[Hipster Duck]

I think that the elevated guideway looks better than the suburban "geography of nowhere" cityscape around it.

 

[smuncky]

if elevated lines looked like this, i don't think there would be a problem. even if just at the stations.

 

[Second_in_pie]

I agree that an elevated line doesn't have to be a bad thing, and it could actually be an interesting addition to Eglinton. We could trench Eglinton West, tunnel the middle and raise the west part, and all the ROWs for a subway are covered. It might not be as expensive as one may think, seeing as how they're going to have to rip out half the road for LRT and then re-pave it later.

 

[Ansem]

if elevated lines looked like this, i don't think there would be a problem. even if just at the stations.

This on Eglinton?

This would be a projecr that the whole city could be proud.

Elevated is way cheaper than subway. At least half the cost.
This would be a good comprimise.

TTC gets is LRT

Metrolinx gets its true Rapid Transit.

 

[BMO]

This on Eglinton?

This would be a projecr that the whole city could be proud.

Elevated is way cheaper than subway. At least half the cost.
This would be a good comprimise.

TTC gets is LRT

Metrolinx gets its true Rapid Transit.

I think the elevated ROW will look nice when it is built, but then like 5 or 10 years down the road it will eventually look outdated and old, and begin to be an eye-sore, that's the problem with elevated guideways. In all honesty the SRT looks really old and ugly, but it probably looked really modern and cool when it was built, and look they're even thinking of revamping it or replacing it...(i know it is mostly due to maintenance issues, but still...it is going to be made to look nicer)

 

[jwill]

Elevated structures may be cheaper than tunneling, but they are still much more expensive than running track at grade. We're talking about spending a lot of extra money just to avoid a couple dozen intersections. Is it really worth it?

Also, lets be honest with ourselves. This is Toronto. It will end up being the ugliest possible bulky concrete guideway. And the TTC will be on the hook for increasing maintenance costs for decades to come. All just to skip a handful on intersections on parts of the route that may or may not require the capacity of an HRT system.

 

[waterloowarrior]

Paris Metro Line 2

 

[junctionist]

I think the elevated ROW will look nice when it is built, but then like 5 or 10 years down the road it will eventually look outdated and old, and begin to be an eye-sore, that's the problem with elevated guideways. In all honesty the SRT looks really old and ugly, but it probably looked really modern and cool when it was built, and look they're even thinking of revamping it or replacing it...(i know it is mostly due to maintenance issues, but still...it is going to be made to look nicer)

I disagree. The SRT stations only look ugly when they're dirty and the roof leaks. While even at a glance they don't look to be high budget and the narrow platforms are a negative, the minimalist aesthetic is akin the Apple look in a transit station. They're hardly eyesores, and any reconstruction by the TTC would be motivated by issues of function and cost.

Elevated structures may be cheaper than tunneling, but they are still much more expensive than running track at grade. We're talking about spending a lot of extra money just to avoid a couple dozen intersections. Is it really worth it?

Of course grade separation is worth it in this key crosstown corridor. Faster and more reliable travel is possible with grade separation. For me, this is highly desirable. The TTC planned to bury part of this line from the beginning.

 

[Whoaccio]

Most big cities do have a major network of what for lack of a unifying term could be called elevated railways. New York outside of Manhattan, Chicago, London, Paris, Berlin and Tokyo all come to mind. As much as building anything anywhere that isn't a side street has fallen out of favor in the post Jacobs era, they really aren't so bad. I wouldn't go so far as to claim they are a cityscaping improvement (though that viaduct from what I think is Rotterdam is quite slinky), they do bring high quality transit at a fairly low price, which almost always outweighs the negative impact of the viaduct.

 

[Automation Gallery]

Where is this.

 

[smuncky]

The Hague, The Netherlands

http://www.archdaily.com/18304/randstadrail-station-beatrixlaan-den-haag-zwarts-jansma-architecten/

 

[Amphibius]

Only in Europe. (sigh!)

 

[kettal]

Elevated stations are the real monstrosities.

 

[MisterF]

Is snow an issue for the Scarborough RT or has that been exaggerated? I'm not usually one to play the "it wouldn't work in our climate" card, but it's something to think about if the SRT breaks down in snow more often than streetcars or subways. Beijing and New York have ICTS and cold winters but they get less snow.

 

[Whoaccio]

Is snow an issue for the Scarborough RT or has that been exaggerated? I'm not usually one to play the "it wouldn't work in our climate" card, but it's something to think about if the SRT breaks down in snow more often than streetcars or subways. Beijing and New York have ICTS and cold winters but they get less snow.

I think this is more or less specific to the ICTS itself, not elevated guide ways in general. My understanding was that the snow interferes with the linear motors along the trackbed. With traditional traction motors, like in the streetcars & subway, even if snowfall slows traffic down they can at least still move.