Jump to content
Cartography 101

Eglinton Crosstown line

Recommended Posts

This was not to happen until 2009 and looks like someone lite a fire for it.

Very interesting in light of recent events.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here's your first bit of info in the form of a FAQ document: http://www.toronto.ca/involved/projects/eg...lrt/pdf/faq.pdf

Most noteworthy point: we won't know routing west of Martin Grove until the end of the year as it is being studied separately.

I think the only other real questionable situation is what will be done at Weston Road. The ROW exists to the east of Weston, but briefly to the west it is constricted. So I see 3 options being done for this ...

1. Extend subway portion of route westerly from Keele to a point between Jane & Weston. Underground Station constructed at Weston Road.

2. Construct short tunnel section between rail underpass east of Weston to a point between Jane & Weston. Underground Station constructed at Weston Road.

3. Expropriate the 15 residential properties west of Pearen Street, expand Eglinton Ave into a wider ROW, sell the land for development (to offset purchase cost), construct surface LRT through area with stop at Weston Road.

I'm favouring Option 3, but I think the cost of property acquisition might be prohibitive. A cost/benefit analysis will determine what's best.

As for the airport alignments, one cannot forget about connecting with the proposed Mississauga BRT terminus, to be constructed in the NW corner of Eglinton and Renforth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the only other real questionable situation is what will be done at Weston Road. The ROW exists to the east of Weston, but briefly to the west it is constricted. So I see 3 options being done for this ...

1. Extend subway portion of route westerly from Keele to a point between Jane & Weston. Underground Station constructed at Weston Road.

2. Construct short tunnel section between rail underpass east of Weston to a point between Jane & Weston. Underground Station constructed at Weston Road.

3. Expropriate the 15 residential properties west of Pearen Street, expand Eglinton Ave into a wider ROW, sell the land for development (to offset purchase cost), construct surface LRT through area with stop at Weston Road.

I'm favouring Option 3, but I think the cost of property acquisition might be prohibitive. A cost/benefit analysis will determine what's best.

I think that buying 15 properties and building ROW on the ground will be cheaper than tunnelling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the only other real questionable situation is what will be done at Weston Road. The ROW exists to the east of Weston, but briefly to the west it is constricted. So I see 3 options being done for this ...

1. Extend subway portion of route westerly from Keele to a point between Jane & Weston. Underground Station constructed at Weston Road.

2. Construct short tunnel section between rail underpass east of Weston to a point between Jane & Weston. Underground Station constructed at Weston Road.

3. Expropriate the 15 residential properties west of Pearen Street, expand Eglinton Ave into a wider ROW, sell the land for development (to offset purchase cost), construct surface LRT through area with stop at Weston Road.

I'm favouring Option 3, but I think the cost of property acquisition might be prohibitive. A cost/benefit analysis will determine what's best.

As for the airport alignments, one cannot forget about connecting with the proposed Mississauga BRT terminus, to be constructed in the NW corner of Eglinton and Renforth.

There is one more option....

Run the LRVs in mixed traffic for this section, between Weston Road and a new intersection west of the houses. At Weston Road and this new intersection, signal priority will be used to allow the LRVs to enter the mixed traffic section before the other cars. At only 300 metres for this stretch, I believe that there would be no delays if you give them a head start.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the only other real questionable situation is what will be done at Weston Road. The ROW exists to the east of Weston, but briefly to the west it is constricted. So I see 3 options being done for this ...

My guess is that the alignment at Weston will be shown at the public meetings starting tonight, since the FAQ only talks about the portion west of Martin Grove being handled separately. Hopefully they will get the display panels online within a few days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The National Post has an article on Eglinton Crosstown. The most interesting point is that the underground stations are likely to be similar to the 509/510 Queen's Quay Station, with minimal infrastructure and no fair paid area (which would pointless on a line with POP characteristics anyway).

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/t...on-project.aspx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was at the meeting yesterday, and there were placards showing the deep level sections will have a mezzanie level before descending to the the platform.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The National Post has an article on Eglinton Crosstown. The most interesting point is that the underground stations are likely to be similar to the 509/510 Queen's Quay Station, with minimal infrastructure and no fair paid area (which would pointless on a line with POP characteristics anyway).

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/t...on-project.aspx

If the project proceeds with underground station design as you proposed, how would the TTC address the issue of loitering in the stations? Not sure whether Queens Quay has this issue. (I know that a Chief Supervisor is responsible for opening and closing Queens Quay -- which I assume includes an inspection of the station).

In the subway system I'd expect that the requirement to pay a fare would be a barrier to entry for some individuals. Removing the fare-paid requirement may enable more to loiter. If so, what would be the impact to security requirements? Also... what would loitering due to ridership for those who may be uncomfortable waiting in an unsupervised platform/station at night?

I too attended last night's public meeting. Had a discussion with the manager for Service Planning. In response to my question about service disruptions (what happens if service is delayed due to accidents, disablements, etc.)... I was told:

1. There are plans for cross-overs spaced over each line... approximately 3-4km apart (including the underground portion on Eglinton);

2. In the event of a disruption... cars/trains could be re-routed to the opposite direction track... provided proper supervision/protocols are in place.

3. Pocket tracks at ends of line would store standby vehicles. Pocket tracks would be placed at other points on the line... not clear where those would be (where would they find the space?)

4. Five yards are being considered to store new LRV vehicles. Number and location are still TBD. (I'm not sure whether these would be net new properties or existing TTC properties re-purposed for LRVs). The specific maintenance requirements (i.e. inspections/maintenance/repairs would need to be performed from both above and underneath vehicles) suggests that Roncy/Russell may not be preferred locations (unless they can be retrofitted). How feasible would it be to accommodate LRVs in those yards?

While I trust that Service Planning is generally a reliable source for this kind of information... I won't assume that any of this is confirmed until we see it published in a report. So take from it what you will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4. Five yards are being considered to store new LRV vehicles. Number and location are still TBD. (I'm not sure whether these would be net new properties or existing TTC properties re-purposed for LRVs). The specific maintenance requirements (i.e. inspections/maintenance/repairs would need to be performed from both above and underneath vehicles) suggests that Roncy/Russell may not be preferred locations (unless they can be retrofitted). How feasible would it be to accommodate LRVs in those yards?

While I trust that Service Planning is generally a reliable source for this kind of information... I won't assume that any of this is confirmed until we see it published in a report. So take from it what you will.

Here is a report from a couple months ago: Transit City LRT & Streetcar Maintenance Facilities Master Plan. According to it the TTC is planning on building 4 Transit City maintenance and storage facilities and 1 new maintenance and storage facility for the current streetcar system. The preferred locations are:

Sheppard M&S Facility (Sheppard & Morningside):

- 120 car carhouse with a storage capacity of 100 vehicles

- Will serve the Sheppard East, Scarborough-Morningside and some of the Eglinton Crosstown line.

- Proposed to be built by 2012

Finch M&S Facility (Finch & Jane):

- 75 car carhouse and storage capacity of 60 vehicles

- Will serve the Etobicoke-Finch West and Jane lines.

- Proposed to be built by 2013

Eglinton M&S Facility (Eglinton & Jane):

- 160 car carhouse and storage capacity of 150 vehicles

- Will serve the Eglinton Crosstown and Jane lines. There is also a possibility of it serving the 512 St. Clair in the future.

- Proposed to be built by 2015

Don Mills M&S Facility (Don Mills & Sheppard):

- 75 car carhouse and storage capacity of 60 vehicles

- Will serve the Don Mills and part of the Sheppard line.

- Proposed to be built by 2016

Replacement M&S Facility (The Portlands):

- The main maintenance & storage facility for the for the current streetcar system as well as the Waterfront West LRT line.

- Russel & Roncesvalles will be used for staging only of streetcars and LRTs for the current system and the Waterfront West LRT.

- To serve the current streetcar system as well as the Waterfront West LRT Line.

- Proposed to be built by 2012

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here is a report from a couple months ago: Transit City LRT & Streetcar Maintenance Facilities Master Plan. According to it the TTC is planning on building 4 Transit City maintenance and storage facilities and 1 new maintenance and storage facility for the current streetcar system. The preferred locations are:

Hmm, I had heard that there would be a carhouse to serve Finch West and Sheppard East LRT lines together (partially since they would be the first two to open)... apparently the plan has changed.

Don Mills and Sheppard doesn't have much extra room for a carhouse around that intersection... although there's a gas station that closed on the NW corner a few years ago, IMO there isn't enough room for a major carhouse there (plus there may be new development there now, haven't passed through the intersection in a few years).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hmm, I had heard that there would be a carhouse to serve Finch West and Sheppard East LRT lines together (partially since they would be the first two to open)... apparently the plan has changed.

That wouldn't be possible since the lines will be connected using the Don Mills, Eglinton and Jane lines which will be built after them.

Don Mills and Sheppard doesn't have much extra room for a carhouse around that intersection... although there's a gas station that closed on the NW corner a few years ago, IMO there isn't enough room for a major carhouse there (plus there may be new development there now, haven't passed through the intersection in a few years).

If you look on page 15 of the report, the page with the map, there is a star at the southwest corner of Don Mills & Sheppard. The star means it is vacant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it would be best if the west tunnel portal ins built between Jane and Weston. I like how the TTC is proposing new bus terminals like the ones at Keele/Trethewey & Eglinton and at Don Mills & Eglinton. I really think that the TTC should treat these lines like subway lines, especially the stops where 2 LRT lines meet and where it is underground. One question I have, for the cut and cover stations will there be a walkway over the tracks like at Queens Quay Station or will passengers have to go to street level to change sides?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think it would be best if the west tunnel portal ins built between Jane and Weston. I like how the TTC is proposing new bus terminals like the ones at Keele/Trethewey & Eglinton and at Don Mills & Eglinton. I really think that the TTC should treat these lines like subway lines, especially the stops where 2 LRT lines meet and where it is underground. One question I have, for the cut and cover stations will there be a walkway over the tracks like at Queens Quay Station or will passengers have to go to street level to change sides?

Both... see page 19 for cross-sections.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think it would be best if the west tunnel portal ins built between Jane and Weston. I like how the TTC is proposing new bus terminals like the ones at Keele/Trethewey & Eglinton and at Don Mills & Eglinton. I really think that the TTC should treat these lines like subway lines, especially the stops where 2 LRT lines meet and where it is underground. One question I have, for the cut and cover stations will there be a walkway over the tracks like at Queens Quay Station or will passengers have to go to street level to change sides?

I was also surprised to see the proposed bus terminals, and while in the back of my head I was hoping the TTC would treat these more like subway lines than streetcar/surface transit, and seeing bus terminals was one of those things in the back of my mind I was hoping for. I wonder if Don Mills/Eglinton can be turned into a full 'station' with perhaps the LRT converging into the same terminal the buses use, or at least an underground station with easy connections between lines (and walkway to the bus terminal) would be very nice.

As Neil said, it will be both. It looks like any 'cut and cover' stations will be like Queens Quay; walk over the tracks. For the deeper (likely tunnel-bored) stations, there will probably be a concourse level (reminds me of a subway station...). Although the former won't work well for subway conversion, underpasses can be built for crossing between levels, and fare arrangement can be handled by Presto!, if it ever comes. Luckily Eglinton won't need conversion until many years into the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Luckily Eglinton won't need conversion until many years into the future.

You've hit on my one big disappointment with the display boards. They are showing maximum ridership of 5000/hr in 2031 but are not showing the assumptions behind that number, nor whether it is a full-line average or a peak at one point on the line. Also, we don't know what distances people would be travelling.

While I suspect that LRT capacity will be sufficient for this route for some time (and we can build another east-west route when we need to, to distribute load), it's impossible to be absolutely sure of this without a more detailed breakdown. Given the public fuss over a possible subway/ALRT proposal for Eglinton from Metrolinx, I'm surprised that they did not provide more information.

As a side note, is anyone else feeling a bit disappointed with estimated travel speeds on Transit City?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As a side note, is anyone else feeling a bit disappointed with estimated travel speeds on Transit City?

No.

It is meant for local travel, and if the travel speeds are slower, and people have to spend a few more minutes, then so be it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×