[BurlOak]

Regarding elevating the ECLRT through Scarborough:

It seems that the GO Stouffville line is at a higher elevation than Kennedy Road / Eglinton intersection. This actually makes it easier to have an elevated line on Eglinton, since it does not have to drop too quickly after passing over Kennedy Road as the ground is also coming up. The station, or at least the train leading up to the station, would be just below grade. With an single ECLRT and SRT line, you can also avoid a separate plaform for ECLRT and SRT and you can also save on not requiring an underground loop for the SRT. Since the Scarborough Malvern LRT is not on anyones priority list, it makes sense to connect the ECLRT with the SRT as it is quite likely that the SMLRT will never be built.

With the currently planned location for the new station, it looks like you can keep the SRT runnding while the station is built - it would only have to be closed when the new station is tied in to the SRT line for the first +/-200m. However, some bus bays may need to be closed.

 

[Hipster Duck]

The Eglinton line doesn't need to be elevated along its whole non-tunneled length, but it should be grade separated at some of the busier intersections where the LRV is doomed to stop at a red light and wait for left-turn signals no matter what.

In particular, I'm thinking the line should either be elevated or cut-and-covered between just west of Victoria Park and just east of Pharmacy to avoid the bottleneck that is Victoria Park and Eglinton Square. Similarly, following BurlOak's suggestion, the line should be elevated just west of Kennedy to avoid that intersection. Warden and Birchmount are lower priorities in terms of grade separation.

 

[M II A II R II K]

Trenched is another option.

 

[BurlOak]

The Eglinton line doesn't need to be elevated along its whole non-tunneled length, but it should be grade separated at some of the busier intersections where the LRV is doomed to stop at a red light and wait for left-turn signals no matter what.

In particular, I'm thinking the line should either be elevated or cut-and-covered between just west of Victoria Park and just east of Pharmacy to avoid the bottleneck that is Victoria Park and Eglinton Square. Similarly, following BurlOak's suggestion, the line should be elevated just west of Kennedy to avoid that intersection. Warden and Birchmount are lower priorities in terms of grade separation.

The DVP interchange ramp terminals and probably Wynford, due to it proximity to DVP, are also potential bottlenecks.

 

[Voltz]

The Eglinton line doesn't need to be elevated along its whole non-tunneled length, but it should be grade separated at some of the busier intersections where the LRV is doomed to stop at a red light and wait for left-turn signals no matter what.

In particular, I'm thinking the line should either be elevated or cut-and-covered between just west of Victoria Park and just east of Pharmacy to avoid the bottleneck that is Victoria Park and Eglinton Square. Similarly, following BurlOak's suggestion, the line should be elevated just west of Kennedy to avoid that intersection. Warden and Birchmount are lower priorities in terms of grade separation.

The line is already planned to be underground at Kennedy and I would agree with going under ground as well in the area of Victoria Park.

 

[pman]

The Eglinton line doesn't need to be elevated along its whole non-tunneled length, but it should be grade separated at some of the busier intersections where the LRV is doomed to stop at a red light and wait for left-turn signals no matter what.

In particular, I'm thinking the line should either be elevated or cut-and-covered between just west of Victoria Park and just east of Pharmacy to avoid the bottleneck that is Victoria Park and Eglinton Square. Similarly, following BurlOak's suggestion, the line should be elevated just west of Kennedy to avoid that intersection. Warden and Birchmount are lower priorities in terms of grade separation.

Why not keep the line at grade and give LRV's priority at signal-controlled intersections?

 

[Rainforest]

A well-designed signal priority system might actually be more effective on this stretch than grade-separation features. Signal priority can potentially handle all intersections between Don Mills and Kennedy, rather than just selected 1 or 2.

That signal priority does not need to be absolute, it just needs to ensure consistent performance. It is OK if the vehicles still take 2 or 3 min longer to travel between Don Mills and Kennedy than they could if totally unhindered. The goal is to avoid uneven travel times.

 

[gweed123]

Why not keep the line at grade and give LRV's priority at signal-controlled intersections?

Because then it effectively removes the possibility of running the Eglinton and Scarborough lines as a single thru line, because the required frequencies would be too high to be effectively handled by in-median LRT. It would be very hard to maintain such tight headways without having any of the vehicles stop at a red light. Even with signal priority, it would play havoc with the traffic flow of the cross streets.

 

[sixrings]

http://www.globaltoronto.com/decisi...+worries+area+residents/6442781012/story.html

 

[Rainforest]

^ I can see a reason for concerns about the loss of Ferrand Drive stop.

Regarding the loss of Leslie stop, I don't see any affected residents. That stop cannot serve new highrises that are under construction or will be built in the Leaside area. Leslie is too far from them.

 

[sixrings]

I would really like to know if the bulk of the comments in favour of retaining Ferrand actually came from apartment building tenants in the Rochefort / St. Denis area or if they came from the people living in the houses. The cynic in me can't help but think that, if it was the latter group, these people have another, more private, agenda such as designs on the redevelopment of their properties.

I agree.... the Don Mills stop would be closer to most of the buildings... this request doesn't make much sense...

 

[JayBeeGooner]

The inclusion of Ferrand won't have a negative impact on the operation of the line either. The stop will most likely be at the end of the Don Mills portal, and can save residents a walk. The dwell time at the stop will be minimal. I really do not see Metrolinx's exclusion other than to save money.

Actually, looking at the original open house panels, it looks like the east Don Mill portal will be located where Ferrand Station would logically be located. Heck, even the TTC didn't have a design for Ferrand Station.

http://www.toronto.ca/involved/proj...n_lrt/pdf/2009-11-20_display_panels_part3.pdf

So it makes more sense why Metrolinx excluded the station.

 

[sixrings]

The inclusion of Ferrand won't have a negative impact on the operation of the line either. The stop will most likely be at the end of the Don Mills portal, and can save residents a walk. The dwell time at the stop will be minimal. I really do not see Metrolinx's exclusion other than to save money.

I wont lie I don't mind the surface section but TRUTHFULLY I only want stops at major intersections.. That's my bias. Id like the fastest surface LRT possible and we can revisit adding stops later. But once stops are in they are rarely removed. One to few stops in my opinion is better then too many stops that slows down the line too much.

 

[JayBeeGooner]

I wont lie I don't mind the surface section but TRUTHFULLY I only want stops at major intersections.. That's my bias. Id like the fastest surface LRT possible and we can revisit adding stops later. But once stops are in they are rarely removed. One to few stops in my opinion is better then too many stops that slows down the line too much.

I agree with both you and Toronto1. I revised my original post. The Ferrand stop is way to close to Don Mills, and the east portal would make it impossible to build a surface stop without conflicting with the DVP on/off ramps.

 

[sixrings]

I agree with both you and Toronto1. I revised my original post. The Ferrand stop is way to close to Don Mills, and the east portal would make it impossible to build a surface stop without conflicting with the DVP on/off ramps.

maximum 5 mins walking distance doesn't justify a stop for me... good work researching it.. For the record I often have to go to an office building on Gervais drive and I take the eglinton bus. I get off at don mills and WALK.... its really not that complicated. This whole idea of a stop at every single residents door stop is crazy.