News   Jul 17, 2024
Don Valley Floodway
 59     0 
News   Jul 16, 2024
Minto Submits Modifications to Grand Park Village Plan in Mimico
 701     0 
News   Jul 16, 2024
News Roundup for July 16, 2024
 610     0 

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

There's a chart somewhere showing construction lengths for different big move projects, and the DRL is 11 years, meaning 2025. I got the construction start date based on the Scarborough subway which is essentially at the same point as te DRL currently.
 
denfromoakvillemilton said:
So they let's just give Scarborough what they want: Sheppard to STC. Of course it will change just about nothing, but people can bleat about having two subway that are 5-7 km from their house. If people don't want the LRT(I think it's a great idea) there's not much we can do. I guess if people are prepared to go to STC to get downtown so be it.

As for Eglinton, it should have been HRT but now that ship has saled, how do you feel about an extension to Morningside/Kingston? It could happen with Hudak if it was underground.
Click to expand...

Eglinton extension is a good idea, and I think it still can happen; if not with Hudak, then after Hudak.

Extending Sheppard subway to STC should not be high priority; it is a very large investment, for a relatively low projected ridership, and it will not help areas east of STC. I certainly would not close the already built subway, but extending it is another matter due to large capital requirements.

I can live with a "stubway" and a transfer at Don Mills. It is a nuisance, but if it costs a lot to extend and a lot to convert, it is better to spend the funds in other corridors.

Sheppard LRT is a reasonable option if it connects both to Sheppard subway at Don Mills and BD extension at McCowan. Eventually, we might get Don Mills subway reaching Sheppard, and then the nuisance of Don Mills "linear" transfer will diminish as many riders will transfer to Don Mills subway.

If Hudak and his planners are absolutely against LRT, then they should look at another technology for the Sheppard corridor, that can reach the eastern and western limits of the city; some kind of mini-metro, fully grade separate but somewhat cheaper to build than the standard TTC subways.
 
Rainforest said:
Eglinton extension is a good idea, and I think it still can happen; if not with Hudak, then after Hudak.

Extending Sheppard subway to STC should not be high priority; it is a very large investment, for a relatively low projected ridership, and it will not help areas east of STC. I certainly would not close the already built subway, but extending it is another matter due to large capital requirements.

I can live with a "stubway" and a transfer at Don Mills. It is a nuisance, but if it costs a lot to extend and a lot to convert, it is better to spend the funds in other corridors.

Sheppard LRT is a reasonable option if it connects both to Sheppard subway at Don Mills and BD extension at McCowan. Eventually, we might get Don Mills subway reaching Sheppard, and then the nuisance of Don Mills "linear" transfer will diminish as many riders will transfer to Don Mills subway.

If Hudak and his planners are absolutely against LRT, then they should look at another technology for the Sheppard corridor, that can reach the eastern and western limits of the city; some kind of mini-metro, fully grade separate but somewhat cheaper to build than the standard TTC subways.
Click to expand...

I agree with this 100 percent. But if the voices are loud enough, I think Sheppard will happen, especially if Ford gets back in too. Hudak already called LRT's second class(that's wrong, I digress) and that's been the narrtive since December 2010. And even if we brought sheppard forward, ending it at STC while would eliminate a transfer(sheppard/mccowan would involve a transfer unless they found room for the subway to turn.) would cost more then sheppard/mccowan. But if Hudak finds the money like he says, then we'll see.

For Eglinton(the topic of this thread lol). I honestly wanted it to be HRT. From the Airport to Kennedy, and then light rail to UT Scarborough and then Malvern. Hear me out: People say Eglinton West is not dense enough for a subway, but what about all those travelers and tourist from the airport? What about the transfers at Martin Grove, Kipling, Islington, Royal York? The riders are there for HRT, just because they don't live in the immediate vicinity does not mean the corridor is not good enough. If that's the case then University-Spadina is not the greatest success either. And if this still does not convince you, then the Dixon Road corridor, which is more dense, provides the riders from transfers and in the area. I think Hudak believes this fully and will use this argument when the time comes.

My rebuttal for Eglinton Light Rail is this. It will cost a lot to turn Eglinton over to HRT too much infact, plus the technology was chosen. I feel if extended, it would be easier to extend LRT then subway, no? I feel it would be more likely to go past Kennedy as one line rather then a transfer from Kennedy(Eglinton East will never be dense enough for the subway.)
 
Last edited:
denfromoakvillemilton said:
So we did this to ourselves. Not suprising. How can you want a subway when you don't want any highrises?
Click to expand...

My favorite part is that LRT usually costs 1/3 to 1/4 that of subway, so Eglinton was built as LRT for 90%+ the cost of subways.

Generalizations can't be used for design. Just like the Metrolinx reply from a week or so ago that generally a side of road alignment does not work because of private entrances, so they did not use South side alignment at Leslie.
 
The underground section of the LRT was built with a subway price tag. But it enables us to build extend the rt linr into low ridership areas like Eglinton for fractions of the cost of a subway
 
TheTigerMaster said:
The underground section of the LRT was built with a subway price tag. But it enables us to build extend the rt linr into low ridership areas like Eglinton for fractions of the cost of a subway
Click to expand...

Another interesting point is that prior to the Scarborough subway switch in the summer, the plan was to stop the LRT at Kennedy and have the SMLRT (which goes along the east part of Eglinton) be a completely separate line (i.e. NOT an extenssion).

The SRT was also not an extension.
 
TheTigerMaster said:
Building subways and then hoping commercial demand will come is a bad idea. That's how we ended up with the Sheppard Subway.
Click to expand...

BurlOak said:
My favorite part is that LRT usually costs 1/3 to 1/4 that of subway, so Eglinton was built as LRT for 90%+ the cost of subways.

Generalizations can't be used for design. Just like the Metrolinx reply from a week or so ago that generally a side of road alignment does not work because of private entrances, so they did not use South side alignment at Leslie.
Click to expand...

TheTigerMaster said:
The underground section of the LRT was built with a subway price tag. But it enables us to build extend the rt linr into low ridership areas like Eglinton for fractions of the cost of a subway
Click to expand...

BurlOak said:
Another interesting point is that prior to the Scarborough subway switch in the summer, the plan was to stop the LRT at Kennedy and have the SMLRT (which goes along the east part of Eglinton) be a completely separate line (i.e. NOT an extenssion).

The SRT was also not an extension.
Click to expand...

The underground was more expensive, I think that's why everyone wanted a subway. Even now, I think either LRT or HRT Phase 1 should have been Pearson Kennedy. But the with LRT is like Tiger said, we can extend it up ground much easier and choose any alingment we see fit. I have mentioned a couple times the SMLRT was seperate, can anyone tell me why that was? Was it because Morningside/Kingston to Pearson too long to operate.
 
denfromoakvillemilton said:
For Eglinton(the topic of this thread lol). I honestly wanted it to be HRT. From the Airport to Kennedy, and then light rail to UT Scarborough and then Malvern. Hear me out: People say Eglinton West is not dense enough for a subway, but what about all those travelers and tourist from the airport? What about the transfers at Martin Grove, Kipling, Islington, Royal York? The riders are there for HRT, just because they don't live in the immediate vicinity does not mean the corridor is not good enough. If that's the case then University-Spadina is not the greatest success either. And if this still does not convince you, then the Dixon Road corridor, which is more dense, provides the riders from transfers and in the area. I think Hudak believes this fully and will use this argument when the time comes.

My rebuttal for Eglinton Light Rail is this. It will cost a lot to turn Eglinton over to HRT too much infact, plus the technology was chosen. I feel if extended, it would be easier to extend LRT then subway, no? I feel it would be more likely to go past Kennedy as one line rather then a transfer from Kennedy(Eglinton East will never be dense enough for the subway.)
Click to expand...

This is pretty close to my thoughts about Eglinton. First of all, its demand will strongly depend on other parts of the network. If there is enough reliable east-west and downtown-bound lines other than Eglinton, then demand on Eglinton will not exceed the LRT range. On the other hand, if almost nothing else is built, and a lot of riders transfer to Eglinton first in order to get to Yonge or Spadina subways, then demand on Eglinton can reach the subway range.

Secondly, if subway was selected for Eglinton, the risk that only the central section will get built would be greater. And then there would be much fewer transfers to Eglinton, negating the capacity benefit of a subway.

If HRT was originally selected for Eglinton and a commitment existed to make it a long subway, it would work. But now it is too later to reshuffle all plans. Some investments related to LRT choice are already made (larger tunnel diameters to accommodate pantographs), and if we reject LRT and select something else now, we will have unnecessarily large tunnels without the benefit of being able to run in street-median east and west of the tunneled section.

So, LRT it is, but some fine-tuning is still desirable (first of all, south side of the road in the Leslie area).
 
Rainforest said:
This is pretty close to my thoughts about Eglinton. First of all, its demand will strongly depend on other parts of the network. If there is enough reliable east-west and downtown-bound lines other than Eglinton, then demand on Eglinton will not exceed the LRT range. On the other hand, if almost nothing else is built, and a lot of riders transfer to Eglinton first in order to get to Yonge or Spadina subways, then demand on Eglinton can reach the subway range.

Secondly, if subway was selected for Eglinton, the risk that only the central section will get built would be greater. And then there would be much fewer transfers to Eglinton, negating the capacity benefit of a subway.

If HRT was originally selected for Eglinton and a commitment existed to make it a long subway, it would work. But now it is too later to reshuffle all plans. Some investments related to LRT choice are already made (larger tunnel diameters to accommodate pantographs), and if we reject LRT and select something else now, we will have unnecessarily large tunnels without the benefit of being able to run in street-median east and west of the tunneled section.

So, LRT it is, but some fine-tuning is still desirable (first of all, south side of the road in the Leslie area).
Click to expand...

That's the thing. Even after the Etobicoke Finch LRT and Sheppard, nothing is planned. I don't think Lawrence will ever get out of bus range. I think it will be a mix, demand will be there nut not subway level. Because as we can see suburban stations don't get as much ridership out Islington, Sheppard Yonge, etc. But I think Hudak will attempt to change Eglinton to subway and I don't want that because I'm tired of the delays.
 
denfromoakvillemilton said:
I have mentioned a couple times the SMLRT was seperate, can anyone tell me why that was? Was it because Morningside/Kingston to Pearson too long to operate.
Click to expand...

I think it had to be a separate line otherwise too many people would ride through from Kennedy to Don Mills and it would be overwhelmed - none of the locals would have space.

The only way the Kennedy to Don Mills portion of Eglinton works as in-median is if all (most) passengers coming from SRT, and all (most) passengers coming from Scarborough-Malvern, are transferred to the B-D subway.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top