[Palma]

How will elevation of the LRT look anymore beautiful than the elevated Gardiner? I personally hate the idea

 

[howl]

How will elevation of the LRT look anymore beautiful than the elevated Gardiner? I personally hate the idea

I agree. From a strictly service point-of-view elevated might be an efficient way to go, but from an urban-design/city-building point-of-view it would be a poor choice. Vancouver elevated the Skytrain only because the bedrock is so close to the surface they couldn't go underground.

West of Scarlett Road it might be possible to build the Eglinton LRT in a tunnel running parallel to Eglinton using the cut-and-cover method with parkland over top of it.

 

[nfitz]

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

I'd sooner we give Etobicoke to Mississauga.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

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.

I do have my reservations about using the Richview Corridor for the LRT. It may be better to use a ROW and sell off the lands north of the line to developers. This would help to create a far more walkable community along the LRT route. The lack of lights on Eglinton West hopefully means that the LRT wouldn't be any slower than if it used Richview. However your concerns about the bus terminals are fully valid. Using Richview would definitely mitigate those concerns as well as better future proof the line.

Anyways if we do utilize the Richview Corridor elevating or trenching along the whole route will probably be too expensive given how few passengers we're expecting east of Jane.

On the 3 km stretch between Martin Grove and Royal York I'd prefer for the LRT to run north of Eglinton along the Richview Corridor. This would run at grade in a fully protected corridor, with stations at Martin Grove, Kipling, Islington and Royal York. At those streets, the LRT would dip just below grade in a trench where the LRT station will be built. At the other end of the station the line would rise to at grade again. This would allow for a proper bus terminal setup. With at least 1 km between each station we should have more than enough room to transition from below grade to at grade and back below again. Drivers on Russell Road, Wincott Drive and Widdicombe Hill Boulevard would have to cross the LRT tracks through a level crossing, where the LRT would have full signal priority. I'm not expecting these level crossing to be detrimental to operations since they're all small residential streets. The cost of this would hopefully be comparable to the cost of reconfiguring Eglinton West with a ROW.

Just east of Royal York we come into contact with some buildings, meaning that we can't build tracks on the north side of Eglinton. At Royal York Station (trenched) there would be an underground portal at the east side of the station that would run under the westbound lanes of Eglinton so that the line could transition to a centre ROW on Eglinton West. The line would continue along the ROW until just west of Scarlett road, where there'd be a portal running under the westbound lanes to a trenched station on the north side of Eglinton at Scarlett. This is essentially the same setup I described for Royal York station, just with the portal on the west side of the station rather than the east. Even through this section is in a ROW, the LRT would be fully protected from traffic as there are no street crossings between Royal York and Scarlett.

The LRT continues at grade on the at grade north side of Eglinton until Jane, where it will become elevated to connect to the planned elevated western terminus of the ECLRT at Weston Road. An elevated station would be built at Jane.

I'd expect the stations to be barebones so that costs can be kept low. They'd be unmanned, have a simple enclosed platform, (eg platforms at any of our at-grade subway stations) and have escalators/elevators. What I describe is probably the cheapest way to go about using Richview. It would very likely cost about the same as the ROW as long as we don't go crazy with station design.

 

[jtnathan]

found these rendering on skyscraper city

 

[Palma]

I thought Richview lands was sold to a developer? Plus I don't like the idea of unmanned stations. I like knowing when i get off at a subway and go up those stairs there is a TTC guy there at night. I also hated when i went to New York and used their subway and went to a station and no one was there to ask for direction - and this was in the daytime. At one station, there was a sign that the attendant would be there starting at 3pm. NYC gets lots of tourists and to use their subways you need directions. Of course I am talking abut the underground ECLRT between keele and where ever in the east for the manned station,

 

[salsa]

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.

You can also argue that building a subway instead is even better because "it can carry a lot more people". Just because it can doesn't mean that it will.

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."

How do you know? What about all the commuters who also drive from Mississauga, Brampton, Guelph, etc to their jobs that are dispersed all over the GTA? The airport alone is not the reason for 16 lanes of traffic grinding to a halt, and your elevated proposal will not make any difference.

 

[Palma]

Want to wager how long it will be before the LRT is ever extended west. I still find it hard to believe with all the stops along the LRT (25) with the majority above ground someone in the east will take it to get all the way to the west and to the airport. And those are stops from keele in the west to whatever station in the east. If extended west then more stops. Plus how can times for the LRT running below ground be maintained when the same trains are running above ground and facing lights (I think they will be facing lights). I still think the underground should have separate trains from those that will run above ground. Afterall if it was a subway between Keele and Laird, then LRT it would be separate trains. I don't want to hear about a transfer. I transferred at St George and then at Yonge for 8 years. It did not kill me having to get up and walk.

 

[Dan416]

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...

That's an old map of Mississauga. the current western border with Milton is now the 407 instead of Ninth Line after the relatively recent annexation.

 

[Adjei]

found these rendering on skyscraper city View attachment 22059View attachment 22060View attachment 22061

Is this any particular station?

Are those platform edge doors?

 

[innsertnamehere]

It looks like an architecture students plan for Yonge station on the Eglinton LRT. not real at all.

 

[CityPlaceN1]

Still looks pretty good.

 

[innsertnamehere]

and impractical. 1 set of escalators from the platform in the busiest station on the line?

 

[TheTigerMaster]

The size of the station in the render is ridiculous.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

I thought Richview lands was sold to a developer?

Apparently it has been. If we move fast enough we can expropriate it back to the City.