News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 8.9K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5.1K     0 

What do you believe should be done on the Eglinton Corridor?

  • Do Nothing

    Votes: 5 1.3%
  • Build the Eglinton Crosstown LRT as per Transit City

    Votes: 140 36.9%
  • Revive the Eglinton Subway

    Votes: 226 59.6%
  • Other (Explain in post)

    Votes: 8 2.1%

  • Total voters
    379
No, the Yonge subway planners did the absolute right thing. They decided to build a subway even though the ridership on the line was estimated to be very low, maybe even comparable to the Eglinton LRT estimates BUT, they built a subway since they anticipated a growth that would justify a subway in the future.

No, they already had streetcars galore on Yonge which obviously shouldn't have been built. Now the Yonge line is full because they didn't plan ahead enough. With double decked subways and express tracks we wouldn't have this capacity problem on Yonge. Obviously all routes should plan for the future with double decked subways and tunnels that have express tracks because as Yonge shows a 6-car subway train doesn't cut it. Twice they got the capacity screwed up. Think of the money wasted building streetcar first, then subway, and then still having a capacity issue. They should have scaled back other routes just to have the Union to Bloor section a double decked subway with express tracks rather than waste money on regular capacity subways.
 
Last edited:
Aren't you LRTistas all about "LRT =/= streetcar"? If you haven't noticed, streetcar was basically the same as a bus is today.
 
Now the Yonge line is full because they didn't plan ahead enough. With double decked subways and express tracks we wouldn't have this capacity problem on Yonge. Obviously all routes should plan for the future with double decked subways and tunnels that have express tracks because as Yonge shows a 6-car subway train doesn't cut it. Twice they got the capacity screwed up. Think of the money wasted building streetcar first, then subway, and then still having a capacity issue. They should have scaled back other routes just to have the Union to Bloor section a double decked subway with express tracks rather than waste money on regular capacity subways.

Your comparison is valid only if the double-decked subway between Union and Bloor could be built at the same cost, or a small premium, compared to the regular subway. It probably could not, hence their decision to build regular subway was justified.

Regarding Eglinton, I believe that building 30 km of LRT for $ 2.2 billion (original plan; 73 million / km) would be a good value for money, if it was doable.

However, now we are looking at $ 6 billion for 20 km (latest Metrolinx Five-in-Ten projection; 300 million / km); this is no longer a good value for money if built as LRT. First of all, we can build a very functional subway line for that money; if not Jane to Kennedy, then certainly Jane to Don Mills. Secondly, after spending $ 6 billion on Eglinton, it will be very hard to justify another major investment in the same corridor (Lawrence LRT, or Midtown GO Express) in case Eglinton gets overloaded.
 
However, now we are looking at $ 6 billion for 20 km (latest Metrolinx Five-in-Ten projection; 300 million / km); this is no longer a good value for money if built as LRT.

The non-tunnelled parts are far cheaper as LRT and there will be no significant difference in cost in the tunnelled portion. That is a constant. The cost for the Eglinton LRT can go up to $10 Billion but it will still be cheaper than the subway that originally would have been more expensive than the LRT. There seems to be some belief that the inflating costs of the LRT make the subway more of a bargain but the expected costs for building a subway would also be inflating at at least the same rate. Look at all the costs on the University Line stations and how they have inflated since originally quoted. If you look at the costs attached to the latest Metrolinx plan you will see that the portions not in the tunnel are still vastly cheaper than any subway would be.
 
Aren't you LRTistas all about "LRT =/= streetcar"? If you haven't noticed, streetcar was basically the same as a bus is today.

I don't know what an LRTista is but a streetcar is a type of LRT but the LRT includes things much faster and with much greater capacity. Suggesting otherwise is like suggesting that this is something that should be built in Toronto since it is a subway:

Electric_railway_train.jpg
 
Real analysis would focus only on (a) does it meet the capacity requirements expected to be seen in the next 20-30 years, (b) does it meet certain criteria for speed, and (c) is it the cheapest solution to deliver those requirements. Some scoring system where subway gets 100 is simplistic. There is no way a non-arbitrary score would give subways 100 in all implementations. The subway network north of St.Clair would need to be scored higher from a speed perspective than along the Danforth. With true full signal priority there is nothing preventing the Eglinton LRT from achieving speed based scores as high as the Danforth line on Eglinton west of Weston Road. There would definitely be challenges on the Sheppard LRT where the stops are closer together.

Your respons about "real analysis" is just as simplistic when "criteria" is a fluid term up for debate that varies depending on what technology fetishes someone in a position of power has, how much money is available at any given time, whether or not we're basing our transit expansion on "social need," on-the-ground contexts, etc. I'm talking about the general perceptions of the overall public benefit of a rapid transit line, not what an engineer thinks. Also, there's no such thing as a capacity requirement...ridership is malleable and manipulatable, not something that is projected and then comes true. And the subway north of St. Clair would not necessarily score higher because there are fewer stops, which affects travel time. Travel time is what matters, not vehicle speed.
 
Your respons about "real analysis" is just as simplistic when "criteria" is a fluid term up for debate that varies depending on what technology fetishes someone in a position of power has, how much money is available at any given time, whether or not we're basing our transit expansion on "social need," on-the-ground contexts, etc.

Something like a "technology fetish" is not a quantifiable criteria. Real analysis requires quantitative analysis. Qualitative analysis is only useful if you can attach cost benefits to it thus converting it to a quantitative analysis.

Also, there's no such thing as a capacity requirement...ridership is malleable and manipulatable, not something that is projected and then comes true.

When you create a scenario with inputs of fares (afforability), route networks, trip times, etc you arrive an a level of demand. Yes you can jack up the fares to $20 and voila you don't need to expand, but the reality is that there is a level to which a fare is seen as reasonable and there is a level to which the government is willing to pay for transit. Operationally in Toronto that is in the 20-30% subsidy range. Assuming a subsidy in that range you can determine the minimum fare you can charge to achieve the maximum ridership. There are people who based on the current network and fare show up at stations and bus stops and that number of people is measurable. By accepting that leaving people behind at stops is over capacity you can determine how over capacity you are.

And the subway north of St. Clair would not necessarily score higher because there are fewer stops, which affects travel time.

I don't follow you. Of course fewer stops will reduce travel time. A stop is 0km/h and the longer the vehicle stays at that speed the lower your average trip speed will be.

Travel time is what matters, not vehicle speed.

When I say speed I mean average speed, not maximum speed nor minimum speed.
 
Saw a team drilling for soil samples in the TTC parking lot just west of Eglinton West Station.

Good. Everyone here wants the tunnel, it's just what routes through it that's the source of contention.
 
has an article on the Eglinton LRT:

Scenes from the Eglinton LRT

The 10-kilometre route will transform the city and, in the process, demolish it

John Lorinc

From Saturday's Globe and Mail Published on Friday, Aug. 06, 2010 6:00PM EDT

The American architect Daniel Burnham, father of modern Chicago, is reputed to have told colleagues to “make no small plans†– a muscular exhortation that has encouraged and bedevilled urban planners ever since. In a Toronto twist on Burnham's maxim, some critics argued that David Miller's proposed streetcar network, known as Transit City, failed to capture the public’s imagination in the way that a subway-building program might have.

Those critics will spend the next ten years eating dust, and lots of it.

Anyone who doubts the plan’s sheer humongousness should spend a humid afternoon driving Eglinton from Black Creek Drive to the slope east of Laird, a 10.5 km river of traffic. A decade hence, a twinned tunnel for light-rail vehicles, with 13 stations, will run below this busy arterial. That’s equivalent to the Keele-to-Pape segment of the Bloor/Danforth subway line.

The route takes in Fairbank’s working-class grittiness, upscale Forest Hill, congested mid-town and the new/old world of Leaside – in short, a social core sample of Toronto itself. Once the Eglinton LRT re-surfaces, near the saddle of Serena Gundy ParkÖ, it will press through Don Mills and Scarborough’s Golden Mile on its way to the Kennedy subway station, which will be re-invented as a transportation super-hub.

Proponents argue that the Eglinton LRT will provide rapid transit to a huge part of the city and spur development to justify the expense. Opponents fret about disruptive construction, loss of business, and congestion on the narrowed road allowances. Love it or hate it, the $4.6-billion Eglinton LRT – which received the final go-ahead in June – will transform Toronto in ways not seen since the Bloor subway linked the city’s east and west in the 1960s.

Even by Mr. Burnham’s yardstick, it is a big plan.

The Buses

On a typical weekday, 1,300 buses pass along Eglinton just east of Yonge; that figure is even higher near the Eglinton West station. The arrival of the LRT will drastically reduce those volumes and create more space for cars, although the Toronto Transit Commission has yet to make final decisions about the Eglinton bus routes. “At this point, we’ve made no commitments one way or the other,†says TTC planner Scott Haskill.

Less bus service raises the question of where the new LRT stops will be. The TTC modelled the optimal distance between stops and concluded it was about 400 to 500 metres, about twice the gap between bus stops. The trade-off, says Mr. Haskill, is between how far riders are willing to walk and the speed of the service. The TTC opted against spacing the LRT stops as if they were subway stations. “We’ve heard that loud and clear.â€

The Streetscape


The Eglinton Crosstown will unfold in two acts.

The tunnel boring begins in 2012. But construction on the surface sections – from Black Creek to Jane and Laird to Kennedy – will take place between 2014 and 2018. After carving out space for the LRT right-of-way, the TTC says there will be “at least†two lanes in either direction, three if space allows. Unlike St. Clair West, much of the route is not lined by retail stores, so the city has more room to manoeuvre.

On the tunnelled section, the street itself won’t look dramatically different, but Councillor Karen Stintz (Ward 16 Eglinton-Lawrence) wants the city to take advantage of the reduced bus traffic and examine the “exciting†possibility of narrowing the road on some parts of Eglinton in order to widen the sidewalks. “It opens up the opportunity for a pedestrian scramble at Yonge and Eglinton,†she adds, referring to the all-direction crossings where Yonge meets Bloor and Dundas.

The Boss

Peter Allibone is standing on a scrubby slope overlooking a point on Eglinton where it drops down toward the Serena Gundy Park. “The launch pit is going to be around here,†he says, gesturing at a spot in the middle of the road, “and the soccer field†– his pet term for a staging area for heavy equipment – “will be about here.â€

Dressed in a white shirt so crisp it looks as if it could crack, Mr. Allibone is a veteran engineer who exudes self-assurance and wouldn’t look out of place on a British legal drama. He’s spent 40 years building transit projects, including the London Underground, New York City’s subway system, and a connecting rail terminal at Newark Liberty International Airport.

A consultant with engineering giant Parsons Brinckerhoff, Mr. Allibone has signed on as the chief project manager for the Eglinton Crosstown. For the next several years, his focus will be the tunnel. At either end, the entrances will be built on slopes to take advantage of the grade change. The tunnels will be 15 to 25 metres deep, with the lowest points where they dip under the two subway lines. Next year, the TTC will carve out the entrances – 15-metre-deep pits in the middle of Eglinton, with the road lanes routed around the hoardings.

In 2012, trucks will haul a pair of tunnel boring machines (TBM) from a factory in Downsview to the launch sites. At full speed, Mr. Allibone says, the TBMs can move 15 metres a day, disgorging enough “muck†to fill 75 to 100 dump trucks. The tunnel will displace 750,000 cubic metres of dirt, enough to fill half the Rogers Centre.

Mr. Allibone is well aware of the disruption factor. “It’s a bit like tearing off a band-aid,†he offers. You can tear it quickly – lots of pain but it’s over quickly, or you can ease it off, but prolong the agony. “We have to find which is the most effective approach.â€

The Stations

Transit veterans know that stations are the cash sinks in subway schemes, so the TTC’s plan for the Eglinton LRT is to create a standard design that can be adapted to meet local needs. They’ll be “cut-and-cover†boxes about 150 metres long. “You basically dig a large hole, fill it up with stuff and put the lid on,†says Mr. Allibone.

The end walls for each station are built first, and the TBMs bore through, allowing crews to erect the side walls. The platforms, at 100 metres, will be two-thirds the length of a standard subway platform, but the overall design will have familiar subway elements – a mezzanine level above the platform, plus retail kiosks.

For the Eglinton and Eglinton West stations, Mr. Allibone’s contractors will first rebuild the foundations supporting the existing subway tunnels. Only then can they begin to construct the box for the new LRT station situated directly underneath. Tunnelling is never straightforward, but this job presents a formidable challenge, he says. “When we’re building under an operating subway, that technical difficulty goes up exponentially.â€

The Kennedy station, meanwhile, will undergo a massive, $500-million facelift between 2015 and 2018 so it can accommodate two LRTs (Eglinton plus the proposed Scarborough-Malvern line) and the rebuilt Scarborough rapid transit terminus, as well as the existing subway station, bus bays, and GO Transit connection. “This is a very complex undertaking,†says Scarborough Rapid Transit chief project manager Rick Thompson. Kennedy “will become the most complex hub in TTC’s repertoire.â€

The Shopkeeper

Her tiny shop filled with crates of sugar cane, Marcia Sterling is vaguely aware that something on her stretch of Eglinton will be changing. But, as with other businesses along that stretch, she feels the city hasn’t done much to spell out the details.

Ms. Sterling has run Shanty’s Caribbean near the corner of Dufferin for 23 years. There’s a seniors’ home and a gas station across the street, a funeral home next door, and a busy bus stop nearby. “I hope I don’t have to move,†she muses.

The new LRT station at Dufferin will be just steps away, and Ms. Sterling hopes it will bring traffic to a neighbourhood with lots of small shops, but also lots of vacancy signs. “Anything to help business, because we need business around here.â€

The Pitfalls

The Eglinton Crosstown budget is about 40 times higher than the final bill for the St. Clair West right-of-way, which – at $106-million and five years in the making – was a magnet for criticism. The big numbers suggest the spectre of big mistakes, not to mention the prospect of years of traffic snarls around the tunnel entrances, the station construction sites, and the stretches where the route will run above ground.

Looking to avoid past mistakes, the TTC has hired an outreach co-ordinator to keep lines of communication open with businesses and neighbourhood groups so everyone knows when disruption is imminent. “I’m doing a lot of proactive outreach,†says Franca DiGiovanni, a former Liberal aide at Queen’s Park, now community liaison for Transit City. “We’re talking now, and we’ll continue to talk.â€

The TTC has also changed its tendering policies for Eglinton, combining all the construction tasks on each stretch into one contract to minimize delays. As TTC spokesperson Ryan BissonetteÖ says, “One of our mottos is, ‘Get in, get out, stay out.’â€

Maybe the dirt from the tunneling could be used as part of the redevelopment of Ontario Place.
 
Transit veterans know that stations are the cash sinks in subway schemes, so the TTC’s plan for the Eglinton LRT is to create a standard design that can be adapted to meet local needs. They’ll be “cut-and-cover†boxes about 150 metres long. ...

The platforms, at 100 metres, will be two-thirds the length of a standard subway platform ...

What is the maximum future platform length for this design: 150 m, or 100 m?

150 m can handle 5-car LRT trains or 6-car subway trains.

100 m, no more than 3-car LRT trains or 4-car subway trains.
 
100 metres can handle 5 subway cars.
The problem with this endorsement is that it talks strictly about the tunnel. No one debates the fact that the LRT will be as fast as a subway but the problem arises when the trains exit the tunnels. A transit system is only as good as it's weakest point. All it takes is a traffic light going off line anywhere along Eglinton for the entire system, including the tunnel, to grind to a sreetching halt. Also time saved by the tunnel will be lost as the stops as so frequent outside the tunnel. God help them if there is an accident along the route.
Also, only in Toronto would you have to transfer onto a new train to continue to travel in the same direction ie at Kennedy. If they are going to tunnel that long they might as well use a Metro and elevate it to Kingston.
 
The station box is 150m, the platform is 100m. This means the station doesn't need to be re-excavated to be able to handle a 6-car subway but rather the storage rooms at track level would need to be relocated. The platform lengths of the Sheppard line are only designed for 4-car trains but could easily be expanded to 6-car trains as well.
 

Back
Top