Toronto Eglinton Line 5 Crosstown West Extension | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx

[robmausser]

I think even before conversion to heavy rail, they could buy long articulated LRTs that would allow for more standing room, like they did with the Toronto Rocket trains.

Heres a mockup of a 7 section Flexity

I'm sure with dual panto you could make one even longer, the entire length of the platform.

Would be cheaper than subway conversion.

Here you go, 7 section Citadis mockup (using Alstom because they have larger articulation sections)

Basically a subway train.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Here you go, 7 section Citadis mockup (using Alstom because they have larger articulation sections)

Basically a subway train.

On the Yonge Line, we see that capacity constraints aren’t necessarily dictated by vehicle capacity and headway, but rather by station design and pedestrian flows. Hopefully these stations are designed in such a way that passengers can enter and leave the trains and stations without delaying the trains.

 

[aquateam]

Has it really been validated though? The entirety of Line 2 has yet to see significant intensification some 50 years after its introduction. Same story for the SRT, Spadina Line and the Yonge Line north of Bloor (excluding Yonge-Eglinton and NYC).

On the other hand, the shoulder areas of the Downtown core (e.g. Liberty Village) continue to be the fastest growing areas in our city, despite a complete lack of rapid transit in those areas, and despite decades of government policy and billions of dollars spent to encourage that growth to be directed towards suburban centres.

To be fair, you can't blame growth for not happening where it's illegal.

Most of the area around line 2 is designated as "stable neighbourhoods" and thus immune to change by law. The SRT passes through areas that are zoned for industrial. The Spadina line, besides being in a highway, also runs through the "yellow belt" of low-rise residential zoning.

The Yonge line has such visible density around subway stations because the city granted "density bonuses" where developers were able to build more than they normally would have been able to, legally speaking.

Liberty village and Parliament-King both were stagnating and decaying, zoned as industrial. The explosive growth in the "two Kings" is because they were de-zoned.

 

[Streety McCarface]

Has it really been validated though? The entirety of Line 2 has yet to see significant intensification some 50 years after its introduction. Same story for the SRT, Spadina Line and the Yonge Line north of Bloor (excluding Yonge-Eglinton and NYC).

On the other hand, the shoulder areas of the Downtown core (e.g. Liberty Village) continue to be the fastest growing areas in our city, despite a complete lack of rapid transit in those areas, and despite decades of government policy and billions of dollars spent to encourage that growth to be directed towards suburban centres.

To be fair, The BD line, like The Crosstown, will have excellent surface connections throughout. Statistically, this is what makes a station successful, especially in suburban areas. The Bloor line doesn't need to be intensified. It's currently near capacity and ridership is still increasing.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Sorry for the really basic question: This line will force a transfer to Crosstown at Mt Dennis, right? As in, it's not going to be one long single line.

If you're transferring from the UPX or GO Train station at Mt. Dennis, then "yes" it's a transfer.

See link. It is the Mt. Dennis Transit Hub, not just a "station" with many connections, but no parking for the single-occupant motorist.

 

[steveintoronto]

Would be cheaper than subway conversion.

Basically a subway train.

Closer to EMU than subway. The Citadis if ordered as a bi-mode 750VDC/25kVAC current version, could be run on RER lines (signalling equipment permitting)

Alstolm’s Citadis family of modular trams includes both partially low-floor and 100% low-floor trams, which can be delivered in three, five, and seven sections, to suit the needs of individual costumers.

The Citadis family of modular trams comprises of:

• Citadis 100 – three section, 70% low floor, designed and manufactured in Alstom-Konstal plant in Chorzów for polish market (Katowice, GdaÅ„sk)
• Citadis 202 – double articulated 100% low floor (Melbourne)
• Citadis 301 – also three section but with 70% low floor (Orléans and Dublin).
• Citadis 302 – five car-body sections, 100% low floor (Lyon, Bordeaux, Paris T2, Valenciennes, Rotterdam, Buenos Aires, Madrid, Melbourne, Murcia and Barcelona)
• Citadis 402 – seven car-body sections, 100% low floor (Bordeaux, Grenoble, Paris T3)
• Citadis 401 – five sections, 70% low floor (Montpellier and Dublin)
• Citadis 403 – seven sections, with modified end bogie design (Strasbourg)
• Citadis X-04 – three sections, 100% low floor, designed for Central and East Europe and built in Alstom-Konstal plant (Istanbul)
• Regio-Citadis – three sections, 70% low floor (Kassel, Ridderkerk (connected to Zoetermeer and The Hague transportation systems), Salzgitter)
• Citadis-Dualis – derived from the Citadis series and adapted both to tramway lines and regional railway tracks, it will be operated by the SNCF

The 70% low-floor “Regio-Citadis” variant allows for tram-train operation, in which trams run and track-share on mainline railways and is currently used in the German city Kassel, and has been delivered for The Hague in the Netherlands. The Dutch tramtrain is exploring using of duo-powering (diesel/600 VDC, 600 VDC/1,5 kV 16 Hz or 600 VDC/Bioenergy/diesel). [...]

http://www.railforthevalley.com/latest-news/zweisystem/trams-for-the-21st-century-alstom-citadis/

 

[robmausser]

Closer to EMU than subway. The Citadis if ordered as a bi-mode 750VDC/25kVAC current version, could be run on RER lines (signalling equipment permitting)

http://www.railforthevalley.com/latest-news/zweisystem/trams-for-the-21st-century-alstom-citadis/

Ah so its one of those "Tram Trains".

Technically possible, but Tranport Canada would have a field day.

 

[dowlingm]

The other thing about tram-trains - why compromise on interior comfort inherent in narrower low floor vehicles (as even a 2.65m wide Citadis would be vs a 3.00m wide bilevel) unless you have a significant amount of tramway running in mind.

For me tram trains are less about complementing or indeed acting as RER, and more about utilising existing resources like the Don Branch or the OBRY line north of Streetsville or similar lightly used heavy rail alignments but starting and ending by penetrating into the street grid to where people want to go since the rail lines themselves are often remote from origins and destinations (similar to hydro corridors).

 

[steveintoronto]

For me tram trains are less about complementing or indeed acting as RER

That point could be made for longer distance runs, but the huge advantage is established mostly by German operators, where they do complement heavy rail by sharing the same track and stations for local operations, while the heavy rail vehicles do more intercity, and less often. Excellent discussion and photos here:
http://citytransport.info/Share.htm
(Canada gets mention and pic via O-Train)

more about utilising existing resources like the Don Branch or the OBRY line north of Streetsville or similar lightly used heavy rail alignments but starting and ending by penetrating into the street grid to where people want to go since the rail lines themselves are often remote from origins and destinations (similar to hydro corridors).

Fully agreed on both. In North Am, the San Diego Trolley is an excellent example of collecting and disbursing traffic within the city after doing the long-distance run down to the Mexican border at San Ysidro on mainline track (owned by SDT) which hosts freight at night.

I can see the Don Branch hosting both RER and LRV Duals, and combining stretches with the Relief Line, express RER down to Union via the Valley, and LRVs down Don Mills Rd. to Pape, but both sharing track north of Don Mills. One becomes the 'local', the other the 'express'. It would also allow RER to run less frequently on that route.

 

[W. K. Lis]

I see what you mean.

However, the top right is Richview Collegiate. TDSB might be induced to consider a redevelopment where the corner becomes a building (either residential, part of the school, or both) which includes an access to the LRT platform.

The return-to-grade issue could be dealt with by moving the rear accessway from the school further along Eglinton or else mandate right-in, right-out.

View attachment 130619

This intersection, or more accurately, intersections (plural), is the main problem with having an at grade LRT along Eglinton Avenue West.

View attachment 130629

While the East Mall stop has been removed, they still want the LRT to make turns crossing all the eastbound traffic coming off the 401, 427, and 27.
View attachment 130630
The current plans are for the LRT to emerge out of a portal on the east side of Eglinton Flats. However, the LRT would be in the middle of the Eglinton Avenue West roadway, running all the way to the 401/427/27/Eglinton intersection.
View attachment 130631
If the powers-that-be are so set on using at grade for the entire Eglinton West LRT, then they should set up the portal at Eglinton Flats to emerge on the south side of Eglinton Avenue West. Then by having the entire LRT right-of-way at grade level on the south side, by the time the trains get to Martin Grove and the 401/427/27/Eglinton intersection, they would already be on the south side. They'll avoid crossing the very, very, very busy traffic congestion by doing so.

If the right-of-way has to be in the middle as it exits the Eglinton Flats portal (east of Jane Street), it could continue down the middle until just before Islington. Since the intersection of Islington and Eglinton is below grade, the light rail right-of-way could get grade separated there and go over Islington to reach the south side of Eglinton. Then by continuing on the south side of Eglinton past Martin Grove, the right-of-way will avoid the very congested intersection between the ramps of the 401/427/27 and Eglinton.

A lot of the congestion is caused by left turning (eastbound to northbound) vehicles at Martin Grove & Eglinton. They could even add another left turn, to have two left turn lanes (eastbound to northbound) that would not interfere with a grade level light rail right-of-way on south side of Eglinton.

 

[yrt+viva=1system]

I posted this in the Crosstown thread but the idea/issue still pertains to this thread as well:

Was looking up something entirely different and came across this piece by Global News Edmonton. I'd say that the Crosstown is a carbon copy of the Edmonton's Metro Line with underground segments and on-street level intersection crossings. If we go by Edmonton's experience and admission that they "should've gone under ground or over the three intersections," this doesn't bode too well for the Crosstown I'm afraid.

https://globalnews.ca/news/3259483/lrt-trains-along-metro-line-finally-running-at-full-speed/

The city said Wednesday it was given “the green light” by Rail Safety Consulting to lift the speed restrictions that have been in place at intersections along the track. On Sunday, the trains started running up to 50 km/h through intersections.

When it opened in September 2015, trains on the Metro Line were running at a reduced speed of 25 kilometres per hour, due to problems with the signalling system. Then, in May 2016, city administration gave the go-ahead for trains to operate at full speed, except at all five intersections it crosses. In June, the trains were allowed to go a little faster at two of those intersections – 35 km/h between 107 Avenue and Kingsway Avenue and 50 km/h between 111 Avenue and the crossing at 106 Street. The LRT expansion and subsequent delays have been called a “boondoggle,” “frustrating” and “disappointing.”

 

[Voltz]

I posted this in the Crosstown thread but the idea/issue still pertains to this thread as well:

Was looking up something entirely different and came across this piece by Global News Edmonton. I'd say that the Crosstown is a carbon copy of the Edmonton's Metro Line with underground segments and on-street level intersection crossings. If we go by Edmonton's experience and admission that they "should've gone under ground or over the three intersections," this doesn't bode too well for the Crosstown I'm afraid.

https://globalnews.ca/news/3259483/lrt-trains-along-metro-line-finally-running-at-full-speed/

I wouldn't say it's a carbon copy, the Edmonton system gives full priority to the trains and uses crossing arms, and the Metro line has some rather disruptive crossings such as crossing diagonally across two streets next to an intersection, their problems seem to have had more to do with getting the system working as designed.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Noticed a few points from the Crosstown West "Current Work" website, at this link.

1. Martin Grove and Eglinton West anticipated report: Early 2018

2. History of the Eglinton and Martin Grove Area

• - Early 1970s – Plans completed for the Richview Expressway – an expressway along Eglinton with an interchange at Martin Grove – with construction of high speed flyover ramps to and from Eglinton at the Highway 401/ 427 interchange.
• - Late 1970s – Construction of the Richview Expressway was not carried forward but the interchange and highway ramps remained, feeding traffic directly onto Eglinton Avenue.
• - 2016 - The Martin Grove intersection was identified as one of the top 10 congestion hotspots in the City – implementation of several interventions (e.g., optimized signal timing) to try to address traffic issues.

3. Current Issues

• - Highway ramps feed onto Eglinton, resulting in high volumes of merging, weaving, turning and diverting traffic.
• - Missing links in the road network force some highway traffic to use Martin Grove Road to reach Highway 401, and some Eglinton Avenue traffic to use Martin Grove Road to reach Highway 27.
• - Martin Grove intersection sees two to three times more left-turns than an average intersection. (Because of the missing 401 west to 27 north link?)

4. Next Steps

Identification of design alternatives to improve traffic. These could include:

• - A simplified, more connected road network
• - Intersection capacity improvements
• - New ramps
• - Transit links
• - Traffic management techniques

Noticed that they may have "funds" available for highway or road improvements. Just wonder if there will be the same "funds" available for the Eglinton West LRT.

Will have to wait for "Early 2018", before commenting. Will be focusing on ramps, bridges, overpasses, and/or underpasses for both the road improvements and light rail or just for roads.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Noticed a few points from the Crosstown West "Current Work" website, at this link.

1. Martin Grove and Eglinton West anticipated report: Early 2018

2. History of the Eglinton and Martin Grove Area

• - Early 1970s – Plans completed for the Richview Expressway – an expressway along Eglinton with an interchange at Martin Grove – with construction of high speed flyover ramps to and from Eglinton at the Highway 401/ 427 interchange.
• - Late 1970s – Construction of the Richview Expressway was not carried forward but the interchange and highway ramps remained, feeding traffic directly onto Eglinton Avenue.
• - 2016 - The Martin Grove intersection was identified as one of the top 10 congestion hotspots in the City – implementation of several interventions (e.g., optimized signal timing) to try to address traffic issues.

3. Current Issues

• - Highway ramps feed onto Eglinton, resulting in high volumes of merging, weaving, turning and diverting traffic.
• - Missing links in the road network force some highway traffic to use Martin Grove Road to reach Highway 401, and some Eglinton Avenue traffic to use Martin Grove Road to reach Highway 27.
• - Martin Grove intersection sees two to three times more left-turns than an average intersection. (Because of the missing 401 west to 27 north link?)

4. Next Steps

Identification of design alternatives to improve traffic. These could include:

• - A simplified, more connected road network
• - Intersection capacity improvements
• - New ramps
• - Transit links
• - Traffic management techniques

Noticed that they may have "funds" available for highway or road improvements. Just wonder if there will be the same "funds" available for the Eglinton West LRT.

Will have to wait for "Early 2018", before commenting. Will be focusing on ramps, bridges, overpasses, and/or underpasses for both the road improvements and light rail or just for roads.

This is the most problematic on the route. Based on the EA, the solution here is a eastbound-to-northbound flyover, so that left turn can be removed. Once that's fixed, this intersection will be mostly fine.

 

[crs1026]

This is the most problematic on the route. Based on the EA, the solution here is a eastbound-to-northbound flyover, so that left turn can be removed. Once that's fixed, this intersection will be mostly fine.

Wanting to be sure I'm understanding this correctly.... an east on Eglinton to north on 27 flyover?

- Paul