Toronto Eglinton Line 5 | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx | Arcadis

[EastYorkTTCFan]

That's what they should have done to protect intersections that are at grade.

Why? It's not like it crossig the road in a way that is different from the traffic running beside it? If you look at Ion all of the places it has railroad crossing arms on it is on the right of way of a normal railroad or turning off of it to run on the streeet much like how Eglaigton runs. Crossing arms is just overkill for the line and ot;s not necessary at all.

 

[christiesplits]

Hypothetically, how much would it cost to bury the ground level portion of the Crosstown? If signal priority doesn't make a dent in the transit times, would there be a political appetite to bury the Laird to Kennedy portion?

 

[cplchanb]

Hypothetically, how much would it cost to bury the ground level portion of the Crosstown? If signal priority doesn't make a dent in the transit times, would there be a political appetite to bury the Laird to Kennedy portion?

everyones organs and then some.

 

[micheal_can]

Hypothetically, how much would it cost to bury the ground level portion of the Crosstown? If signal priority doesn't make a dent in the transit times, would there be a political appetite to bury the Laird to Kennedy portion?

Probably the same as building a subway.
Who knows about the political appetite for it at this point. I feel people just want it open.

 

[Amare]

Hypothetically, how much would it cost to bury the ground level portion of the Crosstown? If signal priority doesn't make a dent in the transit times, would there be a political appetite to bury the Laird to Kennedy portion?

I can say with absolute certainty, the surface stretch of the Crosstown will never be buried in any of our lifetimes, nor in the lifetimes of any children/grandchildren that people on this forum may have.

 

[A 6264]

Trainspotting report: This morning I took the bus along Eglinton from Don Mills to Victoria Park. Saw zero trains heading eastbound (which may be because that was my direction), but 4 trains westbound, and 3 of them were within a range of 2 intersections. Maybe someone saw the posts here about "bunching", and ordered a "bunching test".

On the way back around noon, saw 2 more westbound trains go by while waiting for the bus, and only 1 eastbound.

 

[duty free]

I can say with absolute certainty, the surface stretch of the Crosstown will never be buried in any of our lifetimes, nor in the lifetimes of any children/grandchildren that people on this forum may have.

Love the confidence, but hope you're wrong because we all know it will never run smoothly.

 

[hw621]

Trainspotting report: This morning I took the bus along Eglinton from Don Mills to Victoria Park. Saw zero trains heading eastbound (which may be because that was my direction), but 4 trains westbound, and 3 of them were within a range of 2 intersections. Maybe someone saw the posts here about "bunching", and ordered a "bunching test".

On the way back around noon, saw 2 more westbound trains go by while waiting for the bus, and only 1 eastbound.

Any sign that they may be testing the aggressive TSP?

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

The automobile disciples in Toronto and especially in Ontario (Doug Ford) will prohibit the use of physical left turn gates. This video has been shown before, but is shown here for the newbies. Even the use of red turn arrows is prohibited in Ontario, even though they would make it safer for all.

 

[EllaW]

Rosemount Drive and Sinnott Road, along with a few other intersections in the east, seem pretty inconsequential except to a few drivers, I wonder if there would be an appetite for ending left turns on those sorts of small roads in order to eliminate a handful more of the intersections the Crosstown has to pass through. Maybe a politically feasible way to speed things up somewhat.

 

[hw621]

I can say with absolute certainty, the surface stretch of the Crosstown will never be buried in any of our lifetimes, nor in the lifetimes of any children/grandchildren that people on this forum may have.

But they may scrap it like the SRT...

 

[crs1026]

Love the confidence, but hope you're wrong because we all know it will never run smoothly.

It would be foolish to jump to this conclusion without giving it a few years of seriously trying to perfect it as LRT. It might turn out to be good enough.

Even if the results were not stellar - the option would still be, do we spend the money and suffer the disruption to improve it - or do we accept that it's the best we can do as LRT and put the money into building some other line that is needed also (accepting that maybe the lesson learned is that the new line should not be LRT so we don't repeat whatever dissatisfaction is evident with a "not good enough" version)

I would predict the vote would land on living with LRT on Eglinton and putting the money elsewhere. That would be my preference, too.

- Paul

 

[Northern Light]

Hypothetically, how much would it cost to bury the ground level portion of the Crosstown? If signal priority doesn't make a dent in the transit times, would there be a political appetite to bury the Laird to Kennedy portion?

Setting aside the merits or likelihood of such an exercise, lest my answer spur such replies, I'll try to give that a serious answer.

First though we have to set some parameters.

1) I'll work with the assumption that we are retaining the current running concept (train lengths, catenary, low boarding platforms.)

2) I'm only considering the east end.

3) I'm going to look at this in chunks:

Brentcliffe Portal to Don Mills

Don Mills to Wynford

Wynford to Bermondsey

Bermondsey to Kennedy.

There is a logic to this based on how the current surface network is supposed to operate, whether bridges/river crossings are required, and effects on existing operations.

** Note that I am not including any rolling stock costs, maintenance costs or debt servicing costs, though the latter is surely mandatory, but too fuzzy to predict based on how the financing is done.

****

Segment 1 (west to east), Brentcliffe to Don Mills:

I could provide an estimate for full undergrounding, but it would be astronomical because you'd have to rebuilding the existing tunnel at least back to Laird Station and you might even have to rebuild the station. Getting the LRT to go under the Don River would mean a very significant re-grade of the line, its also not clear to me that the math would allow it to get back up high enough for the station at Don Mills in time.

So I won't even work out the details.

Instead, I'll give the alternative. You shift the alignment of the LRT so the south side of Eglinton at all times until it reaches the Portal into Don Mills Station.

There is an obvious problem with getting the traffic under/over the LRT at that point, but its do-able and gives full separation from the Leslie Intersection which is the only issue in this segment.

Except for the cross over this would be relatively 'cheap', providing the existing bridge structure can support the shift. I will assume that it can for the purposes of costing.

Estimate: 450M (very back of the envelope, but it should be ballpark accurate)

****

Segment 2, Don Mills Station to Wynford.

There are a series of challenges and assumptions you have to make here. You want to maintain grade separation, but you have to decide in advance what you're doing w/the line east of Wynford (how are you crossing the East Don?)

I will decide on our collective behalf, that we're using the same strategy as the previous segment in that we're going to keep the line on the existing bridge. That means we don't want or need to deep-dive.

However, given the existing depth of the line here, I'm not confident we can do this w/o reconstructing the DVP/Eglinton interchange. We might be able to, with cut and cover, but it would be quite disruptive.

I will assume we can get away w/leaving the interchange. But what to do about Wynford itself? The road passes under, but there's a traffic lit connection to Eglinton. What do we do about a Station?

Very cursory look suggests to me that the LRT should stay underground at Wynford, but at almost the exact elevation of Wynford today. That means we need to rebuild, and re-align Wynford to go over the top, at-grade.

Estimate: 600M

****

Segment 3, Wynford to Bermondsey

Here we would go underground, likely by boring, immediately east of the river crossing.

Bermondsey would then be a deep station.

Estimate cost: 500M

****

Finally, we have Bermondsey to Kennedy, I'm going to assume this is entirely underground, more or less, though it would want to try to get it level with the existing portal into Kennedy Station if feasible to avoid reconstructing that and rebuilding Kennedy.

This would likely entail a closer of Ionview. its also problematic that it would to pass under Taylor-Massey Creek then come back up. One could consider alternatives, but none are particularly appealing or easy.

Estimate: ~3.5km of tunnel + deep stations at Victoria Park, Warden and Birchmount (I'd cut Pharmacy in adittion to the mid-block stops to make this work), 1.5B

All-in, 3.2B with rounding.

* note the items I omitted; in the real world there will be debt to be serviced, that could double the cost. Also I have excluded the cost of removing the surface track and reconstructing Eglinton. That would be at least 200M, possbily double that.

There's a lot of IFs, ands and Buts there.

But I thiink a realistic range would be 5.5B-7.5B inclusive.

****

Line would be shut down for 3 years minimum, up to 5.

 

[crs1026]

I did a little playing with the map, and it became obvious that this elephant could be eaten pretty easily, in two or three steaks.

Coming out of the portal at Brentcliffe, the line has only six signalled intersections in the first 4.5 kms

Leslie - possibly impacted
DVP west intersection - little impact on the city grid but backup onto active DVP lanes might be a problem
DVO east intersection - little impact on the city grid but backup onto active DVP lanes might be a problem
Swift/Credit Union - a lesser intersection that TSP would barely move the needle on
Sloane/Bermondsey - moderate impact
Victoria Park - could have major impact

So, realistically, putting full TSP on that segment would get trams half way to Kennedy at full LRT velocity with manageable impacts. Just making that improvement would move the line much closer to potential optimum velocity. I would do all of these and monitor impacts.

East of the Vic Park platform, there are 8 signalled crossings of which four are potentially major impacts if TSP impeded flow, and four where the impact is likely much less severe.
O'Connor
Pharmacy
Hakimi/Lebovic - minor
Warden
Sinnott - minor
Birchmount
Rosemount - minor
Ionview - minor

Putting TSP on those four "minor" intersections would halve the number of"painful" delays in that segment. I can't see a reason not to put TSP at these.

I can understand the reluctance to impede auto flow on the other four, but I would say, try it on a couple and monitor the results.

Sure seems like there is low hanging fruit here. I'm keeping my mind open about how major arteries might be impeded, but even there I would say let's try a few things and be prepared to tinker before we declare surface LRT a poor option for this route.

- Paul

 

[ctf5650]

Setting aside the merits or likelihood of such an exercise, lest my answer spur such replies, I'll try to give that a serious answer.

First though we have to set some parameters.

1) I'll work with the assumption that we are retaining the current running concept (train lengths, catenary, low boarding platforms.

2) I'm only considering the east end.

3) I'm going to look at this in chunks:

Brentcliffe Portal to Don Mills

Don Mills to Wynford

Wynford to Bermondsey

Bermondsey to Kennedy.

There is a logic to this based on how the current surface network is supposed to operate, whether bridges/river crossings are required, and effects on existing operations.

** Note that I am not including any rolling stock costs, maintenance costs or debt servicing costs, though the latter is surely mandatory, but too fuzzy to predict based on how the financing is done.

****

Segment 1 (west to east), Brentcliffe to Don Mills:

I could provide an estimate for full undergrounding, but it would be astronomical because you'd have to rebuilding the existing tunnel at least back to Laird Station and you might even have to rebuild the station. Getting the LRT to go under the Don River would mean a very significant re-grade of the line, its also not clear to me that the math would allow it to get back up high enough for the station at Don Mills in time.

So I won't even work out the details.

Instead, I'll give the alternative. You shift the alignment of the LRT so the south side of Eglinton at all times until it reaches the Portal into Don Mills Station.

There is an obvious problem with getting the traffic under/over the LRT at that point, but its do-able and gives full separation from the Leslie Intersection which is the only issue in this segment.

Except for the cross over this would be relatively 'cheap', providing the existing bridge structure can support the shift. I will assume that it can for the purposes of costing.

Estimate: 450M (very back of the envelope, but it should be ballpark accurate)

****

Segment 2, Don Mills Station to Wynford.

There are a series of challenges and assumptions you have to make here. You want to maintain grade separation, but you have to decide in advance what you're doing w/the line east of Wynford (how are you crossing the East Don?)

I will decide on our collective behalf, that we're using the same strategy as the previous segment in that we're going to keep the line on the existing bridge. That means we don't want or need to deep-dive.

However, given the existing depth of the line here, I'm not confident we can do this w/o reconstructing the DVP/Eglinton interchange. We might be able to, with cut and cover, but it would be quite disruptive.

I will assume we can get away w/leaving the interchange. But what to do about Wynford itself? The road passes under, but there's a traffic lit connection to Eglinton. What do we do about a Station?

Very cursory look suggests to me that the LRT should stay underground at Wynford, but at almost the exact elevation of Wynford today. That means we need to rebuild, and re-align Wynford to go over the top, at-grade.

Estimate: 600M

****

Segment 3, Wynford to Bermondsey

Here we would go underground, likely by boring, immediately east of the river crossing.

Bermondsey would then be a deep station.

Estimate cost: 500M

****

Finally, we have Bermondsey to Kennedy, I'm going to assume this is entirely underground, more or less, though it would want to try to get it level with the existing portal into Kennedy Station if feasible to avoid reconstructing that and rebuilding Kennedy.

This would likely entail a closer of Ionview. its also problematic that it would to pass under Taylor-Massey Creek then come back up. One could consider alternatives, but none are particularly appealing or easy.

Estimate: ~3.5km of tunnel + deep stations at Victoria Park, Warden and Birchmount (I'd cut Pharmacy in adittion to the mid-block stops to make this work), 1.5B

All-in, 3.2B with rounding.

* note the items I omitted; in the real world there will be debt to be serviced, that could double the cost. Also I have excluded the cost of removing the surface track and reconstructing Eglinton. That would be at least 200M, possbily double that.

There's a lot of IFs, ands and Buts there.

But I thiink a realistic range would be 5.5B-7.5B inclusive.

****

Line would be shut down for 3 years minimum, up to 5.

**disclaimer -- I am an amateur with a crayon that doesn't really know what he's talking about**

An easier (but unrealistic since it inconveniences drivers) solution to the first section could be to simply ban left turns to/from Leslie, forcing some drivers to U-turn at the Brentcliffe portal and Don Mills respectively, allowing for the retention of the central alignment. This still leaves the issue of passengers/pedestrians crossing the street and going between platforms, could a pedestrian bridge with ramps be a feasible build, maybe along the CPKC bridge?

For the second section, could the DVP interchange be reconfigured slightly to the 4-clover design of Lawrence one arterial to the north? This would get rid of both crossings of the centre ROW and extend grade separation further east. The pedestrian crossing at Wynford stop would have to be eliminated, but pedestrians could be encouraged to walk down the stairs to Wynford drive (albeit inconvenient and ramps would need to be added).

Instead of tunneling beyond this point, could the line be elevated east of the Don for less money? Eglinton is wide in the area and the space available between Ionview and the tunnel portal is similar (a little shorter) than the underground-elevated transition at Black Creek Drive in the west, meaning the current trains should be able to tackle the necessary grade.