Canada's 50 Tallest Proposals - Page 173

yaletown_fella · #**3441** Posted **Dec 16, 2011, 3:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ramako

It's going to be underground, but it's still going to be light rail rather than the heavy rail that you'd see on the Yonge or Bloor line... imagine three streetcars tied together in one train.

The LRT will be a huge mistake if it travels any slower than a subway. The lower capacity compromise makes sense considering the tight budget.

caltrane74 · #**3442** Posted **Dec 16, 2011, 3:34 PM**

Still better than a Bus or at grade streetcar.

vegeta_skyline · #**3443** Posted **Dec 16, 2011, 3:36 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by steveve

lol! ya. i've been comparing this one to 1 bryant park from the start!... I'm really really really happy to see that they;re finally realizing they should go taller... My only worry is the potential of this looking really fat on it's sides and the cladding.. I mean, this one could end up looking really really fat on the sides.

But isn't it normal for office buildings to be of more girth? We have far more pencil thin condo's going up vs. projects with large floor plates. I'd argue diversity in size is just as important as diversity in height and design for a skyline.

Quote:

Originally Posted by caltrane74

No more fat than Bay Adelaide down the way......

Exactly and only from one side, the north & south sides look to be less than half as wide so I wouldn't call this one fat. Think Commerce Court with angles.
Either way, if you think its fat or not, its beautiful! Brings a tear to my eye(see avatar

) to see more of this kind of diversity in design being proposed.

vegeta_skyline · #**3444** Posted **Dec 16, 2011, 3:39 PM**

I think one day they'll regret not building the Eglington underground to full subways specs. That day is decades away, but unless Toronto enters into prolonged era's of stangation, it will happen.

caltrane74 · #**3445** Posted **Dec 16, 2011, 3:58 PM**

Some More renders on that new project

The_Architect · #**3446** Posted **Dec 16, 2011, 4:00 PM**

Despite Bob&Doug's delusions, Eglinton does NOT need a subway right now.. The planned LRT more than meets the capacity and expected growth of that line. In fact, putting it underground for the entire length is a complete waste of money. Trust me.

It is also designed to be easily converted into a subway when the need arises. In the mean time, we get an unnecessarily more expensive LRT, no Finch LRT, which was desperately needed, a pointless Sheppard extension which has no plan for funding, and Scarborough is left without rapid transit for 7 years.

YAY FOR THE SAVIOR ROB FUCKING FORD!

yaletown_fella · #**3447** Posted **Dec 16, 2011, 4:39 PM**

The sad thing is, the politicians are all simply to stupid to use common sense. Eglinton DOES need a subway and an affordable remedy which is completely do-able.

Unarguably, a Canada Line style system would make the most sense.It would be a fraction of the cost with foreign labor, realistically take only 5 years to construct, and could be easily upgraded to a full fledged subway in the future.

Vancouvers costed only $1.8 billion (vs Toronto's 8 million dollar ripoff)

Toronto will become a world wide joke for running streetcars with overhead wires underground, and for a higher price than the original Bloor Danforth line. It's quite sad actually.

MonkeyRonin · #**3448** Posted **Dec 16, 2011, 5:16 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by yaletown_fella

Toronto will become a world wide joke for running streetcars with overhead wires underground, and for a higher price than the original Bloor Danforth line. It's quite sad actually.

Subways powered by overhead wire are quite common...the metros of Madrid, Barcelona, Shanghai, Rome, Milan, Tokyo, and a whole lot more all have overhead power supply. If the trains are built as modified versions of the standard LRT vehicles with raised floors, it'll basically be a "light metro". Not really any different from something like the Madrid Metro actually.

And as someone who's always supported a subway under Eglinton, if building it as a lower-capacity one can save money, then it seems like a reasonable compromise.

yaletown_fella · #**3449** Posted **Dec 16, 2011, 6:13 PM**

So why isn't a Canada Line do-able on Eglinton? I don't get it.

WhipperSnapper · #**3450** Posted **Dec 16, 2011, 7:16 PM**

But, the plan is for a "Canada Line" type LRT minus the elevated portion which would be a frack'n eyesore on Eglinton.

On a side note, I really want to know what you smoke and how much.

blacktrojan3921 · #**3451** Posted **Dec 16, 2011, 7:29 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by The_Architect

Despite Bob&Doug's delusions, Eglinton does NOT need a subway right now.. The planned LRT more than meets the capacity and expected growth of that line. In fact, putting it underground for the entire length is a complete waste of money. Trust me.

It is also designed to be easily converted into a subway when the need arises. In the mean time, we get an unnecessarily more expensive LRT, no Finch LRT, which was desperately needed, a pointless Sheppard extension which has no plan for funding, and Scarborough is left without rapid transit for 7 years.

YAY FOR THE SAVIOR ROB FUCKING FORD!

But so is an LRT, my dad does budgets for a living since he works in the provincial department of Energy and Resources. A city that's the size of Toronto can't maintain both forms of transit as the combination of maintenance and the constant infrastructure upgrades would put alot of strain in a municipal budget. Once a city has one form of Rail transit, they best stick with it till they are at an appropiate population size and the demand is great enough. Los Angeles is a good example of that.

caltrane74 · #**3452** Posted **Dec 16, 2011, 7:37 PM**

But..

Toronto will now only have two types of rail transit, down from 3 with the elmination of the Scarborough RT.

We should actually see savings once this thing is up and running.

We will in the Future Just Have:

Subway
LRT

In the Past we had :

Subway
Scarborough RT
Streetcar

new age · #**3453** Posted **Dec 16, 2011, 8:42 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by yaletown_fella

So why isn't a Canada Line do-able on Eglinton? I don't get it.

Canada line has a 40 m station, and Eglinton has a 60 m platform, they are both types of LRT's. The biggest issue between them is power source, and secondly size of which Eglinton is the larger of the two.

caltrane74 · #**3454** Posted **Dec 16, 2011, 8:51 PM**

And the Eglinton Line is a longer line, plus it's all underground with the exception of the old Scarborough LRT

LeftCoaster · #**3455** Posted **Dec 16, 2011, 8:54 PM**

Guys lets try to keep on topic, this kinda chatter belongs in the Toronto subforum, so please go there to continue

Coldrsx · #**3456** Posted **Dec 16, 2011, 9:18 PM**

It was hinted at yesterday that Manu 2 (26. Manulife Tower 2 (Edmonton): 161m / 528ft) is still moving forward.

Travis007 · #**3457** Posted **Dec 16, 2011, 9:29 PM**

The (speculated) height increase on 100 Adelaide is incredible news! Fantastic way to finish up an epic 2011.

steveve · #**3458** Posted **Dec 17, 2011, 5:32 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by caltrane74

Some More renders on that new project

... and who said it wasn't fat!!... this thing is pretty wide, and definitely is wider than Bay Adelaide... this thing is actually HUGE on it's sides and the impact on the skyline!!!... i hope it looks good (the skyline render looked too fake)

Dwils01 · #**3459** Posted **Dec 17, 2011, 8:33 PM**

It's no wider than Commerce Court West or Toronto Dominion Tower. Office buildings are suppose to have larger floor plates anyways.
It could have been worse. It could have been that wide on the north/south views too.

Metro-One · #**3460** Posted **Dec 17, 2011, 9:48 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by new age

Canada line has a 40 m station, and Eglinton has a 60 m platform, they are both types of LRT's. The biggest issue between them is power source, and secondly size of which Eglinton is the larger of the two.

Sorry, but i have to correct the post. THe Canada line is actually not an LRT, but indeed runs standard sized HRT subway vehicles. So the wider (larger) cars make up for having the shorter platforms vs. this Toronto LRT.