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 

Tulse said:
I really don't get the love of elevated transit -- to me it is so profoundly visually intrusive, and creates dead spaces underneath.
Click to expand...

If I understand properly, price wise, elevated is between at grade and underground, which would be preferable if a ROW is called for but the space or money does not exist for other formats.

"Dead spaces" could be avoided by providing spaces for street vendors, tourism kiosks, cooling stations... just examples.
 
JWBF said:
If I understand properly, price wise, elevated is between at grade and underground, which would be preferable if a ROW is called for but the space or money does not exist for other formats.
Click to expand...

There is plenty of space on Eglinton East for a dedicated at-grade ROW.

"Dead spaces" could be avoided by providing spaces for street vendors, tourism kiosks, cooling stations... just examples.
Click to expand...

I don't think there is much call for cooling stations and street vendors on Eglinton East.
 
Tulse said:
There is plenty of space on Eglinton East for a dedicated at-grade ROW.



I don't think there is much call for cooling stations and street vendors on Eglinton East.
Click to expand...

You asked "why" pertaining to elevated transit; of course there is plenty of space on Eglinton.


Cooling stations and street vendor are just examples; however, these and other possible sources of revenue or community support should be considered to eliminate "dead spaces" (especially for side of the road els).

To explain a bit better, transit should, at least in the case of surface transit, show that it is part of a community, and support that community.

Then again I have been accused of being optimistic and idealistic...
 
JWBF said:
transit should, at least in the case of surface transit, show that it is part of a community, and support that community.
Click to expand...

I completely agree, but that's why I think elevated lines are so undesirable, in that they loom over the community, and are visually intrusive -- they essentially define a visual scale far above people-height. At-grade transit, even in its own right-of-way, is at a far more human scale, and doesn't impose itself visually on the built environment. At-grade integrates into the community, whereas elevated just runs through it.
 
Ultimately, the design, capacity and built form of a rapid transit line is a trade-off between the need for speed (exclusive right of way), cost and asthetics and the balancing of local and commuter interests (yes, commuters pay taxes that go towards the line).

The black and white Subway versus LRT debate seems to miss the various forms that rapid transit can adopt.
 
Palma said:
There is no way that elevated is better than median. I love the College, Queen and King streetcars and they are not even ROW. Of course downtown with the amount of cars and people its hard to go above the speed limit which is nice and those street are so vibrant. Putting anything below ground on those street would be a tragedy
Click to expand...

Putting the College, King and Queen streetcars underground would be a tragedy? Talk about hyperbole. I'm not even going to bother arguing this.

I guess this is Toronto Stockholm Syndrome. Let's call it the Toronto Syndrome. We've made do with our slow, plodding, at-grade streetcars for so long we've developed this affection for them that renders any hope of improvement over them unthinkable. We don't want to get away from it.

If the Toronto Syndrome existed back in the day, we would never have built Yonge or University or Bloor-Danforth lines. We want the view goddammit, who cares when I get where I want to go!

EDIT: Christopher Hume is another well-known sufferer of the Toronto Syndrome. I think you two would get along famously. I suggest you calculate which of the 500-series streetcars is slowest and ride it all day, and hope you catch every single red light just so you can enjoy the view longer.
 
Last edited:
Coruscanti Cognoscente said:
I guess this is Toronto Stockholm Syndrome. Let's call it the Toronto Syndrome. We've made do with our slow, plodding, at-grade streetcars for so long we've developed this affection for them that renders any hope of improvement over them unthinkable. We don't want to get away from it.
Click to expand...

While taking a streetcar all the way from Finch to King on Yonge is a silly idea, taking the 504 from Riverdale to King & Bay is a (most days) relaxing experience much better than the subway alternative (Broadview to Yonge/Bloor, switch lines, ride to King, hike underground.) The streetcars have their uses; no need to get your knickers in a knot.

Streetcars aren't the be-all and end-all, but the people who really hate streetcars are the car drivers forced to deal with them. Selfishly, I don't really care about their travails, since they could just join me on the streetcar if it annoys them to have to drive on streets with streetcars.
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
Presentation from the Feb 28 Town Hall:

http://thecrosstown.ca/sites/default/files/Eglinton-Scarborough_Crosstown-LRT-Update_reduced.pdf

See p. 7 - does that mean they are still considering interlining?

AoD
Click to expand...

There are no words to that effect. The diagragm on page 7 even shows Eglinton and SRT as separate colours. I did not interpret it that way at all.

The 2010 EA (http://www.toronto.ca/involved/projects/scarborough_rapid_transit/epr/a5_a6_exec_summary.pdf) showed SRT and Eglinton arriving at Kennedy Station at different elevations, so I doubt they could be interlined. Finally, the capacity of the Eglinton East portion (between Don Mills and Kennedy) may not be adequate if interlined since many passengers would continue to Yonge/Eglinton instead of transfering to B-D. Actually, even the Scarborough-Malvern line is not interlined as well since it stops on the East side of the rail lines. Forcing the NE Scarborough residence to have a transfer at Kennedy Station is integral to the Transit City Plan.
 
quick q guys, as i can't seem to find the answer sifting through this massive thread. how many additional minutes will be added to the commute time with the eglinton route going onto surface? thanks!
 
ellett44 said:
quick q guys, as i can't seem to find the answer sifting through this massive thread. how many additional minutes will be added to the commute time with the eglinton route going onto surface? thanks!
Click to expand...

15 minues approx or 25% longer (Page 7)
http://www.metrolinx.com/en/project...lintonScarboroughCrosstownUpdate_Feb72012.pdf

Ridership – forecasted to increase by 30%, and peak hour travel to
increase from 5,400 passengers to 12,000 passengers
Click to expand...

That's the main argument for keeping it underground or elevated. Attracting DOUBLE the ridership is worth the spending otherwise that extra ridership will refuse the "at-grade" LRT and turn to their cars or just ignore it to go to the Bloor Danforth line
 
Last edited:
Thanks Solid Snake for the quick reply! I meant how many additional minutes would be added the commute time for vehicles for the proposed surface section of the lrt (from Kennedy to Don Mills) vs. commuting times for vehicles for that section today? Do we have those numbers?
 
ellett44 said:
Thanks Solid Snake for the quick reply! I meant how many additional minutes would be added the commute time for vehicles for the proposed surface section of the lrt (from Kennedy to Don Mills) vs. commuting times for vehicles for that section today? Do we have those numbers?
Click to expand...

If you mean cars, I don't have the data but logically not being able to turn left or having left turn restriction would make it longer
 
Solid Snake said:
15 minues approx or 25% longer (Page 7)
http://www.metrolinx.com/en/project...lintonScarboroughCrosstownUpdate_Feb72012.pdf


That's the main argument for keeping it underground or elevated. Attracting DOUBLE the ridership is worth the spending otherwise that extra ridership will refuse the "at-grade" LRT and turn to their cars or just ignore it to go to the Bloor Danforth line
Click to expand...

So attracting double the ridership that is still less than the Finch, and SELRT ridership is a good justification for putting a line underground where a surface alignment can surface. Makes no sense!
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top