[innsertnamehere]

rule #1 of transit planning: don't build transit lines to directly serve corridors served by car. the car wins. every. single. time. case and point: Sheppard. on a direct corridor driving is always faster, especially considering how the vast majority of drivers on the 401 come from elsewhere that the Eglinton or sheppard lines don't serve.

 

[salsa]

rule #2: don't just say stuff without having facts to prove it

 

[TFC]

Since when was the first rule of transit planning "don't build transit lines to directly serve corridors served by the car"?

 

[ehlow]

I don't think that low ridership on the western part of the 32 bus really indicates low ridership on the Eglinton line. The 32 bus is a really slow way to get to the employment areas south of the airport, and does not go to the airport terminal. The Eglinton line would be much faster, and given how ridiculous the 401 traffic problems are (caused mostly by large numbers of people going to work near the airport) I think many people will want to use it. If making the line grade separated to double capacity doesn't cost very much why aren't we doing it?

Fair enough re: 32 bus ridership, but I'm extremely skeptical that traffic on the 401 means Eglinton west of Jane would have huge ridership. I think the central, urban part will have greatest ridership as it does now.

I'm also skeptical of your claim that making it elevated "doesn't cost very much". Do you know of any cost estimates? I would think you would need an elevated structure and stations similar to the Vancouver Skytrain, which to me seems like it would cost much more than a simple surface shelter.

I don't think building the highest capacity possible is always a good thing, if that capacity isn't needed, and if it drives up the cost making a short line that can't be extended. Example: Sheppard subway. The great thing about choosing LRT for Eglinton is that the western extension is possible, and we can have a long continuous line without having to transfer.

 

[ehlow]

rule #1 of transit planning: don't build transit lines to directly serve corridors served by car. the car wins. every. single. time. case and point: Sheppard. on a direct corridor driving is always faster, especially considering how the vast majority of drivers on the 401 come from elsewhere that the Eglinton or sheppard lines don't serve.

Right, I don't see how putting subways beside highways is a good general policy. Look at the subway on Allen Rd, or Sheppard. Highways tend to create extremely low density areas filled with industrial parks and parking lots that are very difficult to serve with transit, and destinations near the highway tend to be so dispersed that there are huge walks to the nearest station.

The lines with highest ridership tend to be urban areas with both feeder buses & some density like Yonge, Bloor, Queen, King, Eglinton.

 

[innsertnamehere]

Since when was the first rule of transit planning "don't build transit lines to directly serve corridors served by the car"?

Sorry, maybe it should be rule #322. It doesn't really matter, it was more of a figure of speech..

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

Fair enough re: 32 bus ridership, but I'm extremely skeptical that traffic on the 401 means Eglinton west of Jane would have huge ridership. I think the central, urban part will have greatest ridership as it does now.

I'm also skeptical of your claim that making it elevated "doesn't cost very much". Do you know of any cost estimates? I would think you would need an elevated structure and stations similar to the Vancouver Skytrain, which to me seems like it would cost much more than a simple surface shelter.

I don't think building the highest capacity possible is always a good thing, if that capacity isn't needed, and if it drives up the cost making a short line that can't be extended. Example: Sheppard subway. The great thing about choosing LRT for Eglinton is that the western extension is possible, and we can have a long continuous line without having to transfer.

A lot of the people that would use Eglinton west are going to Kipling , Islinton subway stations and the Dixon bus. The western leg would up those riders and reduce a 3 transfer ride to a 1 transfer ride(get off at Eglinton West subway station or Y/E).

 

[gweed123]

Ridership on the Eglinton West LRT in Etobicoke is going to be very dependant on perpendicular transfers from surface routes (Royal York, Islington, Kipling, Martin Grove, etc). So naturally, whatever design is chosen needs to optimize transfer efficiency. IMO, an in-median alignment (whatever configuration is chosen) is a poor setup for this type of transfer, as people are going to need to cross at least one side of the intersection, possibly two, in order to reach the LRT platform.

I believe that whether or not it's at-grade, elevated, trenched, or tunnelled is secondary. In order to maximize transfer efficiency, it needs to make use of the Richview corridor. Elevated or trenched would allow for the LRT station to be placed directly underneath or overtop of the cross street, allowing for curbside bus lanes dropping people off right at the station door on either side of the street. This would be a very similar setup to what is going to be built at Pimisi Station (LeBreton Station) on the Confederation line:

This setup would be similar regardless of if it's trenched or elevated. My preference would be elevated, as that would allow green space to be preserved underneath the guideway, and would be a very pleasant commute, as you would be travelling through a tree-lined linear park for a substantial portion of the ride, instead of in a trench or in the middle of a busy avenue.

 

[andrewpmk]

A lot of the people that would use Eglinton west are going to Kipling , Islinton subway stations and the Dixon bus. The western leg would up those riders and reduce a 3 transfer ride to a 1 transfer ride(get off at Eglinton West subway station or Y/E).

My point is that the Eglinton line is going to be used by a significant fraction of the many people who live in Toronto and work in the large employment areas in and surrounding the airport, once it gets extended further west. Currently most of those people use 401 (or 427, Gardiner, or 407), that is why the traffic on 401 is so bad. The 32 bus is not very useful because getting from Eglinton West station to Airport Corporate Centre is incredibly slow, and it drops people off in a rather inconvenient location, and it does not go to the west side of Airport Corporate Centre or the Pearson Airport terminal. The only other way of getting from Toronto to those parts of Mississauga is to take a bus from Islington or Kipling station (Mississauga Transit 35 or 109 or TTC 112), which is not at all convenient if you are coming from the northern side of Toronto and the buses have limited capacity and get stuck on the 427. The traffic in that area is so awful that I think that a transit alternative will be used by a huge number of people. Building elevated costs more than surface sure, but you get what you pay for, it can carry a lot more people than surface, and certainly doesn't cost as much as tunneling. There is no excuse for the provincial government wanting $30 billion in tax increases and then cutting corners like not making Eglinton fully grade separated.

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

A lot of these jobs near the airport would still require a massive walk to get to from any stations on Eglinton West. Time consuming in the summer and quite unfeasible in the wintertime.

 

[andrewpmk]

A lot of these jobs near the airport would still require a massive walk to get to from any stations on Eglinton West. Time consuming in the summer and quite unfeasible in the wintertime.

A bus station would be located at Airport Corporate Centre, replacing "Skymark Hub", to solve this problem. Feeder buses would connect the Eglinton line to some of the employment areas west of the airport; many of these bus routes exist already. Extending the Eglinton line along the Mississauga Transitway route to Square One would also help with this problem.

Another (probably crazy) idea for relieving the Eglinton LRT's capacity problems. Build a second railway spur which is underground off the Georgetown line designed to handle 12-car electric GO trains, which is needed to provide regular non-premium train service to the airport (as opposed to the current elevated spur that is under construction, which is designed for very short trains for premium airport express service only). Then extend that spur south underneath the airport and build a station at Airport Corporate Centre. This could then potentially be extended southwest along the hydro corridor to Square One.

Extending the Bloor-Danforth line up the 427 to Airport Corporate Centre and Pearson Terminal 1 is yet another alternative.

 

[ehlow]

A bus station would be located at Airport Corporate Centre, replacing "Skymark Hub", to solve this problem. Feeder buses would connect the Eglinton line to some of the employment areas west of the airport; many of these bus routes exist already. Extending the Eglinton line along the Mississauga Transitway route to Square One would also help with this problem.

Another (probably crazy) idea for relieving the Eglinton LRT's capacity problems. Build a second railway spur which is underground off the Georgetown line designed to handle 12-car electric GO trains, which is needed to provide regular non-premium train service to the airport (as opposed to the current elevated spur that is under construction, which is designed for very short trains for premium airport express service only). Then extend that spur south underneath the airport and build a station at Airport Corporate Centre. This could then potentially be extended southwest along the hydro corridor to Square One.

Extending the Bloor-Danforth line up the 427 to Airport Corporate Centre and Pearson Terminal 1 is yet another alternative.

I think it could make sense to extend the Eglinton LRT even further west to at least Dixie road to serve the offices around there. I'm not sure if it would have to continue back from Pearson or branch at Renforth. However, that adds even more KM to the extension, making it seem even more cost effective to do it at grade to me.

If it doesn't happen, then going to the airport offices requires transferring to a bus at Renforth, which could be inconvenient.

My main concern with elevated is that cost reduces the probability that it will happen any time soon (politically), and that elevated doesn't really buy you much anyways since there aren't too many traffic lights along the route. Also, the EA is done at grade already so I think that would save years of time for the at-grade option.

Having said that, I have no problem with elevated or trenched if it can be done.

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

I think it could make sense to extend the Eglinton LRT even further west to at least Dixie road to serve the offices around there. I'm not sure if it would have to continue back from Pearson or branch at Renforth. However, that adds even more KM to the extension, making it seem even more cost effective to do it at grade to me.

If it doesn't happen, then going to the airport offices requires transferring to a bus at Renforth, which could be inconvenient.

My main concern with elevated is that cost reduces the probability that it will happen any time soon (politically), and that elevated doesn't really buy you much anyways since there aren't too many traffic lights along the route. Also, the EA is done at grade already so I think that would save years of time for the at-grade option.

Having said that, I have no problem with elevated or trenched if it can be done.

Dixie is in Mississauga, not Toronto. You need a passport, visa, medical exam, money exchange, and a new fare when you cross the border. North of Eglinton (west of Renforth) it is Mississauga, south it is Toronto until Etobicoke Creek.

Now if Toronto annexed that portion, along with the airport...

 

[ehlow]

Dixie is in Mississauga, not Toronto. You need a passport, visa, medical exam, money exchange, and a new fare when you cross the border. North of Eglinton (west of Renforth) it is Mississauga, south it is Toronto until Etobicoke Creek.

Now if Toronto annexed that portion, along with the airport...

So maybe Mississauga should pay for it

 

[BurlOak]

My main concern with elevated is that cost reduces the probability that it will happen any time soon (politically), and that elevated doesn't really buy you much anyways since there aren't too many traffic lights along the route. Also, the EA is done at grade already so I think that would save years of time for the at-grade option.

The same way that the extra cost of the B-D subway to STC made unlikely to be built, while the at-grade option would be preferred by all since it is less expensive.