CapitalSeven said:
The cost of option 4 shouldn't be that ridiculous, if it's possible to build the station relatively shallow and have the entrances in some of the green strip on one side or the other of the road. But I don't know if Toronto can imagine that. Ottawa is building a section of the Phase 2 along Richmond Road that way, so just a few elevators and stairs, no mezzanines, and as a result less excavation.
Click to expand...
Shallow - means built by cut-and-cover.
Rainforest said:
Maybe the project team feels that if any tunneling is involved at all, then they should put the TBMs into the ground and let them dig as far as possible. Saving on the portals etc.
Click to expand...
I never even imagined they would consider using TBM. But if the goal is to inflate the cost as much as possible, then sure.
 
BurlOak said:
Hopefully, those at-grade portions at Renforth and (north) West are fully grade-separated.

I think there may be some tweaking near 427. There should be a way of going over Etobicoke Creek, then through the end spans of the 427 and all the ramp bridges - basically at-grade.
It depends on how they plan on solving the entire interchange.
Current-issues.jpg
Click to expand...
robmausser said:
What doesnt make sense to me here is why with Option 4 the portion from Martin Grove to Renforth would have to be underground.

To me it looks like it is south of Eglinton and in a space that is able to be grade separated with underpasses etc without having to be tunneled.
Click to expand...
I decided to try solving the above (improving the traffic, and avoiding a fully underground LRT) with the following (with crude sketches):
  1. ROAD NETWORK
  2. To solve the weaving issue, I realigned the Eglinton Intersection to be just West of Mimico Creek. This gives more space to weave.
  3. I did add a 401 EB to 27 NB - as a left turn and not a loop.
  4. I did not add an Eglinton left turn to 401 - although I think its still possible if I move my traffic signals closer together. I am not sure it's warranted, and adding that turning movement would take up a fair bit of valuable traffic signal time (causing the 401-Eglinton to be stopped).
  5. To address the merging, I proposed to reduce the number of lanes coming in a bit earlier. This area was designed as a Freeway to Freeway connection. By reducing lanes a bit earlier, it is just reinforcing to the driver that they are entering an urban area. This starts by having only 2 lanes (instead of 3) before the 27 SB to 401 EB ramp comes in. Then again down to 2 before the 427 NB to Eglinton EB joins in. This 427 ramp lane would not end. The 2 Eglinton lanes that join would keep both lanes (thus having 5 just east of the intersection). In this extra 200m (by moving the Eglinton intersection West), there would hopefully be enough space (500m total from the new Eglinton intersection to Martin Grove) to drop the lanes down to 4 and allow for the required weaving so motorist could get in the correct lane for the Martin Grove intersection.
  6. As part of the relocation of the Eglinton intersection, the 427 off-ramps need to be moved.
  7. The 427 ramp to EB Eglinton switches places and becomes the more westerly. This allows this ramp to join before the new Eglinton intersection.
  8. The 427 ramp to WB Eglinton (and East Mall) also switches places, with a somewhat tighter radius.
  9. East Mall is re-aligned to meet this new off ramp. This frees up a small parcel of land for development, with the short piece of abandoned East Mall becoming an intra-mall road.
  10. LRT
  11. The LRT would be underground at Martin Grove.
  12. The LRT would come out on the south side, with the portal under the hydro lines.
  13. As the ground falls towards Mimico Creek, the LRT would elevated above the creek, and above the new, realigned Eglinton.
  14. The LRT would reach it's maximum elevation, about 6m above ground level at new Eglinton and new off-ramp.
  15. The LRT would then descend in the 200m from the new off-ramp to the 427 ramp bridge. (this would be about 4% grade).
  16. The LRT would then go at-grade, under the north spans of all (8) the 427 bridges. Possibly, EB LRT would be on north sidewalk and WB in the end spans - depending on exact space.
  17. . Somewhere nearing Matheson (not shown), the LRT would become elevated again to get over Renforth.
2 longer term benefits. 2 bridges can be decomisioned. The Eglinton over Mimico Creek can be demolished. This saves ongoing maintenance of the bridge. (There may have had to be a small extension of the Mimico culvert, but culverts require much less maintenance). Also, the 427 NB to Eglitnon WB ramp has a bridge over the abandoned ramp. This bridge can also be removed.
Another good thing is that either existing Eglinton off-ramp can actually be used to access both directions of Eglinton. Maybe, not ideally, but good for traffic staging during construction to actually get to this final position.

176261
 
BurlOak said:
I decided to try solving the above (improving the traffic, and avoiding a fully underground LRT) with the following (with crude sketches):
  1. ROAD NETWORK
  2. To solve the weaving issue, I realigned the Eglinton Intersection to be just West of Mimico Creek. This gives more space to weave.
  3. I did add a 401 EB to 27 NB - as a left turn and not a loop.
  4. I did not add an Eglinton left turn to 401 - although I think its still possible if I move my traffic signals closer together. I am not sure it's warranted, and adding that turning movement would take up a fair bit of valuable traffic signal time (causing the 401-Eglinton to be stopped).
  5. To address the merging, I proposed to reduce the number of lanes coming in a bit earlier. This area was designed as a Freeway to Freeway connection. By reducing lanes a bit earlier, it is just reinforcing to the driver that they are entering an urban area. This starts by having only 2 lanes (instead of 3) before the 27 SB to 401 EB ramp comes in. Then again down to 2 before the 427 NB to Eglinton EB joins in. This 427 ramp lane would not end. The 2 Eglinton lanes that join would keep both lanes (thus having 5 just east of the intersection). In this extra 200m (by moving the Eglinton intersection West), there would hopefully be enough space (500m total from the new Eglinton intersection to Martin Grove) to drop the lanes down to 4 and allow for the required weaving so motorist could get in the correct lane for the Martin Grove intersection.
  6. As part of the relocation of the Eglinton intersection, the 427 off-ramps need to be moved.
  7. The 427 ramp to EB Eglinton switches places and becomes the more westerly. This allows this ramp to join before the new Eglinton intersection.
  8. The 427 ramp to WB Eglinton (and East Mall) also switches places, with a somewhat tighter radius.
  9. East Mall is re-aligned to meet this new off ramp. This frees up a small parcel of land for development, with the short piece of abandoned East Mall becoming an intra-mall road.
  10. LRT
  11. The LRT would be underground at Martin Grove.
  12. The LRT would come out on the south side, with the portal under the hydro lines.
  13. As the ground falls towards Mimico Creek, the LRT would elevated above the creek, and above the new, realigned Eglinton.
  14. The LRT would reach it's maximum elevation, about 6m above ground level at new Eglinton and new off-ramp.
  15. The LRT would then descend in the 200m from the new off-ramp to the 427 ramp bridge. (this would be about 4% grade).
  16. The LRT would then go at-grade, under the north spans of all (8) the 427 bridges. Possibly, EB LRT would be on north sidewalk and WB in the end spans - depending on exact space.
  17. . Somewhere nearing Matheson (not shown), the LRT would become elevated again to get over Renforth.
2 longer term benefits. 2 bridges can be decomisioned. The Eglinton over Mimico Creek can be demolished. This saves ongoing maintenance of the bridge. (There may have had to be a small extension of the Mimico culvert, but culverts require much less maintenance). Also, the 427 NB to Eglitnon WB ramp has a bridge over the abandoned ramp. This bridge can also be removed.
Another good thing is that either existing Eglinton off-ramp can actually be used to access both directions of Eglinton. Maybe, not ideally, but good for traffic staging during construction to actually get to this final position.

View attachment 176261
Click to expand...
I'm not sure if you're aware of this. This plan was presented at the open house: http://www.eglintonwestlrt.ca/phase2boards/16-potential-traffic-impacts-of-lrt-on-surface/
176272
 
There may be a good technical explanation, but it really does feel like they embellished Options 3 and 4 so that they were as close as possible in cost to option 2..... thereby making Option 1 the most attractive ie most affordable.... ie
Creating non-starter options to steer decisionmaking to the preferred option, while creating the appearance of objectivity and openness to alternatives.


- Paul
 
jje1000 said:
That looks so fussy, why not just elevate the LRT over the whole mess?
Click to expand...

Or shift the light rail right-of-way to the south side of Eglinton between Islington Avenue and Highway 27, using the Eglinton/Islington intersection which in a depression to carry the right-of-way from the middle (east of Islington) to the south side (west of Islington).

176286

From link.
 
vic said:
Put all of Etobicoke underground then. 100% subway.
Click to expand...

Nah put 100% of Etiobicoke underground, but still an above ground LRT. Just to mess with them.

Actually this brings up a great philisophical question. If an entire city is a subway, and the LRT is at grade, does that make it elevated rail? ?
 
robmausser said:
Nah put 100% of Etiobicoke underground, but still an above ground LRT. Just to mess with them.

Actually this brings up a great philisophical question. If an entire city is a subway, and the LRT is at grade, does that make it elevated rail? ?
Click to expand...
Same thing as calling the employee tunnels at Magic Kingdom Disney World underground tunnels. If the park is built on the second story, does that make the paths at-grade and the park elevated?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top