Toronto Crosstown LRT | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx | Arcadis

[BurlOak]

I'm glad there is some common sense in the Ford crowd. Karen Stinz: "If the decision is to go with an LRT, it should be at-grade,†she said. “If there’s a decision to put it underground, it should be a subway."

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...-suburban-stretch-of-eglinton/article2311140/

Could it be the Stinz is actually looking at the second part of her statement - that it should be subway. That is what "transit expert" David Gunn, who was hired by Ford, said.

If I had to guess, things are lining up so that the Province will cut funding to Eglinton. The left will be happy that transit funding is cut, because it means Ford did not get his way with an underground line. Meanwhile, Toronto will be without any transit improvements.

 

[Tulse]

Could it be the Stinz is actually looking at the second part of her statement - that it should be subway.

Stinz of all people knows that the money is not there to build a subway. She also knows that a subway would be even more expensive and likely take longer to build than a buried LRT. I took her comments about a subway to be more a way to temper her real opinion, which is that Eglinton should be built like Transit City envisioned.

If I had to guess, things are lining up so that the Province will cut funding to Eglinton. The left will be happy that transit funding is cut, because it means Ford did not get his way with an underground line.

That's absurd -- I would count myself among "the left", and would be delighted if we could have a fully underground Eglinton LRT. I also want a pony. But both of those things are impractical and too expensive. I very much doubt that there are very many on "the left" who hate Ford more than they like transit.

 

[sixrings]

Stinz of all people knows that the money is not there to build a subway. She also knows that a subway would be even more expensive and likely take longer to build than a buried LRT. I took her comments about a subway to be more a way to temper her real opinion, which is that Eglinton should be built like Transit City envisioned.



That's absurd -- I would count myself among "the left", and would be delighted if we could have a fully underground Eglinton LRT. I also want a pony. But both of those things are impractical and too expensive. I very much doubt that there are very many on "the left" who hate Ford more than they like transit.

agreed - as much as the left dislikes fords ideas on transit we wouldnt rather have nothing. thats bizarre. infact i would say alot of the left is against rob fords ideas on transit simply because we think its about as likely as the raptors winning the nba championship this year. why waste time on a highly unlikely plan. there is no way id prefer nothing over something. thats never a good idea.

i just want to see something built.

 

[nfitz]

She also knows that a subway would be even more expensive and likely take longer to build than a buried LRT.

Well, it could certainly delay things. Not so much the 2020 opening date, but certainly the plan to start tunnelling west from Black Creek later this year (which then makes the entire project cancellable if the province was to pull the funding - for example if the Conservatives got back in power).

But ignoring the contracts that have already been issued - I don't see that it's going to be much difference on cost for underground LRT vs traditional subway. The tunnels will have a narrow diameter for subway, so there will be a significant saving on that. And the trains will be cheaper for subway. Stations will be more expensive, unless they go for 4-car stations without the ability to expand to 6.

Should all come out fairly similar in the end.

 

[sixrings]

cancelled eglinton in either form would make me cry.

 

[k10ery]

Well, it could certainly delay things. Not so much the 2020 opening date, but certainly the plan to start tunnelling west from Black Creek later this year (which then makes the entire project cancellable if the province was to pull the funding - for example if the Conservatives got back in power).

But ignoring the contracts that have already been issued - I don't see that it's going to be much difference on cost for underground LRT vs traditional subway. The tunnels will have a narrow diameter for subway, so there will be a significant saving on that. And the trains will be cheaper for subway. Stations will be more expensive, unless they go for 4-car stations without the ability to expand to 6.

Should all come out fairly similar in the end.

We'll know in about 6 weeks if provincial funding is to be cut or not -- McGuinty will get out all the bad news he can in the first budget. I don't think it will be cut but maybe that is qwishful thinking.

But clearly a switch to HRT is not on the cards. Not only is it too expensive, but it destroys Metrolinx's raison d'etre on the project which is interlining with the SRT.

 

[M II A II R II K]

What about the cost of having it off the road at the side and be at grade in some suburban stretches, would that make it much cheaper...

 

[Electrify]

Couple of quotes I just need to comment on:

Any rethink on the line, however, would lead to further delays. Metrolinx, the provincial agency building the LRT, has little desire to change course. Renegotiating the plan between the city and province would take time and some already completed design work would have to be redone... “We believe the public wants to see outcomes and results,” said Metrolinx spokeswoman Vanessa Thomas, “not more planning and debate.”

As frustrating as it may be, there is some truth to this. Really, getting a full metro under Eglinton while Sheppard and Finch (areas which voted for Ford) get jack is hardly a bad compromise. The very least, the province can save face by reminding us that going ahead as an LRT would allow extensions to be cheaper than to go full subway.

With that said, any estimates on how much in extra costs and delays it would be to go surface on Eglinton East at this point?

Critics of surface light rail argue such systems can’t achieve the same speeds as a subway, but this is not necessarily true. On Martin Luther King Jr. Way South in suburban Seattle – an arterial road similar to Eglinton Ave. East – light-rail trains zip along just as quickly as Toronto’s Yonge-University-Spadina line. The reason? Stations are spaced far apart and traffic lights are controlled to ensure trains don’t have to stop at cross streets.

This, this, and THIS!

It doesn't matter if it is light or heavy rail, execution is all that is important! Heavy rail can be as slow as buses if it is executed poorly (diesel power, over-zealous signalling, close stations, etc.) while light rail can be lightning quick if implemented properly. I was critical on Transit City not because it was light rail per se, but because as-was it was set to be the worst implementation of this kind of transit on a global scale! As wasteful as it is to run LRVs underground in low density environs, it sure as hell is better than to build a suburban 'streetcar-pretending-to-be-LRT' with stops every few hundred meters.

For clarification, I think Eglinton should be built on the surface or as an el on its eastern portion with the same stopping pattern as is planned for its underground section and with full signal/traffic priority. Meanwhile Sheppard should have the same stopping pattern as Eglinton, full traffic priority, and the subway should be renovated to become an LRT tunnel.

 

[sixrings]

is it possible to make lrt in a newly built right lane of the road instead of in the median. technically it would still be a row except when cars need to move into the lane to turn right similar to a car pool lane. if the lrt was on the right side of the road then they could have the stations on the sidewalk instead of on a island which would be less dangerous and save money as well.

 

[Tulse]

is it possible to make lrt in a newly built right lane of the road instead of in the median.

This is the setup to be used for Queens Quay and Cherry Street in the West Donlands development. I'm not sure as to what the advantages and disadvantages are, and why this approach isn't used more widely.

 

[sixrings]

i thought one of the reasons we have our streetcars in the middle lanes is because when hey have to turn they need alot of space. However our tc lines are all straight and dont need to turn so why go in the middle? as a pedestrian id much rather wait on a sidewalk for a lrt then wait in the middle of the road while cars rush by. also it seems this would clearly help drivers turn left.

 

[BMO]

This is the setup to be used for Queens Quay and Cherry Street in the West Donlands development. I'm not sure as to what the advantages and disadvantages are, and why this approach isn't used more widely.

There are also a lot of turning restrictions that are needed to be imposed on drivers when you have streetcars on a side of the street. This can create some difficulties with turning over the streetcar tracks, and in many cases a turning light is required (whereas now, you can turn even if the light is red).

 

[gweed123]

is it possible to make lrt in a newly built right lane of the road instead of in the median. technically it would still be a row except when cars need to move into the lane to turn right similar to a car pool lane. if the lrt was on the right side of the road then they could have the stations on the sidewalk instead of on a island which would be less dangerous and save money as well.

All of Ottawa's on-street BRT is set up this way. Personally it makes a lot more sense to me, because:

a) You can build wider stations on the sidewalk
b) You don't have to cross half an arterial road in order to stand in the middle of the street
c) It's a lot easier when driving too, because all you need to do is create a dedicated right turn lane on the outside of the BRT/LRT lane. The only interaction between cars and buses/LRT vehicles is when a driver wants to cut across the lane. On suburban arterials, the right turn lane is long enough so that even if a vehicle in the bus lane is stopped at a red light, there's still enough room to go behind it and access the right turn lane. Only thing is though that this setup requires far-side stops, which are usually the norm with rapid transit anyway.

For example, here's the new queue jump lane that was put in place at the intersection of Baseline and Clyde in Ottawa:

Notice the dedicated right turn lane, and the bike lane. Much more efficient layout in my opinion. The stop is on the other side of Clyde.

 

[sixrings]

All of Ottawa's on-street BRT is set up this way. Personally it makes a lot more sense to me, because:

a) You can build wider stations on the sidewalk
b) You don't have to cross half an arterial road in order to stand in the middle of the street
c) It's a lot easier when driving too, because all you need to do is create a dedicated right turn lane on the outside of the BRT/LRT lane. The only interaction between cars and buses/LRT vehicles is when a driver wants to cut across the lane. On suburban arterials, the right turn lane is long enough so that even if a vehicle in the bus lane is stopped at a red light, there's still enough room to go behind it and access the right turn lane. Only thing is though that this setup requires far-side stops, which are usually the norm with rapid transit anyway.

For example, here's the new queue jump lane that was put in place at the intersection of Baseline and Clyde in Ottawa:

View attachment 8329

Notice the dedicated right turn lane, and the bike lane. Much more efficient layout in my opinion. The stop is on the other side of Clyde.

why not on the north side from pearson to jane, underground from jane to leslie and then above ground on the right sides of the roads between leslie and kennedy?

 

[js97]

For clarification, I think Eglinton should be built on the surface or as an el on its eastern portion with the same stopping pattern as is planned for its underground section and with full signal/traffic priority. Meanwhile Sheppard should have the same stopping pattern as Eglinton, full traffic priority, and the subway should be renovated to become an LRT tunnel.

I think that's the most sensible thing to do...

As a former TC opposer (and a fair centrist) I think Miller tried to push the agenda too LEFT and it backfired.

The original Shepperd (and Eglinton) TC line had WAY TOO MANY STOPS, the style and stops resembled too much to normal street car stops and hence, suburbians absolutely voted against it. (Stops are way too short on some Streetcar/bus stops)

A TRUE Rapid TRANSIT would have been to ensure stops where distant enough (only major arterials) so optimium speed etc would happen.


Back to my original comment of building the eglinton line OUT from Yonge and Eglinton and deferring the design and construction of the suburbia lines to 2014... when people are more sensible.