[ARG1]

Of course, you leave out a critical point in this argument: the LRT is too far along to just change the types of vehicles used without a significant price tag associated with it.

It's done! It's over! Eglinton will be an LRT and that is set in stone. Unless you have a time machine and can go back to when the project was first proposed, all of these pie in the sky fantasies are pointless thought exercises. Try to come up with ways to make maximum use of what we have.

Many of Toyko's Elevated Lines started as at grade interurbans that were grade separated overtime and became metros. So no, it's technically not done and over.

 

[T3G]

Many of Toyko's Elevated Lines started as at grade interurbans that were grade separated overtime and became metros. So no, it's technically not done and over.

At grade interurbans are a touch easier to upgrade than a pre-existing underground line.

Moreover, if we find ourselves one day at a point where Eglinton is carrying too much people for the mode of transit chosen, based on the city's track record thus far, I suspect the chances of an upgrade being made in a timely manner are near 0. How long have we been talking about building the Downtown Relief Line?

 

[W. K. Lis]

Many of Toyko's Elevated Lines started as at grade interurbans that were grade separated overtime and became metros. So no, it's technically not done and over.

In Toronto and Ontario, they try to do the work over several years, using the minimum number of workers. In Japan, in this example, they used 1,200 workers OVERNIGHT.

It's because of the low priority Toronto and Ontario give public transit.

 

[ARG1]

In Toronto and Ontario, they try to do the work over several years, using the minimum number of workers. In Japan, in this example, they used 1,200 workers OVERNIGHT.

At grade interurbans are a touch easier to upgrade than a pre-existing underground line.

Moreover, if we find ourselves one day at a point where Eglinton is carrying too much people for the mode of transit chosen, based on the city's track record thus far, I suspect the chances of an upgrade being made in a timely manner are near 0. How long have we been talking about building the Downtown Relief Line?

I used Japan to highlight what's possible, not what's probable

It's because of the low priority Toronto and Ontario give public transit.

Honestly I'm tired of this myth that Ontario politicians care way more about the car than they do about public transit. This isn't true. The problem isn't that Transit has a low priority - my brother in christ the capital costs for future transit projects outnumber roadway projects at a ratio of 3:1, but rather that we as a province are incompetent at everything we do, even if it is high priority. Just look at some of our "high priority" highway projects. For the highway 404 widening north of Hwy 7, shovels broke ground around late 2018, and whilst the section between Major Mack and Stouffville has more or less been done since the Pandemic Started, work between H7 and Major Mackenzie has completely stalled. 3 years later and there are still dirt piles in more or less the same places and any sign of finishing is nowhere in sight. The Opening of the 427 was delayed by like 8 months because afaik the contractor screwed up a lot of the work.

Being incompetent, and having all of our processes tied up in tons of bureaucratic red tape isn't the same thing as being low priority. I'd argue we have transit at a very high priority, we just need to, as the kids say, "git gud".

The good news is, getting good is possible. We definitely have the will to improve transit, projects like GO Expansion and our willingness to work with industry leaders like DB on such massive projects shows that there is a desire and goal to deliver a good product. What we need now is a way to cut more red tape, and grow a political apatite to just push projects forward despite opposition.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Of course, you leave out a critical point in this argument: the LRT is too far along to just change the types of vehicles used without a significant price tag associated with it. It's done! It's over! Eglinton will be an LRT and that is set in stone. Unless you have a time machine and can go back to when the project was first proposed, all of these pie in the sky fantasies are pointless thought exercises. Try to come up with ways to make maximum use of what we have.

That's not the point of my inquiry above. I am asking if we saved any time or money by making the Crosstown a LRT rather than a full on subway running Toronto Rockets (TRs)? I'm not looking for a time machine, but I am hoping for learnings, so that for future transit projects when some accountant says we could save time and money by making it a LRT, someone can look back at the Crosstown and verify our accountant's claims. Wasn't the point of making the Crosstown a LRT rather than TRs because it would be faster and cheaper to build and operate?

 

[MrGoose]

Of course, you leave out a critical point in this argument: the LRT is too far along to just change the types of vehicles used without a significant price tag associated with it.

It's done! It's over! Eglinton will be an LRT and that is set in stone. Unless you have a time machine and can go back to when the project was first proposed, all of these pie in the sky fantasies are pointless thought exercises. Try to come up with ways to make maximum use of what we have.

Ok, we cut out some of the closest stations in the eastern section, and construct flyovers/unders at the big intersections to grade separate the line for cheap(er).

From east to west we should

Remove the left turn from eastbound Eglinton@ ionview, have a protected left/u turns at Kennedy. Remove this station

Remove left turns from westbound and eastbound Eglinton at Rosemount.

Grade separate the intersections at Warden and Birchmount and put in protected lefts and uturns.

Remove left turns at Simott, create a pedestrian overpass here.

Remove left turns at Hakimi Lebovic, remove station here and at Pharmacy.

Grade separate from Pharmacy to Victoria Park.

Grade separate at Sloan. Protected lefts here.

Remove left turns at Swift/ Credit Union

Remove left turns at Leslie.

Will the city do this? never in our dreams.

 

[ARG1]

Ok, we cut out some of the closest stations in the eastern section, and construct flyovers/unders at the big intersections to grade separate the line for cheap(er).

From east to west we should

Remove the left turn from eastbound Eglinton@ ionview, have a protected left/u turns at Kennedy. Remove this station

Remove left turns from westbound and eastbound Eglinton at Rosemount.

Grade separate the intersections at Warden and Birchmount and put in protected lefts and uturns.

Remove left turns at Simott, create a pedestrian overpass here.

Remove left turns at Hakimi Lebovic, remove station here and at Pharmacy.

Grade separate from Pharmacy to Victoria Park.

Grade separate at Sloan. Protected lefts here.

Remove left turns at Swift/ Credit Union

Remove left turns at Leslie.

Will the city do this? never in our dreams.

Pharmacy should stay, and we should instead remove Aga Khan. Also, elevate Leslie so that the line could be fully grade separated until Don Mills. The rest I agree with.

 

[JSF-1]

Ok, we cut out some of the closest stations in the eastern section, and construct flyovers/unders at the big intersections to grade separate the line for cheap(er).

From east to west we should

Remove the left turn from eastbound Eglinton@ ionview, have a protected left/u turns at Kennedy. Remove this station

Remove left turns from westbound and eastbound Eglinton at Rosemount.

Grade separate the intersections at Warden and Birchmount and put in protected lefts and uturns.

Remove left turns at Simott, create a pedestrian overpass here.

Remove left turns at Hakimi Lebovic, remove station here and at Pharmacy.

Grade separate from Pharmacy to Victoria Park.

Grade separate at Sloan. Protected lefts here.

Remove left turns at Swift/ Credit Union

Remove left turns at Leslie.

Will the city do this? never in our dreams.

I would say that by doing this the TTC would need to run a parallel bus service to fill that gaps, but they are already going to do this on the surface section anyways.... for reasons.... It does defeat the purpose of shorter stop spacing, that being to ensure the line can be used for local travel and is more accessible to a larger number of people. It's the same principle that was used for Line 2 in order to replace the BLOOR Streetcar and is why there is not day time bus service on Bloor or Danforth. Someone ,managed to convince the TTC however that Eglinton East still needed a bus eventhough the stop spacing of the line was designed to literally preclude the need for it.

 

[W. K. Lis]

According to the February 10, 2022 Service Plan, there is supposed to a 34 Eglinton bus running from Mt. Dennis Station to Kennedy Station. Could still change by opening date, of course.

From link.

This recommended 34 Eglinton route will be adjusted to operate parallel to Line 5, serving all surface transit stops on the corridor from Mount Dennis Station to Kennedy Station. The purpose of 34 Eglinton is to provide local transit access along the Eglinton Ave corridor.

The original proposal for this route was to operate parallel to the below-grade portion of Line 5, from Mount Dennis Station to Science Centre Station, serving all surface transit stops on this segment. However, during the consultations for the 2022 ASP, many customers and stakeholders highlighted the importance of access to local transit, including along the above-ground portion of Line 5 east of Science Centre Station. In order to address this, we adjusted the proposal for 34 Eglinton to run parallel the entire length of Line 5.

Existing customers travelling through Yonge St today will no longer be required to transfer between the 34 Eglinton and 32 Eglinton West unless travelling beyond Mount Dennis Station. Customers travelling along the Eglinton Ave corridor will have the option to use Line 5 or 34 Eglinton to make the trip from Kennedy Station to Mount Dennis Station. Selecting Line 5 to travel across the corridor would decrease overall travel times for users and eliminate the transfer currently required to travel across Yonge St. For users seeking a shorter access distance to local transit stops, the 34 Eglinton will
continue to make all local stops along the corridor, and will also provide service across Yonge St, eliminating the current need for a transfer. The consolidation of service on the Eglinton corridor would result in some increased wait times for users of the 34 Eglinton, but these would be significantly outweighed by the reduction in travel time on the corridor via Line 5. Overall, this change is an improvement for customers and, therefore, is recommended.

Having a 32 Eglinton West bus running parallel to the Line 5 Eglinton West extension in Etobicoke would serve the "local" stops between the stations, especially between Martin Grove Station and Renforth Station. If the extension had been on the surface, there would have be more stops for the LRT, but Dougy doesn't want to see the plebeians passing him when he drives by himself around.

 

[MrGoose]

I would say that by doing this the TTC would need to run a parallel bus service to fill that gaps, but they are already going to do this on the surface section anyways.... for reasons.... It does defeat the purpose of shorter stop spacing, that being to ensure the line can be used for local travel and is more accessible to a larger number of people. It's the same principle that was used for Line 2 in order to replace the BLOOR Streetcar and is why there is not day time bus service on Bloor or Danforth. Someone ,managed to convince the TTC however that Eglinton East still needed a bus eventhough the stop spacing of the line was designed to literally preclude the need for it.

People can walk the extra 200m to the next closest stop. The faster and more frequent the train, the more likely they’ll do it

 

[W. K. Lis]

But is that really true? Id be willing to bet that the areas of the Subway network that has wider stop spacing has far fewer "walk-in" passengers then the denser parts of the network. Unless you are fortunate enough to live right next to a stop most people will likely take the bus to the nearest station and not walk.

The cul-de-sacs and crescents surrounding Eglinton West in Etobicoke add a LARGE distance to get to and from the stations. Even if they have sidewalks, they will have many more minutes added to their walks (if the sidewalks are plowed, being low priority for the city). (If a street has no sidewalks, then the speed limit needs to be 30 km/h or less.)

Hopefully, walkways will be installed so that people can use the "shortcuts". Additional cost maybe involve if the city has to buy property to put them in.

From link.

 

[ARG1]

I would say that by doing this the TTC would need to run a parallel bus service to fill that gaps, but they are already going to do this on the surface section anyways.... for reasons.... It does defeat the purpose of shorter stop spacing, that being to ensure the line can be used for local travel and is more accessible to a larger number of people. It's the same principle that was used for Line 2 in order to replace the BLOOR Streetcar and is why there is not day time bus service on Bloor or Danforth. Someone ,managed to convince the TTC however that Eglinton East still needed a bus eventhough the stop spacing of the line was designed to literally preclude the need for it.

It is because of the backlash they got for removing stops as part of Eglinton East RapidTO. The TTC is now terrified of the prospect of reducing stop access in any way.

 

[Rainforest]

I would say that by doing this the TTC would need to run a parallel bus service to fill that gaps, but they are already going to do this on the surface section anyways.... for reasons.... It does defeat the purpose of shorter stop spacing, that being to ensure the line can be used for local travel and is more accessible to a larger number of people. It's the same principle that was used for Line 2 in order to replace the BLOOR Streetcar and is why there is not day time bus service on Bloor or Danforth. Someone ,managed to convince the TTC however that Eglinton East still needed a bus eventhough the stop spacing of the line was designed to literally preclude the need for it.

The bus is kind of needed between Don Mills and Mount Dennis, as some stations will be more than 1 km apart. In fact, the stop spacing there will be wider than on the central part of BD subway.

They could save on the bus cost if they don't run any bus between Don Mills and Kennedy. But perhaps decided that the section is short and the saving isn't worth dealing with complains.

 

[Rainforest]

The 32A Eglinton West bus to Renforth Station has a headway of about every 12 minutes (allegedly). Most passengers today would be heading south towards Line 2, because of the traffic congestion (caused by single-occupant autos) and remaining construction.

With the opening of Line 5 this year (allegedly), there will likely be an increase in passenger loads on the 32 (between Renforth Station and Mt. Dennis Station. Will it be every 5 minutes, like they expect Line 5 to be? Will they use articulated buses on the 32 and leave the headway at every 10 minutes?
View attachment 450645Subject to change, of course.

In the interim (ECLRT in service, Eg West is under construction), the frequency of 32A will probably go up.

Once Eg West opens: expect that parallel bus service will exist but will be very infrequent. Think #97 Yonge.

 

[W. K. Lis]

In the interim (ECLRT in service, Eg West is under construction), the frequency of 32A will probably go up.

Once Eg West opens: expect that parallel bus service will exist but will be very infrequent. Think #97 Yonge.

The station spacing on Line 5 is almost the same as the station spacing on Line 2, except that Line 2 does not have a parallel bus service.