[BMO]

Depends what you are trying to measure. If you are trying to measure how irresponsible society is in general than a per capita value needs to be used. If you are trying to measure how noticeable the impact of their actions are then a per km^2 is more useful. Obviously the more you spread people out the less they will notice what the other people are doing.

Exactly, it's not a matter of whether we as a society in whole are adding substantially to the global air degradation, but the fact that if everyone in the world lived like us, it would be very bad news for the environment.

 

[Mapleson]

Exactly, it's not a matter of whether we as a society in whole are adding substantially to the global air degradation, but the fact that if everyone in the world lived like us, it would be very bad news for the environment.

Point emissions is only one way of viewing our impact on the environment, one that makes Canada look much less environmentally friendly that it actually is (60% of our electricity generation comes from Hydro and another 15% from Nuclear). Both the environement and economy are global issues that require a global view to account for each players interactions.

The fact that if everyone in the world lives like we currently do, it is very bad news for the environment. At current usage, we have 47 years of proven and probably (conventional and unconventional) oil reserves. If world population peaks in 2030 at 9 billion, we'll have a chance, if not I'll be glad to be retired and let someone else figure out the future.

 

[kd86]

What a mess the Eglinton LRT project has become. If you put it underground it doesn’t make sense because their using a technology thats meant for the surface, and if you put it on the surface your now compromising the speed of the line; because we all know the city's traffic department will not give transit priority signal to Eglinton LRT. Here's an easy suggestion scrap the LRT order from bombardier and order the cheaper Mark 2 train trains, and elevated the line between Don Mills and Kennedy. DONE! It’s cheaper and I'm sure it would be faster to build.

At this point I'm just frustrated that this option is not even a part of the debate at city hall or the TTC. Wake up people.

 

[drum118]

What a mess the Eglinton LRT project has become. If you put it underground it doesn’t make sense because their using a technology thats meant for the surface, and if you put it on the surface your now compromising the speed of the line; because we all know the city's traffic department will not give transit priority signal to Eglinton LRT. Here's an easy suggestion scrap the LRT order from bombardier and order the cheaper Mark 2 train trains, and elevated the line between Don Mills and Kennedy. DONE! It’s cheaper and I'm sure it would be faster to build.

At this point I'm just frustrated that this option is not even a part of the debate at city hall or the TTC. Wake up people.

Will not be faster to build being elevated vs. grade, but faster than tunnel.

There has been debates on elevations, but they get shot down.

It will cost more to build an elevated line than a surface line as will take longer. More so, you have major accessibility issues with both elevation and tunnel, where there is none for grade.

You wanting to go to Mark II is what Metrolinx and bombardier wanted to do from day one, as bombardier will try to use the Eglinton line as a show case to sell their system. The SRT was the showcase for the Mark I and how many got built before the Mark II came along? How many Mark II lines have been built, not counting airports?

Priority signals are a major issue and its time for council to deal with it.

At the end of the day, elevated systems need to be built, as they are cheaper and faster than underground system.

Everyone talks speed, but who for and what purposed?

Are we building a city for people to live, work, shop and play in a small area or are we built them to be located in zones, like they are today?

 

[kd86]

When I meant cheaper, I was referring to an elevated vs subway option. I'm very supportive of at grade light rail; however I'm just not convinced Eglinton is an appropriate place to display such a technology. If the line every reaches the airport in the west and Malvern in the northeast then the line will need to be grade separated. Having exclusive right-of-way to semi right-of-way will make things to complicate in terms of operation. In addition I'm not sure anyone would want to use a line that would take more than an hour to get to the airport from Malvern.

 

[unimaginative2]

When I meant cheaper, I was referring to an elevated vs subway option. I'm very supportive of at grade light rail; however I'm just not convinced Eglinton is an appropriate place to display such a technology. If the line every reaches the airport in the west and Malvern in the northeast then the line will need to be grade separated. Having exclusive right-of-way to semi right-of-way will make things to complicate in terms of operation. In addition I'm not sure anyone would want to use a line that would take more than an hour to get to the airport from Malvern.

Completely agree with all your points. I think surface LRT is great in many locations, but Eglinton demands higher speed and capacity.

 

[Electrify]

I think it is more likely to build a subway to the North Pole, than it is to get Ford to realize (or admit) that surface LRT is a fast and efficient form of rapid transit. Understood. But I want him to comment on the idea of elevated rail. Going for the "it's ugly" excuse to dislike it is far too easy at this point, and proves to his critics that he truly has an illogical hate for surface transit. Remember, he proposed a monorail for the waterfront after all. If he wants the line to be separate from cars, then there is no reason why it can't be elevated considering the money saved and density of the vicinity.

Build Eglinton on the surface in Etobicoke, underground through midtown, and elevated through Scarborough. Use the money saved for a Finch B/LRT in the hydro corridor from Woodbine Slots to the Zoo, and figure out what to do with the Sheppard subway some other time.

 

[Justin10000]

Completely agree with all your points. I think surface LRT is great in many locations, but Eglinton demands higher speed and capacity.

And what is your basis? The average speeds for the western, and eastern surface sections come close to subway speeds. How is an underground line that will have slightly faster vehicle time, but will require lengthy trips to reach the surface/platforms quicker?

 

[Dan416]

And what is your basis? The average speeds for the western, and eastern surface sections come close to subway speeds. How is an underground line that will have slightly faster vehicle time, but will require lengthy trips to reach the surface/platforms quicker?

Lengthy trips to reach the surface/platform?

I never hear anyone complain about getting to the stations of subway stations or elevated rail.

 

[nfitz]

I never hear anyone complain about getting to the stations of subway stations or elevated rail.

Have you transferred from AMT to Metro at Lucien L'allier lately? Or tried to get to the streetcar from northern entrance to Spadina station?

Don Mills station to the buses is quite a trek too. York Mills too now I think about it. Certainly a lot slower than changing from a Cosburn bus to a 506 at Main, or a 504 at Broadview.

 

[TTCboy13]

What about the Eglinton Crostown LRT transitoning to an above ground ROW like the RT but on top of Eglinton Ave from Banff Rd until Brentcliff Rd, the row then splits into two and runs along Eglinton ave before Leslie it runs in a tunnel going down still seperated tunnels until Wynford Dr, it continues and merges into one above ground ROW until Kennedy Station and continues onto the RT platform XD

 

[BurlOak]

What a mess the Eglinton LRT project has become. If you put it underground it doesn’t make sense because their using a technology thats meant for the surface, and if you put it on the surface your now compromising the speed of the line; because we all know the city's traffic department will not give transit priority signal to Eglinton LRT. Here's an easy suggestion scrap the LRT order from bombardier and order the cheaper Mark 2 train trains, and elevated the line between Don Mills and Kennedy. DONE! It’s cheaper and I'm sure it would be faster to build.

At this point I'm just frustrated that this option is not even a part of the debate at city hall or the TTC. Wake up people.

Ford (Metrolinx) had a contract(s) in place so he acted quickly (within 4 months of taking office) to make his political decision to switch to a grade seperated (underground or elevated) line. It should have been the technical experts (TTC or Metrolinx) that should have realized that LRT is the wrong technology for fully grade seperated. Most times, subway announcements have always come at the end of a political term, leaving the next guy to pick up the costs.

I believe the main reason Mark 2 trains (or full subway) were not considered was that TTC was hoping that the Ford plan would die and things would revert back to the old Transit City plan. It looks like there strategy may be working.

By the way, median LRT is supposed to be good for building healthy neighbourhoods, while underground or elevated much less so. However, the Eglinton median portion is mostly through areas that have no residential/neighbourhood feel to them (i.e. Golden Mile) and the underground portion is where there is already a nice urban setting. I know there are other factors (narrow road width in central core), but the logic seems to lead away from median LRT on Eglinton East.

 

[rbt]

I believe the main reason Mark 2 trains (or full subway) were not considered was that TTC was hoping that the Ford plan would die and things would revert back to the old Transit City plan. It looks like there strategy may be working.

Mark II sucks because there is only one vendor who can build them. If they price Mark III's at $10M per train, then that is what you would need to pay. No choice in the matter without undertaking a billion dollar line conversion.

Vendor lockin is a horrible place to get yourself, particularly if that vendor decides that they're not making that item anymore (see Mark I's).

When Bombardiers patents expire and other vendors can make vehicles that would run on a Skytrain type line, then by all means.

 

[officedweller]

Will not be faster to build being elevated vs. grade, but faster than tunnel.

There has been debates on elevations, but they get shot down.

It will cost more to build an elevated line than a surface line as will take longer. More so, you have major accessibility issues with both elevation and tunnel, where there is none for grade.

You wanting to go to Mark II is what Metrolinx and bombardier wanted to do from day one, as bombardier will try to use the Eglinton line as a show case to sell their system. The SRT was the showcase for the Mark I and how many got built before the Mark II came along? How many Mark II lines have been built, not counting airports?

Priority signals are a major issue and its time for council to deal with it.

At the end of the day, elevated systems need to be built, as they are cheaper and faster than underground system.

Everyone talks speed, but who for and what purposed?

Are we building a city for people to live, work, shop and play in a small area or are we built them to be located in zones, like they are today?

WRT construction time for elevated vs at-grade - it depends on the allignment (centre or to the side)
and whether there are utilities under the allignment that need to be relocated.

For elevated, I think a side of road allignment is better, because the guideway and stations can be lower and more human in scale to fit in with the community.
Elevated guideway construction can also be done around active roadways.

Columns on No. 3 Rd for Canada Line in Richmond
(note the lack of disruption other than the column footing, as electrical conduits, etc. are housed within the elevated guideway):

http://canadalinephotos.blogspot.com/2007/11/2007-11-25-richmond-brighouse-station.html

http://canadalinephotos.blogspot.com/2008/01/2008-01-06-richmond-brighouse-station.html

The gantry crawls from column to column and assembles the precast sections of guideway
(this is the single track section, but it's the same for dual track (as both track are within one guideway)):

http://canadalinephotos.blogspot.com/2008/01/2008-01-06-richmond-brighouse-station.html

http://canadalinephotos.blogspot.com/2008/02/2008-02-17-richmond-brighouse-station.html

http://canadalinephotos.blogspot.com/2008/02/2008-02-17-richmond-brighouse-station.html

http://canadalinephotos.blogspot.com/2008/02/2008-02-17-richmond-brighouse-station.html

http://canadalinephotos.blogspot.com/2008/03/2008-03-24-richmond-brighouse-station.html

Further north along No. 3 rd. in Richmond - after landscaping:

http://canadalinephotos.blogspot.com/2009/05/2009-05-25-aberdeen-station.html

http://canadalinephotos.blogspot.com/2009/05/2009-05-25-aberdeen-station.html

http://canadalinephotos.blogspot.com/2009/05/2009-05-25-aberdeen-station.html

Here's a link to pics of Seattle Link LRT construction -
go to April 2007 and later for pics of at-grade construction on Martin Luther King Way
(note that that stretch is the only at-grade section of the line and locals complained that Sound Transit cut costs there because it was a low income area):

http://st2.soundtransit.org/delory_slideshow/soundtransit.html

 

[ssiguy2]

As I have stated before, ALRT being proprietary is a moot point.......as long as Bombardier builds it then it's fine because they are Toronto's defacto rail supplier.
Would I recommend SkyTrain generally?....no as I think monorail is superior but the difference is that you already have the SRT. The TTC is going to be spending an unbelievable $1.2 billion to convert the line to LRT and it says it will have to shut the line down for up to 4 years to do it. If they simply upgraded the stations, bought the very nice, quiet, attractive, spacious, reliable, fast, and safe MK11 cars, put in the cheap heating mechanisms, and improved the GO underpass they could save themselves a cool billion, have a higher capacity line than standard LRT, only have to shut down the line for a couple of months, and have lower operational costs as it can be automated unlike at grade LRT.
If they elevated the Kennedy to DM sections then Toronto would have nearly $2.5 billion extra dollars to play with for rapid transit. $650 for Sheppard, $650 to extend the line towards Malvern, $200 million for new buses , bus lanes, and stations for the Finch BRT, and would leave a cool billion to start the eastern section of the DRL.
If Toronto simply extended SRT along Eglinton elevated to DM it would be totally grade separated rapid/mass transit but have better speed and capacity than any at grade LRT and be much cheaper to boot.
Correct me if I'm wrong but was that not the original plan by Metrolinx?