Eglinton-Crosstown Corridor Debate

[officedweller]

FYI - came across the following pesentation (to OC Transpo?) on SkyTrain dated June 2009 by BCRTC staffer
(includes slides on snow operations (i.e. track switches are heated to 150C):

http://www.ottawa.ca/residents/public_consult/tmp/lrt/vancouver_en.pdf

Other rapid transit presentations at that conference (including Calgary and Toronto):

http://www.ottawa.ca/residents/public_consult/tmp/lrt/presentations_en.html

 

[gweed123]

My question to the TTC is this: By your own projections and plans, Eglinton West was worthy of a subway in the 1980s, so why not now? Has the corridor lost density (I don't see any apartments being torn down)? Have the bus patterns changed that significantly that it doesn't warrant a subway anymore?

Also, I agree with previous posts: it's not so much the technology that has me upset, it's the grade separation (or lack their-of). If you're really so concerned about costs, I suggest they do a similar thing to what they did at St. Clair West station with the streetcar, do an underpass. Further out along Eglinton it's arterial anyways, so do at-grade between intersections, and dip it down at intersections leading to a station. Saves tunnelling/trenching/elevating the extremities, but it still gives you grade separation.

 

[drum118]

I heard someone say "why not use subway cars with pantograph and high platforms on the surface with shoes in the tunnel" ?

That will a long ramp to get up and the platform would be setback from the intersection a fair distance to do this. You gain floor space since there is no low floor there in the first place.

This idea would happen on Sheppard lines also.

 

[nfitz]

My question to the TTC is this: By your own projections and plans, Eglinton West was worthy of a subway in the 1980s, so why not now?

Surely the answer to this, is that at the same time, the TTC considered that Sheppard East was even more worthy than Eglinton West ... and we can all see that the demand on Sheppard East can be met with LRT.

 

[RedRocket191]

My question to the TTC is this: By your own projections and plans, Eglinton West was worthy of a subway in the 1980s, so why not now? Has the corridor lost density (I don't see any apartments being torn down)? Have the bus patterns changed that significantly that it doesn't warrant a subway anymore?

From Transit Toronto:

When the Network 2011 report proposed an Eglinton Rapid Transit route, it took great lengths to say that the initial line should not be a subway. Buses on private right-of-way could carry the traffic involved at far less cost, it argued. What had changed over the intervening years to transform the busway into a subway?

Very little, actually. The change likely occurred due to political pressures. The cities of Etobicoke and York strongly supported the concept of an Eglinton Rapid Transit line, as did the Region of Peel, but they were unsatisfied with the prospect of a busway. There was some political jealousy over the fact that North York had successfully made the Sheppard Subway a priority, when it was felt that their transit needs were at least that acute. On Metro Council meetings, Etobicoke and York formed something of a voting block agitating that the Eglinton rapid transit line be built as a subway from the start.

http://transit.toronto.on.ca/subway/5112.shtml

 

[gweed123]

That's true I guess. Having had experience with part at-grade and part separated grade systems before (I'm originally from Ottawa, and the Transitway has both), the efficiency of flow between the at-grade and the separated grade I found was pretty substantial, even with transit priority signaling.

Like I said before, it's not really the technology that I have an issue with, it's the lack of grade separation on the extremities of the line. A line of this much importance should not have to interact with regular traffic.

 

[Dan416]

That's true I guess. Having had experience with part at-grade and part separated grade systems before (I'm originally from Ottawa, and the Transitway has both), the efficiency of flow between the at-grade and the separated grade I found was pretty substantial, even with transit priority signaling.

Like I said before, it's not really the technology that I have an issue with, it's the lack of grade separation on the extremities of the line. A line of this much importance should not have to interact with regular traffic.

Agreed.

 

[Darwinkgo]

Trenching it would be the obvious solution for Eglinton West. With the Richview corridor right there it'd be stupid to tunnel a subway instead of just trenching it. Then, future developers could just build over it like was done south of St. Clair.

I'm not so sure of Eglinton east. I'd say that past Don Mills, it could be elevated pretty easily. If you build it right, an elevated ROW could actually be quite nice, almost as nice as a LRT ROW. Of course, on top of that you get substantially better service and capacity than a LRT.

EDIT: If it was LRT, then it could at least have underpasses under major streets. I believe that's what the C-Train does, is it not?

I agree. And I don't know about the C-Train, but I know that's how the majority of the Transitway in Ottawa works.

Outside of the core, Calgary's LRT does dip down or go above major cross streets. This is not the case for all streets, as there is still plenty of interaction. But the train has 100% traffic pre-emption at level crossings where they do exist. No half measured priority or signal control. Preemption - as in when the train gets close crossing arms go down even if the intersection lights are in a left turn phase [and the lights just cycle, no compensation for those slowed by the train]. The C-Train does not operate with any traffic constraints outside of the core, and operates at 80 km/h crossing roads with 50 km/h speed limits in medians of roads with 50 km/h speed limits (but of course that necessitates fences which Toronto seems to want to avoid).

 

[W. K. Lis]

The Eglinton Crosstown LRT will be providing local service across Toronto. Express service could be provided by the projects for expansion of GO Train service. There could be a GO Toronto Crosstown which will provide new transit corridors in central Toronto with GO train hubs at Yonge/Summerhill and/or Spadina/Dupont. Should transfer capabilities of some sort be made available between the TTC and GO, we could have faster service crosstown, but only if there is frequent headway.

If only we could transfer from the TTC to GO and back to the TTC, with the transfer acting as part of the GO fare or discount. I would use the Eglington Crosstown LRT to transfer to the GO Crosstown, ride the GO Crosstown train into Scarborough and transfer again onto the Sheppard East LRT to the zoo, for example.

 

[Second_in_pie]

^^ So does that mean Go's crosstown line is going to be a bit of the Georgetown line and the CP Mainline? I would have thought the best route would use the whole mainline, from Milton to Seaton/Locust Hill.

 

[doady]

The Eglinton Crosstown LRT will be providing local service across Toronto.

A line designed for local services should not go "across" Toronto, and it shouldn't connect to the airport either.

 

[Rainforest]

^^ So does that mean Go's crosstown line is going to be a bit of the Georgetown line and the CP Mainline? I would have thought the best route would use the whole mainline, from Milton to Seaton/Locust Hill.

This is an interesting point. Potentially, both routes can be useful. The case for Airport connection via Georgetown line is obvious. On the other hand, if a section of Milton line is diverted and tunneled via MCC, people who live in Toronto and work near MCC can take it.

Not sure whether two frequent schedules can be accomodated in this corridor.

 

[Rainforest]

A line designed for local services should not go "across" Toronto, and it shouldn't connect to the airport either.

Perhaps it should not be marketed as a Crosstown line, but it still can go across the city and connect to the airport if the demand is there.

For example, Eglinton / Bathurst to airport in 35 min? - I would certainly use it if it existed when I lived in that area.

Likewise, many trips across Yonge would work pretty well - not Kennedy to Kipling, but say Vic Park to Keele.

 

[Second_in_pie]

For someone who works at Pearson Airport and takes the subway and 192 Rocket (or 300A nightbus on early starts) and , I have lived in European cities which all have rail links (not the Union Pearson proposed kind but LRT or Metro/Subway links) it is beyond me why Canada's largest city and most important air gateway has no rail link. And always , for the past 30 years (I am Canadian and grew up here just spent alot of time abroad)they (CityHall etc) always say there is no money and feasability plans ned to be done etc etc (same old with Toronto planners right?). Now HOW embarrassing for Toronto that Vancouver is now Canada's first city with a direct rail link to the airport!

I say how embarrassing that Vancouver, with about half the population of Toronto, has a bigger metro system than we do! Canada is certainly an underachieving nation, and Toronto takes the cake in underachieving-ness! We have the population to support oodles of Metro, Regional Rail, LRT and BRT lines, but instead we avert our eyes and shout "WE'RE NOT WORTHY!"

And..marvel of marvels..something I have suggested numerous times to Giambrone and his TTC predecesor's..a Skytrain/Monorail. Vancouver recently opened it's latest Skytrain line direct from downtown Van to the airport in Richmond. What is the problem with the TTC/Toronto having a monorail run from Kipling subway Above the 427 right into Pearson;s 2 terminals. And before all the Toronto naysayers say "oh it wouldn't work here etc etc.." these type of systems run the world over. And the winter weather/ice is not an issue as we have a monorail connecting the 2 terminals and employee parking lots and they run fine all year.

I believe there were actually plans to have an Etobicoke RT to twin with the Scarborough RT. The original plans were to have both as streetcars in fully separated ROWs instead of Bombardier ICTS, and the Etobicoke RT was to connect Kipling station with Pearson. I'm not sure if the plan folded before or after ICTS was pushed though.

So..when will Toronto come into the modern world...

I ask myself that every day

and even US cities such as Boston,Chicago,San Francisco all have subway links airport/city..just like in europe. Until the Toronto politicians stop bending over to the car driver lobbies we will be forever...behind.

Well to be fair, Boston isn't anywhere near your average American city. I'd say it's one of the most European cities in the US, and it's by far my favorite of every city in the US.

Chicago is just such a big an important city that an airport rail link would be insane to not have (nudges New York.) San Francisco I think is a bit caught between public transit and cars, but California has been known to indulge, especially in environmentally friendly things such as mass transit.

 

[XBOYZ]

How right you are on every point! And thank you for pointing out the embarrassing fact of Van's population vs ours! Indeed! And before someone says..well its only because of the Olympics that they have a skytrain link...no this was in the planning stages for tis extension years ago..and even if..so what..they are still ahead of us..Oh to be able to take the skytrain to work..and oh lets not forget all the foreign visitor's who..from their own cities and other cities in the world visited..are accustomed to some kind of a rail link! Poor Toronto! But that's just like us right..the underdogs..at least with condo towers we are stepping up to the world plate.....