic at intersections and keep it on its own ROW

Sort of like at St Clair West station.

I can imagine this working at some intersections, but not all. It will require more room and the construction of an underground station. Whether it ends up being worth it just to avoid some traffic (which can be mitigated with the right traffic light algorhythm) is an open question, though.

 

[nfitz]

Many TTC drivers are unfriendly and gruff, and many are quite careless at their job. This in general causes disruptions to the system, and bad customer service.

I haven't said one word about fare collectors ... that's a different issue ... given that many of them are former drivers who for whatever reason can't drive, would you prefer they simply sit at home on disability?

As for drivers ... for every rude driver I've seen, I must have seen a score of rude customers.

Those people certainly don't deserve the wage they're getting, I don't think they even deserve $20 an hour.

I can't believe that anyone would suggest that an operator deserves less than $40,000 a year! I'm completely shocked by that comment!

But this is off topic, I agree. However, your ignorant and insulting comments are not appreciated at all.

Your calling ME ignorant? ROTFLMAO!

And insulting ... your lack of respect for operators is absolutely stunning. I think an apology is in order.

 

[Long Island Mike]

CTA (Chicago) Grade Crossings...

WKL: The CTA in Chicago's Rapid Transit has grade crossings on the outer end of two lines: The Douglas Line(Blue)in Cicero and Berwyn primarily and the Ravenswood (Brown) line in NW Chicago from the Kimball Terminal S and E somewhat. These are old crossings that would not be built in the present days. Remember that if third rail would be used that there would be definite opposition to it as opposed to overhead wire. LI MIKE

 

[Second_in_pie]

I haven't said one word about fare collectors ... that's a different issue ... given that many of them are former drivers who for whatever reason can't drive, would you prefer they simply sit at home on disability?

Just because they're disabled (I know many in fact aren't) doesn't mean they can treat what're supposed to be valued customers like crap. The TTC should not allow these people to work if they continue their bad attitude and general bad service.

As for drivers ... for every rude driver I've seen, I must have seen a score of rude customers.

And the operators that put up with rude customers should be commended. That in now way excuses the actions of the countless bad system operators. They're getting paid while providing a public service, and really can't be allowed to treat people the way some do.

I can't believe that anyone would suggest that an operator deserves less than $40,000 a year! I'm completely shocked by that comment!

Well, some people definitely don't deserve $40,000 a year. As I've said, I'm all for a proper living wage. But a person really can't be allowed to sit around all day, doing almost nothing for essentially no education, while getting paid as much as people who've gone through several years of post-secondary education.

If employees are well educated in proper customer service or efficient transit operation, then I could accept them getting a fair wage. But I'm pretty sure that many of these people don't.

Your calling ME ignorant? ROTFLMAO!

And insulting ... your lack of respect for operators is absolutely stunning. I think an apology is in order.

I was talking about your response to several other posts in this thread and others.

 

[golodhendil]

I guess we could take the opposite view and follow Chicago Transit Authority example and have subway (or L) trains cross roads at grade.

Notice that all the grade crossings shown are gated and give absolute priority to rail, like those of many other LRT systems such as C-train. If the Transit City lines do intersections like this, I don't think board members here will have any complaints about it.

 

[Second_in_pie]

^^ I'd still have some complaints about it, but it'd definitely be an improvement.

I still think that it'd make so much sense to just grade separate the line. It's definitely quite easy to do on the general western segment, and the part from Don Mills to Kennedy could be easily done with either cut and cover or a raised guideway.

 

[Dan416]

I think the reason the TTC is reluctant to do it is because it would add to the cost, and the more cost they add to the Eglinton project, the more people will start to question why we don't just build a subway with all that money?

 

[Second_in_pie]

Yeah, that seems pretty much it actually.

 

[unimaginative2]

I wish there was some way to convince the TTC to completely grade-separate Eglinton. If it were completely grade-separated, had fare-paid areas and functioned like part of the subway, I'd be happier, even if it was using LRVs. Assuming its built with subway conversion in mind, it'd be as easy as switching to subway vehicles when the time came.

Has anyone attended the Eglinton EAs and brought this up? I don't care about LRTs supposed capability of "avenuing" streets (which is complete bollocks anyway), rapid transit should be RAPID. And it doesn't mean sacrificing accessibility to aforementioned transit if we're following B-D spacing.

If it's completely grade-separated, there's no point in using LRVs that cost three times as much as subway cars for equivalent capacity.

Now that I think about it, that's another potential justification for full grade separation. The vehicles (standard "Toronto Rocket" subway cars) are much cheaper than LRVs, and you'd need fewer of them because of shorter travel times. The vehicle cost and operating cost savings should be factored in.

St. Clair is not a pilot project for Transit City. And it never was or will be. Same with Spadina. They are both streetcars on a right-of-way. Even the Queensway portion of Queen and Queens Quay are still streetcars on a right-of-way.

Uh, you should tell that to Adam Giambrone who specifically said that St. Clair was the pilot project for Transit City.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Notice that all the grade crossings shown are gated and give absolute priority to rail, like those of many other LRT systems such as C-train. If the Transit City lines do intersections like this, I don't think board members here will have any complaints about it.

Some U.S. cities have put up gate crossing (RR signs, bells, flashing lights, arms, etc.), just like a regular train crossing, at some light rail crossings. But then, their schedules are not as frequent as our LRT will be.

 

[unimaginative2]

I'll take that as a "no."

Oh not at all. I think it would be perfectly fine. Yeah, there'd be disruption, but certainly no more than we've seen on St. Clair. Eglinton, while it does have some businesses, is also less of a shopping street than Cambie. It would be crazy to waste hundreds of millions of dollars because of a couple million dollars in lost sales at a few stores. Compensate them if necessary and be done with it.

 

[Second_in_pie]

I definitely don't think that the central portion of Eglinton should be cut and covered. The places where there could be a lot of grade separation savings will be at the edges. The Western end will easily be able to be trenched along the Richview corridor, which means they won't even have to fill it in. Developers can just build over it. And in that segment, we could quite easily be seeing very high-density, transit-based developments.
In the east end, the Don Mills-Kennedy stretch is basically lined with parking lots, perfect to cut and cover or even elevate the line.

And it doesn't need to be done all at once. As I've said, Jane-Don Mills tunneled. That hits the Jane LRT, gives enough room to catch a large amount of Etobicoke riders, and hits the DRL/Don Mills LRT as well. In the future, the line can be extended either way using these cost-saving techniques previously mentioned.

 

[W. K. Lis]

I thought the Kodak lands at 3500 Eglinton Avenue West was going to be used for LRV storage. There's a City of Toronto report that seems to say otherwise:

seeks an interpretation of retail use for the subject lands. ~ the proposed development is for a mix of office, retail and service commercial uses having a total gross floor area of approximately 75,100 square metres. The office component would have an approximate floor area of 17,500 square metres, the retail component would have an approximate floor area of 55,575 square metres, and the service commercial component would have an approximate floor area of 2,025 square metres. A variety of retail unit sizes is anticipated, ranging from 325 square metres to 10,350 square metres.

See this link to the Juntioneer on 3500 Eglinton Avenue West – old Kodak site – City staff report out.

The report in PDF is available from this link.

 

[GraphicMatt]

The Transit City cars will be double-ended too, so short-turns won't require the level of infrastructure they do now with loops.

If capacity on Eglinton ever gets so great that even multi-car tunneled LRT can't handle the demand, it'll probably be time to turn to Metrolinx and look for a cross-town GO line.

 

[rbt]

The only question I have is how the portals at Jane and Leslie be built to still allow for a future tunnel.

You don't need to. As prep for construction, you can break the line into 2 (tunnelled portion and surface portion). A small tail track could be run in mixed traffic around the portal and to the surface above the nearest station.

Once the portal is no longer in use it can be reconstructed to whatever form is necessary.

This isn't all that different from how the St. George tunnel work was completed. Bloor/Danforth was broken into two independent routes joining at a different location, and work was completed in the original joining segment.