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

[Midtown Urbanist]

My second issue is this. While I prefer Keele, Dundas West allows for the transfer to UPX faster then doing it at Mt Dennis. What do you guys think, is that a fair argument for Dundas West, the inter modal station being built?

It is an argument, but it is not as if the UPX, GO and Dundas West are that well connected. Major work would need to be done to smooth the transfer process. (I say as someone who got off the UXP at Dundas West and vowed to never again.)

 

[Avenue]

Keele Station - Parkside Drive alignment (hence no stations between Bloor and Queen) basically completely ignores/neglects so-called downtown neighbourhoods and falls into trap of conceiving subway as something merely connects suburbs to downtown core.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

It is an argument, but it is not as if the UPX, GO and Dundas West are that well connected. Major work would need to be done to smooth the transfer process. (I say as someone who got off the UXP at Dundas West and vowed to never again.)

Yup, I can see this. I mean in the GO construction thread they have spent 3 pages talking about the bridge connecting the bloor station, subway and upx, that needs to be fixed.

Keele Station - Parkside Drive alignment (hence no stations between Bloor and Queen) basically completely ignores/neglects so-called downtown neighbourhoods and falls into trap of conceiving subway as something merely connects suburbs to downtown core.

They can put a station at Roncesvalles near St Josephs hospital.

 

[Hopkins123]

Pretty nice! This would be perfect and would evenly space out the demand.

My second issue is this. While I prefer Keele, Dundas West allows for the transfer to UPX faster then doing it at Mt Dennis. What do you guys think, is that a fair argument for Dundas West, the inter modal station being built?

The DRL alignment I've outlined allows for GO interchanges at Queen-Dufferin, St Clair-Keele and Mt Dennis; not to mention Weston and Etobicoke North. There's little need to also consolidate everything into the Bloor Line interchange with an intermodal link as well.

It should be noted that any potential DRL link at Dundas West Stn would have to be tunneled super-deep (~4 storeys below the surface) as that stop is already quite a ways from the surface, making it an inconvenient transfer point for most. It also brings up the question of alignment, underneath Bloor-Dundas or below the GO station, and the continued opposition to an easternly exit by the property owners of the Crossways Mall.

Keele/Parkside alignment avoids all this contention.

 

[Hopkins123]

Keele Station - Parkside Drive alignment (hence no stations between Bloor and Queen) basically completely ignores/neglects so-called downtown neighbourhoods and falls into trap of conceiving subway as something merely connects suburbs to downtown core.

What exactly is it neglecting? A 2 km apart stop spacing is actually pretty commonplace in the TTC (Victoria Park - Warden, Warden - Kennedy, St Clair West - Eglinton West, Wilson - Downsview, Yonge Line north of Eglinton)

If the Line were to follow Roncesvalles, only a station at Howard Park Blvd would likely be built in-between Queen and Bloor, but that would come at the lost of the 6 other surface stops along the corridor en route. The Parkside alignment preserves streetcar service along Roncy, which is a net win. 80 Queensway, especially along Parkside Dr is sparsely used and thus if service were suspended during construction it would not have as much of an impact.

You also have to consider the gentler curvature of getting the Line to transition from east-west to north-south a Parkside alignment permits. The DRL would actually have to go past Roncesvalles then do a 180 degree turn radii around the streetcar barns to veer back to align with Roncesvalles fi that alignment were chosen. By contrast, west of Glendale, the Queensway gradually swings northwards and the DRL can follow this trajectory onto Parkside.

 

[Hopkins123]

There's one problem with the alignment: it would be very close to an aquifer. There's a reason why Spring Road in High Park is called such.

But there's no reason why this part of the DRL couldn't be elevated, much like how the Queensway itself is elevated through this stretch. Once it aligns north-south with Parkside Dr and clears the aquifer it could transition via a portal underground north of Spring Rd in the southeast corner of High Park.

 

[Leo_Chan]

I would like to draw a comparison between the Eglinton East LRT and the 198 Rocket Kennedy to UofT Scarborough.

Eglinton East LRT:

198 UofT Scarborough Rocket:

Is it safe to assume that when the Eglinton East LRT gets constructed and opened in 2021+ (assuming it receives funding), that the 198 will disappear? In addition, the LRT will likely have more stops than the bus as well as having its own centre lane ROW (if not elevated).

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

Is it safe to assume that when the Eglinton East LRT gets constructed and opened in 2021+ (assuming it receives funding), that the 198 will disappear? In addition, the LRT will likely have more stops than the bus as well as having its own centre lane ROW (if not elevated).

Probably, yes. This LRT offers local stops.

 

[W. K. Lis]

I would put the Lawrence Avenue East and Kingston Road stop/intersection grade separated. It is one of the ten most congested intersections in Toronto, and needs to be separated from the single-occupant motor vehicles.

Ditto for the Eglinton Avenue East and Martin Grove Road intersection/stop.

 

[Voltz]

I would put the Lawrence Avenue East and Kingston Road stop/intersection grade separated. It is one of the ten most congested intersections in Toronto, and needs to be separated from the single-occupant motor vehicles.

Ditto for the Eglinton Avenue East and Martin Grove Road intersection/stop.

Much of the congestion at Lawrence and Kingston Road is on Kingston Road, where the LRT would be in its own lane and immune from that traffic. So I would not say it is worth while to put it underground there.

at Morningside and Kingston Road it was mentioned in the EA that they would probably short turn half the LRT's there to reduce the number of then going through the intersection

 

[Voltz]

I would like to draw a comparison between the Eglinton East LRT and the 198 Rocket Kennedy to UofT Scarborough.


Is it safe to assume that when the Eglinton East LRT gets constructed and opened in 2021+ (assuming it receives funding), that the 198 will disappear? In addition, the LRT will likely have more stops than the bus as well as having its own centre lane ROW (if not elevated).

As mentioned, the LRT would also replace local routes, like the 86 and 116, so it needs the local stops, but the stop spacing on this route is still fairly good.

 

[muller877]

I would put the Lawrence Avenue East and Kingston Road stop/intersection grade separated. It is one of the ten most congested intersections in Toronto, and needs to be separated from the single-occupant motor vehicles.
.

The Lawrence/Black Creek is bad both northbound and southbound on Black Creek (and lesser so on Lawrence). A lot of people are turning left which takes up a lot of the signal cycle. Southbound if this was solved a lot of problems would just be pushed down the road to the next light. However northbound it's clear sailing to the 400 and sometimes it takes 3 lights to get through. Could it be solved with a bridge and on/off ramps just like Bayview and Lawrence? The topography even helps here for Lawrence to have a bridge.

There is zero pedestrian traffic here so it should not impact them.

 

[Steve X]

The Lawrence/Black Creek is bad both northbound and southbound on Black Creek (and lesser so on Lawrence). A lot of people are turning left which takes up a lot of the signal cycle. Southbound if this was solved a lot of problems would just be pushed down the road to the next light. However northbound it's clear sailing to the 400 and sometimes it takes 3 lights to get through. Could it be solved with a bridge and on/off ramps just like Bayview and Lawrence? The topography even helps here for Lawrence to have a bridge.

There is zero pedestrian traffic here so it should not impact them.

The Lawrence/Black Creek intersection is better off being built out as an interchanged as originally planned. Land is reserved there for that purpose. If not, a dedicated bus only bridge on Lawrence over can help improve transit in that location. That location is horrible for pedestrians/cyclists.

There would be a lot of opposition for any changes there through. It's in the Black Creek ravine which will automatically draw in the environmentalist and conservation agencies to protest an interchange at that location. Probably a dedicated bus lane with priority is the only option that would work out.

As mentioned, the LRT would also replace local routes, like the 86 and 116, so it needs the local stops, but the stop spacing on this route is still fairly good.

We'll might see the rest of the 86 become branches of 54. The 116C is fairly busy between Sheppard and Lawrence. It makes much more sense to extend the LRT to Sheppard as originally intended.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Lawrence Avenue West and Black Creek Drive needs two left turn lanes from the northbound to westbound, instead of the current one left turn lane. Would be better with right turn lanes on each road in the intersection.

BTW. HOV & bus lanes on Black Creek Drive would be an improvement.

 

[Palma]

The Lawrence/Black Creek intersection is better off being built out as an interchanged as originally planned.

There would be a lot of opposition for any changes there through. It's in the Black Creek ravine which will automatically draw in the environmentalist and conservation agencies to protest an interchange at that location. Probably a dedicated bus lane with priority is the only option that would work out.

WEll I for one am against Thais idea. Why cut into a ravine? I thought ravines are not to be touched? I remember once when a councillor said the city does not sell parks (a councillor running against him had suggested this as the park was being run down). So if parks are not sold why would a ravine be taken over for transit. I think taking i lane for an LRT along Black Creek is a good idea. I say close Threteway from Lawrence and divert cars more west towards Jane St