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

[Johnny Au]

From link.

Looks like the light rail turnback operations will be similar to the heavy rail turnback operations the TTC currently uses on its rapid transit lines.

They could have used loops, but unlikely to be used here.

In Montréal and other cities, they use a reversing track located beyond the terminal station.

The latter is the used in such places as Paris Metro and Tokyo Underground and London.

For lines with reversing tracks, they can become pocket tracks if a line were to be extended in the direction of the reversing track.

 

[robmausser]

Sounds like my prediction of December of 2022 is likely to happen. LoL

I do think that the biggest delay will be some stations like Yonge/Eglinton.

If thats the case, and 90% of the line is finished and ready, I think they should run free service with some stations being bypassed until everything is ready.

Why? There is no better testing than running actual service. Look at how much testing the O-Train had and it STILL was a mess after opening.

Acknowledge the line is not ready for full revenue service, and give free rides on an unfinished line (but one that has been properly tested and deemed safe first), and use the GP as guinea pigs to work out the kinks.

That way, when the line does fully open, albeit late, there will be minimal issues with it.

No one wants a delayed line thats also a mess of problems. At least we can nip one of those in the bud.

 

[Reecemartin]

Toronto transit nerds on Transit City pre-Montreal-REM: Transit City is the best!! LRT ALL THE WAY!
Toronto transit nerds on Transit City post-Montreal-REM: Transit City is the worst!! LIGHT METRO ALL THE WAY!

I was not here! Hehe

 

[toronto647]

Well I can infer that Sloane is the only stop on the line that is a centre platform, but also that general area of work from Credit Union-Jonesville has been a bit behind schedule. I don't know why.

I drove by the Credit Union - Jonesville part and its much behind schedule imo compared to the other parts I drove by. I wonder why as well.

 

[Undead]

Walking on Glenvale Blvd today I noticed a steady stream of cars in both directions. Infiltration because of the construction?

 

[ssiguy2]

The whole reason the modern LRT systems began in the late 1970s {ie Edm/Cal/Port} was because they offered a rapid transit alternative where subway constructions costs could not be justified. Often they took advantage of existing rail ROWs and/or wide blvds and mostly ran at grade allowing for large cost savings and much reduced construction times. It was a trade-off offering not quite as fast speeds, slightly less reliability, and non-automation but offering a budget those mid-size cities could afford.

Eglinton's problem is that it doesn't offer any of these advantages of either full subway or full LRT. It is a slower, less reliable, non-automated, and lower frequency system typical of LRT but is coming in at subway level prices and construction times. It's not offering the best of both worlds but rather the worst of both. In Eglinton's case this is made worse by the line having almost no signal priority as opposed to those other cities that not only have priority but in many locations actual rail guards allowing for the continuation of fast service with far less chances of an accident. Also by using rail ROW, the trains are not regulated by the posted speed limit on the road. Despite what ML may claim, the entire at-grade eastern section of the line is just a glorified streetcar and under no stretch of the imagination could it be described as rapid transit.

It's all water under the rail bridge now and they are stuck with it but due to it's slow travel times, it will never be a true 'crosstown' route that ML was hoping for. In order for Toronto to get a real crosstown route now that actually allows one to cross the non-downtown part of the city in a reasonable amount of time, they will have to wait util ML can finally get it's hands on the Milton line and use it as a crosstown RER connecting Malvern & Milton.

 

[Steve X]

The crosstown and all the transit city lines were never meant to be subway replacements. They were higher capacity reliable bus replacements meant for local travel and triggering mid rise development along the corridor. The central tunnel only existed because the LRT won't be able to fit on the surface along with two traffic lanes in each direction. That's why it ended at Brentcliffe and Black Creek. That's why low floor streetcars were selected. Yes it is suppose to be a glorified streetcar line!

There was nothing rapid planned for Eglinton East. The Eglinton West subway ended at Allen with nothing going east. Eglinton East is never getting a subway. Had this project been a true subway, I doubt we'll see anything east of Yonge in out lifetime. We'll just end up with another stubway like Sheppard. As for a transit project that only emerge in the mid-2000s, it's been quiet successful in terms of TO success. As for everyone here dreaming of light metro, you should have gone protesting at city hall and Queen's Park back in 2008 when you had the chance. You're a decade late.

 

[afransen]

The whole reason the modern LRT systems began in the late 1970s {ie Edm/Cal/Port} was because they offered a rapid transit alternative where subway constructions costs could not be justified. Often they took advantage of existing rail ROWs and/or wide blvds and mostly ran at grade allowing for large cost savings and much reduced construction times. It was a trade-off offering not quite as fast speeds, slightly less reliability, and non-automation but offering a budget those mid-size cities could afford.

Eglinton's problem is that it doesn't offer any of these advantages of either full subway or full LRT. It is a slower, less reliable, non-automated, and lower frequency system typical of LRT but is coming in at subway level prices and construction times. It's not offering the best of both worlds but rather the worst of both. In Eglinton's case this is made worse by the line having almost no signal priority as opposed to those other cities that not only have priority but in many locations actual rail guards allowing for the continuation of fast service with far less chances of an accident. Also by using rail ROW, the trains are not regulated by the posted speed limit on the road. Despite what ML may claim, the entire at-grade eastern section of the line is just a glorified streetcar and under no stretch of the imagination could it be described as rapid transit.

It's all water under the rail bridge now and they are stuck with it but due to it's slow travel times, it will never be a true 'crosstown' route that ML was hoping for. In order for Toronto to get a real crosstown route now that actually allows one to cross the non-downtown part of the city in a reasonable amount of time, they will have to wait util ML can finally get it's hands on the Milton line and use it as a crosstown RER connecting Malvern & Milton.

They would need more than just Milton corridor for such a cross-town line, no? A Sheppard extension could play that role.

The crosstown and all the transit city lines were never meant to be subway replacements. They were higher capacity reliable bus replacements meant for local travel and triggering mid rise development along the corridor. The central tunnel only existed because the LRT won't be able to fit on the surface along with two traffic lanes in each direction. That's why it ended at Brentcliffe and Black Creek. That's why low floor streetcars were selected. Yes it is suppose to be a glorified streetcar line!

There was nothing rapid planned for Eglinton East. The Eglinton West subway ended at Allen with nothing going east. Eglinton East is never getting a subway. Had this project been a true subway, I doubt we'll see anything east of Yonge in out lifetime. We'll just end up with another stubway like Sheppard. As for a transit project that only emerge in the mid-2000s, it's been quiet successful in terms of TO success. As for everyone here dreaming of light metro, you should have gone protesting at city hall and Queen's Park back in 2008 when you had the chance. You're a decade late.

Maybe the bus capacity issues should have been addressed by creating a true rapid transit line on Eglinton with reasonable stop distances and grade separation, and leave buses for local service. Short distance riders are much more likely to find a bus ride tolerable as long as it is reasonably frequent.

Not sure how we can define Crosstown a success when it failed at being cheap, fast, or non-disruptive. It's great that we got something, but the opportunity cost was high.

 

[superelevation]

I think at this point they would rather build a line that is either just right or a bit undersized so the capacity can justify the line so that if it did fill up quickly, they can lobby for extensions and expansions.
However I would caution against treating projected riderships as gospel. Remember what was the sheppard line and their claimed ridership?

Never came.

This line is not just undersized, but too slow

I'm sure Crosstown can handle several Golden Mile type projects.

If Spadina can handle the kind of development it's current receiving (along with what's already there) then the Crosstown should be good for another century.

Unfortunately a decade of rhetoric around LRTs has convinced people it's nothing more than a slow streetcar line, when it's really just a step below a subway.

The problem that everyone seems to forget about is that most ridership on these type of crosstown lines comes from buses not from local development

Osgoode has lower ridership than Kennedy or York Mills

For some perspective, that's generally considered the lowest threshold for moving from bus service to higher order transit.

Assuming a subway connection to STC is completed, this line should not have any capacity issues for a long, long time.

The problem here is basically confirmation bias - build low quality transit and nobody will ride it and it will confirm your belief that demand could never have been high.

The crosstown and all the transit city lines were never meant to be subway replacements. They were higher capacity reliable bus replacements meant for local travel and triggering mid rise development along the corridor. The central tunnel only existed because the LRT won't be able to fit on the surface along with two traffic lanes in each direction. That's why it ended at Brentcliffe and Black Creek. That's why low floor streetcars were selected. Yes it is suppose to be a glorified streetcar line!

There was nothing rapid planned for Eglinton East. The Eglinton West subway ended at Allen with nothing going east. Eglinton East is never getting a subway. Had this project been a true subway, I doubt we'll see anything east of Yonge in out lifetime. We'll just end up with another stubway like Sheppard. As for a transit project that only emerge in the mid-2000s, it's been quiet successful in terms of TO success. As for everyone here dreaming of light metro, you should have gone protesting at city hall and Queen's Park back in 2008 when you had the chance. You're a decade late.

They weren't meant to be and thats why transit city was a bad plan

 

[W. K. Lis]

This line is not just undersized, but too slow



The problem that everyone seems to forget about is that most ridership on these type of crosstown lines comes from buses not from local development

Osgoode has lower ridership than Kennedy or York Mills



The problem here is basically confirmation bias - build low quality transit and nobody will ride it and it will confirm your belief that demand could never have been high.



They weren't meant to be and thats why transit city was a bad plan

I find the rapid transit on Line 1 and Line 2 also to be "slow", especially at approaches to the terminal stations.

 

[Streety McCarface]

I find the rapid transit on Line 1 and Line 2 also to be "slow", especially at approaches to the terminal stations.

Those slow sections are still accounted for in the average speed of the line, so this is a moot point.

 

[robmausser]

The whole reason the modern LRT systems began in the late 1970s {ie Edm/Cal/Port} was because they offered a rapid transit alternative where subway constructions costs could not be justified. Often they took advantage of existing rail ROWs and/or wide blvds

This. This a million times over. Look at most LRT systems in the USA and Calgary/Edmonton. They are not run like streetcars, in the median of a street (except for sometimes downtown sections in small parts). They run in hydro corridors, Rail ROWS, in the median of a highway (with grade sep) or streets that are closed to cars and converted to rail corridors.They are elevated, tunneled, etc. They are fenced off so that people can't trespass and that allows them to run at higher speeds (unlike the Queens Quay disaster, for example)

The problem with Transit City and Toronto is that we have a legacy streetcar system that clouds our judgement on what an LRT should be.

 

[Voltz]

This. This a million times over. Look at most LRT systems in the USA and Calgary/Edmonton. They are not run like streetcars, in the median of a street (except for sometimes downtown sections in small parts). They run in hydro corridors, Rail ROWS, in the median of a highway (with grade sep) or streets that are closed to cars and converted to rail corridors.They are elevated, tunneled, etc. They are fenced off so that people can't trespass and that allows them to run at higher speeds (unlike the Queens Quay disaster, for example)

The problem with Transit City and Toronto is that we have a legacy streetcar system that clouds our judgement on what an LRT should be.

Those LRT systems are the highest level of transit those cities have, they have to perform the role that our Subways and GO Trains fill.

Eglinton is getting rapid transit, if a real rapid transit line had been planned it would have never made it east of Don Mills, and no one would have thought it should have. We are better off with what we are getting, a long underground rapid transit line that continues transfer free to a high capacity traffic free line..

 

[syn]

The problem that everyone seems to forget about is that most ridership on these type of crosstown lines comes from buses not from local development

Osgoode has lower ridership than Kennedy or York Mills

That's kind of the point.

The difference between Osgoode and the two stations you mentioned is that it's in the middle of a ~1km stretch that has 4 stations.

The problem here is basically confirmation bias - build low quality transit and nobody will ride it and it will confirm your belief that demand could never have been high.

Low quality transit?

Are you telling me Scarborough residents won't use the Eglinton LRT because they'll deem it beneath them?

It's an essential service. What will they use instead?

 

[afransen]

Are you telling me Scarborough residents won't use the Eglinton LRT because they'll deem it beneath them?

It's an essential service. What will they use instead?

Cars.