Monarch Butterfly
Superstar
The private sector would support the DRL more than the Sheppard or even the Eglinton east of Laird.
|
|
|
The private sector would support the DRL more than the Sheppard or even the Eglinton east of Laird.
BurlOak
Senior Member
I do not think that the West stretch was even funded before Ford took over. We would be lucky if we maintain the funding that we have to complete Eglinton from Laird to Kennedy.
With the save Transit City crowd making noise I could see the Province cutting money for the Eglinton LRT and only funding the central portion. The left would be happy since it would stop the Ford plan of grade separation in the East. The Liberals may be able to save money but cutting transit (which they did a couple of years ago as well), and still appeal to the left as the party of public transit.
denfromoakvillemilton
Senior Member
That probably is the best option right now.
Dan416
Senior Member
And orphaning the SRT again? How is that the best option by any stretch of the imagination? I'd rather have at- or above-grade grade separation in the eastern section over tunneling if it got the line built. Hell, even at-grade would be better than that section being cut entirely. But with Ford he won't want it at-grade anyway. So it's either tunneled, nothing or some other grade separated solution. Nothing is the WORST of those three possibilities.
11th
Senior Member
How strong is the NIMBY-ism around the area which a DRL is supposed to run through?
sixrings
Senior Member
How are you in support at grade seperation in the eastern section of Eglinton but you are against a Sheppard Subway conversion to LRT and a extension to STC. If your main goal was to get lines "BUILT" then I cant see why you would be against this option since its cheaper when you factor getting to Downsview and to STC.
Rainforest
Senior Member
^ Sheppard Subway conversion to LRT is expensive ($670 million per Metrolinx estimates). Furthermore, if you want to extend that line as LRT towards Downsview, note that it cannot be all at grade. Sheppard West is too narrow between Yonge and the West Don bridge, so you will need about 1.5 km of tunneling even if it is LRT.
If you add $1.2B for the original SELRT plan, $670 million for conversion, and perhaps $600 million for the partly tunneled LRT between Yonge and Downsview, the total cost approaches $2.5B.
If we have that much extra money to spend on transit expansion, I can suggest a number of better uses for those funds (either in the Sheppard corridor or elsewhere).
If you add $1.2B for the original SELRT plan, $670 million for conversion, and perhaps $600 million for the partly tunneled LRT between Yonge and Downsview, the total cost approaches $2.5B.
If we have that much extra money to spend on transit expansion, I can suggest a number of better uses for those funds (either in the Sheppard corridor or elsewhere).
Dan416
Senior Member
The key word being "separation". I have no problem with the Crosstown running at-grade as long as it's fully separated (i.e. no traffic lights, whether that be that it ducks under roads or is elevated above, I don't care--as long as it runs like a subway).
Sheppard Subway conversion to LRT was never seriously considered, nor would any politician touch it with a ten-foot pole.
Sheppard Subway is subway. Deal with it.
It's too late to change Eglinton to subway and Sheppard to LRT. Sad to say the City (Lastman, Harris, Miller, Ford) has screwed everything up so completely it's pretty much beyond repair and we can do what we can. It's amazing the City functions as well as it does based on the miniscule transportation that does exist for a city its size.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
signal changes as the LRT approaches the lights to ensure it can continue as a subway should ensure that it is run like a subway.
If it crosses general traffic without some kind of barrier (even crossing arms), there's a limit on how many cars each train can have. That has a huge effect on capacity, especially if the ECLRT and SLRT are going to run as a through-line, because then that capacity will be needed.
And you can bet your ass that if crossing arms are even mentioned, Rob Ford is going to throw a hissy fit from the drivers seat of his SUV.
denfromoakvillemilton
Senior Member
You know what, since toronto wanted subways so bad, I would go with what Ford wanted (+extension to Pearson) if they did cut and cover. If Toronto wants subways they should pay up for them.
I'd much rather they just dig a trench in the middle of the roadway (the same spot where the at-grade LRT was going to be), and use the money saved compared to tunnelling to push the line further west. The area is already an eyesore, and if the trench was landscaped properly (trees between the trench wall and the roadway, possibly a 1m buffer on each side of the trench), I think it would look not half bad. And if you want sections with a nice stylized wide median, you can deck the trench over.
BMO
Senior Member
Would there be substantial savings if a trench was dug and just decking over it with some shrubs and greenery? I think most people would be all for this actually, it would create quite a nice boulevard feel on Eglinton I'd imagine.
On a side note...I can't believe I'm the only person who really doesn't understand why so much emphasis is being put on the eastern section of the line. I would much rather have them go from Yonge all the way to Pearson, before they go east to Kennedy. I mean there is already an existing SRT (why don't they just repair that and leave provisions for an extension along eglinton towards Yonge in the future). People in scarborough already have a link downtown (bloor subway/ SRT link). Etobicoke and the west really, and especially the north-eastern part of Toronto could really benefit from an eglinton subway in the west that connects to Pearson. Pearson is a huge employer in the area (much more so than STC). Why is everyone obsessed with STC? Not to mention that Pearson stands to benefit from local connections just as much as longer connections (ARL). It also seems to be much more built up along eglinton in the West as opposed to the eastern portion.
I don't mean to come off as a douche or anything, I just really have a hard time understanding why there is so much emphasis on the STC area?
Riverdale Rink Rat
Senior Member
Well, 'our' end of the DRL, assuming it drops from Pape Station to the shopping centre then follows the rail line rather than Queen, would probably be pretty popular. Pape is wide enough to accommodate, but not really an arterial as it jogs to Carlaw at the tracks.
If, on the other hand, they want to run it along Queen for as long as possible east of the Don, I think the businesses that would disappear would squawk VERY loudly.
The savings would come from not having to equip the line with ventilation and expensive emergency exit tunnels (the EE's would just be a set of metal stairs every x metres). Stations would need to be partially underground, but because of track depth, they wouldn't be double-levelled stations. Think Dundas Station, only right beyond the end of the platform it would become open air.
And yes, the boulevard effect could be quite nice in certain spots. I would imagine that at stations especially having them decked over would be nice and would have a double benefit (nicer street presence, and covered platforms). Of course, the decked sections should be short enough as to not require any ventilation. As soon as you start adding that the price jumps.
The emphasis on the eastern stretch of Eglinton is so high because putting that section at-grade, especially if the two lines are connected, could place a pretty severe choke point on the entire line. Think of it like a roadway where everyone is trying to get from Point A to Point F. If the road between Point A and Point C is 4 lanes in each direction, but from Point C to Point D is only 2 lanes, and then from Point D to Point F back to 4 lanes again, does it really matter that the majority of the road is 4 lanes? Not really. The capacity of the road in that case is limited to it's narrowest point.
This is the issue with Eglinton East. It doesn't matter that the tunnelled and elevated sections can support 3 car trains using ATC, if the at-grade section can only support 2 car trains. It effectively kills any possibility of increasing capacity further down the road.
As for the STC thing, it's not just a density hub, it's also a transit hub for the entire Eastern GTA, something that is only going to increase in importance with time. I agree that the line should be pushed as far west as possible right off the bat, but I also want to see it designed properly, something that the last western section plan was not.