[Voltz]

As pointed out earlier, if a line runs at-grade, it limits the length of the train to 2 cars, which could have severe effects on the capacity of the line. This was ok when the Eglinton line was running independent of the SLRT, but now that they're interlined capacity could become an issue.

No it is not limited to 2 car trains on the surface, the surface platform were designed as 90 metres in length, and the vast majority of the rider ship increase as a result of interlining came from passengers who are already riding the BD line, It is not worth the cost premium of total grade separation to build those existing riders another line, so it is also not worth interlining the SRT with Eglinton.

 

[sixrings]

Elevated from laird to Kennedy and trench west of Jane.... The land is there in the west why wouldnt we use it. And in the east its big box stores so I cant see the objection to elevated.

 

[k10ery]

Elevated from laird to Kennedy and trench west of Jane.... The land is there in the west why wouldnt we use it.

Anybody who wants to put LRT in a trench in the Richview Corridor had better grab their piggy banks: The city is selling the land.

http://www.toronto.ca/involved/statutorynotices/archive2012/jan/surplus_land_010912.htm

 

[ssiguy2]

Elevated from laird to Kennedy and trench west of Jane.... The land is there in the west why wouldnt we use it. And in the east its big box stores so I cant see the objection to elevated.

Exactly my thoughts. Remember kids this line is to be automated which means total grade separation. Toronto always bitches that he gets little money for operating expenses and nothing brings down that cost like automation.

 

[dunkalunk]

I'd like to see grade separation at stations at lleast as a pedestrian safety issue. On streets with less cross-traffic it matters less whether or not there is grade separation as it is easier to give almost full priority to LRVs at these intersections.

 

[sixrings]

im pretty sure it can be automated without being grade seperated. and I dont know how pedestrian safety is a concern if its in median. Are people jaywalking across 6 lanes of eglinton? I also tend to think in median gives pedestrians the best access since they dont have to walk up or down stairs. However that convienence is at the cost of speed which I think should be a priority on Eglinton.

In the end I am beginning to think the cheapest way to fix our transit issues is to redirect businesses to places we want growth through reduced taxes. SO for instance if they reduce the taxes to 905 levels at yonge and Eglinton then alot of new businesses will end up somewhere we are planning transit. The same goes for yonge and Sheppard. If you reduce taxes enough that businesses start to move in at yonge and sheppard the sheppard line starts to make more and more sense. PLus Torontonians stop losing these businesses to the 905. I wouls put dundas west in this category as well since its served by a subway and potentially 2 GO train lines.

 

[smallspy]

No it is not limited to 2 car trains on the surface, the surface platform were designed as 90 metres in length, and the vast majority of the rider ship increase as a result of interlining came from passengers who are already riding the BD line, It is not worth the cost premium of total grade separation to build those existing riders another line, so it is also not worth interlining the SRT with Eglinton.

The surface platforms were designed for a maximum length of a-3 car train, but were to be built for 2-car trains. That was all the TTC had calculated would be needed for the immediate future.

As well, only every second train would have run past Brentcliffe/Don Mills. They weren't planning for better than 5 or 6 minute service east of the tunnelled section because the passenger loads didn't require it.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[Darwinkgo]

im pretty sure it can be automated without being grade seperated. and I dont know how pedestrian safety is a concern if its in median. Are people jaywalking across 6 lanes of eglinton? I also tend to think in median gives pedestrians the best access since they dont have to walk up or down stairs. However that convienence is at the cost of speed which I think should be a priority on Eglinton.

In the end I am beginning to think the cheapest way to fix our transit issues is to redirect businesses to places we want growth through reduced taxes. SO for instance if they reduce the taxes to 905 levels at yonge and Eglinton then alot of new businesses will end up somewhere we are planning transit. The same goes for yonge and Sheppard. If you reduce taxes enough that businesses start to move in at yonge and sheppard the sheppard line starts to make more and more sense. PLus Torontonians stop losing these businesses to the 905. I wouls put dundas west in this category as well since its served by a subway and potentially 2 GO train lines.

No way - unless you mean exclusive, protected right of way at grade, which I would classify as grade seperated in any case.

 

[BurlOak]

Elevated from laird to Kennedy and trench west of Jane.... The land is there in the west why wouldnt we use it. And in the east its big box stores so I cant see the objection to elevated.

If it was elevated, would an extra station at/near Ionview Rd. help sell this area on the elevated? The rest is all big box stores so there should be no problems for the EA there.

Has there been any preliminary proposal for how the Ford plan would make the curve up the the SRT corridor?

 

[11th]

Calgary does high-speed at-grade really well, but even they grade-separate once the crossing roads get to a certain size. The busiest arterial I reckon that crosses Calgary's LRT at-grade where it's median-running is probably 32 Ave NE, which is quieter than a Victoria Park or Warden. Calgary has grade separated most of the other crossings that're equivalently busy.

The view of that intersection reminds me of the section of Sheppard East east of McCowan more so than the stretch of Eglinton that's going to receive the LRT line.

 

[11th]

In the end I am beginning to think the cheapest way to fix our transit issues is to redirect businesses to places we want growth through reduced taxes. SO for instance if they reduce the taxes to 905 levels at yonge and Eglinton then alot of new businesses will end up somewhere we are planning transit. The same goes for yonge and Sheppard. If you reduce taxes enough that businesses start to move in at yonge and sheppard the sheppard line starts to make more and more sense. PLus Torontonians stop losing these businesses to the 905. I wouls put dundas west in this category as well since its served by a subway and potentially 2 GO train lines.

Was that the case before amalgamation? Somehow I think if amalgamation didn't happen, Scarborough, North York, and Etobicoke would still be luring business away from the downtown core with some sort of tax incentives.

 

[Rainforest]

In the end I am beginning to think the cheapest way to fix our transit issues is to redirect businesses to places we want growth through reduced taxes. SO for instance if they reduce the taxes to 905 levels at yonge and Eglinton then alot of new businesses will end up somewhere we are planning transit. The same goes for yonge and Sheppard. If you reduce taxes enough that businesses start to move in at yonge and sheppard the sheppard line starts to make more and more sense. PLus Torontonians stop losing these businesses to the 905. I wouls put dundas west in this category as well since its served by a subway and potentially 2 GO train lines.

That's a pretty good choice of locations to promote business growth.

 

[Rainforest]

As well, only every second train would have run past Brentcliffe/Don Mills. They weren't planning for better than 5 or 6 minute service east of the tunnelled section because the passenger loads didn't require it.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

Actually it makes a huge difference whether the turn-back point is Don Mills or Brentcliffe.

Don Mills is a natural hub, as several passengers flows converge there:

1) Eglinton westbound
2) Lawrence westbound (since Lawrence avenue is not continuous between Leslie and Bayview, and buses run via Eglinton)
3) From the densely populated Flemmington Park community towards Yonge
4) Transfers from Don Mills towards Yonge / Eglinton

Trains turning back at Don Mills will get quite a few riders boarding them.

In contrast, Brentcliffe is just a minor stop. If half of trains turn back there, they will run almost empty till Yonge, while trains serving the Kennedy branch will do almost all of work.

 

[Voltz]

Actually it makes a huge difference whether the turn-back point is Don Mills or Brentcliffe.

Don Mills is a natural hub, as several passengers flows converge there:

1) Eglinton westbound
2) Lawrence westbound (since Lawrence avenue is not continuous between Leslie and Bayview, and buses run via Eglinton)
3) From the densely populated Flemmington Park community towards Yonge
4) Transfers from Don Mills towards Yonge / Eglinton

Trains turning back at Don Mills will get quite a few riders boarding them.

In contrast, Brentcliffe is just a minor stop. If half of trains turn back there, they will run almost empty till Yonge, while trains serving the Kennedy branch will do almost all of work.

I agree, I have always thought that the intersection with leslie should be grade separated so all the service could make it to don mills, plus it would avoid having to build underground storage and crossover tracks at brentcliffe.

 

[Rainforest]

I agree, I have always thought that the intersection with leslie should be grade separated so all the service could make it to don mills, plus it would avoid having to build underground storage and crossover tracks at brentcliffe.

Exactly. Moreover, there are ways to build the line as fully grade separated between Brentcliffe and Don Mills without going entirely underground.