News   Apr 26, 2024
Sustainability Month: ReHousing — A Multiplex How-To Guide Explores What’s Possible in the Yellowbelt
 2.3K     4 
News   Apr 26, 2024
Mattamy's Soleil and Mile & Creek Condos in Milton’s Flourishing Landscape
 521     0 
News   Apr 26, 2024
Galleria on the Park Soon to Welcome First Residents of Masterplanned Community
 1.1K     1 

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

ARG1 said:
I really hope that happens sooner than later, although that leaves the question of what we do with Eglinton East. Should we fully grade separate that as well or do we make that a separate line?
Click to expand...
If the eastern portion gets grade-separated I think they would ideally run Eglinton as a separate line at least until it congested enough it needs its own grade separation project, but see no reason why some trains couldn't through run from line 5 to EELRT and vice-versa
 
jelbana said:
The incremental cost of building additional lines is insanely higher only in Toronto. Vancouver over the past few decades proves it not to be the case, and Montreal recently with REM is also showing promise. Let alone the rest of the world which is successful at building a network of metro lines rather than being capable of only extending the few over-capacity lines it has into the suburbs.
Click to expand...

Is it because they aren't insanely high just because of sizing - or because they adopted other cost saving measures (elevation, reusing existing infrastructure, etc)?

AoD
 
jelbana said:
I'll defer to this.

Click to expand...

That report is utterly silent about the issue - and increasing the sizing (by which I meant having 130m platform length) doesn't meant building TYSSE-styled cathedral stations. Also keep in mind - platform length is a constant - it hasn't changed much from the original Yonge subway (low cost) all the way to TYSSE - even the interregnum Sheppard stations built full-sized but with knock out walls were fairly cheap by today's standards, and that's barely 20 years ago. Also Vancouver isn't that cheap anymore either - the 6 station Millennium extension to Arbutus is going to be what, close to 3B for a line that can handle what, 20K pphpd max.

And back to the issue of incremental cost of new lines - think OL, even at stripped down level is a 10+B project. I cannot envision significant new lines through the urban core costing any less given the contraints inherit.

AoD
 
Last edited:
jelbana said:
Unfortunately, GO Expansion will be hardly used within Toronto and will serve mainly the outer suburbs. A lot of the station choices and the way they are planned to be integrated is currently poorly planned. There should be TTC/suburban bus integration at every new and existing GO station within and outside Toronto, in addition to having one fare system. Otherwise it's not going to be anything other than commuter rail.
Click to expand...
As I've said many times I highly doubt we won't have Fare Integration. Many Metrolinx projects like the Ontario Line and GO Expansion are being designed purposefully with Fare Integration in mind, and without fare integration both of these projects will have absolute nonsensical sore points. Obviously its a massive if to whether or not it will happen due to competancy, but at the very least the goal with GO Expansion is to have Fare Integration ready when it does open, or at the very least soon after opening.
 
ARG1 said:
As I've said many times I highly doubt we won't have Fare Integration. Many Metrolinx projects like the Ontario Line and GO Expansion are being designed purposefully with Fare Integration in mind, and without fare integration both of these projects will have absolute nonsensical sore points. Obviously its a massive if to whether or not it will happen due to competancy, but at the very least the goal with GO Expansion is to have Fare Integration ready when it does open, or at the very least soon after opening.
Click to expand...
I remain optimistic fare integration will indeed be set in place once GO RER is complete but for now, won't believe it until I see it. Again, these tidbits is the most recent status of fare integration we have so far. Baby steps.

1621388726479.png



1621388823349.png
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
And back to the issue of incremental cost of new lines - think OL, even at stripped down level is a 10+B project. I cannot envision significant new lines through the urban core costing any less given the contraints inherit.

AoD
Click to expand...

The report is ok in that it acknowledges depth (and by default vertical size of stations), as well as related issues of soil removal. Cut/cover could be a future. Since a full closure of the road a la early Yonge isn't happening, maybe close half the road and do one track. Still allowing 50% vehicle traffic. Then once done alternate to the other side. All accomplished in sections that move forward weekly/monthly. Similar with the stations, focus energy one at a time vs a multi-km, decade-long perma construction site.
 
From the Globe:

Eglinton LRT decision could set precedent for other projects, analysts say

Four companies involved in Eglinton Crosstown LRT could trigger contractual procedure to give them more time to finish, as COVID-19 has created delays, added unexpected costs
www.theglobeandmail.com www.theglobeandmail.com

“With so much capital going into infrastructure development in Canada, U.S., U.K. and Australia, risk transfer strategies that would have been acceptable 10 years ago as players were vying for a piece of the public-private partnership pie no longer suffice.”
Click to expand...

I am not sure why the private sector need a slice of the pie if the one key rationale for their involvement is removed in the first place.

AoD
 
ssiguy2 said:
Yes I know the central part will be underground as it should be but the rest should have been elevated. The CT has too many stations both at grade and underground adding to the costs for little return. Also the underground stations themselves had to be made significantly larger than needed than if the system was grade separated because the system will suffer from much lower frequency capacity.

Miller proclaimed that LRT would offer the best of both worlds.......... high capacity, high frequency but lower costs and faster construction than subway but as Torontonians are quickly realizing instead it offers the worst pf both world.............high costs, lower capacity, less frequent service, less reliable but coming in a subway costs and timetables.
Click to expand...
For Eglinton West, comparing elevated vs at-grade it was estimated that elevated cost 2x at grade. You can argue that there is value there or that the numbers are skewed but it's at least a billion dollars in difference.

We are getting better transit, changes can be made to improve the at grade service without spending the billion dollars. Although saying that, I would agree with your potential view that those surface upgrades are not going to happen anytime soon.
 
ARG1 said:
God I really wasn't expecting to see the different font. It gives such a strong feeling of visual dissonance, I really don't like it.
Click to expand...
You'll see more new signs with the application of Metrolinx's new Wayfinding Standard across all their projects. To make matters worse, the other agencies haven't signed on to Metrolinx's program, meaning that the region's wayfinding will only get more complicated.
KhalilHeron said:
Great new signs for line... line... why don't the signs say line 5 😮
Click to expand...
Metrolinx (according to their Wayfinding Standard) doesn't think you should know the line # until you're inside the station. I know, it's ridiculous.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top