innsertnamehere said:
or.. you know.. the elevated part of the Crosstown LRT..

www.google.com

Google Maps

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.
www.google.com www.google.com
Click to expand...
The elevated part of the Crosstown LRT only has 2 tracks abreast. The section in the Eglinton West LRT I'm referencing is west of Jane Station that has 3 tracks abreast which is shown requiring 2 pillars per pier.
 
fanoftoronto said:
The elevated part of the Crosstown LRT only has 2 tracks abreast. The section in the Eglinton West LRT I'm referencing is west of Jane Station that has 3 tracks abreast which is shown requiring 2 pillars per pier.
Click to expand...
It would depend upon how long the siding will be. Five cars long would need to be about (5 x 30.8 m) 154 m using two pillars, while the rest could make do with single pillars.
 
fanoftoronto said:
The way the headline is phrased, it sounds like the TBMs are making progress in tunneling.

Alas, we're still only in the assembly phase of the TBM. I wonder if the TBMs come here with Ikea style instructions!
Click to expand...

Hey man im just happy we are starting to extend a line thats not even itself finished yet. Thats awesome.

Shouldnt have been tunneled in the first place, but i'm happy with the expediency of these projects starting.
 
If most of the line is going to be off the road they should have gone with Ontario Line tech, which would have also assured that none of the line would be on the road.
 
M II A II R II K said:
If most of the line is going to be off the road they should have gone with Ontario Line tech, which would have also assured that none of the line would be on the road.
Click to expand...
What do you mean by Ontario Line tech? Vancouver Sky Train type trains with fully elevated viaducts?

I mean, we're using LRT technology, we're kinda stuck with this as we don't want 2 different train systems on the same Eglinton line. Decision made back in 2011 like @ARG1 mentioned.

The elevated conversation is very valid. Cheaper and faster. But decisions made by politicians can't be helped by us mere mortals.
 
ARG1 said:
Well the idiots made their decision back in 2011, its too late now.
Click to expand...
Cause it flip flop way too many times.

Now it’s a mess of three different groups of people. 1. David Miller’s urban boulevard scheme. 2. ML’s hybrid subway/LRT line 3. Doug’s Etobicoke subway

Maybe it’s a good thing John Tory’s stop reduction LRT modifications didn’t make the cut.
 
Steve X said:
Cause it flip flop way too many times.

Now it’s a mess of three different groups of people. 1. David Miller’s urban boulevard scheme. 2. ML’s hybrid subway/LRT line 3. Doug’s Etobicoke subway

Maybe it’s a good thing John Tory’s stop reduction LRT modifications didn’t make the cut.
Click to expand...

And at the end of the day this "subway" is still very much LRT. Just an unbelievably expensive one, with fewer riders than the previous proposal, and still not reaching the airport.

I actually interpreted @M II A II R II K's post to mean terminate Crosstown at Mount Dennis, and use OL technology as a separate line continuing west. It could loop to Kipling with a branch to Pearson as per the Prov's future loop concept. And Mount Dennis makes a fairly good hub point. Railway, highway, and Crosstown which could continue along Jane instead. If they actually want Eglinton West to be a subway make it a subway. Plans now it ain't.
 
44 North said:
And at the end of the day this "subway" is still very much LRT. Just an unbelievably expensive one, with fewer riders than the previous proposal, and still not reaching the airport.

I actually interpreted @M II A II R II K's post to mean terminate Crosstown at Mount Dennis, and use OL technology as a separate line continuing west. It could loop to Kipling with a branch to Pearson as per the Prov's future loop concept. And Mount Dennis makes a fairly good hub point. Railway, highway, and Crosstown which could continue along Jane instead. If they actually want Eglinton West to be a subway make it a subway. Plans now it ain't.
Click to expand...
A “subway” means rapid transit. Using OL tech doesn’t improve speed or overall transit experience. I could consider Skytrains not a subway under the TO subway standards.

You can call it crippled subway add it carries less riders. East Asia would call our subway crippled as it only carries 30-35k instead of 60-80k.

Using another technology for Eg West creates another problem. Where will the trains be stored. The crosstown of already built with yard space for all that’s needed. A transfer at Mt Dennis also creates an additional transfer those heading across Eg. Best to keep it to what we got.
 
44 North said:
And at the end of the day this "subway" is still very much LRT. Just an unbelievably expensive one, with fewer riders than the previous proposal, and still not reaching the airport.

I actually interpreted @M II A II R II K's post to mean terminate Crosstown at Mount Dennis, and use OL technology as a separate line continuing west. It could loop to Kipling with a branch to Pearson as per the Prov's future loop concept. And Mount Dennis makes a fairly good hub point. Railway, highway, and Crosstown which could continue along Jane instead. If they actually want Eglinton West to be a subway make it a subway. Plans now it ain't.
Click to expand...
I don't see what the benefit is for OL style technology vs LRT.
  • It would needlessly add a transfer for travel across Eglinton reducing the incentive for folks travelling south on the cross streets (Jane, Royal York, Islington, Kipling, Martin Grove, etc.) to transfer onto the Eglinton LRT vs going further south to the Bloor Subway.
  • LRT can handily carry the expected riders in Eglinton West LRT for decades to come, meaning we would be wasting any added capacity increase.
  • LRT can also be elevated as it is being between Jane and Scarlett. OL type tech isn't the only tech that can be elevated.
  • I don't think anyone should fool themselves by calling the Eglinton West a subway. It is 100% a grade-separated LRT line. And that's fine for the demand that is expected in this section. 37,000 passengers PER DAY expected in 2031 (Citation), and grade-separated LRT can handle up to 14,000 passengers PER HOUR per direction in a 3-car configuration. Citation
I agree that burying an LRT system under Eglinton which has one of the widest ROWs of any major road in Toronto is stupid and extremely expensive. But it's one gripe in an otherwise decent extension.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top