News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.5K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.4K     0 

So why can't Metrolinx just expropriate the land? Its not like expropriation by gov;t has not be done in the past
 
Palma said:
So why can't Metrolinx just expropriate the land? Its not like expropriation by gov;t has not be done in the past
Click to expand...
It would be a little scandalous. Government just sold the land (Ford's fault), and now needs to buy the land back at a higher cost.

Plus reimbursements and penalties paid to all the developers who just built new buildings last year on the land. And demolishing brand new buildings!
 
Last edited:
Using the south side of Eglinton Avenue West would cause an uproar should anyone take over the linear parkland and bicycle path. This isn't the 1950's, when they handed 18 acres (7.3 ha) of High Park over for The Queensway. That should never happen again. As it stands currently, the city would have another battle with the groves of trees on the north side of Eglinton Avenue West.
 
mdrejhon said:
It would be a little scandalous. Government just sold the land (Ford's fault), and now needs to buy the land back at a higher cost.

Plus reimbursements and penalties paid to all the developers who just built new buildings last year on the land. And demolishing brand new buildings!
Click to expand...
I wonder if Ford's name is dragged so thoroughly in the mud that we could actually pull it off...
 
W. K. Lis said:
Using the south side of Eglinton Avenue West would cause an uproar should anyone take over the linear parkland and bicycle path. This isn't the 1950's, when they handed 18 acres (7.3 ha) of High Park over for The Queensway. That should never happen again. As it stands currently, the city would have another battle with the groves of trees on the north side of Eglinton Avenue West.
Click to expand...

Ask people if they want elevated or subway and they will choose elevated. Ask if they want elevated or on-street and they will choose elevated. Set the budget and preclude the subway option. And I don't think that a 1.5m diameter pier column (or periodically two 1.0m diameter pier columns about 4m apart) would have much of an effect on a bike path.
 
CapitalSeven said:
Well, ask people if they want elevated in someone else's neighbourhood and they might say yes.
Click to expand...
I can only go by facts:
  • The most popular part of the SRT is at STC, where its elevated.
  • The original planned SRT replacement with LRT had locals pushing to have the eastern portion grade-separated - they settled on part elevated, part underground with no on-street portion.
  • The ECLRT was planned on street through Black Creek and locals pushed for it to be elevated.
  • The ECLRT in-median was disliked enough to lead to the stalemate between on-street LRT and an fully underground Eglinton line.
  • It lead to the Scarborough subway and SmartTrack proposals because the stalement was too strong.
 
BurlOak said:
I can only go by facts:
  • The most popular part of the SRT is at STC, where its elevated.
  • The original planned SRT replacement with LRT had locals pushing to have the eastern portion grade-separated - they settled on part elevated, part underground with no on-street portion.
  • The ECLRT was planned on street through Black Creek and locals pushed for it to be elevated.
  • The ECLRT in-median was disliked enough to lead to the stalemate between on-street LRT and an fully underground Eglinton line.
  • It lead to the Scarborough subway and SmartTrack proposals because the stalement was too strong.
Click to expand...

I believe that elevated option is suitable for the western section of Eglinton. The right-of-way is very wide there, and the visual disruption will be minimal.

Still, I think that some of your arguments are a bit stretched:

BurlOak said:
The original planned SRT replacement with LRT had locals pushing to have the eastern portion grade-separated - they settled on part elevated, part underground with no on-street portion.
Click to expand...

To my knowledge, that eastern portion was always planned as fully grade-separated. Locals did not have to push for it.

BurlOak said:
The ECLRT was planned on street through Black Creek and locals pushed for it to be elevated.
Click to expand...

Indeed, that section was initially planned on street. However, I am not aware of any "locals" who pushed it to be elevated. A considerable local opposition applied to the next section (around Weston Rd), and got the line underground there. As for the elevated section crossing Black Creek, it is more likely that Metrolinx found the elevated option is preferable from the traffic flow perspective, and connectivity to the maintenance facility.

BurlOak said:
The ECLRT in-median was disliked enough to lead to the stalemate between on-street LRT and an fully underground Eglinton line.
Click to expand...

Again, I did not read about any complains related to Eglinton in-median LRT. There were lots about Sheppard, and some about Finch.
 
GenerationW said:
I guess STC having a bus terminal with a thousand connecting routes has nothing to do with that.
Click to expand...

If you take a look at the Sheppard Corridor report from a few years ago, you'll see that STC isn't a particularly major destination in Scarborough. In fact, the interesting thing about Scarborough is that destinations are very evenly distributed throughout the borough. There isn't any one location where people tend to terminate their trips.

This has made me wonder if we really needed the SRT built back in the 80s. I'm sure that if Scarborough bus routes were reorganized to terminate at Kennedy, ridership on the SRT would be a fraction of what it is today.

Speaking from personal experience, when travelling through Scarborough to get downtown, there are usually significant travel time benefits by taking a bus directly to Kennedy, rather than taking a bus to STC and then to Kennedy. The only exception I've seen to this rule is if your designation is STC.
 
TheTigerMaster said:
If you take a look at the Sheppard Corridor report from a few years ago, you'll see that STC isn't a particularly major destination in Scarborough. In fact, the interesting thing about Scarborough is that destinations are very evenly distributed throughout the borough. There isn't any one location where people tend to terminate their trips.

This has made me wonder if we really needed the SRT built back in the 80s. I'm sure that if Scarborough bus routes were reorganized to terminate at Kennedy, ridership on the SRT would be a fraction of what it is today.

Speaking from personal experience, when travelling through Scarborough to get downtown, there are usually significant travel time benefits by taking a bus directly to Kennedy, rather than taking a bus to STC and then to Kennedy. The only exception I've seen to this rule is if your designation is STC.
Click to expand...

But you would need a lot more buses, if every major route had to run to Kennedy instead of feeding into STC.

A rail trunk route is more efficient operationally, if the demand is high enough.
 
Definitely. The operational costs of rail amortized over decades will be much lower.

In the short term, such as with our SRT life extension plan, the merits are not as clear. As far as I know, the TTC has never released an evaluation of the costs and benefits of extending the life of our SRT by 10 years (while we wait for SSE to be completed) vs. running busses.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top