News   Jul 23, 2024
 254     0 
News   Jul 23, 2024
 330     0 
News   Jul 22, 2024
 945     1 

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

This section of Eglinton will be a lot busier when new condos get built.

Reducing road capacity in a city with traffic as bad as Toronto is a terrible idea.

It will never be as dense as downtown, unlike King there will be turning lanes, and there is a decent street grid in the area to distribute local traffic. Anyone that has tried on multiple occasions to cross the city on Eglinton would know that there are better ways (i.e. Lawrence or the 401) because Eglinton wasn't moving most days prior to construction. Eglinton is now 2 lanes each way and will be for the next 5 years with or without Eglinton Connects and that is with buses on the street and no underground LRT. The whole point of these transit projects are to get people to use them and Yonge and Eglinton is the intersection of two lines. They will reduce Front street to two lanes in front of Union Station as well... but it doesn't matter because the effective capacity (the lanes which are free of parked and standing vehicles) will not really change. Why build LRT for billions of dollars and then make more lanes of traffic through the area than there was originally?
 
Reducing road capacity in a city with traffic as bad as Toronto is a terrible idea.
Although, reducing road capacity doesn't automatically equal worse congestion either. Many mature cities reduce road capacity for a variety of reasons and continue to prosper, often even more so after. Traffic is elastic basically.
 
This is not great to say the least. They should have been upfront with this.

They have been very up front about this project. We have received mailings, there have been a number of public workshops, all the businesses were invited, etc. I was voting on the changes last October in a survey of differing options.
 
A cursory look at Yonge and Eglinton as offered by Google Street view here at a variety of times and dates shows at best an approximate ratio of 50 motor vehicles to one bicycle moving on the street, at some dates there are no bicycles at all. Did the planners on this project realize that the bicycle lobby here in Toronto is much noisier than their numbers justify? The sidewalks are far from crowded in every instance. https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.7066...!1e1!3m2!1scbArqF9mJirHfHRhO0EUhw!2e0!5m1!1e3
 
A cursory look at Yonge and Eglinton as offered by Google Street view here at a variety of times and dates shows at best an approximate ratio of 50 motor vehicles to one bicycle moving on the street, at some dates there are no bicycles at all. Did the planners on this project realize that the bicycle lobby here in Toronto is much noisier than their numbers justify? The sidewalks are far from crowded in every instance. https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.7066...!1e1!3m2!1scbArqF9mJirHfHRhO0EUhw!2e0!5m1!1e3

Give me a break. I'm at Yonge & Eglinton every day, throughout most of the day. You're trying to say there aren't many pedestrians at Yonge-Eg? It's usually one of the top 3 (sometimes #1) in pedestrian traffic.

http://spacing.ca/toronto/2011/06/0...oronto-with-the-top-25-walking-intersections/
 
What do you mean? Wasn't this all posted on the Eglinton Connects website almost 3 months ago - http://www1.toronto.ca/wps/portal/contentonly?vgnextoid=44ae86664ea71410VgnVCM10000071d60f89RCRD

They have been very up front about this project. We have received mailings, there have been a number of public workshops, all the businesses were invited, etc. I was voting on the changes last October in a survey of differing options.


Okay, then why did they reverse course on the number of lanes? I never expected bikes = lane reduction.
 
Okay, then why did they reverse course on the number of lanes? I never expected bikes = lane reduction.
Have they reversed course? It's been three lanes for a long time for this project.

Perhaps your thinking of the LRT project. It doesn't reduce lanes ... but if the city comes along later and decides to have less lanes in a different project ... then that's something else.

You don't think bike lanes would mean a lane reduction? On a narrow road with limited sidewalks? Out of curiousity, where did you think they'd get the extra width from?
 
Have they reversed course? It's been three lanes for a long time for this project.

It not 3 lanes according to the City planner. The quote on the preveious page had her saying that there would not be one (through) lane at any location.
 
its 3 lanes, plus parking. No, things haven't changed. Yes, the development was unanimously approved by council. Yes, it has full support of local residents. I don't understand the problem here? The only people who seem to be upset about it are the ones who live far away and which this project will have little or no impact on.
 
A cursory look at Yonge and Eglinton as offered by Google Street view here at a variety of times and dates shows at best an approximate ratio of 50 motor vehicles to one bicycle moving on the street, at some dates there are no bicycles at all. Did the planners on this project realize that the bicycle lobby here in Toronto is much noisier than their numbers justify? The sidewalks are far from crowded in every instance. https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.7066...!1e1!3m2!1scbArqF9mJirHfHRhO0EUhw!2e0!5m1!1e3

We don't bike on Eglinton, too many cars, buses and especially pedestrians. We bike on Roehampton, Broadway or Soudan instead.

We'll gladly bike on Eglinton when there is a bike line here.

its 3 lanes, plus parking. No, things haven't changed. Yes, the development was unanimously approved by council. Yes, it has full support of local residents. I don't understand the problem here? The only people who seem to be upset about it are the ones who live far away and which this project will have little or no impact on.

Exactly. The only people upset about this project are people who on the rare occasion intend to use the street as their expressway. There is Lawrence and the 401 for that.

Hopefully after Eglinton Connects is complete, trucks will stop using Eglinton as their expressway too.
 
I think the confusion stems from the fact that:

The on narrowest section between Mt Pleasant an Ave it is: one lane in each direction and a left turn lane in the middle: 2 lanes + 1 turn lane + parking.

People are describing this configuration as "3 lanes", "2 lanes" (not counting the turn lane), "one lane in each direction".

Also funny: Rob Ford kept calling Eglinton a "subway" during the press conference where he was heckled by the shirtless protestors. I guess he was referring to the underground section, since that's what's under construction.
 
It not 3 lanes according to the City planner. The quote on the preveious page had her saying that there would not be one (through) lane at any location.
I have no idea what your talking about.

But said planner tweeted earlier - https://twitter.com/jen_keesmaat/status/486651257458016256 referencing http://www1.toronto.ca/City Of Toro...bout Eglinton Connects July 8 14 e update.pdf that explicitly says "However, a 3 lane cross section was approved for about 1.5km of the corridor, roughly between Avenue Road and Mount Pleasant.".

So yes, it is still 3 lanes. As it has been for a long time.

I'm not sure what all the fuss is about.
 
Ford, lying liar that he is, said it will go from 5 lanes to 2. Which is definitely untrue. But it is understandable that when people are told that they will believe there is something seriously wrong with this project. Liar wins again.
 
Ford, lying liar that he is, said it will go from 5 lanes to 2. Which is definitely untrue. But it is understandable that when people are told that they will believe there is something seriously wrong with this project. Liar wins again.

The problem is that Ford is correct.

Go to Google and check how many through lanes there are at Yonge. 3 Eastbound + 2 Westbournd = 5 total lanes.
Next look at the new plan - link provided above. There is 1 lane EB and 1 lane WB = 2 total lanes.
Thus Eglinton is going from 5 lanes to 2. Although he has lied in the past, this statement appears to be 100% true.
 

Back
Top