[Palma]

No, at grade vs elevated is a legitimate debate. First of all, the first section to be built is Black Creek to Yonge, almost entirely underground anyway. Eglinton East is funded but the construction will happen later, and if it can be done elevated for a small premium over at-grade, then why not? it won't delay the whole project.

Even more so for the western segment (Jane to the airport) that is not even funded at this time. Plenty of time to evaluate all options (at grade / elevated / trenched in certain sections).

How is an elevated LRT any different that the elevated Gardner?

I would never trust an elevated LRT. If it ever derails no where to go but down. I will never have the need to go to Scarborough so I would not be using an elevated LRT but still. And if its the western part of the LRt (west of Black Creek) I'd find ti hard to believe the citizens of Etobicoke would want to see an elevated LRT

 

[mFaust]

No, at grade vs elevated is a legitimate debate. First of all, the first section to be built is Black Creek to Yonge, almost entirely underground anyway. Eglinton East is funded but the construction will happen later, and if it can be done elevated for a small premium over at-grade, then why not? it won't delay the whole project.

Even more so for the western segment (Jane to the airport) that is not even funded at this time. Plenty of time to evaluate all options (at grade / elevated / trenched in certain sections).

Agree 100%...........build the underground section now as planned and fund. East and West ends have time for proper study with all options available on the table. Let's for once leave politics out of our transit decisions.

 

[mFaust]

How is an elevated LRT any different that the elevated Gardner?

I would never trust an elevated LRT. If it ever derails no where to go but down. I will never have the need to go to Scarborough so I would not be using an elevated LRT but still. And if its the western part of the LRt (west of Black Creek) I'd find ti hard to believe the citizens of Etobicoke would want to see an elevated LRT

Please find me an example of a transit vehicle flying off of and elevated guideway; got to be the most ridiculous comment against a proven form of transit ever.

I live along the Richview corridor and would absolutly have no problem with an elevated line(would actually prefer it be so); and in speaking with many neighbors they are very much of the same opinion. An elevated line would not interfere with anybody's views as there are no views to be had (this being the main argument agianst elevated) nobody has a home facing Eglinton between Jane and Airport and the few backyards that face Eglinton between Royal York and Wincot would easily masked by old grooth trees already planted and living there (tree canopys are inline with height of construction..IMO).

 

[Palma]

it can happen. Trains collide on the ground - they can't collide up there. Besides, what will never get them here in Toronto is that people will not want to see elevated transit going through their areas. Even New York has torn down elevated transit

 

[mFaust]

it can happen. Trains collide on the ground - they can't collide up there. Besides, what will never get them here in Toronto is that people will not want to see elevated transit going through their areas. Even New York has torn down elevated transit

So, by the same brilliant logic you just bestode on the us neither should in medium transit or underground as trains are colliding all over the place....................sheeeeeez.

Look out everyone the sky is falling; stay in and do nothing as there might be the possibly something bad might happen. world class thinking for a world class city............Winning.

As for New York tearing down elevated: easy to to when you a dozen other subway lines............oh and was wasn't elevated transit it was and expressway.

 

[Rainforest]

How is an elevated LRT any different that the elevated Gardner?

Very different. LRT is 2 lanes wide; Gardiner is 6 or 8 lanes wide dependent on the location.

Furthermore, with some imagination applied, LRT can be built into the streetscape and look rather pleasant. Vienna's metro line U6 is largely elevated, but it is not visually disruptive.

And if its the western part of the LRt (west of Black Creek) I'd find ti hard to believe the citizens of Etobicoke would want to see an elevated LRT

It is worth to at least propose that option and ask them to express their opinions. They might not object as much as residents of the central areas. Eglinton through Etobicoke is very wide (even wider than St Clair, not to mention downtown streets like Queen) and some stretches have only highrises and commercial buildings facing the street (no low-rise subdivisions).

 

[Palma]

Very different. LRT is 2 lanes wide; Gardiner is 6 or 8 lanes wide dependent on the location.

Furthermore, with some imagination applied, LRT can be built into the streetscape and look rather pleasant. Vienna's metro line U6 is largely elevated, but it is not visually disruptive.



It is worth to at least propose that option and ask them to express their opinions. They might not object as much as residents of the central areas. Eglinton through Etobicoke is very wide (even wider than St Clair, not to mention downtown streets like Queen) and some stretches have only highrises and commercial buildings facing the street (no low-rise subdivisions).

WEll your right in the central portion they would complain - but its going underneath in the central portion so nothing for them to complain about.

Even if its less lanes it will not happen and I still think it looks awful. The difference with trains colliding on the ground is just that they are on the ground - instead of derailing. Even if it would never happen just the thought of it.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

Why does it matter? Why does it kill everyone to support the thing that will cause LRT to be built in the shortest time at the lowest cost, using a plan that has been approved and funded?

If the marginal cost is low enough and the service benefits high enough. I.e. the line is able to operate fully segregated from traffic, which would improve speed, service, and reliability of the line. Than why not?

What is this Darhma and Greg??? Ohhhh I don't like being so far away from mother earth.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Palma:

While I am not the biggest fan of elevated structures (given the almost inevitable use of concrete and weathering of such), there is a HUGE difference between a relatively narrow elevated track to something like the Gardiner. It's not such a big deal if you are going through industrial or other relatively insensitive areas.

AoD

 

[BMO]

I was in Barcelona a few weeks ago where they are extending one of the Metro lines out into the suburbs/ airport, and surprise surprise , it goes from Underground (subway) to an above ground guideway above the street in the less dense portions.

 

[vz64]

Assuming that the main delays will happen when Eg LRT crosses major intersections, maybe a better solution is to build a few underpasses? Considering they will coincide with the stations, they will not halt all traffic in the same direction.

 

[BMO]

Assuming that the main delays will happen when Eg LRT crosses major intersections, maybe a better solution is to build a few underpasses? Considering they will coincide with the stations, they will not halt all traffic in the same direction.

If you have LRT in the middle of the road, it's not jsut the physical barrier of intersections, but if the LRT is in the middle of the road, it MUST travel at the posted speed limit, whereas other LRT lines in other cities like LA, or Edmonton have completely sgragated lines that can travel above posted speed limits due to cutting off access to the tracks to pedestrians and motorists.

 

[vz64]

I see. But would LRT be able to travel much faster than the posted 60km/h if it is physically separated from the main road? If I recall it correctly, the Eglinton LRT train will have speed limiters at 80km/h?

 

[W. K. Lis]

If you have LRT in the middle of the road, it's not jsut the physical barrier of intersections, but if the LRT is in the middle of the road, it MUST travel at the posted speed limit, whereas other LRT lines in other cities like LA, or Edmonton have completely sgragated lines that can travel above posted speed limits due to cutting off access to the tracks to pedestrians and motorists.

Yet I find that the heavy rail we have running down the middle of Allen Road (AKA Allen Expressway) does not reach the posted speed limit of 80 km/h. It has to slow down and stop at the stations.

 

[BMO]

Yet I find that the heavy rail we have running down the middle of Allen Road (AKA Allen Expressway) does not reach the posted speed limit of 80 km/h. It has to slow down and stop at the stations.

Yet the spacing distance between stations on the Allen expressway are much closer than what is being proposed for Eglinton East. in fact the *edit : average* spacing between Eglinton West and Yorkdale is roughly 800m. Eglinton East spacing would be 1km or greater.

I've been on the subway where it's gone (not quite as fast as the cars) fairly similar speeds to vehicles on the adjacent expressway. The cars could be speeding, I don't know, All I know is that having the subway being fully segregated allows it to move at a quicker speed, you really can't deny a segregated line of any technology would not increase speeds on the line. I mean you're using an example where a subway is in the middle of an expressway that has 20km/hr speed limit higher than Eglinton. I'm sure the speed would be even slower on Allen if the subway had to cross Glencairn, Lawrence, and Eglinton, as well as Wilson at grade without crossing arms...your point is redundant. If Eglinton was an expressway, i'm sure nobody would worry about the LRT travelling quickly in the middle of it...because highways completely segregated.