News   Jul 09, 2024
 622     1 
News   Jul 09, 2024
 1.5K     2 
News   Jul 09, 2024
 571     0 

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

That seems like a waste of a question. They'd simply say that the design isn't up to them, and refer you to Metrolinx. If you pressed for operational details they'd say that operation is years away, and they haven't got any details.

This just reminds me of what the government says every time there's an investigation into something they've done wrong. "We cannot comment at this time, because there is an open investigation". And then once the investigation is done: "The investigation has concluded, so there's no point in us commenting on it."

It never seems like the right time to ask the questions that need to be asked. It's always either "it's too early to think about stuff like that" or "it's too late to make any changes to accommodate something like that".
 
Last edited:
How do you define greatly increase operational speed? As I recall the difference in operating speed between the eastern surface section and the underground section is minimal.

Wasn't the operational speed underground about 50% faster than the ROW (22 kmh vs 32kmh)

Forgive me if I'm incorrect. I'm operating off of memory from Metrolinx documents I read almost 18 months ago.
 
This just reminds me of what the government says every time there's an investigation into something they've done wrong. "We cannot comment at this time, because there is an open investigation". And then once the investigation is done: "The investigation has concluded, so there's no point in us commenting on it."

It never seems like the right time to ask the questions that need to be asked. It's always either "it's too early to think about stuff like that" or "it's too late to make any changes to accommodate something like that".


Yup.

We should be praising Solid Snake for being so proactive. At least he is willing to spend his personal time to attempt to improve the ECLRT. More than can be said for most here.

So thank you Solid Snake.
 
How do you define greatly increase operational speed? As I recall the difference in operating speed between the eastern surface section and the underground section is minimal.

Wasn't the operational speed underground about 50% faster than the ROW (22 kmh vs 32kmh)

Forgive me if I'm incorrect. I'm operating off of memory from Metrolinx documents I read almost 18 months ago.

Update

My previous posts were correct was correct.

According to the February 2012 Eglinton-Scarborough Crosstown LRT Report from Metrolinx, the operational speed of a fully grade separated LRT is 30-32kph. The surface LRT will operate at a speed of 22kph. So up to 50% increase in speed (approximately).
 
TM: I think you're greatly exaggerating the dangers to surface LRT and gain in operational speed in order to convince the world to spend more money to not inconvenience traffic.

Metrolinx report confirms my claim. The "fully separated LRT" operates at an average of 32kph, a little less than 50% faster than the current ROW plans.

And I never said that there are any particular dangers to surface LRT vs underground or elevated.

And trust me, I don't care at all about inconvinincing cars (within reason). I do not live in the area, never have not owned a car and don't plan on purchasing one anytime soon.

I cannot otherwise fathom your stance, as the operational speed gains are as marginal as the reliability gains. Sure, your top speed is higher, but you still have to stop at the stops. Actual time saved will be marginal.

Average operational speeds include dwell time

From Metrolinx report regrading travel speed (final page):

"Factors include traffic, number of stops, dwell time at stops, signal priority, level of dedication of the right-of-way"
 
Last edited:
Average operational speeds include dwell time

From Metrolinx report regrading travel speed (final page):

"Factors include traffic, number of stops, dwell time at stops, signal priority, level of dedication of the right-of-way"

Elevated will also reduce the number of stations, which will increase speeds as well. It all ties in together.
 
Ok, so Metrolinx has wilted in the face of opposition from a few Leslie St. condo dwellers and/or become scared to bring the EA back to City Council for amendment (despite only hours earlier winning approval for the Western EA amendments at Mt. Dennis from the same council.)

But like it or not, what I thought were reasonable changes (and necessary ones) to the Brentcliffe-Don Mills section have been cancelled - for now.

I still say there has to be a way to do this without sticking with the original EA plan which would create a construction and operational nightmare for both LRT's and cars.

So,

would it be fair to say that ideally the vast majority would like to have
a) a Leslie stop
and
b) separate right-of-way for the LRT through to the hub at Don Mills
and
c) the maintenance of the present intersection for car traffic at Leslie and Eglinton to keep traffic flowing and to prevent massive back-ups of cars waiting to turn left from EB Eglinton and SB Leslie?

Constraints are:
1) bridge over West Don River can only accommodate 2 LRT lanes and 4 lanes of traffic.

2) Eglinton under the CPR bridge can only accommodate 2 LRT lanes and 4 lanes of traffic.

3) Celestica access road just east of CPR line must be accessible to all traffic on EB Eglinton.

So here’s what we do:

The LRT portal remains directly east of the new road that is coming down from the Scenic condos but instead of emerging in the centre 2 lanes of Eglinton (as in EA), it emerges in the 2 southernmost lanes. 4 lanes of car traffic to the north.

After going over the West Don bridge the road widens (as it does already now) so there is room for 2 left turn lanes to northbound Leslie from EB Eglinton (just as there is now). Just east of the Leslie intersection the road will pinch in to the same size as in the EA plates, but the Leslie stop will be south of traffic instead of in the middle. The 4 traffic 2 LRT arrangement proceeds under the CPR bridge and over the Celestica access road bridge (which I believe is already 7 lanes wide – not 6 – at present). The Celestica access road is modified slightly so that after it comes under the Eglinton bridge and turns east, instead of immediately splitting into a wye, both directions continue east (parallel and south of the LRT lanes) until east of the Don Mills Station portal. At that point the Celestica access road splits to a wye and merges with Eglinton eastbound (just like now but further east.)

(Pedestrian) access to Leslie stop would be by a pedestrian signal to cross the WB track at the western end of the platform. You could potentially have the pedestrian walkway also cross the EB track to access stairs to the park. The pedestrian signals could be controlled by the trains so pedestrian crossings wouldn’t affect the LRT schedule.

What do you guys think? Everybody wins?
 
Ok, so Metrolinx has wilted in the face of opposition from a few Leslie St. condo dwellers and/or become scared to bring the EA back to City Council for amendment (despite only hours earlier winning approval for the Western EA amendments at Mt. Dennis from the same council.)

Care to expand on this?
What was the plan? What was the wilting? What's the new plan?

I have a hard time evaluating your proposal without knowing what you're proposing against.
 
Yup.

We should be praising Solid Snake for being so proactive. At least he is willing to spend his personal time to attempt to improve the ECLRT. More than can be said for most here.

So thank you Solid Snake.
If he were to approach the Isreali Embassy to try and improve the ECLRT would that also require thanks?

He's barking up the wrong tree, wasting his time and theirs. Surely if he has a single opportunity to ask a question, he'd be better off asking something that could be answered.
 
But remember that the media will likely be at the meeting. If Solid Snake can go in there and question the TTC about why it isn't being elevated when it is relatively cheap to do so, perhaps the crowd will become riled up. If they're outraged enough (as they should be) it will make it to the news and councillors will hear about it. So this is a legitimate opportunity to change things for the eastern ECLRT. Hopefully more of us can make it to the meeting to question the TTC.

Exactly!

I don't care about TTC's answer. People have a right to know the implications of having the line at grade in their area vs the rest of the line.
 
because bitching to the TTC is like bitching to the mayor of vancouver, they have 0 control over the alignment of the line at this point. That is metrolinx's job, the TTCs only involvement in the project is the fact that they will be contracted out to operate it.
 
If he were to approach the Isreali Embassy to try and improve the ECLRT would that also require thanks?

He's barking up the wrong tree, wasting his time and theirs. Surely if he has a single opportunity to ask a question, he'd be better off asking something that could be answered.

So negative...

You have a right to disagree but voicing your opinion and questioning politicians and in this case city staff is NEVER a waste of time...
 
because bitching to the TTC is like bitching to the mayor of vancouver, they have 0 control over the alignment of the line at this point. That is metrolinx's job, the TTCs only involvement in the project is the fact that they will be contracted out to operate it.

Well... Metrolinx certainly reacts to Councillors flip flop attitude. The point is not having TTC do something about it. Is to make people aware that they can demand to get better and pressure their Councillor to harass Metrolinx like Robinson did.
 

Back
Top