|
|
|
re: elevated proposal
It is probably better to put it in the centre of the street - less need to worry having something visually and structurally intrusive directly abutting nearby buildings. Plus it offers an opportunity to put in a covered walkway to both sides of the street (which is less "necessary" if you have it on one side), which may provide the opportunity to connect directly to redevelopments in the future.
AoD
Hi guys, I just joined UT and am thoroughly enjoying it. Thanks for all your contributions. I'm fascinated by all the above talk of elevating the east Crosstown. Is there any indication it's being officially considered?
Also, any word on whether they are definitely extending the tunnel to Don Mills and eliminating the stop at Leslie?
Finally, if the Eglinton and Scarborough RT will NOT be interlined, then are they going to rename the Crosstown the Eglinton Crosstown (i.e. drop "Scarborough")?
I found this diagram in the Eglinton EA. I was wonding why the station box is 21m wide, even though the platform is 8m and there are 2-2.5m wide trains on either side. Why the extra 3m between the train and the wall.
View attachment 12109
There is absolutely no indication at all that it's being officially considered. In fact they put the surface design out for a RFQ (request for qualification) for contractors, and have said they will actually issue the RFP (request for proposal) soon. The design is very close to being locked.Hi guys, I just joined UT and am thoroughly enjoying it. Thanks for all your contributions. I'm fascinated by all the above talk of elevating the east Crosstown. Is there any indication it's being officially considered?
I thought about centre of the road, but I thought the stations may be too daunting in the middle of the road. Even comparing the SRT, Brimley looks reasonably elegant, but Midland the station just dominates - and that still is not entirely in the median. If the station is in the median, it could have less height with 2 side platforms instead of 1 centre platform, but then passengers could not access both sides of Eglinton. If the station has a separate mezzanine level and platform level, it just becomes that much larger of a structure in the middle of the road.
Also, a side station would be much less disruptive during construction and the station could be more easily integrated into adjacent developments when it is at the side of the road. There is not that much there now, so I do not think the adjacent properties would be too negatively affected. Bening on the South, there is less concerns about blocking out the sun. A glass enclosure around the tracks in the vicinity of any building would also reduce the impact.
Likely to accommodate the larger loading gauge of subway cars, if the line is converted to subway in the future. Maybe also so that the tracks could be moved a bit further out to make the centre platform wider, I don't know.
When the city had the Prince Edward Viaduct built, opening in 1918, its lower deck was built to accommodate streetcars. When the Bloor-Danforth subway opened in 1966, there was no major structural changes to be made to accommodate the wider heavy rail trains. Looks like provision is being made, just in case, for any kind of wider vehicles in the future.
BTW. The Transit City LRV's are going to be wider (2.65 m wide) than the downtown streetcars (2.54 m wide) and wider than Montréal Metro cars (2.5 m wide).
I found this diagram in the Eglinton EA. I was wonding why the station box is 21m wide, even though the platform is 8m and there are 2-2.5m wide trains on either side. Why the extra 3m between the train and the wall.