denfromoakvillemilton
Senior Member
Eglinton should have been a subway.
|
|
|
Voltz
Senior Member
The plans for the SRT replacement did not come from Transit City.
WislaHD
Superstar
Eglinton wouldn't work with 1 lane, period. My old apartment building was directly on Eglinton and I've watched traffic on Eglinton from my balcony for at least 3/4 of my life. The streets are narrow along the center portion of Eglinton and traffic is congested. While I love that one lane is being reduced to increase sidewalk space and allow a bike lane, I also cringe at the prospect. The LRT won't do much to alleviate congestion beyond removing buses from the road because most Eglinton traffic isn't local. At-Grade LRT would be a nightmare.
Probably, makes much more sense than Sheppard anyway and I would love to see a recreation of Bloor level density on Eglinton. I doubt a subway would expand outside of Black Creek and Don Mills for a very very long time though.
Probably, makes much more sense than Sheppard anyway and I would love to see a recreation of Bloor level density on Eglinton. I doubt a subway would expand outside of Black Creek and Don Mills for a very very long time though.
Last edited:
ehlow
Senior Member
Um.. I only recently start posting on this forum, and never said he didn't "suck", if you're implying that I've changed my opinion of him. I've read his columns for a few years and personally never took his opinions on transit very seriously. Some of his writing on architecture can be enjoyable.
He very much implied that at-grade LRT should be used to transform streets to be more urban in the past if you read his writing & view his videos, which obviously contradicts the recent report he seems to support. If you don't believe that "everything will become Queen st", then you'd probably disagree with much of his writing in the past as well.
denfromoakvillemilton
Senior Member
Probably, but we would have paid just as much and there would be much less talk about subways.
denfromoakvillemilton
Senior Member
Not you in particular, other posters have been getting antsy with him because he felt the report was apt.
ehlow
Senior Member
It's not "mostly underground", it is almost exactly half underground. If it's extended west to the airport, then it will be roughly 1/3 underground. It could also be extended further east along Eglinton.
ehlow
Senior Member
If it were built as a subway, I think it would be a similar situation as Sheppard: it would be a subway from about Black-Creek to Don Mills (almost the same as the current underground section). There would be bus service on either end, and people would have to transfer to the subway.
In that situation, I don't think the subway would be extended either east or west, because of the lack of density/ridership, and the cost of tunnelling.
I don't have a huge objection to the above scenario, but I would prefer the current LRT plan. The above scenario is still possible, if it does happen I hope it doesn't delay the opening of the project.
ehlow
Senior Member
I think it's generally best to be grade separated in dense, urban areas where the traffic lights are close together and the streets are narrow and there is lots of pedestrian activity.
Grade separating gives you less of an advantage in suburban areas where the road is wide, traffic lights & intersections are far apart, and people aren't jay-walking across the tracks.
I'd prefer both Eglinton as a subway (fully grade-separated) and the current LRT plan with an underground central portion over Eglinton being at-grade the whole way.
Also the tunnels are being dug right now... so I think most would agree we shouldn't fill the tunnels again
.
denfromoakvillemilton
Senior Member
Yes, the current LRT will go to Airport and Highland Creek sometime in the future, but I feel a lot of the current critics would have been quiet if the plan was a subway. I also think Dixon would have been the western leg and Eglinton East could have been rezoned. I happened to agree with Hume. Why? Because than plan was the original one and it cost way less.
BurlOak
Senior Member
I always count the SRT into the total distance since it made so much more sense to connect it to Eglinton, rather than extend the B-D subway.
In terms of cost, it is mostly underground. The underground portion is about $5B (plus another $2B for the SRT replacement), while an extra $0.5B or less would be enough to elevate the Scarborough portion.
I thought it is about 11 km underground and 7 km in-median in Phase 1. Even that is over 60% underground, and it becomes 75% grade-separated when the SRT to Malvern is added in. With the Pearson extension, the percentages will go down, but still close to 60% grade-separated. With the Pearson extension not making the list of next wave projects, we can maybe consider this portion dead as well for the time being.
Last edited:
ehlow
Senior Member
I don't see how adding the SRT is accurate considering that I assumed we're talking about the current Eglinton LRT, which is from Black Creek to Kennedy station.
Black Creek to Brentcliff: 10.6km
Brentcliff to Kennedy: 9.1km
So 54% grade-separated. I guess that's technically "mostly"
My source was Google maps.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
58% grade seperated (11.2) and 42% "not grade seperated", and 14 intersections, 7 of which probably can't be given complete priority. The other 7 serve minor roads that can probably be allowed to give full priority to the LRTs. The surface portion will be quite fast.
BurlOak
Senior Member
I don't see how adding the SRT is accurate considering that I assumed we're talking about the current Eglinton LRT, which is from Black Creek to Kennedy station.
Black Creek to Brentcliff: 10.6km
Brentcliff to Kennedy: 9.1km
So 54% grade-separated. I guess that's technically "mostly"
My source was Google maps.
How about the underground portions at Don Mills and at Kennedy.
ehlow
Senior Member
Good point, I forgot about that. I didn't think those sections would be very long.