|
|
|
Richard White
Senior Member
It appears our members are getting off... topic.
Avenue
Active Member
When dad jokes and bro jokes collide...
Allandale25
Superstar
To help us get back on topic, I received this email.
Dear Community Member,
You are invited to attend a community drop-in focused on the future planning opportunities along the Eglinton East LRT corridor in Scarborough. This community drop-in will include an interactive drawing event and optional walking tour where you will be able to provide input on the planning directions and priorities of the Eglinton East LRT project.
We are undertaking a planning study as part of the broader Eglinton East Light Rail Transit (LRT) project. The Eglinton East LRT will run east from Kennedy Station, along Eglinton Avenue East, Kingston Road, Morningside Avenue, Sheppard Avenue and Neilson Road to connect to Malvern Town Centre. The planning study will focus on developing a vision for the LRT route, improving public spaces, supporting the growth of local businesses, and strengthening travel connections to surrounding communities.
If you would like to attend a community drop-in in the area that interests you most, please RSVP at least 24-hours in advance to EglintonEastLRT@toronto.ca.
The four opportunities to get involved are as follows:
Eglinton Avenue East and Midland Avenue area: September 5th from 6:00-8:30pm at Don Montgomery Community Centre, 2467 Eglinton Avenue East, focusing on the area of Eglinton Ave between Midland and McCowan.
Malvern area: September 10th from 6:00-8:30pm at Malvern Town Centre, 31 Tapscott Road, focusing on the area of Malvern Centre
Kingston Road, Lawrence Avenue East and Morningside Avenue area: September 13th from 6:00-8:30pm at Centre for Connected Communities, 4218 Lawrence Avenue East, focusing on the area of Kingston Road-between Galloway/Lawrence and Morningside
Eglinton Avenue East and Kingston Road area: September 18th from 6:00-8:30pm at Scarborough Village Community Centre, 3600 Kingston Road, focusing on the area of Eglinton Ave between Markham Road and Kingston Road.
**If you are a business owner or operator in the area, please take our Community Business Survey. Completing the survey will help us better understand how we can support business development in the community through the planning process.
For further information, please contact the project team at eglintoneastlrt@toronto.ca or on 416-338-2848.
Leo_Chan
Senior Member
Technically wrong thread.
Avenue
Active Member
Is Eglinton East (assuming going to get built) going to be continuation of Crosstown or is it going to force a transfer at Kennedy?
Neutrino
Senior Member
A dad joke and a bro joke walk into a bar..
Allandale25
Superstar
Sorry, good point. Was just trying to get the discussion refocused.
EastYorkTTCFan
Senior Member
0k I get it now. Again it's to provide relief for the city of Toronto not bringing more people from outside of Toronto in. The TTC and city council really don't care or want to extend either the relief line or the younge line outside of the city of Toronto.
steveintoronto
Superstar
The whole point of tunnel bore diameter and universality of that tunnel for "future proofing" is an entirely gemane line of discussion. Crossrail has set a template for that. The Relief Line should follow.
Toronto1834
Active Member
Work is progressing on the west portal at Don Mills. I got a photo of what appear to be the permanent concrete barriers and guard rails on the sides of the west portal. In between the guard rails, the concrete track bed has been poured on the eastward descent from what I could see from the bus.
Attachments
TrickyRicky
Senior Member
Thanks for posting that video. I was just driving down Black Creek Drive today and wondering what the monsterous white building across the valley was. Too big for a station with operation desert storm quality architecture.
Midtown Urbanist
Superstar
I'm not quite sure what that last page was (
), but I am glad to have read it.
Since I began this discussion to begin with, I want to clarify that I believe that the intent of the Relief Line is to provide relief to the Yonge subway line given the crush capacity constraints there. The ridership on the Yonge Line (and transit ridership as a whole) in York Region is stemming from the Yonge corridor north of Steeles, not from areas in Markham between Hwy-404 and the Stouffville line. It is these commuters on the Yonge corridor who are flooding into Finch Station and bringing full trains to Eglinton at rush hour. Moreover, it is this same corridor that York Region is slating for massive residential growth, which will only make things worse along the Yonge line,
Whereas the logic of Relief Line South is to intercept the riders on the Danforth line before Bloor-Yonge station, the rationale for the Relief Line North is to intercept the bus riders on Eglinton, Lawrence, York Mills/Ellesmere and Sheppard (and Finch + Steeles should it go that far north) before they arrive at the over-capacity Yonge line. I would make the argument that the same rationale of intercepting bus riders before they reach the Yonge subway holds true if you extend the RLN northwest to Yonge Street, because given stop spacing, the Relief Line would be a quicker ride for downtown bound York Region commuters than the Yonge Line. So I would counter that, no, it isn't illogical to send the RLN to meet Yonge Street. What would be illogical is sending it to somewhere in Markham between Hwy-404 and the Stouffville line where the ridership is lacking and relief to the Yonge line is zero.
For a quick reference to the numbers (dated from 2014 and 2015), the Steeles East bus carries 28,300 daily riders (many of these are York Region commuters) and the VIVA Blue (Yonge) bus carries 19,774 daily riders.
For comparison, the VIVA Green (Vic Park to Markham) bus carries 644 daily riders. The 90 Leslie/Don Mills bus carries 3,655 daily riders. The 24 Woodbine North bus carries 1,140 daily riders. Given the above, I think it is actually ludicrous to send the Relief Line anywhere in York Region other than to meet Yonge Street.
Now to address Richmond Hill GO line for a moment, some were suggesting that it is asinine to end service of a GO line. But I ask to look at it from a numbers perspective. Richmond Hill GO carries a grand total of 10,000 daily riders which is by far the smallest in the GO system and the equivalent of the 11 Bayview bus. It is a costly service to maintain and the higher GO fare is unattractive for many riders. Unlike the other GO routes, the RHGO cannot even be upgraded and electrified to RER service without a prohibitively expensive new route through the Don Valley, and is unlikely to ever have an interchange with either Bloor or Eglinton subways.
I get that the suggestion of ending a GO rail service is near blasphemous, but if looked at objectively, it is doubtful the RHGO line would ever be worth the investment upgrading to RER, and if service was replaced by a Relief Line that met with Yonge Street, would it be so bad of a loss? The majority of those 10,000 riders likely board at Langstaff GO station, which a Relief Line under this configuration would intercept anyway.
So it boils down IMO to the legitimate question of whether the Bala Corridor has room for a subway line, given the interests of CN Rail. Could this be overcome by squeezing the subway next to the CN corridor, or by sending TBMs under the rail corridor? Tunnelling is not that expensive in the grand scheme of things, but I am not sure what the factors with tunneling under an active rail corridor would be.
All this might just be a transit fantasy at the end of the day given that last question, but I wanted to justify the positions that having the RLN meet Yonge Street is intuitive rather than illogical, and that the idea of ending RHGO service south of Langstaff is not so blasphemous if the replacement is a subway line with wide stop spacing. Fantasy or not, I think it is good to dream big and search for creative solutions for our regional transit, because after all, discussion of a Relief Line North was considered fantasy just a few short years ago (and lets be real, the Yonge subway is going to need all the relief it can get).
), but I am glad to have read it.Since I began this discussion to begin with, I want to clarify that I believe that the intent of the Relief Line is to provide relief to the Yonge subway line given the crush capacity constraints there. The ridership on the Yonge Line (and transit ridership as a whole) in York Region is stemming from the Yonge corridor north of Steeles, not from areas in Markham between Hwy-404 and the Stouffville line. It is these commuters on the Yonge corridor who are flooding into Finch Station and bringing full trains to Eglinton at rush hour. Moreover, it is this same corridor that York Region is slating for massive residential growth, which will only make things worse along the Yonge line,
Whereas the logic of Relief Line South is to intercept the riders on the Danforth line before Bloor-Yonge station, the rationale for the Relief Line North is to intercept the bus riders on Eglinton, Lawrence, York Mills/Ellesmere and Sheppard (and Finch + Steeles should it go that far north) before they arrive at the over-capacity Yonge line. I would make the argument that the same rationale of intercepting bus riders before they reach the Yonge subway holds true if you extend the RLN northwest to Yonge Street, because given stop spacing, the Relief Line would be a quicker ride for downtown bound York Region commuters than the Yonge Line. So I would counter that, no, it isn't illogical to send the RLN to meet Yonge Street. What would be illogical is sending it to somewhere in Markham between Hwy-404 and the Stouffville line where the ridership is lacking and relief to the Yonge line is zero.
For a quick reference to the numbers (dated from 2014 and 2015), the Steeles East bus carries 28,300 daily riders (many of these are York Region commuters) and the VIVA Blue (Yonge) bus carries 19,774 daily riders.
For comparison, the VIVA Green (Vic Park to Markham) bus carries 644 daily riders. The 90 Leslie/Don Mills bus carries 3,655 daily riders. The 24 Woodbine North bus carries 1,140 daily riders. Given the above, I think it is actually ludicrous to send the Relief Line anywhere in York Region other than to meet Yonge Street.
Now to address Richmond Hill GO line for a moment, some were suggesting that it is asinine to end service of a GO line. But I ask to look at it from a numbers perspective. Richmond Hill GO carries a grand total of 10,000 daily riders which is by far the smallest in the GO system and the equivalent of the 11 Bayview bus. It is a costly service to maintain and the higher GO fare is unattractive for many riders. Unlike the other GO routes, the RHGO cannot even be upgraded and electrified to RER service without a prohibitively expensive new route through the Don Valley, and is unlikely to ever have an interchange with either Bloor or Eglinton subways.
I get that the suggestion of ending a GO rail service is near blasphemous, but if looked at objectively, it is doubtful the RHGO line would ever be worth the investment upgrading to RER, and if service was replaced by a Relief Line that met with Yonge Street, would it be so bad of a loss? The majority of those 10,000 riders likely board at Langstaff GO station, which a Relief Line under this configuration would intercept anyway.
So it boils down IMO to the legitimate question of whether the Bala Corridor has room for a subway line, given the interests of CN Rail. Could this be overcome by squeezing the subway next to the CN corridor, or by sending TBMs under the rail corridor? Tunnelling is not that expensive in the grand scheme of things, but I am not sure what the factors with tunneling under an active rail corridor would be.
All this might just be a transit fantasy at the end of the day given that last question, but I wanted to justify the positions that having the RLN meet Yonge Street is intuitive rather than illogical, and that the idea of ending RHGO service south of Langstaff is not so blasphemous if the replacement is a subway line with wide stop spacing. Fantasy or not, I think it is good to dream big and search for creative solutions for our regional transit, because after all, discussion of a Relief Line North was considered fantasy just a few short years ago (and lets be real, the Yonge subway is going to need all the relief it can get).
Last edited:
steveintoronto
Superstar
Excellent post! We might differ on details on how to deliver this service, but the routing, purpose and exploding demographics as described underline the need for this to be *regional* in nature, whether it be by conventional subway, RER (partially at least in tunnel) or 'metro'.
The absence of York Region taking a role in this is perturbing. Perhaps they are, and just aren't being heard, but getting an alignment over to Yonge (or close) is essential.
It is absurd to keep injecting the present Line 1 with steroids to get it to do what it was never designed for. It's throwing good money after bad in some respects. Yonge and Bloor has been revamped twice since being built. It can be improved, doubtless, but leave what's there pretty much alone, and serve the nether regions with a new line(s). It will actually be far less disruptive and yield far more capacity as per investment.
I've been praising the Crosstown for being "future proof" to some degree, but already I'm wondering if even it will quickly fill to capacity. It can be revisited, the Relief Line is the crucial need, and to north of Steeles.
I'd say Don Mills might be the place to consider 'partial truncation' of the RH line. I'd still leave the present single track section south from there (possibly using the old CP RoW as a passing section) for peak express runs into Union.
Something truncation could lend itself to is a branch of the Crosstown running LRT down the lower section with passing loops. As much as the lower leg is flood prone, as long as there are other options to bypass it, it would be a shame not to use it.
Last edited:
Midtown Urbanist
Superstar
Thanks. I think York Region just doesn't have this thing on the radar. They have been singularly focused on the Yonge North extension for obvious reasons.
But creating a network where both the Yonge subway and RLN (or whatever configuration) reach Langstaff station would be York Region's equivalent of having their cake and eating it too. York commuters headed to North York, Midtown or Uptown could take the Yonge Line, and commuters heading downtown could take the RLN. Former RH-GO riders would enjoy more frequent service at a lower fare than GO. Transit capacity between the two lines would be able to support all the intensification targets York Region has put on the Yonge Corridor (a station at John Street near Bayview even opens up a whole district for intensification that isn't even on the radar at the moment).
The Crosstown is fortunate in that even if it ends up having very high daily ridership, it won't necessarily peak at or near the capacity constraints of the line. Spadina, Yonge and Kennedy already provide 'outlets' for downtown-bound riders. Westbound ridership towards Yonge is the question mark (especially given the capacity constraints they will face transferring at Eglinton-Yonge station) but this will also be addressed by building the Relief Line North to Don Mills and Eglinton.
Oh, but I have an idea of how to reuse that flood prone lower leg that I think you in particular would really enjoy. That picturesque corridor running through the Don Valley would make for an excellent location to build Toronto's first cycling superhighway.
The rather circuitous routing that is inconvenient for rail service would be a lot less of a debilitating factor on a bike, and you could potentially use the corridor to connect downtown with the Finch Hydro Corridor, and deep into Scarborough using the Gatineau Hydro Corridor.
Alas, I think this idea is a bit more of a pipe dream.