|
|
|
Transit City: Sheppard East Debate
- Thread starter unimaginative2
- Start date
DavidH
Senior Member
From dictionary.com:
1. Also called, especially British, tube, underground. an underground electric railroad, usually in a large city.
How, then, is the central portion of Eglinton *not* a subway?
rbt
Senior Member
True, you win some and you lose some. The work on Church was/is actually significantly ahead of schedule and the build out on Fleet was way behind.
We can probably expect some parts of Transit City to be ahead of schedule and under budget and other parts to be behind schedule and over budget. Even Spadina subway has had a few tenders come in well below estimates (tunnel liner purchase off the top of my head); though stations are obviously well above expected.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
If one looks at the support walls of the Queen Street West railway underpass between Dufferin and Gladstone, one will see (carved in stone no less) "SUBWAY". It used to be the term used for underpasses in Toronto.
So by the above 1897 definition, they are building a subway already on Sheppard Avenue East, under the railroad tracks at the Agincourt Go Station and the Stouffville GO line.
Last edited:
kettal
Banned
semantics r fun
DavidH
Senior Member
I have always felt that an argument over semantics is one of the more important arguments one can have, since we cannot communicate if we cannot define our terminology. Stating that central Eglinton will not be a subway prevents clear communication on the points that actually do matter, such as its expected operational performance.
Looks like the SOS group has achieved its goal, then.
Rainforest
Senior Member
Operational performance of central Eglinton will not be exactly same as of other lines known as "subways" in Toronto.
Rather, central Eglinton and SLRT will be "light metro": high speed, intermediate capacity (much higher than that of regular surface routes, yet lower than that that of "subway" lines).
The rest of TC lines will be "streetcars in a ROW".
Second_in_pie
Senior Member
After seeing the plans for Eglinton west, I'd actually be happy to call that distinct from the rest of TC. If all the TC lines were like that, I'd be happy to call them LRT and being distinct from glorified streetcar.
The problem is that Eglinton west is one of the corridors in the city that will need the higher capacity and as high a speed as possible. Considering that it's got the Richview Corridor to build RT on with low cost, this shouldn't be as big an argument as people are making it.
kettal
Banned
[citation needed]
Rainforest
Senior Member
^ It is hard to predict the demand on Eglinton route, since it is not known how many people will switch to Eglinton. Will the passengers of buses going from the north switch to Eglinton LRT, or continue all the way to Bloor subway?
Metrolinx's projection predicts < 10,000 pphpd on Eglinton and this is within the LRT capacity; however, do they model the human behavior well? I don't think they analyzed the demand as a function of the LRT speed.
However odd that might sound, good speed of Eglinton LRT might precipitate capacity issues - if too many people switch to Eglinton. The current top demand on Bloor subway is 24,000 pphpd; if 1/2 of them switch to Eglinton and in addition some ridership growth occurs, the demand can exceed the capacity limit. (Let's assume 3-car trains == 500 ppl per train, 2 min headways == 30 trains per hour; then 15,000 pphpd is the capacity limit.)
Metrolinx's projection predicts < 10,000 pphpd on Eglinton and this is within the LRT capacity; however, do they model the human behavior well? I don't think they analyzed the demand as a function of the LRT speed.
However odd that might sound, good speed of Eglinton LRT might precipitate capacity issues - if too many people switch to Eglinton. The current top demand on Bloor subway is 24,000 pphpd; if 1/2 of them switch to Eglinton and in addition some ridership growth occurs, the demand can exceed the capacity limit. (Let's assume 3-car trains == 500 ppl per train, 2 min headways == 30 trains per hour; then 15,000 pphpd is the capacity limit.)
kettal
Banned
So Bloor ridership is going to fall in half, down to 12,000, and Eglinton West is going to surpass 15,000? Are you serious?
Clearly, if that happens, the answer is to build an LRT on Lawrence Avenue, which will cause Eglinton to go down to 6,000, and the sound of crickets chirping will fill the Bloor subway.
Fresh Start
Banned
Great point, Rainforest. Eglinton built to its full potential could easily trump Bloor-Danforth in terms of utility. It only now needs a complimentary DRL interlining to provide direct service from Scarborough to the downtown core to the airport.
The Eglinton LRT Line though would be near perfect had they just have the forethought to grade-separate the line at major cross-intersections for the at-grade portion. It's cost neutral to do so given the reduced number of stops such implementation could entail. So 5-car trainsets with station boxes juxtaposed between the proposed stop locations throughout Richview would benefit the local communities and long-haulers at the same time.
I also wish that the section west of Martin Grove would be reassessed. Originally they came up with the idea to have ECLRT split into two separate spurs at this point for a more direct route into Pearson. That's probably the best option and could bring rapid transit into the high-demand Dixon/27 and Dixon/Carlingview areas en route.
The Eglinton LRT Line though would be near perfect had they just have the forethought to grade-separate the line at major cross-intersections for the at-grade portion. It's cost neutral to do so given the reduced number of stops such implementation could entail. So 5-car trainsets with station boxes juxtaposed between the proposed stop locations throughout Richview would benefit the local communities and long-haulers at the same time.
I also wish that the section west of Martin Grove would be reassessed. Originally they came up with the idea to have ECLRT split into two separate spurs at this point for a more direct route into Pearson. That's probably the best option and could bring rapid transit into the high-demand Dixon/27 and Dixon/Carlingview areas en route.
GenerationW
Senior Member
Again, by the simple fact that the TTC is not calling the Eglinton Crosstown route a subway (not even the underground portion), but rather Light Rail Transit.
Similarly, they don't call the underground portion of the 509/510 south of Union a subway.
MisterF
Senior Member
I doubt that. Both are crosstown lines but Bloor goes downtown, the biggest trip generator in the GTA by far, while Eglinton doesn't. Case closed.
DavidH
Senior Member
Agreed completely. And I have no problem with the use of "subway", with the quotation marks, as "subway" is currently used in Toronto.
But to argue as others have that those lines aren't subway in the worldwide sense of the term is silly. Just because we have locally associated the word with a specific technology does not mean that the word subway no longer means "underground electric rail line".