News   Jul 03, 2024
News Roundup for July 3, 2024
 377     0 
News   Jul 03, 2024
Rainbow Flyby
 279     0 
News   Jul 02, 2024
Pinnacle Toronto East's Towers Rising on Sheppard in Scarborough
 1.3K     0 

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

diminutive said:
The best solution would be to increase turnover on the route. Transfers to surface-subway routes at Mt. Dennis and Caledonia as well as Leaside and Kennedy would reduce peak demands in the tunneled segment to more manageable levels. Kennedy in particular, given that ECLRT riders would be boarding there in the first place and face no transfer penalty.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you're proposing, and I think it's because I'm not understanding what you mean by "surface-subway". Or maybe my midnight mind is just slow and it will make perfect sense after I get some rest ;)
 
TheTigerMaster said:
I'm not sure what you're proposing, and I think it's because I'm not understanding what you mean by "surface-subway". Or maybe my midnight mind is just slow and it will make perfect sense after I get some rest ;)
Click to expand...

That mode which has a 100 names. REX, RER, S-Bahn, SmartTracks, Overground, Surface-subway. Some kind of high frequency bi directional rail service along, more or less, the existing GO corridors.
 
ehlow said:
Massive amount of construction between Bayview & Don Mills right now.
Click to expand...

Also taking soil samples at Don Mills and Eglinton today, right in the centre of the roadway. The site south of Loblaws Superstore also has quite a bit of digging going on.
 
For comparison purposes, the following article from Light Rail Now is on

New U.S. light rail transit starter systems — Comparative total costs per mile


at this link:

What’s been the been cost per mile of new U.S. light rail transit (LRT) “starter systems†installed in recent years?

The Light Rail Project team was curious about this, so we’ve reviewed available data sources and compiled a tabulation comparing cost-per-mile of “heavy-duty†LRT starter systems installed in or after 1990, all adjusted to 2014 dollars for equivalency. (“Heavy-duty†distinguishes these systems from lighter-duty streetcar-type LRT projects.)

This is shown in the figure below, which presents, for each system, the year opened, the initial miles of line, the cost per mile in millions of 2014 dollars, and comments on significant construction features. (“RR ROW†refers to available railroad right-of-way; “street track†refers to track embedded in urban street pavement, almost invariably in reserved lanes or reservations.)


Major data sources have included TRB/APTA 8th Joint Conference on Light Rail Transit (2000), individual LRN articles, and Wikipedia.

Averaging these per-mile cost figures is not meaningful, because of the wide disparity in types of construction, ranging from installation of ballasted open track in railroad right-of-way (lowest-cost) to tunnel and subway station facilities (highest-cost). These typically respond to specific conditions or terrain characteristics of the desired alignment, and include, for example:

• Seattle — While Seattle’s Link LRT is by far the priciest system in this comparison, there are explanatory factors. Extensive modification of existing Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel (and several stations) previously used exclusively by buses; tunneling through a major hill, and installation of a new underground station; extensive elevated construction to negotiate hilly terrain, major highways, etc.

• Dallas — This starter system’s costs were pushed up by a long tunnel beneath the North Central Expressway (installed in conjunction with an ongoing freeway upgrade), a subway station, a new viaduct over the Trinity River floodplain, and significant elevated construction.

• Los Angeles — The Blue Line starter system included a downtown subway station interface with the Red Line metro and a short section of subway before reaching the surface of proceed as street trackage and then open ballasted track on a railroad right-of-way.

• St. Louis — While this system’s costs were minmimized by predominant use of former railroad right-of-way, a downtown freight rail tunnel was rehabilitated to accommodate the system’s double-track LRT line, with stations; an existing bridge over the Mississippi River was adapted; and significant elevated facilities were installed for access to the metro area’s main airport.

Hopefully this cost data may be helpful to other communities, in providing both a “ballpark†idea of the unit cost of new LRT, and a reality check of any estimated investment cost already rendered of such a new system. ■
Click to expand...

Click on this link for the full size image of the table.
 
Just read this morning in SAL column that the Eglinton Connects proposal is proposing to reduce traffic to a single lane on Eglinton - is that right? Can someone point me to a proposal document that shows this?

If this is true, its sort of madness. I am a proponent of the LRT on Eglinton and a reduction to 2 lanes, but reducing to 1 lane will be a nightmare on this street.
 
^ Avenue to Mount Pleasant is planned to have one lane per direction with left turn lanes. The rest of the project will be two lanes. See the "Mega Map" on the study site.
 
Wait, you read SAL?

You can find the materials here:
http://www1.toronto.ca/wps/portal/contentonly?vgnextoid=44ae86664ea71410VgnVCM10000071d60f89RCRD

Yes, the tightest section, Avenue to Mount Pleasant, will have one general traffic lane in each direction.

But Eglinton in many sections is single lane in each direction in off-peak hours due to street parking between Laird and Keele. There are some areas where there are two traffic lanes and a parking lane, such as near Bathurst Street. Eglinton Connects improves the public realm (sidewalks, street trees) and adding bike lanes. Since so much of the corridor's capacity will be underground, why not? Most buses will be removed from the street as well. (There will likely be a minimum bus service and definitely night buses on the route).
 
Last edited:
SAL is essential the way Fox News is essential - its always compelling to see the depth of crazy in the world :)

Thanks for the links, I'll have a look.
 
Having lived on the street for 18 years, I can say that so long as the buses are gone from the roads, lane reduction here won't be too bad. An inconvenience for long-distance travelers perhaps, but they shouldn't be using Eglinton for long-distance commuting anyway.

This is designated as an area to grow though and there are many new condos being built at Yonge+Eg, and I don't think all of those people will be commuting via the subway. This is similar to the Yonge+Sheppard experience. I can see the Y-E intersection as well as Eglinton between Yonge and Allen being regularly congested.
 
WislaHD said:
Having lived on the street for 18 years, I can say that so long as the buses are gone from the roads, lane reduction here won't be too bad. An inconvenience for long-distance travelers perhaps, but they shouldn't be using Eglinton for long-distance commuting anyway.

This is designated as an area to grow though and there are many new condos being built at Yonge+Eg, and I don't think all of those people will be commuting via the subway. This is similar to the Yonge+Sheppard experience. I can see the Y-E intersection as well as Eglinton between Yonge and Allen being regularly congested.
Click to expand...

Yes we can't just consider car congestion alone, but pedestrian congestion. Yonge & Eg is already very crowded most times of day (one of the top pedestrian intersections). Imagine when all the condos being built open & the new transit line opens. Implementing at wider sidewalks and nicer pedestrian environment like big trees is a good thing.

Once the buses are off the road they can ban car turns (which I think they do anyways), and implement a pedestrian scramble like at Yonge-Dundas, if needed.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top