News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 8.9K     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
 5.1K     0 

BurlOak:

Lest I remind you, it's fairly arguable that the public in question is schzoid in the first place - i.e. wanting changes to existing transit plans again and again, by the choice of their elected representatives. Remind me what mode of transit Hudak is quoted multiple times as saying he support again? Are you saying if given the opportunity that his government will somehow not bungle transit planning and it has already pledged to do so prior to any election? Besides, just how much will would the PCs have in raising the funds when it has already raised the white flag on new revenues?

AoD
 
Last edited:
BurlOak said:
Why does Metrolinx always plan the wrong thing and then force more expensive solutions to correct the faults.

When does the construction on this portal actually start. Maybe we can just pay an extra $100M or so to the Contractor and get them to switch to the south side alignment. We can just call it the Metrolinx stupidity fee that I am sure the public would be happy to pay.

It is really a joke that Metrolnx has completely bungled their first two City of Toronto projects - namely the SRT replacment and the Eglinton line. Is it Metrolinx's fault alone, or are they directed by the Liberal government, or a combination of the two. Nobody will have any confidence for the remaining Metrolinx projects and decisions like these will go a long way towards encouraging the public to NOT accept any new transit taxes.

I rememeber back in the spring some people thought that a continued Liberal government would be the best for transit. So far we have the Scarborough Subway standoff (between City and Province plan), complete with numerous cancellation fees, and this Eglinton line debacle. We have a government covered in corruption that has no moral authority, or political will, to raise money for transit. Boy do I wish we could go back in time and defeat the Liberals in the spring when we had the chance.
Click to expand...

The SRT replacement fiasco is mostly Karen Stintz's fault.

Metrolinx really screwed up with the airport rail link though. They made the airport rail link spur incompatible with the existing GO train fleet, did not electify the line and did not provide any significant improvements for Brampton/Georgetown/Kitchener. The current airport rail link, with no more than a few extra trains a day to Brampton, is basically useless.
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
BurlOak:

Lest I remind you, it's fairly arguable that the public in question is schzoid in the first place - i.e. wanting changes to existing transit plans again and again, by the choice of their elected representatives. Remind me what mode of transit Hudak is quoted multiple times as saying he support again? Are you saying if given the opportunity that his government will somehow not bungle transit planning and it has already pledged to do so prior to any election? Besides, just how much will would the PCs have in raising the funds when it has already raised the white flag on new revenues?

AoD
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree that Hudak wanted subway. The big problem was the that City overwhelmingly votes for changes to the Transit City plan and Metrolinx, City Councillors, and Liberal politicians all ignored these pleas and instead of finding a cost effective solution - they waited until the whole thing blew up. It would have been much better to have a general election and then politicians would have considered the entire City and not just a small part of Scarborough. I believe the best strategy is to build the DRL, and the Yonge line, and Eglinton and the SRT. I think Hudak had it right on 3 of 4. I also think the best strategy for transit funding is to provide some sound, fiscally prudent governance for the next couple of years and then some additional taxes would be better tolerated - so I do think the best strategy is to NOT raise taxes right now.

andrewpmk said:
The SRT replacement fiasco is mostly Karen Stintz's fault.
Click to expand...

But the subway proposal was completely dead until the Liberals opened it. And then Metrolinx came out opposite their 3 years of planning to say that the subway is a better alternative. They could have easily just opened the door a bit by eliminating the transfer. Since the contracts are not public, only the Liberals knew the cancellation costs and they still have not said what they will be.
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
Yes! Good to finally see some forward looking solutions for these sorts of issues instead of building an interchange station configured in a way that's no better than the current Y+B.

AoD
Click to expand...
Do we know where Councilor Jaye Robinson and the condo residents at Leslie & Eglinton stand on this? Because apparently they have the final say on this project.

And I bet they don't want left turns banned at Leslie.
 
For the Leslie issue, if the portal location can't be changed, then another solution might be branching off the eastbound left turn right before the portal and having it beside the westbound lanes. That way the Leslie signal would only have one of the three phases conflicting with the LRT and not two. I wonder how much it would cost to add the extra lane to the West Don bridge, seeing that it's already being widened for bike lanes.
 
bielawski said:
For the Leslie issue, if the portal location can't be changed, then another solution might be branching off the eastbound left turn right before the portal and having it beside the westbound lanes. That way the Leslie signal would only have one of the three phases conflicting with the LRT and not two. I wonder how much it would cost to add the extra lane to the West Don bridge, seeing that it's already being widened for bike lanes.
Click to expand...

If the portal can't be moved at Leslie & Eglinton, move the Eglinton eastbound to Leslie northbound left turn lane to the north side of the west portal and right-of-way. In addition, the Leslie southbound to Eglinton eastbound left turn lane could stay on the north side of the right-of-way until after the east portal and then merge into the eastbound traffic. That'll leave the right-of-way without any cross traffic, other than pedestrians. Not as good as moving the right-of-way on the side side Eglinton, but it would be only a compromise.
 
W. K. Lis said:
If the portal can't be moved at Leslie & Eglinton, move the Eglinton eastbound to Leslie northbound left turn lane to the north side of the west portal and right-of-way. In addition, the Leslie southbound to Eglinton eastbound left turn lane could stay on the north side of the right-of-way until after the east portal and then merge into the eastbound traffic. That'll leave the right-of-way without any cross traffic, other than pedestrians. Not as good as moving the right-of-way on the side side Eglinton, but it would be only a compromise.
Click to expand...
Not a bad idea. Keep the left-turn movements (east to north, south to east) on the north side of the ROW, and you allow Leslie eastbound to continue uninterrupted.
It would remain to be seen if you could keep 2 left turn lanes in the configuration.
 
Markster said:
Not a bad idea. Keep the left-turn movements (east to north, south to east) on the north side of the ROW, and you allow Leslie eastbound to continue uninterrupted.
It would remain to be seen if you could keep 2 left turn lanes in the configuration.
Click to expand...

You would still have to give pedestrians the ability to cross Eglinton and as such, there would still have to be a signal there unless the LRT remained underground (whihc should have happened!) or a pedestrian underpass/overpass built, which I don't want to see.
 
ShonTron said:
You would still have to give pedestrians the ability to cross Eglinton and as such, there would still have to be a signal there unless the LRT remained underground (whihc should have happened!) or a pedestrian underpass/overpass built, which I don't want to see.
Click to expand...

Why not bury the LRT before leslie? Or just get rid of Leslie (for now)
 
Markster said:
It would remain to be seen if you could keep 2 left turn lanes in the configuration.
Click to expand...
The at-grade alignment already includes removing one of the left turn lanes, though there is space for two. For the scenario with the lanes north of the ROW, there would be space for dual lanes for SB-WB if the westbound bike lane was removed. For SB-EB it would be hard to squeeze in even one extra lane through the CP overpass.
 
GenerationW said:
Do we know where Councilor Jaye Robinson and the condo residents at Leslie & Eglinton stand on this? Because apparently they have the final say on this project.

And I bet they don't want left turns banned at Leslie.
Click to expand...

How can you blame the people of Leslie. The underground portion of the line has average station spacing of 800m (i.e. 400m walk to a Station) and they wanted to slit the 2.4 km (Laird to Don Mills) in half with a Station. What they wanted could have been built for no extra cost and no disruption to the high capacity grade-separated transit line from Yonge to Don Mills. It can also be noted that the Ferrand Stop was reinstated even though the stop is only 500m away from Don Mills.

The same problem happened in the East where residents wanted the transfer eliminated. This was a reasonable request that could have been addressed for $300M to $400M, but they decided to come up with a $1.5B solution instead.

The big people to blame are the experts who should have had the knowledge and the people with the power. In order, the list is: Metrolinx, Provincial Liberal Government, TTC, TTC Chair and Councillors on Board, Mayor and Executive, Remaining Councillors. I would probably add both Provincial opposition parties somewhere near the right side of this list since they have propped up the Liberals for the past 2 years.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top