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

This sums up how the city has screwed up transit in the city with their obsession with on street LRT. They hate elevated transit with a passion.

DOm0EOwXcAElklx.jpg


They even messed up the Crosstown with that useless stop at Sunnybrook Park when Metrolinx wanted to go underground all the way to Science when the councillor and a few residents at one of the condo buildings complained. Ditto for why the line wasn't elevated to Kennedy? Look at the Aga Khan stop, Metrolinx tried to eliminate it and the city with its useless councillors complained because some residents would have to walk a little bit further to go to the stop even though the stop is right by Science Center station. They always find ways to screw up lines and make it slower. The original Crosstown line was flawed and any attempts to improve it has been fought by the city who wants to stick to their original vision.
 
Amare said:
^And the funny thing is, the city cant even implement on-street LRT properly to it's fullest capabilities despite being in heavy favor of it. They like to include unnecessary stops, and have the Transportation Department interfere with implementing full signal priority on varying segments of any given transit line.
Click to expand...

Examples of this include the stops at Sunnybrook Park and Aga Khan on the Crosstown. Metrolinx eliminated those two stops and the city along with their politicians fought to have it included back. Sunnybrook Park had the distinction of not making the line completely grade separated from Mount Dennis all the way to Science Centre Station just to serve a few people. Aga Khan station is literally right next to the Science centre station. The City complained that some residents would be inconvenienced by having to walk a couple of more minutes to the Science Centre station. The wanted to line to stay true to the original Transit City plan even though there were flaws with that plan which was improved by removing those two stops.
 
I went to a public consultation and asked then commissioner Byford why elevated LRT was not considered for Eglinton East and he gave me a bunch of esthetic reasons. It's not just the city but the TTC are against it too. This on-street or nothing attitude is aggravating - sucks for transit and cars.

Regardless on how the city keep spinning this due to their unwillingness to implement TRUE transit priority signals, the at-grade section are glorified streetcars. It's fine on Finch but not Eglinton
 
^If you followed any of the most recent City Council meeting, you would have seen City staff defend their position and indicate that they were sticking to their guns about a surface alignment. While I don't agree with everything in their position (I would like to see a couple cut-and-cover duckunders at key intersections) I thought that showed integrity and courage. One wonders how ML managed to write a business case with a completely different result. ML is not known for a willingness to speak truth to power.

Interestingly, City Staff also went further than I have ever heard to acknowledge and promote transit priority signalling, for Crosstown and for the Eglinton West extension.

- Paul
 
Cobra said:
I went to a public consultation and asked then commissioner Byford why elevated LRT was not considered for Eglinton East and he gave me a bunch of esthetic reasons. It's not just the city but the TTC are against it too. This on-street or nothing attitude is aggravating - sucks for transit and cars.

Regardless on how the city keep spinning this due to their unwillingness to implement TRUE transit priority signals, the at-grade section are glorified streetcars. It's fine on Finch but not Eglinton
Click to expand...

That's laughable. What can the city of Toronto teach Amsterdam or Sydney about aesthetics These are cities which have elevated transit or are building it. We dont even have to leave Canada, just go to Vancouver. Montreal is building elevated for its REM.

The city have a credibility issue with elevated transit. It's hated with a passion from the politicians to the city organizations.
 
This might sound cynical but the funny part of this discussion is the idea that the design process could bring about an unbiased evaluation of the options presented.

A fundamental principle of engineering is: in order to find the solution you need to know the solution. In management parlance you would say: begin with the end in mind.

You don’t hire expensive consultants to tell you what to do. You hire expensive consultants to back-rationalize your actions and provide a narrative for public consumption.

Keep in mind however that this process is occurring with equal force in cases of projects you love as with those you hate
 
TrickyRicky said:
This might sound cynical but the funny part of this discussion is the idea that the design process could bring about an unbiased evaluation of the options presented.

A fundamental principle of engineering is: in order to find the solution you need to know the solution. In management parlance you would say: begin with the end in mind.

You don’t hire expensive consultants to tell you what to do. You hire expensive consultants to back-rationalize your actions and provide a narrative for public consumption.

Keep in mind however that this process is occurring with equal force in cases of projects you love as with those you hate
Click to expand...
Very true, happens in all my college design projects. Fiddle around with the decision matrices to produce the desired outcome.
 
TrickyRicky said:
You don’t hire expensive consultants to tell you what to do. You hire expensive consultants to back-rationalize your actions and provide a narrative for public consumption.
Click to expand...
This has been my experience in the private sector as well. Consultants are often bozos who are good at making slick board presentations.
 
Reecemartin said:
"LRT" as we know it (especially as our second East West Metro Line) is a North American thing.
They are tramways, not 4.5 billion dollar hybrid subways - and they are supplemented by fast grade-separated rail.
Click to expand...

Sure. Whatever the label, the point is that there are models around the world that demonstrate surface level LRTs/tramways can provide excellent service.
 
Adjei said:
This sums up how the city has screwed up transit in the city with their obsession with on street LRT. They hate elevated transit with a passion.

DOm0EOwXcAElklx.jpg


They even messed up the Crosstown with that useless stop at Sunnybrook Park when Metrolinx wanted to go underground all the way to Science when the councillor and a few residents at one of the condo buildings complained. Ditto for why the line wasn't elevated to Kennedy? Look at the Aga Khan stop, Metrolinx tried to eliminate it and the city with its useless councillors complained because some residents would have to walk a little bit further to go to the stop even though the stop is right by Science Center station. They always find ways to screw up lines and make it slower. The original Crosstown line was flawed and any attempts to improve it has been fought by the city who wants to stick to their original vision.
Click to expand...
Going back a little farther - immediately after Rob Ford was elected. There was talk of going elevated then.
Elevated trains: Metrolinx offers subway alternative . The key quote was
The message from the Mayor’s office was that “minimizing the impact on traffic” (also known as preserving road space for vehicles) is “very important” to him
Click to expand...
There was a similar article in The Star at the time. Both had no negative comment about elevated from Ford - after all, it's quite believable that Ford only cared about the cars, but by default it would make transit rapid. The Memorandum of Understanding even allowed for for non-tunneled segments near Black Creek (that actually got switched from on-street to elevated), Don Valley, and near Kennedy - which was well over half the on-street portion.
 
syn said:
Sure. Whatever the label, the point is that there are models around the world that demonstrate surface level LRTs/tramways can provide excellent service.
Click to expand...
Yes, however as we've said a hundred times now, most of those surface LRTs are used in contexts that completely differ from Eglinton. Its not comparable.
 
99Messier said:
Going back a little farther - immediately after Rob Ford was elected. There was talk of going elevated then.
Elevated trains: Metrolinx offers subway alternative . The key quote was

There was a similar article in The Star at the time. Both had no negative comment about elevated from Ford - after all, it's quite believable that Ford only cared about the cars, but by default it would make transit rapid. The Memorandum of Understanding even allowed for for non-tunneled segments near Black Creek (that actually got switched from on-street to elevated), Don Valley, and near Kennedy - which was well over half the on-street portion.
Click to expand...
Council were able to lock out Ford and force a return to Transit City - surely they could have force the elevated option on Eglinton whether Ford liked it or not.

The entire council is a joke with career politicians filled with their own agendas as far as I'm concerned
 
ARG1 said:
Yes, however as we've said a hundred times now, most of those surface LRTs are used in contexts that completely differ from Eglinton. Its not comparable.
Click to expand...

What about those contexts completely differ from Eglinton and make them incomparable?
 
TheTigerMaster said:
No, the Government of Ontario is responsible for the line going underground. They could have made the decision to elevate it, but they didn't. The City of Toronto isn't responsible for poor decisions made at the provincial level.
Click to expand...

The city didn't want to elevate, that's the story here.

crs1026 said:
^If you followed any of the most recent City Council meeting, you would have seen City staff defend their position and indicate that they were sticking to their guns about a surface alignment. While I don't agree with everything in their position (I would like to see a couple cut-and-cover duckunders at key intersections) I thought that showed integrity and courage. One wonders how ML managed to write a business case with a completely different result. ML is not known for a willingness to speak truth to power.

Interestingly, City Staff also went further than I have ever heard to acknowledge and promote transit priority signalling, for Crosstown and for the Eglinton West extension.

- Paul
Click to expand...

If your job is presenting the best solution, presenting a bad one (no matter how well) is bad.

syn said:
Sure. Whatever the label, the point is that there are models around the world that demonstrate surface level LRTs/tramways can provide excellent service.
Click to expand...

Not as a replacement for grade separated rapid transit.

syn said:
What about those contexts completely differ from Eglinton and make them incomparable?
Click to expand...

They tend to be used for local service or in far more far flung suburban areas, or again to supplement existing Metro Lines. Look at Paris.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top