Jump to content

Recommended Posts

you can get used parts since are many still around in North America but they would cost more then making them yourself
Regarding the Eglinton LRT display boards, my concern (so far) is with the attempt to introduce "Michigan Lefts" at several intersections - for no good reason that I can see.

Dan

Link to post
Share on other sites
In what way?

With some station, entrance locations are concentrated mostly on the eastern side. I wonder why the TTC could not have an entrance on each end of the station, considering there isn't going to be a fair paid barrier.

In one case, both entrances are on side of the street.

Link to post
Share on other sites
With some station, entrance locations are concentrated mostly on the eastern side. I wonder why the TTC could not have an entrance on each end of the station, considering there isn't going to be a fair paid barrier.

Looks to me like they try to get the station entrances near the actual prime intersection, which then locates the station to one side of the intersection.

As for not having entrances at each end of the station, I think it's simply a matter of cost. The additional set of entrances would require an additional mezzanine and three additional elevators.

Anyone know why the TTC has moved away from having shallow stations without a mezzazine?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Looks to me like they try to get the station entrances near the actual prime intersection, which then locates the station to one side of the intersection.

As for not having entrances at each end of the station, I think it's simply a matter of cost. The additional set of entrances would require an additional mezzanine and three additional elevators.

Anyone know why the TTC has moved away from having shallow stations without a mezzazine?

Given how much effort is being spent now to make second exits at subway stations with only 1 exit, I don't think that the new uderground stations on LRT lines will have only 1 exit. Wouldn't it be against safety/fire codes?
Link to post
Share on other sites
Looks to me like they try to get the station entrances near the actual prime intersection, which then locates the station to one side of the intersection.

As for not having entrances at each end of the station, I think it's simply a matter of cost. The additional set of entrances would require an additional mezzanine and three additional elevators.

Anyone know why the TTC has moved away from having shallow stations without a mezzazine?

Apparently the TTC is building the underground portion to subway standards. Which would explain leaving entrances out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Regarding the Eglinton LRT display boards, my concern (so far) is with the attempt to introduce "Michigan Lefts" at several intersections - for no good reason that I can see.

Dan

My biggest concern was the fact that the 2nd set of display boards was entirely upside down except for the first slide :lol:. Joking aside...

I believe the concern is that the TTC doesn't want to install another lane in the road for the extra left turn lane. Intersections with stations are problematic because the streetcar platform adds a lot of extra room, and there would be (at many spots I'm sure) cuts into the sidewalks and property acquisitions. By eliminating left turn lanes at intersections, that lane will be used for platforms instead. This will keep road widening to a minimum and property acquisitions down.

When these left turn lanes are installed as U-turn lanes at other intersections, the pre-existing left turn lane can be used, or a left turn lane installed. Because there are no platforms at these U-turns, the road widening would be less significant than at intersections with platforms. My primary concern over these arrangements is that more places cross the LRT track, meaning more places for the LRT to be slowed down.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I personally do not oppose implementing them, I just think that others will.

It's not a comment at you. It's a comment at a defeatism in general.

In all honesty, the way the environmental assessment rules are written there isn't much that a person opposed to the project can do. Unless the complaint involves a provincially significant natural or cultural resource or an aboriginal treaty right then you can't delay an EA.

Link to post
Share on other sites
My biggest concern was the fact that the 2nd set of display boards was entirely upside down except for the first slide :lol:. Joking aside...

Although there's nothing that says that they would still be upside-down after you've printed them. But I digress...

I believe the concern is that the TTC doesn't want to install another lane in the road for the extra left turn lane. Intersections with stations are problematic because the streetcar platform adds a lot of extra room, and there would be (at many spots I'm sure) cuts into the sidewalks and property acquisitions. By eliminating left turn lanes at intersections, that lane will be used for platforms instead. This will keep road widening to a minimum and property acquisitions down.

When these left turn lanes are installed as U-turn lanes at other intersections, the pre-existing left turn lane can be used, or a left turn lane installed. Because there are no platforms at these U-turns, the road widening would be less significant than at intersections with platforms. My primary concern over these arrangements is that more places cross the LRT track, meaning more places for the LRT to be slowed down.

I'm sorry but that's garbage, especially when you consider that the City owns all of the land for the former Richview Expressway and could in theory run the line in a depressed open cut for only the cost of construction.

The original plans for all of the lines (including Eglinton) was to have far-side platforms at all locations. And according to one of the planners at the first round of Eglinton meetings, to have the priority equipment set up in such a way that it would trigger the lights far enough away that LRT's wouldn't have to stop - they would sail through a green and stop at the far-side stop. When it was time to go, there was no waiting for the signal to cycle back to green.

Nevermind the fact that cars/trucks will now have to contend with up to four different traffic lights where in many places there is only one. What is all that pollution going to cost? How about the decreased average speed, increased travel time, etc.?

I would like to know where the hell this idea came from. Frankly, I don't think it came from the same area code that the original plans for the line came from - I can't help but suspect that someone behind the scenes, and not directly involved in planning the lines, is the reason for it.

I'm going to be passing this along to a buddy of mine in the City Traffic department - I would love to see his reaction to this.

Asinine doesn't go far enough in describing my reaction to it.

As Dennis Miller would say, "I don't mean to go on a rant here, but....".

Dan

Link to post
Share on other sites
Toronto's too much of a car community to implement anything that disadvantages cars... the car users usually outweigh the transit users.

The biggest problem with a "Michigan Left" esque intersection is that people from Toronto have never experienced it before, and will have a crash course on it. In Michigan on the other hand, it's been around a long time and came as an evolution of the "divided highway" concept back in the 30's, as M.L.'s started appearing in the late 60's and early 70's. The big advantage with them there ... the need to not have it signalized!

Going back to Eglinton, my biggest concerns are as such ...

- Get rid of the Michigan Left. The idea to implement something different is there, but the ROW on adjacent streets is not. To effectively do a Michigan Left on Eglinton, the left turn lanes should be EXCLUSIVELY on Eglinton, to the east and west of the intersection. There is no need to do them in all 4 directions, as there is nothing impeding left-turning traffic on the north-south streets to begin with. The other issue is the lack of space available, which is restricting these U-turns to be limited to vehicles no larger than a delivery truck (so no transports, and likely will just barely squeeze a bus). An alternative that could be looked at is the free-flow intersection concept, which has the left-turn lane start WELL before the intersection, and cross over opposing traffic (at a signal) to have nothing impede it at the intersection where turns are taking place. Now, to be fair, this is a bit nuts, but what could be done is to have the left-turn lanes cross-over ONLY the ROW at a signal, so that when there is the left-turn phase at the intersection, LRT's can still run straight through along with the qued-up left-turns.

... and really, how many people in Toronto do you believe will understand the concept of "turning right to turn left?" I'm sure it was amusing enough to witness first-encounters to a roundabout!

- Where proper left turns lanes are going to be installed, there should be ample room for at least 8-10 standard cars to fit in the designated left turn, thus reducing the chance of having this que overflow into the through lanes, thus impeding traffic. These would be longer (or have 2-lane left turns) for cases where there is a high volume of traffic turning (ex. Leslie, O'Connor, etc).

- The section west of Keele Street (the tunneled section) should be built to a higher capacity and standard than the rest of the line. Main Reason: Pearson. This is one of the main transit connections to a city of millions from the international airport, so it should be built right from the start. Grade Seperate the line entirely west of Keele, and have the line designed so that conversion to a subway is for the most part, smooth and relatively painless. At the very least, have some intersections grade seperated due to traffic volumes (Martin Grove/Eglinton and Eglinton/Richview Expwy being the two key ones).

- The ROW west of Scarlett exists (really, west of Weston Road) so use it. Have wide buffers with trees seperating the LRT with the vehicle lanes of Eglinton, similar in cross section to The Queensway btwn. Ellis and Parkside with curbs and trees. The potential exists to make a beautiful, asthetically pleasing boulevard leading into the heart of the city from the west, but all it will turn out to be is a concrete and asphalt linear strip and nothing more. Decorative light standards won't do anything to solve that appearance either!!!

- What is being realized is that this project is being built for the gain of transit, not for vehicles. When all modes of transport gain, then everyone wins. My ideal scenario for all intersections west of Keele (and east of Brentcliffe, if space permits) is to have a left turn lane (8-10 car capacity), 2 through lanes, and a right turn lane (5-8 cars). The basic reason for the right-turn lane is to permit right-turning traffic without being impeded by through traffic, as well as allowing the option to signalize right-turns because of the sidewalk/bikeway on the south side of Eglinton west of Jane.

And really ... it'd be nice if the ROW was in grass, but that may be pushing it just a bit! Or we could just replicate the Spadina Expwy and relive the dreams of those who wanted the Richview Expwy built. I mean, it's crude, but it could work, as long as lessons are learn to make it more functional, aesthetically pleasing, and more integrated into the community (yes, that is possible too).

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 months later...
  • 2 weeks later...
What is all this talk about a rail line near Eglington, for CP and GO? Is this an existing or abandoned line?

There are three rail crossings. At Weston with the Georgetown and future Bolton lines. Over at Caledonia is the Barrie-Bradford line and at Wynford is the Stouffville line. The eastern connection up to Malvern will meet up with the Lakeshore East line.

Link to post
Share on other sites
There are three rail crossings. At Weston with the Georgetown and future Bolton lines. Over at Caledonia is the Barrie-Bradford line and at Wynford is the Stouffville line. The eastern connection up to Malvern will meet up with the Lakeshore East line.

only the future Bolton line is CP also the eastern connection to Malvern could possible connect with rail service to Peterborough on CP if and when its built

Link to post
Share on other sites
There are three rail crossings. At Weston with the Georgetown and future Bolton lines. Over at Caledonia is the Barrie-Bradford line and at Wynford is the Stouffville line. The eastern connection up to Malvern will meet up with the Lakeshore East line.

At Wynford is the Richmond Hill Line. The connection to the Stouffville Line is between Kenney Rd & Midland Ave, right next to the TTC's Kennedy Station. The Scarborough-Malvern Line will connect to the Lakeshore East line twice in fact, at Eglinton and Guildwood GO Stations. Guildwood is also a VIA Rail stop.

Link to post
Share on other sites
What is all this talk about a rail line near Eglington, for CP and GO? Is this an existing or abandoned line?

There are talks about a "crosstown" GO rail service using the CP North Toronto Subdivision across Toronto.

That line would likely start at the Junction or Kipling and cross GO's Milton, Georgetown, Bolton(future), Barrie, Richmond Hill, Stouffville lines and end at Agincourt (connections to the future Peterborough line). Of course, they could make it a big loop (Union-Mimico-Kipling-West Toronto-Leaside-Union) if they route it on the Canpa Sub and Belleville Sub (Don Branch) sections. That line could prove a useful tool for getting around Toronto.

As for the future Bolton service, it may start up with just peak hour trains. I've seen plans indicating a big transit terminus at Rutherford Rd in Vaughan (CP SNS "Elder").

Link to post
Share on other sites
There are talks about a "crosstown" GO rail service using the CP North Toronto Subdivision across Toronto.

That line would likely start at the Junction or Kipling and cross GO's Milton, Georgetown, Bolton(future), Barrie, Richmond Hill, Stouffville lines and end at Agincourt (connections to the future Peterborough line). Of course, they could make it a big loop (Union-Mimico-Kipling-West Toronto-Leaside-Union) if they route it on the Canpa Sub and Belleville Sub (Don Branch) sections. That line could prove a useful tool for getting around Toronto.

As for the future Bolton service, it may start up with just peak hour trains. I've seen plans indicating a big transit terminus at Rutherford Rd in Vaughan (CP SNS "Elder").

But that trestle has only seen a small usuage in recent year, such as the 2007 Christmas Train. Plus they would have to reinstall the switch. They could use that trestle, and they could re-establish Leaside station as a passenger station.

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
×
×
  • Create New...