[scarberiankhatru]

What would you guys prefer, an Eglinton to SC-Malvern link, or an Eglinton to SRT link?

I'd prefer the former, but I think most would prefer the latter.

Probably true for the majority of riders, but Yonge and Eglinton is becoming a large focus of activity nowadays too.

Not really. A combined Eglinton-SRT line serves no real purpose and helps more imaginary commuters than real people.

Extending the RT anywhere is stupid, plain and simple.

 

[Eug]

Extending the RT anywhere is stupid, plain and simple.

I wasn't suggesting extending the RT. I was suggesting converting it to LRT.

 

[kEiThZ]

It doesn't make sense when the only "benefit" is potentially similar stopwatch times between several completely arbitrary points at which no one is even beginning or ending their trip.

How does it not make sense? It removes a transfer for some passengers (those heading north of Davisville). Conversely having no link would mean every passenger deplaning at Kennedy.

We've lost the fight for a subway extension and all that's left is choice between another orphan RT and a LRT. I would rather have a continuous LRT than another orphan RT that does nobody any favours when it comes to transfers and increases the costs for the city (lack of commonality, etc.)

 

[kettal]

It doesn't make sense when the only "benefit" is potentially similar stopwatch times between several completely arbitrary points at which no one is even beginning or ending their trip.

There you have it folks, nobody ever goes to Yonge & Eglinton.

And there was nothing inaccurate about my "moronic" post. Using Eglinton rather than Bloor will only be used by the more inteligent of those commuters destined for midtown. Even if it is LRT, even if it is a transfer from SRT.

Yes, for downtown-bound riders, Eglinton is not the best choice. For downtown-bound folks, Kennedy GO train will (one day) be the best choice.

 

[nfitz]

The new Kennedy Station looks like it will be transfer hell with all those lines terminating and with the technology changes.

Subway, LRT, Skytrain, Go Train, Bus. That's a lot of different vehicle types. Though with the Skytrain being buried between the Subway and buses; and I'd think the LRT would be either at ground surface, or one layer deeper, I can't imagine it would be worse than it is now.

 

[Amphibius]

Emmet Avenue can go, but the other west end stations should stay. Remember, they still have to serve the locals if you like it or not. I'd say the LRT can skip these stops when nobody requests, but that may require standing at the next major intersection in order to maintain headways.

It's just not worth the investment nor fair to the much larger crowds awaiting further down the line. And we could still be serving the locals via the stop locations that I approved of. It's all a matter of strategic stop locations and ways in which we can facilitate safe pedestrian crossings. Also consider the surrounding communities (midblocks through Richview are sparsely-populated and comprise primarily affluents whom drive themselves). So having to stop for the odd handful of customers daily turning out at the omitted stops isn't really worth it when designers can engineer it such that no one coming in from the midblock is more than 300m away from an arterial station stop.

Specifically in the case of Mulham Pl, an intersection doesn't even exist here yet, let alone a signaled one. So an otherwise stop-free section of the 32 bus would now take ~5 mins just to clear through Scarlett -> Mulham -> RY. Meanwhile a Scarlett Stn, centric to the westside of the intersection nets all of the high rise apartment dwellers that otherwise would feed into a Mulham stop, just requiring minimal effort on their part (transferring off from the 73B's even better for all the walk-a-phobics out there).

Merging Jane & Weston is also a horrible idea. They're both major transfer points.

What exactly's right at Jane & Eglinton worth serving pretell? The Jane LRT can veer off Jane's alignment north of Lambton/south of Pinehill Cr and navigate the outskirts of Eglinton Flats Park to enter a portal leading directly into the mezzanine level of a Mt Dennis Station beginning from Guestville Ave, one block west of Weston Rd. Jane LRT may not even be needed south of Eglinton, which I've heard may be tunneled most of way down to Bloor subway. Those funds could go elsewhere since a DRL extension to Mt Dennis in the future would negate its purpose. Meanwhile a newly realigned 35 Jane bus could operate in-between Bloor and Weston, taking over the Emmett looping of the by then former 32D bus. As such, a midblock LRT stop at Emmett's unnecessary.

It's going to be sweet, there's not even 10 intersections between the tunnel and the airport. It's not as slow as the pessimists are making it out to be at all.

I hope you're right. However from having to serve all those midblocks at only 23km/h through mixed traffic to the wild, meandering routing west of Martin Grove that the planners are considering-- it may very well still take ~30 minutes from Mt Dennis to reach the airport (50 mins from Yonge-Eglinton). Beefed up transit signal priority, less stops, a more direct alignment west of MG and exclusivity of ROW could easily shave another 10 mins off such a commute.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

I wasn't suggesting extending the RT. I was suggesting converting it to LRT.

An Eglinton-SRT link does not suggest a conversion to LRT. I'm not going to trawl through a hundred pages of posts to find the one time you may have suggested something otherwise (while saying the opposite of what you're implying).

How does it not make sense? It removes a transfer for some passengers (those heading north of Davisville). Conversely having no link would mean every passenger deplaning at Kennedy.

We've lost the fight for a subway extension and all that's left is choice between another orphan RT and a LRT. I would rather have a continuous LRT than another orphan RT that does nobody any favours when it comes to transfers and increases the costs for the city (lack of commonality, etc.)

So now we're playing 'would you rather' with which theoretical project is better for a theoretical commuter base?

What larger purpose is served by having a one seat ride from Ellesmere or Malvern to Eglinton and not a one seat ride from points *on* Eglinton east of Kennedy to the rest of Eglinton?

There never was a fight for a subway extension to STC...this city and the 5 people that get a say explicitly did not want a subway extension.

There you have it folks, nobody ever goes to Yonge & Eglinton.

And there was nothing inaccurate about my "moronic" post. Using Eglinton rather than Bloor will only be used by the more inteligent of those commuters destined for midtown. Even if it is LRT, even if it is a transfer from SRT.

Yes, for downtown-bound riders, Eglinton is not the best choice. For downtown-bound folks, Kennedy GO train will (one day) be the best choice.

It's always funny to read people talk about up and coming spots like Yonge & Eglinton, which have seen massive developments in our lifetimes...a staggering 5 or 6 condos! Surely there's a few hundred people in central or NE Scarborough that would love to ride a brand new $5-6B line that either stops for cars in spots or stops for snow. The number of people riding from a point along the RT in Scarborough to a point along Eglinton, without transferring before or after they ride this RT-Eglinton line, is clearly very small - a completely insignificant number of people will benefit from this one-seat ride. How nice that multi-billion dollar transit decisions are designed around such niche groups of riders that are merely assumed to exist in numbers large enough to fill more than a few buses per hour.

I guess this vast horde of riders who crave a one-seat ride no matter where it goes or how long it takes can't possibly take the future Midtown GO line, though...oh, certainly not. It only goes from central and NE Scarborough to Summerhill and/or Don Mills & Eglinton - the vast horde is going to Yonge & Eglinton and that's a *totally* different market requiring totally different lines!

 

[scarberiankhatru]

So are you trying to tell me that the hordes of people who cram into the Eglinton sardine bus each day are confused and they actually shouldn't be using Eglinton at all?

Are you trying to tell me that people using the Eglinton bus are starting their trip along Ellesmere or in Malvern? Your question about crowded Eglinton buses only supports my point, that whatever is built along Eglinton should run both east and west of Kennedy station.

 

[kettal]

I agree with you on that. It's your "Everyone will ride the Danforth line over rather than take something that stops at red lights," and "nobody is going to a destination on Eglinton" is complete bullshit, as evidenced by the current ridership of the Eglinton East bus.

 

[kEiThZ]

So now we're playing 'would you rather' with which theoretical project is better for a theoretical commuter base?

What larger purpose is served by having a one seat ride from Ellesmere or Malvern to Eglinton and not a one seat ride from points *on* Eglinton east of Kennedy to the rest of Eglinton?

Hey. All I suggested was that it's a wasted opportunity to have the Eglinton LRT not connect to either of the other two LRT lines meeting at Kennedy. This could be either the SRT or the SMLRT. I would think this way at least some commuters would benefit from one less transfer.

Does that have to necessarily be the SRT? Not really. If it's better to hook up with the SMLRT, so be it. We could also have short-turns and various other combinations....some lines going up the SRT corridor to STC, some to Malvern, some travelling along the SMLRT to UTSC or even some going all the way up Morningside to Malvern. I am not saying any of those are preferred or practical. But surely there is some merit in going beyond Kennedy? My original point was that there has not been any documentation discussing extensions beyond Kennedy....even just beyond Kennedy till the end of Eglinton.

There never was a fight for a subway extension to STC...this city and the 5 people that get a say explicitly did not want a subway extension.

Fair enough. You know I support you on the subway. And I have written to every person I could think of about this. I have also met with various politicians (MP, MPP, City Councillor, etc.) to push forward the idea. But at the end of the day the voters chose Miller and his agenda stands. That's how democracy works. While I am not happy about the stupid transfer at Kennedy, the people have spoken and that's what we get. I just hope that some day in the future the subway will be a better sell. Till then I take consolation in the fact that whatever comes along will be a step up from the SRT today.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

I agree with you on that. It's your "Everyone will ride the Danforth line over rather than take something that stops at red lights," and "nobody is going to a destination on Eglinton" is complete bullshit, as evidenced by the current ridership of the Eglinton East bus.

People using the Eglinton East bus are going to a destination - their house or the subway (ending up somewhere other than Eglinton).

Try reading posts before pressing reply - you'll find out that I was quite clearly saying virtually nobody from the RT corridor in Scarborough is going to a point along Eglinton (or vice versa), so having one line serve these places is utterly pointless when both lines should run elsewhere.

Sorry, but people won't switch to something that stops at red lights (yet costs like $4B) when there's a parallel subway line. That's just the way it is. Actually, it's not even parallel, as it intercepts Eglinton at one end of the city and runs all the way to Etobicoke where it ends up only 4km away.

But at the end of the day the voters chose Miller and his agenda stands. That's how democracy works. While I am not happy about the stupid transfer at Kennedy, the people have spoken and that's what we get. I just hope that some day in the future the subway will be a better sell. Till then I take consolation in the fact that whatever comes along will be a step up from the SRT today.

The voters chose Miller but Miller (and about 4 other people) chose to not extend the subway. The voters don't factor into the equation, and even the public consultations are nothing more than telling the public what they've decided. *That's* how democracy works.

 

[unimaginative2]

Sorry, but people won't switch to something that stops at red lights (yet costs like $4B) when there's a parallel subway line. That's just the way it is.

Exactly. That's why the Bloor-Danforth and Yonge lines are five times busier than any parallel bus route.

 

[Eug]

Are you trying to tell me that people using the Eglinton bus are starting their trip along Ellesmere or in Malvern? Your question about crowded Eglinton buses only supports my point, that whatever is built along Eglinton should run both east and west of Kennedy station.

I know some that start their trips well east of Kennedy, which is why I mentioned having a continuous LRT on Eglinton going east on what is to be the SC-Malvern line would be my preference.

So perhaps we're in agreement. Perhaps the Eglinton X-town line should go to Kingston Road (as I originally suggested on previous pages), or perhaps even Lawrence.

 

[W. K. Lis]

I can see the light rail vehicles stopping at each underground station, like the HRT stations. On the outdoor stops, they should stop only on request. So that quiet stops, like Emmett Avenue, will be bypassed unless someone is either waiting to board or someone inside pulls a bell cord.

 

[kettal]

Sorry, but people won't switch to something that stops at red lights (yet costs like $4B) when there's a parallel subway line. That's just the way it is.

Even if it shaves 10 minutes off their total trip? You really don't have much faith in the intelligence of a commuter, do you?