Jane LRT Public Meetings

The meeting dates and locations for the proposed Jane LRT are:

Tuesday, August 26, 2008
6:30pm to 9:00pm
Jane Finch Mall
1911 Finch Avenue West (SE corner of Finch Ave and Jane St)

Thursday, August 28, 2008
6:30pm to 9:00pm
Syme Woolner Community School – Gymnasium
69 Pritchard Ave (north of Jane and St. Clair intersection, east of Jane)

The project website does not yet contain the display panels for these meetings.


10 thoughts on “Jane LRT Public Meetings

  1. Had a look at the Frequently Asked Questions PDF for the Jane LRT. One of the FAQ that bothered me was this one:

    “Q11) Will any lanes of traffic be removed on any streets to accommodate the LRT?
    Depending on the selected design, it is possible that a lane in each direction may be removed along the southern portion of Jane Street to accommodate the LRT. This would allow more space to provide a better pedestrian and cycling environment and improved urban design.”

    The southern portion of Jane Street is to have one of the lanes in each direction taken away? The traffic will become worse with that, along with the removal of parking on Jane Street. They must not do that.

    The Jane LRT should enter a level portal just south of Alliance Avenue and Black Creek into a tunnel under Jane Street down to Bloor Street. Then underground stations should be built at Woolner Avenue, St. Clair Avenue and Dundas Street West, Annette Street, and of course Bloor Street to connect with the Jane Street Subway station.

    The stop at Outlook Avenue should also be moved south between Dalymple Drive and Alliance Avenue, because it would better serve the Jane Park Plaza than up the hill. (I would rather tunnel straight through the hill out into Eglinton Flats, myself. But, that’s me.)

    Steve: I am continually amazed by how the presentations stick with the less viable parts of the proposal (a similar thing showed up in the Don Mills study with a scheme for a surface right-of-way on Broadview or Pape). Alternatives for Jane include simply routing the line as a branch of Eglinton. Yes, this would leave the area south of Eglinton with a local bus service, and would eliminate the proposed connection to the St. Clair route (something that to me does not make sense anyhow), but it would make for a much more credible LRT proposal.

    When options like this are omitted, it affects the “vision” of the line people see, the attractiveness (or not) of the potential service, the neighbourhood impacts and even the riding projections.


  2. Steve

    To me failing to link Jane and St. Clair and by extension St. Clair and Eglinton is what makes no sense – it leaves the door open for a similar situation to the Bathurst rebuild where St. Clair cars could not access a yard.

    Because of the large dollar value of the Eglinton tunnel such a connection could start the Eglinton West line and the Jane line using existing infrasturcture, with Jane being progressively extended northward and Eglinton westward.

    Steve: I feel the more appropriate link is via the Weston rail corridor as part of a line to Union Station.


  3. It’s not really my ‘hood’ but much of the southern end doesn’t make much sense to me either. Jane is really tight to have ROW put into it; tunnelling would be quite expensive; and the obvious thing as Steve supports/says is to put the transit onto the Weston railtrack somewhere near Jane St. and bring it down to Union Station (via Front St.)

    I’ll break ranks with cyclists and alienate a few of them by saying the higher and best use of the rail corridor has to be transit, and so the Rail Trail idea must come after effective transit, including regrettably ripping up what is just going in. Its’ only a couple of million$, but what makes more sense from a network/life-saving standpoint is Bloor St., but the politicians are too chicken to do that, though it’d be cheap paint to do this.

    The taking up of the RailTrail is the worst case scenario; we could use with both facilities – it’s just that sometimes cyclists are a little to eager to embrace any project and politician that might champion that as we’re sooo lagging in good bike projects, anything’s better than zilch.

    Steve: We need to review the space available and whether cut and cover might be used in the tight spots. After all, the tunnel structure isn’t going to have to support a condo. The tricky part would be the stations.


  4. I know this is an operating detail, but… has the TTC decided whether Transit City LRVs will stop at all stops or have “Stop Request” cords and buttons for riders to signal that they want to get off?

    I ask because one of the proposed routings for Jane seems to go right by the front entrance to Black Creek Pioneer Village. A stop there would be nice, but would be mostly used off-peak. Stopping only on request (for all stops, to keep things simple) would allow locations like this to be served without slowing down service as much, especially at peak.


  5. Matt, back at the Sheppard PIC’s, I asked this question and the answer was – Yes, there will be stop request cords and buttons and if nobody is getting on or off at a stop, the LRV will pass it by.

    Should make for a faster ride off peak.


  6. Matt L. said, “has the TTC decided whether Transit City LRVs will stop at all stops or have “Stop Request” cords and buttons.”

    Anything could change, but from my source it will be “Stop Request”.

    In a conversation I had a few days ago with a source, the subject of running times (and how the simulation ran for the Sheppard line showed such a small difference between 400 and 800 metre stop spacing), it was pointed out that if there was no one waiting to board and no one on board requesting the stop, the LRV would keep going. That sounds to me like it will be “Stop Request”.


  7. On the underground station portions, it would likely be full stop because a person could be “hidden” on the steps, escalator, or elevator as the LRV pulls in. Otherwise, it will be “stop request” on the outside stops.


  8. This is my ‘hood’ and I really don’t understand why someone is asking why the St. Clair streetcar wasn’t extended to the end of St. Clair Avenue (coincidentally at Jane St) with a large transit facility that would also see a GO station built to provide a quick link to Union Station, the airport from midtown, and a cross-town rail link to Summerhill.


  9. Even though I am bumping this, but the connection with Eglinton could serve as a Jane branch. But they should probably use the rail trail if possible to Union/continue to subway. But one question is once the Eglinton branch is approved instead of Jane to subway, would the local Jane route terminate with a separate terminal in a fare paid zone, or will it just be like this on street station somewhere in Eglinton flats, or would it just be a “loop” around Eglinton.

    Steve: Ideally it should be a branch that would run into the underground section of the line, at least to Eglinton West Station. Going down the rail corridor to Union is less likely, at least in the short term, because of many competing demands for space in that corridor.


Comments are closed.