Toronto 2200 Eglinton Avenue East | 152.9m | 46s | Dream | BDP Quadrangle

Amare said:
Just looking at all these proposals along the Golden Mile makes me think that the at-grade Crosstown LRT section is going to struggle immensely once all these developments come online. Wow
Click to expand...

Yet, the section of Eglinton West LRT is unlikely to see density anywhere near those levels and will be substantially grade separated.

There is a baffling level of illogic in all this.

The above-ground LRT is fine, at densities about 1/3 below what's proposed (Which might be what we get).

But at the levels proposed will likely exceed the potential capacity of the line; forcing an entirely new project to bury the damned thing, sigh.
 
LRT will be fine here. It’s deceiving because there won’t be any density on the south side of the street (gotta protect those employment zones!) and the Ontario Line means a lot of people will transfer off before hitting the busier sections of the line closer to Yonge.

the overall number of people within walking distance of these stations will probably be surprisingly low considering the built form.
 
innsertnamehere said:
LRT will be fine here. It’s deceiving because there won’t be any density on the south side of the street (gotta protect those employment zones!) and the Ontario Line means a lot of people will transfer off before hitting the busier sections of the line closer to Yonge.

the overall number of people within walking distance of these stations will probably be surprisingly low considering the built form.
Click to expand...

Transportation studies show different.

Also there will be density on the south side as far as the new O'Connor.
 
innsertnamehere said:
LRT will be fine here. It’s deceiving because there won’t be any density on the south side of the street (gotta protect those employment zones!) and the Ontario Line means a lot of people will transfer off before hitting the busier sections of the line closer to Yonge.

the overall number of people within walking distance of these stations will probably be surprisingly low considering the built form.
Click to expand...
As has been previously mentioned, there will be density on the south side of Eglinton. Maybe not to the level of the north side, but the increased density will definitely be there. Also dont forget about "low-rise" apartments which are now being (in a lot of cases )illogically targeted for taller and denser builds.
 
Much like what was done on the west side of CIBC Square, I really wish the city would require developments along this stretch to include provision for the construction of an eventual underground transit line.

I could be wrong, but I think that literally the entire north side of Eglinton from Vic Park to Kennedy is potentially developable. If we did this right we could get the whole tunnel and potentially some station boxes for free, and without the need to shut down the Crosstown for 10 years to upgrade the line
 
Northern Light said:
Transportation studies show different.

Also there will be density on the south side as far as the new O'Connor.
Click to expand...
Can you link those transport studies? Interested in reading them. Just haven't seen any of the studies before.

People are deluded if they think the south side with its employment designation is going to see significant employment growth. This is not an office market area whatsoever and I would be extremely surprised to see major employment intensification occur on the south side at all.

This area will be dense at full build out, but I suspect it will be able to be handled by the LRT. The density is deceiving as it's delivered in high rise towers, but it's mostly only on half the street, has little to no existing background population density, and even the developments themselves aren't actually that high density as they have large tower separation distances, significant park, road, and public realm elements, etc. which bring the overall density levels down.
 
innsertnamehere said:
Can you link those transport studies? Interested in reading them. Just haven't seen any of the studies before.

People are deluded if they think the south side with its employment designation is going to see significant employment growth. This is not an office market area whatsoever and I would be extremely surprised to see major employment intensification occur on the south side at all.

This area will be dense at full build out, but I suspect it will be able to be handled by the LRT. The density is deceiving as it's delivered in high rise towers, but it's mostly only on half the street, has little to no existing background population density, and even the developments themselves aren't actually that high density as they have large tower separation distances, significant park, road, and public realm elements, etc. which bring the overall density levels down.
Click to expand...

See this post, by me, which has a link and excerpts.

Golden Mile Secondary Plan Study

In 20 years, can an area of the City developed so aggressively actually be a nice place to live?
urbantoronto.ca urbantoronto.ca

The key issue is whether the at-grade sections can be ramped up to tighter headways (sub 5 minutes) without ATC (which the surface section lacks) and maintain the reliable spacing required to effectively move passenger load; as well as how the surface section would handle 3-car trains.

****

Additionally, I'd have to go back through each of them, but the various Transportation Impact Studies for several of the developers in the Golden Mile show a red line on portions of the ECLRT indicative of over-capacity in 2041.

If you search one or more of those threads with myself as poster, I probably posted that graphic at least once (but can't be sure)
 
innsertnamehere said:
Can you link those transport studies? Interested in reading them. Just haven't seen any of the studies before.

People are deluded if they think the south side with its employment designation is going to see significant employment growth. This is not an office market area whatsoever and I would be extremely surprised to see major employment intensification occur on the south side at all.

This area will be dense at full build out, but I suspect it will be able to be handled by the LRT. The density is deceiving as it's delivered in high rise towers, but it's mostly only on half the street, has little to no existing background population density, and even the developments themselves aren't actually that high density as they have large tower separation distances, significant park, road, and public realm elements, etc. which bring the overall density levels down.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's all big box/plaza retail that's likely to be redeveloped for high density residential like the north side. But are these retail parcels zoned as employment? That seems very odd if true.

Capture.JPG
 
Northern Light said:
See this post, by me, which has a link and excerpts.

Golden Mile Secondary Plan Study

In 20 years, can an area of the City developed so aggressively actually be a nice place to live?
urbantoronto.ca urbantoronto.ca

The key issue is whether the at-grade sections can be ramped up to tighter headways (sub 5 minutes) without ATC (which the surface section lacks) and maintain the reliable spacing required to effectively move passenger load; as well as how the surface section would handle 3-car trains.

****

Additionally, I'd have to go back through each of them, but the various Transportation Impact Studies for several of the developers in the Golden Mile show a red line on portions of the ECLRT indicative of over-capacity in 2041.

If you search one or more of those threads with myself as poster, I probably posted that graphic at least once (but can't be sure)
Click to expand...
thanks. So assuming 5 min frequencies and 2 car trains it’s slightly over capacity at full buildout, including the presumed large amounts of employment growth.

provided the ECLRT can implement 3 car trains, which it has been designed to do, it should be fine.

Those projections also include all the planned office growth on the south side of Eglinton which is unlikely to happen. It’ll likely be offset by higher than planned residential intensification numbers, but still.
 
innsertnamehere said:
thanks. So assuming 5 min frequencies and 2 car trains it’s slightly over capacity at full buildout, including the presumed large amounts of employment growth.

provided the ECLRT can implement 3 car trains, which it has been designed to do, it should be fine.

Those projections also include all the planned office growth on the south side of Eglinton which is unlikely to happen. It’ll likely be offset by higher than planned residential intensification numbers, but still.
Click to expand...

I'd have to look at the employment projections in detail; but there is one site that probably will show growth, to my understanding Scotiabank will be holding on to a campus at Birchmount, and consolidating more non-downtown functions there.

To the extent that is the case, I really don't have a good sense of scale (ie. a few hundred jobs or a few thousand).....only more than there are now, and that is currently a several thousand employee campus.

*****

There's no question Crosstown can run 3-car trains in the underground section, efficiently.

I would assume (haven't measured) that surface platforms are ~90M long allowing for same.

But I think there is some question about the ability to get service below 5M headways, with reliable consistency on the surface, due to the absence of ATC, and the plethora of traffic lights.

Suffice to say, there isn't (based on current growth projections) abundant extra capacity; and additional vehicles would be required for greater service as well. (for which I will assume the MSF has sufficient capacity).
 
of course we are talking about hitting max capacity upon full build out of the secondary plan area, which is likely 20-30 years from now, so there is definitely lots of extra room to work with for now.

The first buildings along the Golden Mile likely won't be opening until 2025 or 2026, and it will be a long way after that for full buildout.

That gives lots of time for things like buying more trainsets to run 3-car trains.

Running sub-5 minute frequencies will likely be challenging, correct, at least while still being able to deliver strong transit priority and reliable travel times.
 
I also think the studies might be underestimating the level of peak bi-direction travel (reducing the demands in peak direction) that might result in time, especially if fare integration with GO is achieved (Kennedy GO becomes an attractive way to get places), and if the Scarborough LRT is realized (this area attracts students for U of T Scarborough and other destinations east).
 
This site appears to be roughly ~13 acres in total size, so a bunch of Affordable-Housing MINIMUM policy will kick-in at the City. If anyone here knows somebody Senior at DREAM, please have the reach-out to our Volunteers at - info@housingnowto.com for friendly-input on how to meet those mandates. Thx!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top