Talk:Line 5 Eglinton

Eglinton East LRT

The city is planning that the Eglinton East LRT be a separate LRT line with no track connection to Line 5. Thus, it would not be a Line 5 extension. At Kennedy station, the EELRT would either terminate on the surface on the east side of the GO line or terminate as an elevated station near the Line 3 station. The EELRT may use different vehicles that could climb steeper grades and have a different train length. A Steve Munro article summarizes two City of Toronto reports on the subject. Since the EELRT is being planned as a completely separate line resembling the Scarborough Malvern LRT, should we merge Line 5 Eglinton#Eglinton East LRT into Scarborough Malvern LRT, and then rename the latter as Eglinton East LRT? @Joeyconnick, Blaixx, Transportfan70, and Johnny Au: Request to split Eglinton East LRT. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 01:10, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

I think {{Split portions|section=y|Scarborough Malvern LRT}} would be more accurate, then {{Merge portions from}} on the SMLRT article?

But only if it is extremely similar to the SMLRT... and it might be best to wait to see if this new EELRT proposal gains traction since we all know how transit projects in Toronto swing back and forth between modes, integrated/not integrated, planned/cancelled, etc. Given the WP:RECENCY, it may be best to just mention in the Line 5 Eglinton § Eglinton East LRT section that the proposal changed in April/May/June/whatever and then wait to see if they proceed substantively with an LRT line separate from Line 5. There is no rush. 🙂 —Joeyconnick (talk) 02:04, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

The SMLRT is essentially a subset of the EELRT. The SMLRT would have had through-service at Kennedy while the EELRT would not. The SMLRT terminates at Sheppard while the SMLRT continues to Marvern and the SSE terminus. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 00:13, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

I would rather wait and see first as circumstances may change within the next few months, especially given the upcoming municipal election. As Joey said above, there's no rush. Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 14:00, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

A July 2022 TTC report has repeated the assertion that through-operation is not feasible. The TTC has also assigned the EELRT the route number of 7, thus: "Line 7 Eglinton East". TheTrolleyPole (talk) 00:13, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 00:49, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

I would support the split, as it could go hand-in-hand with an overhaul of how this whole line is framed. With Eglinton West now under construction, it should be less differentiated as a separate proposal, and more of one line with two stages and a storied overall history. The extensions section should be a mention of the split article, as well as the "Planned Pearson Connection" as the province puts it. --Natural R_X 15:58, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

I support the split as Eglinton East LRT does not share the same trackage as the rest of the Eglinton LRT. Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 16:37, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

I'm surprised the Eglinton East LRT is still redirected here. It's not connected to this line, it tentatively doesn't have the same route number as this line. It has a different colour on proposed maps. The route is 100% identical to the early Scarborough Malvern LRT proposals, and includes 100% of the final proposal - with the exception of the inclusion of much of the proposed Sheppard East LRT as a spur. Now that the public consultation has started for Line 7 - this needs to be done asap. Merge into Scarborough Malvern LRT and rename to Eglinton East LRT (seems too early to call it Line 7 Eglinton East - but that perhaps should be a redirect. Nfitz (talk) 05:51, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

I strongly agree. Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 14:41, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

absolutely, now that the project has it's own site, here, it should finally be it's own wiki article, perhaps renaming the Scarborough-malvern LRT wiki and having that portion in it's history section. 142.181.47.157 (talk) 03:19, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

I've done a partial rewrite of Scarborough Malvern LRT and requested it be moved to Eglinton East LRT at WP:Requested moves/Technical requests#Uncontroversial technical requests. Article needs more work, and I've not (yet?) tried to merge in the information from Line 5 Eglinton#Eglinton East LRT - there's some work there, as some is redundant, some is unnecessary, but there's some good references and history. The new City/TTC presentation dropped today, and I referenced it. I feel no ownership, so if anyone else wants to jump in, please do so! Nfitz (talk) 08:20, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

That would be great. Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 15:19, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Section Line 5 Eglinton#Eglinton East LRT has been reduced to a stub after transferring and merging all its many details to Eglinton East LRT. This completes the proposed split. TheTrolleyPole (talk) 00:53, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 00:43, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

EELRT wiki page

I believe the EELRT deserves its own wiki article at this time, especially since it’s official numbering of line 7. Currently, “line 7” redirects to an article on the old Shepard east LRT proposal. 184.146.202.26 (talk) 02:57, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Where was it officially designated Line 7? —Joeyconnick (talk) 03:25, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

This report: https://ttc-cdn.azureedge.net/-/media/Project/TTC/DevProto/Documents/Home/Public-Meetings/Board/2022/July-14/8_Transit_Network_Expansion_Update.pdf Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 14:03, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

What is the exact "line 7" link that redirects to Sheppard East LRT? I can't find it. BLAIXX 17:22, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

However, there is a Line 7 Finch West LRT link, which is redirected to Line 6 Finch West. There are no Line 7 links to Sheppard East LRT. Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 01:02, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

 Done Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 00:44, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Recent edits to more closely incorporate the westward extension

hi Natural RX,

I don't think we should be describing Line 5 from Renforth to Kennedy all in one go in the lead, given the central section should open well before 2031 (despite the many changes). Is their sourcing to believe the central section will be delayed that long? —Joeyconnick (talk) 23:52, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi there. I mentioned the possible shift of this towards a more wholesome article in the section about the Eglinton East LRT above. After seeing no action on it and with the western extension of the same exact line with the same track and same vehicles now under construction, I was bold and moved forward with getting this article to be more cohesive. I'd like to restore some of the effort I put into shifting this article unless there are other significant objections, because I don't see how a separate article makes sense. I will also mention that I intended to put work into moving a lot of the timeline into a separate article to whittle this thing down, it is horridly long. Lastly, I sourced and quoted what has been reported; I kept the 2024 date that was posted before, and added the factual statements from Metrolinx that they will not announce an opening date, so I don't see the issue there. --Natural R_X 02:15, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

I re-reverted the lead changes, mostly because there were inconsistencies in what was reverted (lead vs infobox vs body). I am still open to discussing how to break up / restructure this article into segments if trying to move towards melding this all together more cohesively isn't agreed upon. --Natural R_X 17:18, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Yeah no, we can't have it combined as you have when the central section is opening 6 years before the western segment. Saying it goes from Renforth to Kennedy is entirely misleading and will be for those 6 years.

So your lead changes need to be reverted until we can figure out a way forward. —Joeyconnick (talk) 17:35, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm welcome to you being bold and and making the necessary clarifications on opening and staging, instead of undoing contributions. I'd also welcome input by others. --Natural R_X 17:56, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

I have no problem helping out but I feel like the onus is on the person making a significant change to make sure that change actually makes sense. No? Otherwise per WP:STATUSQUO, they should be reverted. —Joeyconnick (talk) 22:27, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

That would not be my interpretation of WP:STATUSQUO, rather that reads as a double-edged sword. My main reason for reverting from your version back to mine was that it seems your revert didn't cover everything, some things still read as if it was covering the whole thing instead of a clean revert (e.g. parts of the infobox, the route diagram template, the timeline, etc.). I believe it's a double-edged sword. Ultimately, I'm not saying I'm right and it's final, I'm saying I disagree with your position but would a) welcome input from others, and b) if the consensus / lack of input from others points to going back to a version where this focuses on the central section, then we need to reconcile the fact that this is the same line, with the same plan origin, operating seamslessly with the same vehicles and MSF, just under separate contracts and timelines.

I agree there's more onus on me to complete more work to finish this transition, but after less than 50 edits over the last year, this was a lot of effort to start the change. I have more stuff drafted, but between having some wind taken out of my sails (not personal and no grudge held) and parenting and a full-time job, I just haven't got there yet. --Natural R_X 01:43, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

I too agree that the article lead should focus only on Phase 1 of the line rather than all phases under construction. I have also clarified the infobox regarding the western terminus. Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 04:05, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

Joeyconnick also made further clarifications. Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 00:54, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Split Timeline to new article

The size of Line 5 Eglinton is becoming too large. It is time the Timeline section be split into a new article. Perhaps call this article Timeline of Line 5 Eglinton, Line 5 Eglinton timeline, or similar. Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 13:37, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

A far simpler approach would be to trim this article, as it's quite bloated. For example, the section on 2015 currently reads as:

On the weekend of April 18 and 19, 2015, the boring machines, Dennis and Lea, were lifted out of a shaft west of Allen Road and moved about 100 metres (330 ft) to a shaft just east of Allen Road.[78]

In April 2015, merchants along Eglinton Avenue West were complaining of lost revenue (up to a 35 percent dip in sales), because construction was discouraging customers with snarled traffic, limited parking options, reduced foot traffic and dusty sidewalks.[79]

By September 2015, the TBMs Don and Humber arrived for assembly in the shaft at Brentcliffe Road before starting to drill the 3.25-kilometre (2.02 mi) section west to Yonge Street.[69][64]

On September 24, 2015, Transportation Minister Steven Del Duca issued a statement saying the Crosstown would not operate until September 2021, in order "to mitigate disruption to the local community and infrastructure as much as possible." The earlier plan had been to open in 2020 with tunnelling and station construction to start in 2012.[80] Infrastructure Ontario has awarded the Crosstown construction contract to Crosslinx, a consortium led by SNC Lavalin. It will take about four years to build the stations, 15 of which will be underground.[69]

On September 29, 2015, TBM Don started to bore the north tunnel from the Brentcliffe Road launching site westwards towards Yonge Street. TBM Humber will start boring the south tunnel approximately one month later.[81]

On November 3, 2015, Del Duca announced that the contract awarded to Crosslinx Transit Solutions to complete the Crosstown and maintain it for 30 years will cost $2 billion less than originally estimated.[9]

There's a ton of minutiae and dated "this will happen" stuff that isn't wholly necessary. It could be easily trimmed down to the essentials, such as:

Over April 18 and 19, 2015, TBMs Dennis and Lea were moved to a shaft just east of Allen Road.[78] During the same month, merchants along Eglinton Avenue West were complaining of lost revenue (up to a 35 percent dip in sales) they blamed on construction impact.[79]

On September 24, 2015, Transportation Minister Steven Del Duca issued a statement saying the Crosstown would not operate until September 2021, following an earlier plan to open in 2020.[80] Infrastructure Ontario awarded the Crosstown construction contract to Crosslinx, a consortium led by SNC Lavalin.[69]

On September 29, 2015, TBM Don started to bore the north tunnel from the Brentcliffe Road launching site westwards towards Yonge Street. TBM Humber was to start boring the south tunnel approximately one month later.[81]

On November 3, 2015, Del Duca announced that the contract awarded to Crosslinx Transit Solutions to complete the Crosstown and maintain it for 30 years would cost $2 billion less than originally estimated.[9]

Quotes from the minister and examples of why merchants believe they have lost revenue can be left in the cited sources. Mentioning when the TBMs get delivered to Brentcliffe isn't noteworthy if within the same month they start boring - the latter is the more useful detail. Etc. This passage could probably be trimmed even further. These sections need some copy editing for updating the tense of things as well. I don't see the value in an entire article about the construction timeline, and I'd bet some proper trimming would bring the article down to a more reasonable level. Echoedmyron (talk) 16:31, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Agree with Echoedmyron... this can be resolved with some editing out of the minutiae. —Joeyconnick (talk) 18:29, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

I'll second this. I advocated for its removal in 2020 but it could probably be trimmed (a lot) and added to the history section. ~UN6892 ^t_c 01:06, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. Cutting the bloat and integrating the timeline to the history section would be a much better option. Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 05:06, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

I strongly agree with cutting the bloat here. I began drafting revised article sections that revised the whole Construction and implementation section. You can see a preview at my sandbox. I'd invite any comments. --Natural R_X 17:04, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Surface stops

Apart from Sunnybrook Park, I don't see how any of the surface stops on the line have demonstrated their own notability. I think info on them can be summarized in this article like for Line 6 given the independent sources on each page seem to be about the full line rather than individual stations. I am considering doing a bulk AfD for these articles though I have not conducted a BEFORE search on any of them so I will not start one yet. I will probably do so if there is not much input in this discussion (or if disagreements remain unresolved). ~UN6892 ^t_c 01:40, 15 January 2024 (UTC)