Eglinton LRT- Skytrain Beams Vs. Median Right-of-Way

[Second_in_pie]

Exactly. Just build nice, new, modern elevated ROWs through the suburbs, and it'll fit right in. I actually think that Eglinton East and Don Mills would look much better with elevated ROWs, maybe that could be the solution to Sheppard too. Not to mention the improvement you get by grade separating the line.

 

[gweed123]

Toronto needs to evaluate mode types by not only capacity, but speed, and the range that they expect passengers to use the service also. I think these are how the modes boil down:

Bus - Low capacity, low speed, local
LRT/Streetcar (On-Street) - Mid capacity, low speed, local
LRT/Streetcar (Partial Exclusive ROW) - Mid capacity, mid speed, local
Mid Capacity Transport Systems - LRT/ICTS/ART (Exclusive ROW) - Mid capacity, high speed, crosstown
Subway - High capacity, high speed, crosstown
REX-Style Commuter Rail - High capacity, super high speed, crosstown-to-regional
GO-Style Commuter Rail - High capacity, super high speed, regional

With Eglinton expecting lower ridership that what would be needed for a subway, i think it fits the MCTS mode the best since it needs less capacity than a subway, serves a more crosstown function than the streetcar lines on Spadina and St Clair since it'll be the primary transit route to the airport (especially the western leg) and thus would need the higher speed afforded by an exclusive ROW.

With that said, there can be a few options that the TTC should explore to build the exclusive right of way... of course underground would be ideal. But, they should really consider elevated or if they have no money, at-grade with true signal priority (gating intersections, not stopping for reds at all, fencing the ROW off to prevent intrusions - the Gold Line in LA is a good example).

I don't think technology choice between conventional LRT vehicles or ICTS really matters as long as we get an exclusive right-of-way somehow.

I find it interesting that you completely ignored BRT, which could easily accomodate the capacities on many proposed TC lines (Don Mills, Jane, and the outer portion of Sheppard East in particular). In addition, BRT is even more flexible than LRT, because it can be run in curbside lanes (in fact, it's better in curbside lanes), which eliminates the whole Michigan U turn BS.

 

[gweed123]

I also find it kind of funny that people can get up in arms about the asthetics of doing elevated guideways, but say nothing about the ugliness of the overhead wires that will be built on all TC lines. To me, those are much more of an eyesore than an overhead guideway (as long as it's done properly, because I do realize that if they aren't done properly they can be ugly too). I have no problem with the SRT guideway at STC. In fact, I think it adds to the area, it becomes symbolic that transit is at the forefront of the area, and is not afraid to be showcased.

I'm actually a big fan of an elevated guideway down the medians of avenues, I think it gives the avenue unique character, and gives the chance for some pretty nice landscaping beneath it. Also, I kind of like the idea of having passengers looking down on the gridlock on the street and they zip by. Again, the subtle message that transit is a priority.

EDIT: Sorry Hipster Duck, didn't read as far down as your comment before I posted, haha. I guess my view just seconds what you already said then!

 

[EnviroTO]

Do any official documents mention that possibility? I haven't seen it anywhere in Eglinton LRT presentation panels.

Rebuilding the intersections after the line is in service means closing parts of the line. Moreover, at present they are planning complex U-turn arrangements for general traffic at many major intersections, including rebuilding parts of some avenues that cross Eglinton. Those arrangements will become redundant if they grade-separate the LRT at intersections in future.

Yes I was glad to see it when I noticed it in one of the documents. It is a long term strategy. Likely they would revisit particular U-turn arrangements when they do the EA to build the "dive-unders" but they need these U-turns the day the line opens because the eventual grade separations would be a long way off for some of the intersections. Calgary is doing the same thing and some of the intersections are at grade, and some dive into tunnels and come up on the other side. If Eglinton became service that arrived at an intersection every 2 minutes and there was true transit priority (i.e. the light changes in time for a vehicle going either way to not have to stop ever, like railway crossings) then there would be no option but to build a grade separation because other traffic would rarely get a green.

 

[superman]

I find it interesting that you completely ignored BRT, which could easily accomodate the capacities on many proposed TC lines (Don Mills, Jane, and the outer portion of Sheppard East in particular). In addition, BRT is even more flexible than LRT, because it can be run in curbside lanes (in fact, it's better in curbside lanes), which eliminates the whole Michigan U turn BS.

That was an oversight, but I agree. Most TC lines could probably be BRT and would probably be better since you'd be able to branch it out. However, in the context of Eglinton, a exclusive railway corridor would probably be needed.

Also, I don't know why there is a Toronto stigma on elevated ROWS... i think it really adds to the urban fabric if done well like in Hong Kong (http://maps.google.ca/maps?q=hong+k...=AL5pMbVuHZzjb4Mnzaq3HQ&cbp=12,44.22,,0,-4.18).

 

[Second_in_pie]

Well, I would have thought that the TC lines would use St. Clair-esque wires. I don't find those that bad.

Agree with all the aesthetic issues, though the SRT could be made a lot nicer. But that said, if STC was a real urban centre packed with high density condos and offices, the SRT would certainly add to the character of it. And over the golden mile in scarborough, even a dreary, basic, flat concrete guideway would be an improvement.

(Agreeing w/ gweed's post)

 

[New_EastYork]

I also find it kind of funny that people can get up in arms about the asthetics of doing elevated guideways, but say nothing about the ugliness of the overhead wires that will be built on all TC lines. To me, those are much more of an eyesore than an overhead guideway (as long as it's done properly, because I do realize that if they aren't done properly they can be ugly too). I have no problem with the SRT guideway at STC. In fact, I think it adds to the area, it becomes symbolic that transit is at the forefront of the area, and is not afraid to be showcased.

I'm actually a big fan of an elevated guideway down the medians of avenues, I think it gives the avenue unique character, and gives the chance for some pretty nice landscaping beneath it. Also, I kind of like the idea of having passengers looking down on the gridlock on the street and they zip by. Again, the subtle message that transit is a priority.

I completely agree that the elevated guideway gives Scarborough Centre a distinct character. I think some of the ideas that have been mentioned here (and their absence from Transity City) is why support from the general public is not high. Despite the research backing the current plan, it seems that to please the masses it will need to be limited stop, fast service. I would love to see a speed improvement over the subway in fact!

 

[Rainforest]

Also, I don't know why there is a Toronto stigma on elevated ROWS...

Because people think of Gardiner, 401, and the dull TTC's portal on Queens Quay. Many Torontonians are not familiar with Asian or European transit designs.

We think that if concrete has been used to build it, then it ought to look like a concrete slab.

 

[Hipster Duck]

I also find it kind of funny that people can get up in arms about the asthetics of doing elevated guideways, but say nothing about the ugliness of the overhead wires that will be built on all TC lines. To me, those are much more of an eyesore than an overhead guideway (as long as it's done properly, because I do realize that if they aren't done properly they can be ugly too). I have no problem with the SRT guideway at STC. In fact, I think it adds to the area, it becomes symbolic that transit is at the forefront of the area, and is not afraid to be showcased.

I'm actually a big fan of an elevated guideway down the medians of avenues, I think it gives the avenue unique character, and gives the chance for some pretty nice landscaping beneath it. Also, I kind of like the idea of having passengers looking down on the gridlock on the street and they zip by. Again, the subtle message that transit is a priority.

EDIT: Sorry Hipster Duck, didn't read as far down as your comment before I posted, haha. I guess my view just seconds what you already said then!

It's okay. I never even thought about the idea that elevated trains are a reminder that transit is a priority (because they are held up higher - literally - than any other form of transport).

In any case, I think that fear of the aesthetic critique is overblown anyway: if places like the Northern suburbs of Atlanta with its legions of wealthy, ultra-conservative NIMBYs can somehow learn to live with an elevated rail line, I'm sure that the denizens of Scarborough or Etobicoke can too.

 

[golodhendil]

In any case, I think that fear of the aesthetic critique is overblown anyway: if places like the Northern suburbs of Atlanta with its legions of wealthy, ultra-conservative NIMBYs can somehow learn to live with an elevated rail line, I'm sure that the denizens of Scarborough or Etobicoke can too.

But you forgot that those great urban avenues are supposed to be inhabited by progressive, urbanistic liberals trying to enjoy the sunshine in their outdoor cafes in between visiting posh galleries and shopping at chic boutiques, and would frown at anything cutting through their vista other than the narrow powerlines of the road-median LRTs.

 

[LAz]

I find the idea of elevated metro sections in Toronto as something interesting. In chicago most of the metro system is elevated. The problem is that the powers at be do not want to have a metro on eglinton, but a tram line. I just can't see it happening if it is a tram.

 

[kettal]

Are Chicago's elevated lines really considered attractive by the locals? I admit I've never been to Chicago, but I've been told that the surrounding areas are overwhelmingly slums.

 

[ssiguy2]

I was surprised that Monorail was not mentioned. Everyone in Toronto {including 90% of the people on this site} is always bitching about the SRT so I can't imagine Torontonians would take to having it expanded. Everyone in Vancouver seems to love the elevated SkyTrain but the beams are very large no two ways around that. Monorail beams are smaller, trains quieter, and is considerable cheaper than SkyTrain. SkyTrain is a proven technology but an expensive one.
The problem with SkyTrain is that it is a dying technology. For all of Bombardiers strong efforts to sell the system all over the world it just hasn't worked. After 30 years Vancouver is still the only city that uses it as the backbone of its rapid transit system. Monorail is the exact opposite with a flurry of new lines being builtall over but particularily in Asia and the Middle East. Sao Paulo is set to put out it's tenure on it's new 100km Monorail system. India has 24 cities that are looking for funding for their wanted Monorails. Tehran has stated it wants also to build a 100km Monorail system.

 

[gweed123]

I'm actually not opposed to the idea of the SRT, I'm just opposed to the short-sightedness in the design. If the curves have been designed to subway specs, we wouldn't have the problem with incompatibility with current Bombardier models. If I had my choice, and the B-D extension to STC wasn't possible, I would like to see the SRT upgraded to Montreal-style Light Metro.

I've ridden it before, and I have to say that the use of rubber tires instead of steel rails makes more a much less screechy ride. The capacity is only moderately less than TTC-style subway, but because the cars are narrower, it means smaller tunnels. I think that would be a perfect solution for Eglinton. Still subway, but a smaller form of subway. Let's face it, Montreal's metro is basically ICTS running at a high frequency and with bigger stations.

 

[LAz]

Are Chicago's elevated lines really considered attractive by the locals? I admit I've never been to Chicago, but I've been told that the surrounding areas are overwhelmingly slums.

It really depends on where you go. The system was first built in the late 1800s and went to quite a few places. Ghettos/Slums developed later, especially on the west side and south side. The reason has nothing to do with the transit, but with racial policies of quarentining the blacks, and redlining. Other things too. Chicago has turned into - as the cities of tomorrow final chapter states, "a city of the permanent underclass". Same for London and St Louis. It's going to be quite difficult to remedy this. They have been trying - by displacing the poor. Unfortunately this has the effect of just moving the ghetto elsewhere. But, I suppose it works... I was at the Cabrini Green highrise ghetto complex recently. It was almost totally gone. Last year I was there and they had these three big highrises left... last week they had two, the rubble of one remains. It's only a matter of time until they flush out the rest. On the south side they have already demolished loads of public housing and are preparing massive renewal projects. Losing the olympic bid was a blow to them, but it's gonna continue nonetheless, and the elevated metro is key, for it provides transit to the downtown. It's absolutely key.


There are some lines that go partially at ground level. The northern part of the brown line does this... but it feels as if it goes through alleys, as well as the pink line. They do not go along any major streets. But, that's because they were built like that when there was like nothing there, about 100 years ago. The only modern lines that were built at ground level are the lines that go along the highways. That was a popular thing for some reason.
But, there are many lines that are not bad at all. Some stops line Fullerton, and Armitage go through really trendy parts of town. The northern half of the redline and much of the brownline go through some really upscale neighborhoods. Like, Lincoln Park, the richest part of the city. You can go there and see homes that sell for many millions... the most is like 20 million I think.