I wonder if the commonly accepted notion that TBM construction produces less disruption is actually correct. To use TBM, there must be a minimum depth below - and this means that every station has to be built deeper than otherwise required. The excavation for the station box is probably 120 to 150m in length. For Eglinton, Stations are about 700 to 1000m apart, meaning that 20% of the length of Eglinton would have to be excavated by cut-and-cover.
If the entire line where built cut-and-cover, there would be a shorter duration disruption since the stations would be built closer to the surface. True, there would be a bit more disruption along the parts inbetween, but again this is a shallower excavation, so the duration of the delays are not as long. Also, I imagine that the excavation at the major intersections are the main cause of inconvenience.
For this line I understand that portions have to go deep to go under the Yonge and Spadina lines, and potentially some other parts are deeper to help smooth out the veritacal profile since subways can not handle as steep grades as are permitted on the surface road. I have nto seen a vertical profile drawing for the entire line to see if some cut-and-cover could have been used to speed construction.