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

[W. K. Lis]

View attachment 249918

At least with a bored tunnel, there is more than enough earth to plant more trees over the tunnels. The bad news is that instead of transplanting the existing trees, they'll likely cut down the old trees and plant saplings instead, in the cut-and-cover areas around the station boxes.

 

[Amare]

The narrative that is all Toronto's fault for selling off developable land is a bit much. Potentially Eglinton west will have more pedestrian friendly nodes with residential development near stations.

It's a pretty accurate assertion IMO.

This stretch of Eglinton will never be pedestrian friendly, I mean have you seen all the developments and the current proposals along this stretch? If the city wanted to make it pedestrian friendly they should've properly prescribed for that when these developments started to happen, but instead we're getting a mish-mash of townhomes (ill-suited for this stretch of Eglinton) and condos that dont even make an effort to face Eglinton.

 

[M II A II R II K]

And a haphazard line where half is rapid transit off the road and the other half being slowed down in the middle of the road. May as well be 2 separate lines but then it wouldn’t be crosstown though.

 

[Rainforest]

And a haphazard line where half is rapid transit off the road and the other half being slowed down in the middle of the road. May as well be 2 separate lines but then it wouldn’t be crosstown though.

While the line's performance and capacity will be somewhat lopsided, that's not nearly bad enough to even consider splitting the line. The value of running through service 99% of the time far exceeds the drawback of occasional delays on one side affecting the other side.

Plus, there is no good place in the middle to split the service. The Yonge / Eglinton station will have limited, if any, capacity for turnbacks. The Cedarvale station would split the grade-separated section in half. Brentcliffe is not a destination, and probably would have difficulties turning back all trains from both west and east.

There are multiple ways of using the greater capacity in the west in the future, for example running one branch from Pearson to Kennedy and another branch from Mississauga's Square One to Brentcliffe.

 

[W. K. Lis]

While the line's performance and capacity will be somewhat lopsided, that's not nearly bad enough to even consider splitting the line. The value of running through service 99% of the time far exceeds the drawback of occasional delays on one side affecting the other side.

Plus, there is no good place in the middle to split the service. The Yonge / Eglinton station will have limited, if any, capacity for turnbacks. The Cedarvale station would split the grade-separated section in half. Brentcliffe is not a destination, and probably would have difficulties turning back all trains from both west and east.

There are multiple ways of using the greater capacity in the west in the future, for example running one branch from Pearson to Kennedy and another branch from Mississauga's Square One to Brentcliffe.

The Eglinton (at Yonge) Station will have crossover tracks for turnbacks. So will Cedarvale, Avenue, Laird, Science Centre, O'Conner, Pharmacy, and Birchmount, not just Mount Dennis and Kennedy.

From link.

Nothing yet defined for crossover tracks for Eglinton West, but likely there would be crossover tracks at Renforth.

 

[Steve X]

This stretch of Eglinton will never be pedestrian friendly, I mean have you seen all the developments and the current proposals along this stretch? If the city wanted to make it pedestrian friendly they should've properly prescribed for that when these developments started to happen, but instead we're getting a mish-mash of townhomes (ill-suited for this stretch of Eglinton) and condos that dont even make an effort to face Eglinton.

It's not that bad compared to Mississauga. The Martin Grove/Eglinton intersection is the worst to cross but the rest are more acceptable compared to the wide 6+ lane intersections. Traffic is busy enough that most people would never consider jaywalking Eglinton. The lack of a sidewalk on the north side of the roadway between Kipling and Royal York is the only thing lacking.


Hopefully the could build entrances for Martin Grove station at the NW, NE (main) and SE corners to all pedestrians to cross the intersection safer and access the LRT.

Looks like the remaining woodlots are toast.

I don't see why they would have to cut more trees down than necessary. They would only need to clear 3-5m from the sidewalk at Kipling for a station box. Even when they build the townhouses, the city planted trees were protected and became part of the townhouse property yards. The city planted more trees along Eglinton in the last year or so too.

 

[M II A II R II K]

And it would be more haphazard if the whole east extension is in the middle of the road too.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Would like to see a "monument" or "arch" on the surface at Martin Grove Station, see it would be a "gateway" into Toronto. Maybe not on the scale of the "arc de triomphe", but maybe a "monument" for the "gates" to Toronto (like the Princes' Gates). ?

From link.

From link.

From link.

Include it in the Martin Grove Station design as the "Gateway to Toronto".

 

[Coolstar]

Would like to see a "monument" or "arch" on the surface at Martin Grove Station, see it would be a "gateway" into Toronto. Maybe not on the scale of the "arc de triomphe", but maybe a "monument" for the "gates" to Toronto (like the Princes' Gates). ?

From link.

From link.

From link.

Include it in the Martin Grove Station design as the "Gateway to Toronto".

And a expensive statue of Doug Ford. For extra measure of course.

 

[Towered]

Would like to see a "monument" or "arch" on the surface at Martin Grove Station, see it would be a "gateway" into Toronto. Maybe not on the scale of the "arc de triomphe", but maybe a "monument" for the "gates" to Toronto (like the Princes' Gates). ?

From link.

From link.

From link.

Include it in the Martin Grove Station design as the "Gateway to Toronto".

Well, a monument of some kind would at least make that stunningly bland suburban area a tiny tad more interesting. Anything would help, really.

 

[robmausser]

There isnt that many intersections on Eglinton west and the stop spacing always was going to be wider than finch. But screw it subways subways subways while we stop the gravy train post pandemic where money grows on trees and more people are working from home not needing transit.

Heres the thing you might not understand: even an LRT thats separated from traffic but in the center lane, with 0 intersections will operate slower than a fully separated line thats in a trench, at grade but fenced in, elevated, etc.

This is because there are mandatory speed limits for transit vehicles that operate on street, even if in their own dedicated lane, and pedestrians have the ability to interact with, even if its only at the stations. If theres no physical barrier separating the train from the possibility of someone on the tracks so the city standard for such transit system requires much slower speeds. As well, PTC or ATC cant be used, meaning slower speeds as well.

The difference is something like 50km/h (sometimes 40) vs 80-100kmh for separated.

Thats significant. Thats doubling the time it takes to get to destinations that are far apart.

However Id like to note that Id prefer elevated over tunneled for this corridor, they could run the elevation in the richview corridor where possible and then curve around the developed areas on street. The tunneling in the area west of Martin Grove is especially egregious, a properly fenced in at-grade line could be possible along much of this corridor area.

 

[LeanMeanMemeMachine]

Heres the thing you might not understand: even an LRT thats separated from traffic but in the center lane, with 0 intersections will operate slower than a fully separated line thats in a trench, at grade but fenced in, elevated, etc.

This is because there are mandatory speed limits for transit vehicles that operate on street, even if in their own dedicated lane, and pedestrians have the ability to interact with, even if its only at the stations. If theres no physical barrier separating the train from the possibility of someone on the tracks so the city standard for such transit system requires much slower speeds. As well, PTC or ATC cant be used, meaning slower speeds as well.

The difference is something like 50km/h (sometimes 40) vs 80-100kmh for separated.

Thats significant. Thats doubling the time it takes to get to destinations that are far apart.

However Id like to note that Id prefer elevated over tunneled for this corridor, they could run the elevation in the richview corridor where possible and then curve around the developed areas on street. The tunneling in the area west of Martin Grove is especially egregious, a properly fenced in at-grade line could be possible along much of this corridor area.

Obviously, this is what a sensible plan (elevated, curving around developments) for this corridor would look like. But Metrolinx clearly has no intention of even considering something if it's not on-street or underground. I asked a question regarding this on the Metrolinx Engage page for the Crosstown West extension a couple of months ago (exactly two months ago today, actually), which, mind you, was far from the only question asking why the heck this extension won't be elevated, and obviously, and they responded saying "The alignment moving forward for further study balances the ease of local access and the speed of travelling, and outperforms other options in offering the best network connectivity and travel experience for people living and travelling along the corridor.", completely avoiding answering my questions about whether an elevated alignment was even considered, and having an outright false answer regarding "ease of local access and speed of travelling", given that an elevated alignment would offer the same speed of travel, or slightly slower speeds in inclement weather, and would offer better ease of local access, since the platforms are closer to street level than those currently planned.

Without much of a doubt, building this extension fully grade-separated is the way to go so it can provide faster connections to the Mississauga Transitway and the airport, but, as many others agree, using deep tunnelling is far from the best option for this, given how much more it costs and how much longer it takes to build. But in the end, the current plan is going to be the easiest to go forward with, largely because the nearby NIMBYs would get angry that this line would be an "eyesore" or, in the case of a cut and cover tunnel, that it would be "too disruptive" if other quicker to build, more cost-effective options were used instead of this one. What it really comes down to is picking between keeping the NIMBYs happy or saving somewhere in the region of $1-2 billion, and it's clear that the province has chosen the former, likely so Dougie can keep his voter base in Etobicoke.

 

[Coolstar]

Obviously, this is what a sensible plan (elevated, curving around developments) for this corridor would look like. But Metrolinx clearly has no intention of even considering something if it's not on-street or underground. I asked a question regarding this on the Metrolinx Engage page for the Crosstown West extension a couple of months ago (exactly two months ago today, actually), which, mind you, was far from the only question asking why the heck this extension won't be elevated, and obviously, and they responded saying "The alignment moving forward for further study balances the ease of local access and the speed of travelling, and outperforms other options in offering the best network connectivity and travel experience for people living and travelling along the corridor.", completely avoiding answering my questions about whether an elevated alignment was even considered, and having an outright false answer regarding "ease of local access and speed of travelling", given that an elevated alignment would offer the same speed of travel, or slightly slower speeds in inclement weather, and would offer better ease of local access, since the platforms are closer to street level than those currently planned.

Without much of a doubt, building this extension fully grade-separated is the way to go so it can provide faster connections to the Mississauga Transitway and the airport, but, as many others agree, using deep tunnelling is far from the best option for this, given how much more it costs and how much longer it takes to build. But in the end, the current plan is going to be the easiest to go forward with, largely because the nearby NIMBYs would get angry that this line would be an "eyesore" or, in the case of a cut and cover tunnel, that it would be "too disruptive" if other quicker to build, more cost-effective options were used instead of this one. What it really comes down to is picking between keeping the NIMBYs happy or saving somewhere in the region of $1-2 billion, and it's clear that the province has chosen the former, likely so Dougie can keep his voter base in Etobicoke.

The problem with Metrolinx is that they're too stubborn to listen to other peoples suggestions. They just copy and paste the same reason why tunnelling is better than elevated. I asked twice why the line isn't elevated and I got the same copy paste answer. However, if they can get the funds to build the line underground, go for it! Let's not waste any time and let's get the line to the airport.

 

[anb]

This relates to the crosstown in some way, but i made a map of what a Lawrence west rt line would look like. This could help relieve congestion if the eglinton west line ever gets congested

Lawrence West LRT - Google My Maps

Lawrence West LRT

www.google.com

 

[Johnny Au]

Would like to see a "monument" or "arch" on the surface at Martin Grove Station, see it would be a "gateway" into Toronto. Maybe not on the scale of the "arc de triomphe", but maybe a "monument" for the "gates" to Toronto (like the Princes' Gates). ?

From link.

From link.

From link.

Include it in the Martin Grove Station design as the "Gateway to Toronto".

...or the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin: