Paleo
Active Member
Take it easy on the guy, he doesn't even live on this side of this country.
|
|
|
Take it easy on the guy, he doesn't even live on this side of this country.
Markster
Senior Member
Capacity on Eglinton will be added by:
1) Automatic Train Control
2) "Rocket" style continuous articulated vehicles
3) Digging out larger station boxes
4) Parallel lines (Sheppard, Finch, and given time Lawrence and others) to take away traffic that doesn't originate on Eglinton
5) Perpendicular lines (Don Mills, Jane, Bayview, Avenue, etc...) to take away traffic that doesn't terminate on Eglinton
Paleo
Active Member
Page 9 here shows a "typical platform plan".
You can see a 2-car 60m platform with an additional 30m reserved area for expansion to 3-car trains. The jury is still out on whether platform space can be expanded into the areas marked as services or not. It will become clearer once detailed designs come out.
You can see a 2-car 60m platform with an additional 30m reserved area for expansion to 3-car trains. The jury is still out on whether platform space can be expanded into the areas marked as services or not. It will become clearer once detailed designs come out.
Rainforest
Senior Member
If needed in future, some capacity (perhaps 10% to 20%) can be added to this line by changing the rolling stock, without rebuilding the tracks or stations. Currently, the Metrolinx order is for dual-cab cars, that will be connected into 3-car trains. Thus, each trains will have 6 cabs, of which only 2 outermost will be used during the normal operation.
But in future, when this rolling stock approaches retirement (or even earlier if it can be transferred to other lines), it is possible to build custom trains for this line, made of 3 permanently connected cars (similar to the T1 subway trains). Such trains will be same length (90 m) and still use overhead power, but they will have higher capacity due to the removal of unused cabs.
But in future, when this rolling stock approaches retirement (or even earlier if it can be transferred to other lines), it is possible to build custom trains for this line, made of 3 permanently connected cars (similar to the T1 subway trains). Such trains will be same length (90 m) and still use overhead power, but they will have higher capacity due to the removal of unused cabs.
ssiguy2
Senior Member
My point is that if the stations are going 60 or 60 or 80 meters or whatever why would they build the most expensivee system, with the lowest capacity, and with vehicles that have the shortest life expectancy.
Also, why would they use another technology which will need all new maintenance infrastrucyure unlike if they used subway or SkyTrain?
There is no logic to LRT. If the line was at one point to run at grade or using rail ROW with a level crossing then LRT is the only option but according to Metrolinx that will not be the case as they want to automate the line.
Also, why would they use another technology which will need all new maintenance infrastrucyure unlike if they used subway or SkyTrain?
There is no logic to LRT. If the line was at one point to run at grade or using rail ROW with a level crossing then LRT is the only option but according to Metrolinx that will not be the case as they want to automate the line.
valvenis
New Member
It seems pretty straight forward to me.
1)The line was designed for use both above and underground.
2)The plan got foolishly changed by the Mayor.
3)Metrolinx is probably waiting for the next mayor of Toronto (assuming it's not Ford again) to go back to the initial plan of building the parts of Eglinton that don't need to be underground above ground.
4)It's technically not the most expensive system with the lowest capacity they could use. That would be a genuine, Bona fide, Electrified, Six-car underground Monorail!
1)The line was designed for use both above and underground.
2)The plan got foolishly changed by the Mayor.
3)Metrolinx is probably waiting for the next mayor of Toronto (assuming it's not Ford again) to go back to the initial plan of building the parts of Eglinton that don't need to be underground above ground.
4)It's technically not the most expensive system with the lowest capacity they could use. That would be a genuine, Bona fide, Electrified, Six-car underground Monorail!
Palma
Senior Member
I really wish this build sheppard nonsense would stop.
As ssiguy2 states "the whole advantage of LRT over other mass transit is that it can work along existing roadways and rail ROW where it does not need to be completely grade separated. This line is going to be completely grade separated so the advantage of LRT is completely gone. Toronto is building a system with lower capacity at a higher price with trains with shorter life expectancy than the other 3 major systems"
So to me this would mean it does matter if capacity is not there right now and that LRT is the more expensive chose and with the disadvantages that has been pointed out.
klb86
Active Member
I saw them drilling with the auger at Eglinton and Birchmount today while I was driving by.
jje1000
Senior Member
Well, it didn't need to be this way if a certain mayor had not cancelled a certain plan. Anyhow, the current situation is certainly worse than the original, and redesigning it as a subway line would push it back by a considerable amount of time.
Markster
Senior Member
The best feature of the current plan is that it gets the LRT foot in the door.
Once the LRT facilities are in place, doing in-median expansion on other routes like Jane, Finch, and Don Mills will be a much easier sell, as the large fixed cost of the maintenance facility will be done.
Also, whomever believes that SkyTrain would require any less investment in maintenance facilities does not seem to realize that the McCowan yard is horrifically out of date, and would need to be completely rebuilt if it were to ever maintain new SkyTrain vehicles.
Once the LRT facilities are in place, doing in-median expansion on other routes like Jane, Finch, and Don Mills will be a much easier sell, as the large fixed cost of the maintenance facility will be done.
Also, whomever believes that SkyTrain would require any less investment in maintenance facilities does not seem to realize that the McCowan yard is horrifically out of date, and would need to be completely rebuilt if it were to ever maintain new SkyTrain vehicles.
At this point, I hope that they stick with LRT, but that they rethink the western and eastern legs of the line. From what I understand, Metrolinx was never keen on at-grade in the east and west, but they weren't keen on the tunnelled east leg either.
I hope Metrolinx uses this opportunity to push for what they really wanted in the first place. I hope it is less costly grade-separation.
Dan416
Senior Member
I think LRT if done right would be great for Toronto.
Neither the original Eglinton plan nor the current Eglinton plan are LRT done right.
The original plan was okay, but it suffered from lack of grade separation outside the tunnel.
The current plan is okay, but it suffers by trying to be a subway but using overly expensive LRT hardware.
That said, the LRT planned for Sheppard East was even worse.
I'm all for LRT. I'm not all for simply more streetcars in the city, which take forever to get anywhere.
And for those of you who say public transit doesn't need to be fast, well, I have nothing to say to you as I drive in my car.
Neither the original Eglinton plan nor the current Eglinton plan are LRT done right.
The original plan was okay, but it suffered from lack of grade separation outside the tunnel.
The current plan is okay, but it suffers by trying to be a subway but using overly expensive LRT hardware.
That said, the LRT planned for Sheppard East was even worse.
I'm all for LRT. I'm not all for simply more streetcars in the city, which take forever to get anywhere.
And for those of you who say public transit doesn't need to be fast, well, I have nothing to say to you as I drive in my car.
superman
Active Member
elevated rail! like the sky train. someone needs to consider this. i know metrolinx floated it for a while. it costs somewhere on the lower end between an at-grade tram system and a subway - but gives truly rapid transit.
44 North
Senior Member
Elevated LRT through the eastern and western legs of Eglinton looks like something the people can agree on. I really don't see spending billions tunneling through sections like the Golden Mile as a wise investment.
IMO, Eglinton needs to be a completely grade-separated line. Though I can't say the same about other TC routes, namely Sheppard. Street-grade is fast enough for fringe areas.
IMO, Eglinton needs to be a completely grade-separated line. Though I can't say the same about other TC routes, namely Sheppard. Street-grade is fast enough for fringe areas.
11th
Senior Member
Sheppard west of McCowan is hardly fringe. It's comparable to (if not denser than) Eglinton east of Leaside. So both sections could use a completely grade-seperated transit option.
Looking at the population density of the ridings, Scarborough Southwest (3297/km2) and Scarborough Centre (3724/km2) - both have Englinton East running through part of it, actually have lower density than Scarborough-Agincourt (4474/km2).
Last edited: