crs1026 said:
I would actually worry about the land required for loops as well as the added traffic measures that would be needed for buses entering and leaving them. And, for through routes, typical TTC behaviour will be to add padding to schedules once buses have a place to lay over. Better to have simple pull offs and force the vehicles to keep moving.

Pedestrian tunnels are absolutely essential. Literally life saving.

- Paul
Click to expand...

Exactly. The added costs of having a bus loop is pretty high. Then forever we'll have buses turning left into oncoming traffic to enter the loop, which can be a dicey manoeuvre and may raise insurance costs. I wouldn't even advise pedestrian tunnels. Just a portal kitty corner from one another and call it a day. Forcing people underground to cross the street is effectively ceding and saying cars win. It shouldn't be that way.
 
44 North said:
I wouldn't even advise pedestrian tunnels. Just a portal kitty corner from one another and call it a day. Forcing people underground to cross the street is effectively ceding and saying cars win. It shouldn't be that way.
Click to expand...
Well, there’s winning a battle and there’s winning the war. The cars won the war when Doug declared that the transit line had to go underground. Now we are just fighting small battles to make the best of that.
Separating people from vehicular traffic is generally prudent. I wouldn’t let my principles get in the way , especially since the transit riders are the ones left with the risk.

- Paul
 
44 North said:
Exactly. The added costs of having a bus loop is pretty high. Then forever we'll have buses turning left into oncoming traffic to enter the loop, which can be a dicey manoeuvre and may raise insurance costs. I wouldn't even advise pedestrian tunnels. Just a portal kitty corner from one another and call it a day. Forcing people underground to cross the street is effectively ceding and saying cars win. It shouldn't be that way.
Click to expand...

What's a portal kitty corner if you don't mind me asking?
 
crs1026 said:
Well, there’s winning a battle and there’s winning the war. The cars won the war when Doug declared that the transit line had to go underground. Now we are just fighting small battles to make the best of that.
Separating people from vehicular traffic is generally prudent. I wouldn’t let my principles get in the way , especially since the transit riders are the ones left with the risk.

- Paul
Click to expand...
It's not even just the ped-auto aspect for me. Adding pedestrian tunnels also adds to the upfront cost/complexity, then forever a place that has to be cleaned and monitored, then locked at night. I picture them and already see flickering fluorescent and dirty slush over broken terazzo.

fanoftoronto said:
What's a portal kitty corner if you don't mind me asking?
Click to expand...

Kitty corner means diagonally opposite something. So a pedestrian portal on diagonally opposite corners. I only learned the term from this site a few years ago, so I kinda like using it.
 
44 North said:
Kitty corner means diagonally opposite something. So a pedestrian portal on diagonally opposite corners. I only learned the term from this site a few years ago, so I kinda like using it.
Click to expand...

I would definitely like a diagonally opposite corner for an entrance, but that might be difficult as the tunnel itself is running along just north of Eglinton at the location of the stations. We'd have to tunnel under Eglinton and each cross street to allow for it. Doable for sure, but more expensive.

I was proposing eliminating the Emergency Exit box and putting an entrance on the opposite side of the street at least. That way we only need 1 bus of people to have to cross the street at these stations:
1649167019866.png


This way at least you have the total cost minimized by avoiding tunneling under Eglinton to reach the station box on the opposite corner. This would necessitate decking to be put on Martin Grove (the above example, but it's similar for the other stations as well) while the concourse and platform levels are built underneath. I am speaking out of my ass so it might just be cheaper to put a small entrance and a small tunnel crossing underneath the intersection to connect with the concourse.

Metrolinx's current plan keeps the station construction almost exclusively in one corner of each station intersection reducing overall cost.

Edit:
Is this what you are proposing? The underground tunnel would lead to the concourse and a set of automatic fare gates.

1649168135444.png
 
Last edited:
fanoftoronto said:
I would definitely like a diagonally opposite corner for an entrance, but that might be difficult as the tunnel itself is running along just north of Eglinton at the location of the stations. We'd have to tunnel under Eglinton and each cross street to allow for it. Doable for sure, but more expensive.

I was proposing eliminating the Emergency Exit box and putting an entrance on the opposite side of the street at least. That way we only need 1 bus of people to have to cross the street at these stations:
View attachment 390320

This way at least you have the total cost minimized by avoiding tunneling under Eglinton to reach the station box on the opposite corner. This would necessitate decking to be put on Martin Grove (the above example, but it's similar for the other stations as well) while the concourse and platform levels are built underneath. I am speaking out of my ass so it might just be cheaper to put a small entrance and a small tunnel crossing underneath the intersection to connect with the concourse.

Metrolinx's current plan keeps the station construction almost exclusively in one corner of each station intersection reducing overall cost.
Click to expand...
And less trees to cut down. There are no trees on the street's asphalt.


I have already e-mailed my concern about having a secondary entrance on the opposite side of the street. We should all send e-mails to Metrolinx at EglintonWest@metrolinx.com..The more the merrier.

From link.
Have a question or concern about the Eglinton Crosstown West Extension? Our dedicated community relations team is available 24/7 through phone at 416-202-8001 or email at EglintonWest@metrolinx.com.


Your opinion matters and we’d love to hear from you. For upcoming engagement opportunities please visit our Metrolinx Engage page.
Click to expand...
 
W. K. Lis said:
And less trees to cut down. There are no trees on the street's asphalt.


I have already e-mailed my concern about having a secondary entrance on the opposite side of the street. We should all send e-mails to Metrolinx at EglintonWest@metrolinx.com..The more the merrier.

From link.
Click to expand...

That's a really good point, I've sent the pictures above to the email address to request them to add a second entrance.

On a similar note, how does one add a question to the Metrolinx engage page? Eglinton Crosstown West Extension - Fall/Winter 2020 - Ask-a-Question
 
Government Presser..........errr, Pre-Election Photo-Op coming today at 3pm:

Ontario Newsroom

news.ontario.ca news.ontario.ca

If the headline of the Advisory is to be believed, Apparently they've cancelled the contract for the TBM, having finally found a use for the Premier other than 'door stop'...

1649679563107.png
 
As cynical as we all might feel about this, I am a big fan of the fact that a conservative politician is touting transit investment as much as Ford does. That is big progress over the Harris era. Hopefully this means we will have more consistent transit funding whenever the governing party changes. Not to say we should not advocate for more sensible investment, I just think we take it for granted that this government is relatively pro-transit.
 
innsertnamehere said:
Looks reasonable. You can really see efforts to keep the scale of the stations down to control costs.

I do think a tunnel under the intersections to permit direct transfers to n-s bus routes is probably appropriate and worth the additional cost through. The added travel times and safety risks of forcing passengers to make two pedestrian crossings to enter the station is too great.
Click to expand...

There will only be one pedestrian crossing, with all north-south routes stopping on the north side of Eglinton. It isn’t great (I, too, would prefer entrances on both sides) but it’s not terrible.

Meanwhile the province/Metrolinx still isn’t budging on two pedestrian crossings at a much busier transfer point at a much busier intersection of Hurontario and Steeles.
 
afransen said:
As cynical as we all might feel about this, I am a big fan of the fact that a conservative politician is touting transit investment as much as Ford does. That is big progress over the Harris era. Hopefully this means we will have more consistent transit funding whenever the governing party changes. Not to say we should not advocate for more sensible investment, I just think we take it for granted that this government is relatively pro-transit.
Click to expand...
I mean if we look at the history of Ontario Premiers, Harris is generally more of an outlier rather than the standard when it comes to conservative politicians in this province.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top