News   Nov 18, 2024
Tower Crane Installed at 1071 King West While Building Gets Height Bump
 1.5K     1 
News   Nov 18, 2024
City of Toronto Introduces Measures to Protect Renters and Boost Affordable Housing Supply
 733     0 
News   Nov 18, 2024
Canada Lands Company Submits Application Outlining Downsview West District
 1.7K     1 

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

kd86 said:
Not only is the stop to the south side of Eglinton painfully obvious but, but they plan on filling in the Wynford Drive over pass in favour of at-grade intersection, which in my opinion doesn't make any sense. There is an opportunity at this proposed stop to avoid vehicle traffic yet the TTC insist on making the LRT interact with traffic. I hope someone points out these flaws at the meeting.
Click to expand...

This design from an October 2013 public meeting shows the grade separation at Wyndford being retained.

Given that UT'ers never agree on anything, yet we agree that the south side alignment makes the most sense, I'm sure that other members of the public will agree as well, and the designers will see the logic. I suspect that the median alignment is just a leftover from when the entire segment east of the portal would be in the median, and no one really thought about it since.

I can't personally attend the public meeting since I have a class at exactly that time, but I hope someone else will attend and make the suggestion. I'll be sure to fill out some online forms though.

BurlOak said:
For Eglinton, if someone says that they want to built a median LRT along Eglinton and an SRT in a raliway right-of-way to save money - again most would say that is a good idea. If the in-median LRT would actually cost 90% to 95% of the cost of a fully grade-separated transit line - I would say that the in-median LRT is a terrible idea.
Click to expand...

Fortunately, in-median LRT costs far less than 90% of the cost of a grade separated line. Tunnelling costs over 300M per km, while elevated costs around 150M per km. At-grade typically costs around 50M per km, which is roughly 17-33% of the cost of grade separation. (source, admittedly slightly biased) The most cost-effective option for Eglinton is to build in-median, with grade separation at key locations which would be sources of delay (Weston, Black Creek, Central Eglinton, Don Mills, Victoria Park, Kennedy).

WislaHD said:
I am actually kind of for a Leslie station. It might seem useless to many in here, but I think I and other locals would definitely use it to get to Sunnybrook Park when not in the mood/too lazy to bike, or unable to drive there. I don't know if that utility alone is enough to warrant the construction and maintenance of a station there, but those are my thoughts.

Anyway, there is enough space at the Leslie-Eglinton intersection that they literally could do whatever they wanted and still maintain a fully functioning intersection with no interference. I'd even strive to make the pedestrian sidewalk on the southside more walkable and have a fully sized bike lane. (Oh and please, a wider sidewalk on Leslie north of Eglinton at least to the entrance of the park)
Click to expand...

I don't think that the issue with Leslie station is that it would be "useless", rather that the benefit to people using it would be outweighed by the delay to people passing through. I happen to suspect that the number of people benefiting from a shorter walk to the park would be outweighed by the number of people traveling through on the line. Consider that there are trains every few minutes, each carrying hundreds of other people. In addition, we need to consider that adding stops could dissuade some people from taking the Eglinton line (putting more people on the more crowded Bloor-Danforth line instead).

That said, none of us can really judge the utility of the station with much accuracy, since the only demand modeling we have available to us is our intuition.
 
Last edited:
BurlOak said:
For Eglinton, if someone says that they want to built a median LRT along Eglinton and an SRT in a raliway right-of-way to save money - again most would say that is a good idea. If the in-median LRT would actually cost 90% to 95% of the cost of a fully grade-separated transit line - I would say that the in-median LRT is a terrible idea.
Click to expand...

reaperexpress said:
Fortunately, in-median LRT costs far less than 90% of the cost of a grade separated line. Tunnelling costs over 300M per km, while elevated costs around 150M per km. At-grade typically costs around 50M per km, which is roughly 17-33% of the cost of grade separation. (source, admittedly slightly biased) The most cost-effective option for Eglinton is to build in-median, with grade separation at key locations which would be sources of delay (Weston, Black Creek, Central Eglinton, Don Mills, Victoria Park, Kennedy).
Click to expand...

in-median LRT may cost 20 to 30% of underground on a per kilometer basis, but if 12 km are already underground on Eglinton, 2km can easily be put on the south side past Leslie, and Don Mills is already underground and another 11 km are grade-separate in the SRT corridor and extension, then the cost of the two options become a more similar. If I remember my calculations from earlier, it was about $6B for the Transit City plan and an extra $6.3B to $6.4B for the elevated option. There may be a few hundred million more in penalties since we have been going down the wrong path for quite a while now.

As for your grade-separation: First, I would add the DVP ramp terminal to your list of key locations. I also think there comes a time when over 80% or 90% of the line is already grade-separated - it make sense to make the whole thing fully grade-separated.
 
Last edited:
I had a brief glance about Kennedy's Subway Station and drivers loosing their parking lot for months as the Eglinton LRT starts construction in the Scarborough Mirror. Wouldn't it be perfect timing to start tunneling so that the subway can go above ground from the Kennedy Subway Stations Layup Tracks?
 
BurlOak said:
As for your grade-separation: First, I would add the DVP ramp terminal to your list of key locations. I also think there comes a time when over 80% or 90% of the line is already grade-separated - it make sense to make the whole thing fully grade-separated.
Click to expand...

We agree that we need more grade separation than is planned. But I don't think there is necessarily much benefit from going from mostly grade-separated to completely grade-separated. Some intersections could provide absolute or near-absolute transit priority, so it would make no difference to speed if they were grade separated.

I don't think the DVP is a particular threat to transit speed despite its high volume, because it could be an intersection with absolute transit priority. Thanks to its simple two-phase cycle, all it would take is to modify the current design to include median pedestrian refuges (like this).

If the transit vehicle detector is located 237 metres* ahead of the intersection, transit vehicles can be guaranteed a green light given a cruising speed of 60 km/h.

In the current design, the crosswalk is roughly 25 metres wide, so its 21 second countdown would require LRVs to be detected 487 metres away. Absolute priority could not be implemented because there are LRT stops and other signalized intersections within that distance, preventing signals from predicting LRVs' exact arrival time.

*CALCULATION (in case you were wondering):

Using standard City of Toronto values:

Walking speed = 1.2 m/s
LRT ROW width = 7m (estimate by me, couldn't find exact value)
Therefore pedestrian countdown = 6 s

Maximum signal reaction time (time from detection to transit green) = Ped Countdown + Amber + All-Way-Red = 6+3+3 = 12.
But to make the detector distance more reasonable, I assume that there is some kind of advance indication about when a green light will be provided, such as a flashing red transit signal during the AWR which would reduce the effective signal reaction time to 9 s.
At 60 km/h, a vehicle covers 150 m in 9 seconds. So LRT will get flashing red 150 metres after it is detected.

But the driver needs to obtain confirmation from the signal further away from the intersection than the vehicle's minimum stopping distance, otherwise they need to start braking on the chance that the light does not turn green in time. Assuming a deceleration of 1.6 m/s[SUP]2[/SUP] (from ALRV specs), the stopping distance from 60 km/h is 87 m.

Therefore if the vehicle is detected 237 metres in advance of the signal, it can be reasonably expected to not even slow down. The exception is if they are detected less than 6 seconds after the start of the DVP off-ramp phase, since the city requires is a minimum green length of 7 seconds (6 for turn signals). But even then, the signal would turn green at most 7 seconds later than normal, which is before the LRV comes to a complete stop.
 
Last edited:
YAY! this is great.. hopefully its true. I knew some new infrastructure money was coming, this is perfect. we finally get the TTC airport connection..

edit: doesn't look like new money. does seem to prove the advancement of the sheppard LRT timeline though.
 
Last edited:
^^^ Im pretty sure they rationalized their costs and figured why take an extra charge when we are going to need the LRVS anyways in a few years time. Might aswell build the full line out. Better optics for the Libs that they are "making best use of funds and not letting more go to waste" and that they are "investing in regions future"

Personally, a more frequent 32A bus service would serve us very well as the loads, both east and west bound, in the peaks drop off once you get west of Jane. The LRT is definitely needed in the future with new developments along Eglinton out here. Its most useful purpose currently will be the RT link to the airport which imho will cannibalize the UPX ridership given the cost differences.

Better to see them building it now though than leaving its future up in the air. Cant wait to see how Hudak spins this extension as "Liberal Waste"
 
Promagstyle said:
I had a brief glance about Kennedy's Subway Station and drivers loosing their parking lot for months as the Eglinton LRT starts construction in the Scarborough Mirror. Wouldn't it be perfect timing to start tunneling so that the subway can go above ground from the Kennedy Subway Stations Layup Tracks?
Click to expand...

Sorry wrong thread.
 
mrxbombastic said:
^^^ Im pretty sure they rationalized their costs and figured why take an extra charge when we are going to need the LRVS anyways in a few years time. Might aswell build the full line out. Better optics for the Libs that they are "making best use of funds and not letting more go to waste" and that they are "investing in regions future"

Personally, a more frequent 32A bus service would serve us very well as the loads, both east and west bound, in the peaks drop off once you get west of Jane. The LRT is definitely needed in the future with new developments along Eglinton out here. Its most useful purpose currently will be the RT link to the airport which imho will cannibalize the UPX ridership given the cost differences.

Better to see them building it now though than leaving its future up in the air. Cant wait to see how Hudak spins this extension as "Liberal Waste"
Click to expand...


Taking the TTC will still take 45-55 minutes to get there from union. the UPX would only take 25. that is a huge bonus time wise.
 
Johnny Au said:
Agreed.

It is well past the point of no return, politically, which means that no future government can cancel it without spending more money than finishing it.
Click to expand...

Although I think it's possible that the at-grade section becomes a full blown subway, if it's politically convenient.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top