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

[TheTigerMaster]

City Council -by a margin of 28 in favor to 14 opposed- rejected to follow through with the planning department's recommendation of sticking the Crosstown West LRT on the centre lanes of Eglinton. They will now look to studying alternatives along the stretch.

On a related note, they also rejected Michael (subway, subway, subway) Ford's fantasy of tunneling the whole Crosstown West line.

https://www.thestar.com/news/city_h...uthorizes-look-at-tunneling-eglinton-lrt.html

Are they looking at 100% grade separation, or merely targeted separation at intersections?

^I havent found details out the details on how exactly they will be proceeding, but from what I caught I believe they will be primarily looking at tunneling options with grade separation at intersections.

I'm really nervous about suggestions of "tunnelling". That wording would seem to indicate 100% grade separation, like the central portion of the Crosstown, which is totally unnecessary for the western part of this corridor, and will get really expensive, really fast.

 

[Rainforest]

City Council -by a margin of 28 in favor to 14 opposed- rejected to follow through with the planning department's recommendation of sticking the Crosstown West LRT on the centre lanes of Eglinton. They will now look to studying alternatives along the stretch.

On a related note, they also rejected Michael (subway, subway, subway) Ford's fantasy of tunneling the whole Crosstown West line.

https://www.thestar.com/news/city_h...uthorizes-look-at-tunneling-eglinton-lrt.html

Cool! A rare occasion of the Council going in the right direction.

Of course, there is a risk that they will go too far and opt for full tunneling, which would be unnecessary and unreasonable for this corridor, especially taking into account the LRT technology chosen for its versatility but not optimal for a fully tunneled line.

Let's hope that they end up doing the right thing, and settle for grade-separating all or some of the major intersections, while keeping the rest of this line at grade.

 

[crs1026]

Just to get the details straight - The original recommendation before Council, as approved at Executive Committee, was (bold and italics added)

4. City Council direct staff to continue planning the Eglinton West LRT transit extension concept for the Toronto Segment between Mount Dennis Station and Renforth Station, including:
a. Ten stops as described in Attachment 2 to the report (November 17, 2017) from the City Manager and the Deputy City Manager, Cluster B; and
b. Direct staff to form a working group of community stakeholders in consultation with local councillors, to investigate further grade separation and or tunnelling options to further develop traffic modelling and an enhanced framework that places additional consideration on local community interest.

Today there were actually three motions, by Councillors Ford Carroll and Cressy, which attempted to modify recommendation b.

Ford attempted to have the line designed as an all below grade design, except for the Humber flood plain; Carroll attempted to have the recommendation deleted outright; Cressy attempted to have the motion revised to explicity direct no further consideration of grade separations at intersections. None of these motions passed.

So, the original recommendation carried today without amendment. I guess that means discussions with the community will continue. I hope that leads to whatever traffic analysis has been done since the EA getting public disclosure. This issue is all about left turns and related delays to LRT vehicles - the very thing that Council just addressed for King Street.

- Paul

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Just to get the details straight - The original recommendation before Council, as approved at Executive Committee, was (bold and italics added)



Today there were actually three motions, by Councillors Ford Carroll and Cressy, which attempted to modify recommendation b.

Ford attempted to have the line designed as an all below grade design, except for the Humber flood plain; Carroll attempted to have the recommendation deleted outright; Cressy attempted to have the motion revised to explicity direct no further consideration of grade separations at intersections. None of these motions passed.

So, the original recommendation carried today without amendment. I guess that means discussions with the community will continue. I hope that leads to whatever traffic analysis has been done since the EA getting public disclosure.

- Paul

Okay, I have nothing wrong with the wording of this motion. This is good.

Ultimately, I suspect the result of this will just be the delaying of the project by another year or two, with the political benefit of allowing councillors to campaign on it. Hopefully it actually results in a better solution.

 

[crs1026]

Ultimately, I suspect the result of this will just be the delaying of the project by another year or two, with the political benefit of allowing councillors to campaign on it. Hopefully it actually results in a better solution.

Hopefully not a year or two. The timeline proposed in the Council documents was to commence the TPAP in Q1 and then

In Q2 2018, staff will report back with a full LRT alignment and concept to be advanced to TPAP addendum which includes both the Toronto Segment and the Airport Segment. The report will include:

• Airport Segment alignment and stop locations;

• Refined at-grade LRT with 10 stops for the Toronto Segment (as recommended in this report);

• Business case update that includes more detailed information on the Airport
  
  Segment of the project; and
  
  
• Measures and associated costs to mitigate local traffic impacts, including findings
  
  from the Martin Grove Road/Eglinton Avenue West Transportation Study.

Hopefully that means that the discussion takes place during the TPAP, which is nominally 6 months. I can live with six months' further debate of all this.

- Paul

 

[MisterF]

RER and LRT and subway serve completely different types of trips, so I’m not sure what the point of this comparison is. It’s like saying we don’t need cars now that we have airplanes.

RER is targeted at long distance trips, while LRT is targeted at short to medium trips. More than half of all trips in Toronto (regardless of mode) are less than 5 km.

With the commuter train model that might have been true, but RER will be just as useful for short trips as light rail or subways. Short trips will likely make up a decent percentage of RER ridership. The Eglinton Crosstown, just by virtue of its name, is being sold as a rapid transit line that gets riders across the whole city. I'd expect to see a lot of overlap in the trip distances of all the different rail transit modes. Referring to LRT as rapid transit is a bit of a stretch when the trains have to wait at the same lights as all the other traffic. LRT can be better (many examples have already been posted), so why settle for less?

Good to know that Council is looking at better options.

 

[EastYorkTTCFan]

With the commuter train model that might have been true, but RER will be just as useful for short trips as light rail or subways. Short trips will likely make up a decent percentage of RER ridership.

I'm not sold on this concept yet I still see it as being something for people outside of Toronto and an extension of the existing go network.

 

[44 North]

Mehhh. I don't really agree with grade-separating a bunch of intersections, specifically because Crosstown East didn't get the same treatment. Why now are we having the discussion about the benefits of affordable grade-separation and dropping midblock stations? Where was Metrolinx to do the same after they signed a deal with the devil behind closed doors for Crosstown East? We should've just built the whole bloody Crosstown as light metro from the start, which obviously would've seamlessly transitioned to Line 3 (and avoided SSE altogether). No LRT, just 100m long subways running on a line from Renforth-Pearson to Malvern.

Yes LRT can be way more dynamic than what's currently proposed with Crosstown West (which is almost all tram-style in-median). But I think many are underestimating the damage to neighbouring areas when trying to prioritize such a line while maintaining the "LRT" aspect. Grade-separating intersections involves dipping and diving. Fine in theory, but with long sections of concrete walls and structures it'd make large stretches of Eglinton impassible to peds. Trying to speed things up by using side-of-road alignment? Again concrete walls and maybe chainlink fencing. Crossing arms for side streets? People don't want that. Although elevated lines are continually viewed as a nonstarter here, I think compared with running walls and fencing down the street that area residents would embrace an elevated solution.

It's clear the support for grade-separating intersections and how it increases speed/reliability. A takeaway is that people genuinely want a subway/light metro on Eglinton. Alas we missed the boat by going forward with tram-style Eglinton East and the dropping of Line 3 interlining. So, may as well just continue with current plans for Eglinton West.

 

[Disparishun]

With the commuter train model that might have been true, but RER will be just as useful for short trips as light rail or subways. Short trips will likely make up a decent percentage of RER ridership.

I'm not sold on this concept yet I still see it as being something for people outside of Toronto and an extension of the existing go network.

I mean, I live south of Christie Pits. I'm totally excited to be able to head west to Lansdowne (via Bloor-Danforth), then transfer northbound to the Eglinton Crosstown (via GO Barrie), or keep ongoing to York University.

Call those short trips or long trips, but I don't at all understand how this is all "something for people outside of Toronto". It's adding pieces to an integrated transit grid we badly need.

 

[Rainforest]

Mehhh. I don't really agree with grade-separating a bunch of intersections, specifically because Crosstown East didn't get the same treatment. Why now are we having the discussion about the benefits of affordable grade-separation and dropping midblock stations? Where was Metrolinx to do the same after they signed a deal with the devil behind closed doors for Crosstown East? We should've just built the whole bloody Crosstown as light metro from the start, which obviously would've seamlessly transitioned to Line 3 (and avoided SSE altogether). No LRT, just 100m long subways running on a line from Renforth-Pearson to Malvern.

Yes LRT can be way more dynamic than what's currently proposed with Crosstown West (which is almost all tram-style in-median). But I think many are underestimating the damage to neighbouring areas when trying to prioritize such a line while maintaining the "LRT" aspect. Grade-separating intersections involves dipping and diving. Fine in theory, but with long sections of concrete walls and structures it'd make large stretches of Eglinton impassible to peds. Trying to speed things up by using side-of-road alignment? Again concrete walls and maybe chainlink fencing. Crossing arms for side streets? People don't want that. Although elevated lines are continually viewed as a nonstarter here, I think compared with running walls and fencing down the street that area residents would embrace an elevated solution.

It's clear the support for grade-separating intersections and how it increases speed/reliability. A takeaway is that people genuinely want a subway/light metro on Eglinton. Alas we missed the boat by going forward with tram-style Eglinton East and the dropping of Line 3 interlining. So, may as well just continue with current plans for Eglinton West.

I see some value in building Crosstown West to a higher standard than Crosstown East. The East (Don Mills to Kennedy) is mostly a line with a local function, while the West has an important destination at the far end; the employment cluster south of Pearson. Faster trips will make transit a more appealing choice to reach that cluster.

Not sure how many more trips that could bring, but at least it is worth trying.

Regarding the impact of grade separation on the neighborhood:

a) That part of Eglinton doesn't see lots of pedestrians today, hence not that much to lose.

b) There are examples of really nice transit portals in the world, decorated with bushes and flowers etc. TTC tends to build portals looking like concrete slabs, but that's not the only option.

c) We can choose which intersections to grade-separate. If we want say Kipling and / or Royal York intersections to remain at grade and walkable, that can be done. Mid-block intersections with at-grade stops will remain walkable as well, assuming that there are pedestrians who actually have reasons to walk there.

 

[MisterF]

I'm not sold on this concept yet I still see it as being something for people outside of Toronto and an extension of the existing go network.

Just take a look at how other RER style systems operate. They're very well used for short trips in the city core and are often pretty much indistinguishable from other forms of rapid transit. There's no reason for RER in Toronto to be any different, especially since city council now officially supports fare integration.

Yes LRT can be way more dynamic than what's currently proposed with Crosstown West (which is almost all tram-style in-median). But I think many are underestimating the damage to neighbouring areas when trying to prioritize such a line while maintaining the "LRT" aspect. Grade-separating intersections involves dipping and diving. Fine in theory, but with long sections of concrete walls and structures it'd make large stretches of Eglinton impassible to peds. Trying to speed things up by using side-of-road alignment? Again concrete walls and maybe chainlink fencing. Crossing arms for side streets? People don't want that. Although elevated lines are continually viewed as a nonstarter here, I think compared with running walls and fencing down the street that area residents would embrace an elevated solution.

It's clear the support for grade-separating intersections and how it increases speed/reliability. A takeaway is that people genuinely want a subway/light metro on Eglinton. Alas we missed the boat by going forward with tram-style Eglinton East and the dropping of Line 3 interlining. So, may as well just continue with current plans for Eglinton West.

I don't think there would be any damage to the area. That stretch of Eglinton is already a pedestrian wasteland. The line could be designed to maintain the mixed use trails and side streets that are already there. I don't think we need to give up on Eglinton West just because Eglinton East was done streetcar-style.

Crossing arms for side streets? People don't want that.

But how do you know that? As far as I know the option for that style of line has never been presented to Torontonians. Unless people from the neighbourhood have been to cities like Calgary and ridden their system, I doubt they'd have any idea that such a design exists.

 

[TransitBart]

I hope not.

Why?

 

[Avenue]

Why?

It shouldn't be included in the rapid transit inventory. Creates confusion and inaccurate marketing.

 

[44 North]

I see some value in building Crosstown West to a higher standard than Crosstown East. The East (Don Mills to Kennedy) is mostly a line with a local function, while the West has an important destination at the far end; the employment cluster south of Pearson. Faster trips will make transit a more appealing choice to reach that cluster.

With the East though the important destination was SC, that assuming we went forth with an integrated Line 3+5. And between Kennedy and McCowan the hard work of making a grade-separated section was done >30yrs ago, so in a way the case for maintaining separation between Leslie and Kennedy was just as strong as Mt Dennis to Pearson-Renforth.

b) There are examples of really nice transit portals in the world, decorated with bushes and flowers etc. TTC tends to build portals looking like concrete slabs, but that's not the only option.

Not just portals (surface to underground and vice versa). The transition to elevated (surface or underground to a raised guidway) would probably have a bigger effect on the permeability of the streetscape and its environs. Naturally these can and should be made attractive with landscaping, but still these transition zones would entail maybe 200m of structure and fencing - multiplied by 2 for the opposing end, then multiplied by however many intersection they want to grade-separate. At which point with all the dipping and diving it begs the question whether we should've just had the line as a fully grade-separated 'light' subway from the start.

I don't think there would be any damage to the area. That stretch of Eglinton is already a pedestrian wasteland. The line could be designed to maintain the mixed use trails and side streets that are already there. I don't think we need to give up on Eglinton West just because Eglinton East was done streetcar-style.

True. Tho one thing I'm interested in, and how it relates to the line as a whole, is speed limits. If the City ever decides to lower speed limits on roads like Eglinton, will the Crosstown follow suit? Considering it's part of the traffic system and is only segregated by a small concrete curb I believe it would. With VisionZero I wouldn't be surprised to see a lowering. In effect the entire Crosstown West could see its max speed drop by 20% (60kmh->50kmh).

Even with major intersections grade-separated, these midblock sections would have to follow the speed limits. However if we want to maintain its 60kmh indefinitely, or even increase to 80, it again should have us question whether LRT was the right option. But it's too late for that debate.

But how do you know that? As far as I know the option for that style of line has never been presented to Torontonians. Unless people from the neighbourhood have been to cities like Calgary and ridden their system, I doubt they'd have any idea that such a design exists.

Oh that was just an example carried over from previous pages re: improving or fortifying LRT like other cities. I wouldn't expect crossing arms here, however with us now scrutinizing extremely key aspects of the project so late in the game I think it's possible they'll be brought up.

 

[Avenue]

True. Tho one thing I'm interested in, and how it relates to the line as a whole, is speed limits. If the City ever decides to lower speed limits on roads like Eglinton, will the Crosstown follow suit? Considering it's part of the traffic system and is only segregated by a small concrete curb I believe it would. With VisionZero I wouldn't be surprised to see a lowering. In effect the entire Crosstown West could see its max speed drop by 20% (60kmh->50kmh).

I don't get why Crosstown West speeds would be reduced. It has a fixed route, no turning, no racing with the rest of the traffic. Transit drivers are incredibly careful, well trained, never distracted, etc. It's overall extremely unlikely to hit pedestrians and there's little reducing speeds can mitigate.