News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 2.6K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 4.3K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 1.2K     0 

afransen

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
2,976
Reaction score
816
Adding onto my earlier post,

Spending billions to put an LRT underground is utterly stupid, if a line needs to be underground for about the same distance ECLRT runs underground than it should be heavy rail only.

LRT has its purpose, but it shouldn't be used as a subway.

Everything about this line is a mess.
Agreed... if you're spending much more than $100M per km and still using LRT you have to question the technology choices.

UPX is quite expensive, not everyone has the luxury to pay for it. Eglinton West as a result fulfills demand to the airport for people travelling outside the immediate downtown. Furthermore, even though there will be an UP Express station at Mt. Dennis, given that it only runs once every 15 minutes, in many cases it will probably be faster to take a grade separated Eglinton West to the airport, rather than changing at Mt. Dennis. Don't forget as well, the Airport is the largest employment center in the city. There is definitely a lot of demand.
Isn't it going to be replaced with GO RER anyway?

UPE has to be expensive to manage demand given the trainsets and frequency they are using.
 

Rainforest

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 23, 2008
Messages
4,309
Reaction score
1,794
Adding onto my earlier post,

Spending billions to put an LRT underground is utterly stupid, if a line needs to be underground for about the same distance ECLRT runs underground than it should be heavy rail only.

LRT has its purpose, but it shouldn't be used as a subway.

Everything about this line is a mess.
That's true. Using the LRT technology only makes sense when all or most of the line actually runs on-street.

The geometry of the LRT vehicles is optimal for the street, where the horizontal space is a scarce resource while the vertical space is relatively free. Thus, the vehicles are relatively narrow, and use pantographs. This geometry isn't best for tunnels or elevated structures; vehicles with a near-round cross-section are preferred there. Plus, the LRT vehicles need to be street-worthy, protecting any electric contacts, having turn signals etc.

Selecting the LRT vehicles for a line that mostly runs underground or elevated, means blending the worst features of the two technologies (light rail and light metro) while forfeiting their best features. Expensive line construction like for light metro, plus expensive and subomptimally shaped light-rail vehicles.
 
Last edited:

Rainforest

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 23, 2008
Messages
4,309
Reaction score
1,794
You're describing the only sane solution to the whole Scarborough transit mess, doing Eglinton as a westward extension of the SRT and upgrading the SRT to use the newest driverless ICTS vehicles (instead of spending $1.8 billion on a technology change to LRT.)

View attachment 275125

It's disappointing to know that this used to be preferred option until Karen Stintz decided she wanted to be Mayor. Imagine a 100% grade-separated, continuous line from the airport to Malvern (once extended.) Elevate instead of tunneling for Eglinton east/west and you get it for significantly less money than we are spending on SSE + EWLRT + ELRT.
This option would work very well, based on today's knowledge: the fact that OL is coming to Science Centre, and the fact that SSE cost escalated a lot compared to earlier estimates.

But back in 2013-2014:

- The future of the Relief Line was totally uncertain. Without the RL / OL connection, funneling the bulk of Scarborough riders to Eglinton East instead of Danforth would result in massive capacity problems both for Eglinton approaching Yonge, and for Yonge south of Eglinton.

- SSE was originally estimated to cost just $0.5B more than SLRT. If that was true, then the cost of upgrading SLRT to SSE would be a lot lower than the cost of upgrading the eastern section of ECLRT to full grade separation.

So, the decision to proceed with SSE was correct based on that time's knowledge, but that knowledge itself appeared to be quite inaccurate.
 

99Messier

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Oct 7, 2020
Messages
45
Reaction score
63
You're describing the only sane solution to the whole Scarborough transit mess, doing Eglinton as a westward extension of the SRT and upgrading the SRT to use the newest driverless ICTS vehicles (instead of spending $1.8 billion on a technology change to LRT.)

View attachment 275125

It's disappointing to know that this used to be preferred option until Karen Stintz decided she wanted to be Mayor. Imagine a 100% grade-separated, continuous line from the airport to Malvern (once extended.) Elevate instead of tunneling for Eglinton east/west and you get it for significantly less money than we are spending on SSE + EWLRT + ELRT.
Link in there somewhere was the 2006 TTC plan. Also, not a plan, but the only idea I found showing all of Eglinton being SRT style trains.

We often forget that the first political interference was in 2010 when David Miller took the SRT plan and switched it with LRT. Rob Ford, in conjunction with Dalton McGuinty, tried restoring the plan back to what you show above. Unfortunately, the province had already order the vehicles and the oversized TBM's - even though at the time I thought it still worthwhile to build the larger tunnels but switch the order to the smaller compatible SRT trains.

Of course the rest is history, with Stintz, City Council, Provincial Liberals, John Tory all taking turns to make a mess of it.
 

44 North

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 8, 2010
Messages
3,399
Reaction score
1,767
It's disappointing to know that this used to be preferred option until Karen Stintz decided she wanted to be Mayor. Imagine a 100% grade-separated, continuous line from the airport to Malvern (once extended.) Elevate instead of tunneling for Eglinton east/west and you get it for significantly less money than we are spending on SSE + EWLRT + ELRT.
Would definitely have been great, but a tad reinventive/fantasy to slip in that 'elevated' part. That wasn't on the table. It was pretty clear from the MOU's getgo that it was all underground from Mt Dennis to Kennedy. Even well after the decision an option of abandoning the SRT and continuing the tunnel up McCowan was being evaluated by mlinx. So potentially 100% underground end-to-end.

I'm sure you're aware. I'm just correcting the wording of your post in case new posters might takeaway a notion that an affordable/elevated subway was on the books at one time.
 

99Messier

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Oct 7, 2020
Messages
45
Reaction score
63
Would definitely have been great, but a tad reinventive/fantasy to slip in that 'elevated' part. That wasn't on the table. It was pretty clear from the MOU's getgo that it was all underground from Mt Dennis to Kennedy. Even well after the decision an option of abandoning the SRT and continuing the tunnel up McCowan was being evaluated by mlinx. So potentially 100% underground end-to-end.

I'm sure you're aware. I'm just correcting the wording of your post in case new posters might takeaway a notion that an affordable/elevated subway was on the books at one time.
It was pretty clear from the MOU's that it was all underground from Mt Dennis to Kennedy could be supplemented with elevated portions through the Don Valley.
The part through Black Creek Drive has actually changed to elevated from on-street after that MOU.
 

slapped_chicken

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 11, 2020
Messages
52
Reaction score
134
Link in there somewhere was the 2006 TTC plan. Also, not a plan, but the only idea I found showing all of Eglinton being SRT style trains.
If they knew 65-70% of the line (Current+West) would end up grade-separated, with around 60% tunnelled, SRT/OL/Skytrain-style light metro might have edged out as the better option.

With LRT tunnels being wider than necessary to accommodate overhead power, it would have been cheaper to build narrower tunnels for light metro between Renforth/Airport and Sci Centre (skipping an at-grade Leslie stop 🙃). It would be cheaper, automated, and offer better capacity! Oh, and they wouldn't necessarily need to tunnel the whole way either, but if they chose to (as TO loves tunnelling 😁) it would still cost less per km than LRT tunnelling.

As mentioned above they could've also had a cheap alternative to the SSE, but depends if the cost of using a light metro from Don Mills to STC is cheaper than current street LRT to Kennedy+SSE.
 
Last edited:

99Messier

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Oct 7, 2020
Messages
45
Reaction score
63
I think when first proposed in 2007, there was consideration for connecting SRT with Eglinton. However, after a bit of study, already by 2010 the official word was;
SRT cannot be combined with Eglinton LRT because too many people would stay on and an on-street Eglinton LRT cannot handle it. Instead of improving Eglinton to allow it to work, they concluded it's best to force all the passengers off the train and onto the Bloor-Danforth Line.

What type of person decided the best way to solve a transit problem is to inconvenience as many people as possible. LRT was a bad idea when first proposed. As they studied it, it became a terrible idea - and yet somehow they proceeded.

edit
 
Last edited:

Cobra

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 18, 2014
Messages
1,096
Reaction score
862
I'm not really sure it was the preferred plan. It certainly was a great political move for Ford, but it removed funding for every other project, including the Finch West LRT.
How much money were we willing to raise in taxes for the Scarborough extension? Toronto unwillingness to pay for transit was always a huge part of the problem and we could have went down this route for Finch - even Jane. Political will at city hall is also an issue.

I also don't think in the long run it would've been beneficial for those on the Eglinton East corridor.
I disagree, you're looking at faster transit and less chance of disruption due to whatever happens on the surface due to accidents at intersection or what not.
 

syn

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 26, 2007
Messages
4,629
Reaction score
2,351
How much money were we willing to raise in taxes for the Scarborough extension? Toronto unwillingness to pay for transit was always a huge part of the problem and we could have went down this route for Finch - even Jane. Political will at city hall is also an issue.
Then why didn't Ford propose that in his plan?

Why did he tell everyone he could build the rest of it without any taxpayer money?

It was foolish on multiple levels.

I disagree, you're looking at faster transit and less chance of disruption due to whatever happens on the surface due to accidents at intersection or what not.
You're also looking at a transfer at Kennedy to continue traveling along Eglinton, which makes far less sense than having to transfer at Kennedy after getting off the RT.
 

99Messier

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Oct 7, 2020
Messages
45
Reaction score
63
"LRT" as we know it (especially as our second East West Metro Line) is a North American thing.

They are tramways, not 4.5 billion dollar hybrid subways - and they are supplemented by fast grade-separated rail.
It seems like the solution back in 2007 should have been to have a few lines build (Eglinton, SRT extension, DRL) along the Vancouver model and a few with streetcar (WWLRT, Jane). We had 3 rail vehicles in Toronto at the time and to avoid having too many vehicle types, they added a new type.
 

Coolstar

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 23, 2019
Messages
837
Reaction score
1,222
City:
Toronto
Just noticed that Renforth Station will be grade seperated and the tail tracks are planned to rise upwards. This means the Crosstown would be able to use ATC all the way to Renforth and possibly to the airport.
View attachment 275871
Depends on what they do at Silver Dart Station which so far looks to be an at-grade station. Of course at-grade doesn't mean it's on-street as we've seen with Renforth in this project. We also need to know the actual approach to the airport itself.

1602511224030.png
 

ARG1

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 28, 2020
Messages
321
Reaction score
730
Depends on what they do at Silver Dart Station which so far looks to be an at-grade station. Of course at-grade doesn't mean it's on-street as we've seen with Renforth in this project. We also need to know the actual approach to the airport itself.

View attachment 275887
I'm pretty sure it doesn't mean on street. If that was the case, it would be really stupid.
 

NoahB

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jun 10, 2019
Messages
252
Reaction score
648
I'm pretty sure it doesn't mean on street. If that was the case, it would be really stupid.
Depends on what they do at Silver Dart Station which so far looks to be an at-grade station. Of course, at-grade doesn't mean it's on-street as we've seen with Renforth in this project. We also need to know the actual approach to the airport itself.

View attachment 275887
Remember that the whole EWLRT was supposed to be on the street. The section from Renfroth to the airport in all the current Metrolinx maps is just copied and pasted from the old street-running design. So, I expect them to review it once the current EWLRT and the airport hub are more solid. Keep in mind that the line has always been planned to elevate over the 401 onto an elevated Convair station. It is just elevating earlier than the original (rough) maps. The question mark lies on if they would elevate Silver Dart station (or provide a grade-separation of any sort) with the runway being relatively close. The REM runs at grade in some sections with just fences. That is an option too.

Regardless, the current Renforth Station alignment shows promise.
 

Top