The "preference" I sensed from conversation with some of the staff on hand was for Option 1, which is pretty much the original proposal from a couple years back. The issues being…
- parity/similar design to the east end of Crosstown and what might be built on Eglinton East and up to U of T in Scarborough
- a view that traffic issues had now been thoroughly studied and were manageable - no reduction in traffic volume or capacity, the view expressed was that Eglinton is full and will be full in 2041, so preserving today's capacity is the best that can be expected
- a view that the additional stops do add value, and overall transit time is acceptable with Option 1
- a desire to keep the cost at a level that might actually lead to Council's approval, versus a more costly option that might scare Council off altogether
I didn't engage anyone on the specifics of each intersection, although there were fairly specific panel boards on each segment of the line. I was told that the plan assumes a "moderate" level of transit priority signalling, with further priority possible but subject to "political will" as it would present a tradeoff with auto traffic.
Personally, I'm still convinced that some grade separation is worth the expense. The maps for Options 2-4 indicated that in all three scenarios the line would be underground all the way from East Mall to Scarlett Road, as opposed to duckunder/overs at key intersections. That seems like overkill to me. The part from Martin Grove to Islington is the only section that I can see as possibly justifying underground - but that's still 5 stations' worth, so not cheap.
Most notably, turnout for the meeting at Martin Grove Collegiate was heavy. I just did the tour of the panel boards, wrote out my comments and left, so I can't speak to what may have been said over the evening. But I expect the community will speak up to Councillors.
- Paul
