TheTigerMaster
Superstar
Richview Corridor may actually be cheaper than a road medium.
|
|
|
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
One big reason is that there'd need to be a forced transfer at the terminals of the underground section (likely at Weston and Don Mills, where ridership would drop off). We're not building a subway that only 5,000 persons will use per hour. That's how you get a Sheppard. Do we want to pull a Sheppard? I don't think we want to pull a Sheppard.
sixrings
Senior Member
not if the land is already sold off
howl
Active Member
I say build it in the median and then sell the Richview corridor lands to developers for mid-rise mixed-use development.
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
They already started selling the corridor.
The idiot who signed that off needs to be fired.
The idiot who signed that off needs to be fired.
mrxbombastic
Active Member
Rich view corridor is tricky at best as its not even width on all sides throughout and there are midblock access points to properties there.
In median lrt just means road widening and shortening of mid block access ways
In median lrt just means road widening and shortening of mid block access ways
denfromoakvillemilton
Senior Member
Member Bio
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2008
- Messages
- 7,451
- Reaction score
- 1,514
- Location
- Downtown Toronto, Ontario
One big reason is that there'd need to be a forced transfer at the terminals of the underground section (likely at Weston and Don Mills, where ridership would drop off). We're not building a subway that only 5,000 persons will use per hour. That's how you get a Sheppard. Do we want to pull a Sheppard? I don't think we want to pull a Sheppard.
No way. And the airport would make sure that it would be more then 5k ppd. Every forgets at Renforth the largest airport in the country is right there, not to mentions all the people that work there. Eglinton underground, Terminal 3 to Kennedy would have fine ridership. Sheppard does not have the density and plus it was botched.
MrsNesbitt
Active Member
If political winds change in favour of Eglinton West and especially in the Richview corridor I'm sure that it wouldn't be too much trouble to expropriate what properties have been built there, assuming we don't have skyscraping condos along Eglinton there. A few bulldozed townhouses would be small change compared to the ludicrously easy and effective grade separation the corridor would provide.
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
Fair enough. I think it needs to be studied. I'm not expecting huge ridership. 7,000 people would be my high estimate.
Anyways Eglinton not being a heavy rail rapid transit route (what some call "subway") isn't a big deal for connecting to the airport. If we wanted to have Eglinton West built on a fully protected at-grade corridor it could be done cheaply.
-Short tunnel to Jane
-At grade through the park on the north side of Eglinton
-The LRT would dip under the westbound lanes of Eglinton for a ROW in the centre of the street. The ROW would continue to Royal York where it would again dip under the westbound lanes to connect to the Richview Corridor on the north side of Eglinton. There could be an underground station at Scarlett and Royal York. The LRT would not have to interact with traffic through this section.
-At grade through Richview Corridor from Royal York to Renforth.
-North from Eglinton @ Renforth to the airport.
ehlow
Senior Member
At least there'll be more demand for transit when the corridor is developed
As long as they keep enough space to widen the road for LRT lanes it's good enough for me.
ehlow
Senior Member
If you're doing it trenched in the corridor, or elevated, it adds to the costs of the station since you would likely need elevators to make the stations accessible, rather than a simple surface stop with no elevators/escalators and no staff.
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
At least there'll be more demand for transit when the corridor is developed
As long as they keep enough space to widen the road for LRT lanes it's good enough for me.
I agree. I may even prefer for there to be some medium density transit oriented development on the corridor. It's better community building IMO. I'm just pissed that someone would sell off the corridor when there's a rapid transit line not even a few thousand meters a way that will certainly be extended west along Eglinton.
diminutive
Active Member
This is a very high estimate. The original EA predicted peak demands <2k people west of Jane. The airport in particular is a very weak draw, with peak demand apparently at about 500 passengers during peak hours. (see exhibit 5.1)
Airports are not very good transit destinations. People (here and elsewhere) routinely overestimate their importance as destinations since they seem so emblematic of "travel" and are, by and large, PITAs to get to. The bulk of transit commutes are normal people using transit to get to normal jobs.
Also, I'm not sure a ECLRT would be particularly desirable to YYZ. It wouldn't be much faster than taking the 192 and bloor-danforth.
WislaHD
Superstar
One big reason is that there'd need to be a forced transfer at the terminals of the underground section (likely at Weston and Don Mills, where ridership would drop off). We're not building a subway that only 5,000 persons will use per hour. That's how you get a Sheppard. Do we want to pull a Sheppard? I don't think we want to pull a Sheppard.
I predict that the ridership levels for Eglinton are low-balling the potential ridership.
Further, this isn't Sheppard. Sheppard has low ridership because it is a stub, it doesn't go anywhere and it doesn't even connect the Yonge line with the Spadina line. Eglinton, especially with the Eglinton West portion, has many destinations, connects to several lines and major employment areas and would be so long that it'll connect with many connecting bus routes.
Nobody thinks the airport itself will be a major destination on its own, though just having it accessible by our subway system is good enough.
People say the airport and surrounding areas would be a major destination because the airport is surrounded by businesses and offices and factories all around it, not to mention the airport itself. It would generate ridership from people looking for an alternative to reach their workplace. The airport&surrounding region is a major employment area.
Edward
Senior Member
A continuous line across the city into the airport would generate additional traffic. From NYCC I would go to Eglinton and across if the line existed.