Toronto Ontario Line 3 | ?m | ?s

TheTigerMaster said:
They've completed UPX and Presto and fumbled on both of them, largely thanks to political interference from the government. They seem to be doing an okay job of managing the Crosstown, so far, although it is a year late.
Click to expand...

A year late can be understandable given the scale. I'll also add that UPX was delivered on budget, although I'm sure if you ask @drum118 about that, he will be happy to point out some things are still not done.

But nonetheless, back to the topic, this won't matter if a) the TTC insists on taking control of managing the Relief Line, instead of using Ontario's AFP process (it will become TYSSE 2.0, I'll take bets on it right now), and b) if this project doesn't get the final go-ahead (something something 'downtown gets all the transit', something something 'Etobicoke/North York/Scarborough deserves more subways').
 
DonValleyRainbow said:
A year late can be understandable given the scale. I'll also add that UPX was delivered on budget, although I'm sure if you ask @drum118 about that, he will be happy to point out some things are still not done.

But nonetheless, back to the topic, this won't matter if a) the TTC insists on taking control of managing the Relief Line, instead of using Ontario's AFP process (it will become TYSSE 2.0, I'll take bets on it right now), and b) if this project doesn't get the final go-ahead (something something 'downtown gets all the transit', something something 'Etobicoke/North York/Scarborough deserves more subways').
Click to expand...

If the Crosstown (19 kilometres) can be built in one go, I don't see why a full DRL from Eglinton (Mt Dennis) to Eglinton (Science Centre) couldn't also be built in one phase. That would put to rest the argument that the inner suburbs are being neglected as the subway would reach far beyond the downtown core.
 
DonValleyRainbow said:
year late can be understandable given the scale. I'll also add that UPX was delivered on budget, although I'm sure if you ask @drum118 about that, he will be happy to point out some things are still not done.
Click to expand...

UPX delivered on time and budget, but failed to achieve its service concept. Not the fault of Metrolinx necessarily, but rather of the Liberal government. Although the two entities are rather inseparable.
 
TheTigerMaster said:
Not the fault of Metrolinx necessarily, but rather of the Liberal government. Although the two entities are rather inseparable.
Click to expand...

Hrrmmm...we could debate that...in the appropriate thread...

Hopkins123 said:
If the Crosstown (19 kilometres) can be built in one go, I don't see why a full DRL from Eglinton (Mt Dennis) to Eglinton (Science Centre) couldn't also be built in one phase. That would put to rest the argument that the inner suburbs are being neglected as the subway would reach far beyond the downtown core.
Click to expand...

Dude, shoot all the way to Don Mills at Sheppard if you're going across the river valleys! But I don't see why we couldn't break it up into phases; the planning work from Pape to downtown is further along and we shouldn't let planning work north of Pape hold us up from getting shovels in the ground months sooner. My only hesitation is from Pape to the Millwood bridge; if you have TBMs in the ground, at least keep boring north until you hit the first major terrain barrier.
 
Then the battleground will be should there be station boxes at Mortimer, Cosburn, and O'Conner, or just Mortimer and O'Conner, or because Cosburn has more frequent service, it should be Cosburn and O'Conner only.

Maybe just run the TBMs to O'Conner and then battle over the number of stations later.
 
Hopkins123 said:
If the Crosstown (19 kilometres) can be built in one go, I don't see why a full DRL from Eglinton (Mt Dennis) to Eglinton (Science Centre) couldn't also be built in one phase.
Click to expand...

Technically it certainly could be built in one phase. But where's the money? A lot more expensive than the Crosstown.
 
The thing with phased work that it can take decades, if not forever, to get the lines built out to their natural terminal points. Mississauga has all but abandoned plans for a Bloor-Danforth extension from Kipling to Square One since first proposed in the '80s, for instance; despite Mississauga's growing 740,000 population + the sizable number of commuters from Brampton and Oakville whom would also feed into such an extension.

We're only now seriously discussing taking the Bloor-Danforth Line east and it's forth with peril.

Crosstown east to UTSC/Malvern may also take decades to come to life. The only extension that seems viable at this point is Yonge North.

Something as important as the DRL should not be subject to the same delays. At least get the core of the line built (Eglinton-Eglinton) with reasonable stop spacing to appease both local and commuter demand. I think most Torontonians could live with that.
 
W. K. Lis said:
Then the battleground will be should there be station boxes at Mortimer, Cosburn, and O'Conner, or just Mortimer and O'Conner, or because Cosburn has more frequent service, it should be Cosburn and O'Conner only.

Maybe just run the TBMs to O'Conner and then battle over the number of stations later.
Click to expand...

I hate the seeming trend of consolidating stops. The gap between Danforth and Cosburn is too far to not have a stop in-between. Mortimer should have its own stop. It's far enough away from Cosburn to be viable in its own right (there's a college campus only a block away). And there'd be no need to sustain bus service along Pape between Pape Stn and O'Connor if they were to do so.
 
Hopkins123 said:
I hate the seeming trend of consolidating stops. The gap between Danforth and Cosburn is too far to not have a stop in-between. Mortimer should have its own stop. It's far enough away from Cosburn to be viable in its own right (there's a college campus only a block away). And there'd be no need to sustain bus service along Pape between Pape Stn and O'Connor if they were to do so.
Click to expand...

This trend goes hand-in-hand with the trend of building subways solely using TBMs, IMO. There's too much sensitivity to built heritage, disturbing neighbours and expropriating property, which make TBMs the only viable option. And as a consequence, individual stations are deeper and more expensive. Too easy to consolidate and cut stations as a result.

Unlike the golden days of subway construction, it's an era of shitty subways that don't go far enough, don't have enough stations, take forever to build, are more expensive, and take longer to access. While I'm not arguing for cut-and-cover/trenched/above grade subways to be used all the time, I think we can use a better mix to deliver better subways. And if I had the ambition to run for Mayor, I'd run on that as a central plank of my platform; more, longer, cheaper, better built subways.
 
DonValleyRainbow said:
A year late can be understandable given the scale. I'll also add that UPX was delivered on budget, although I'm sure if you ask @drum118 about that, he will be happy to point out some things are still not done.

But nonetheless, back to the topic, this won't matter if a) the TTC insists on taking control of managing the Relief Line, instead of using Ontario's AFP process (it will become TYSSE 2.0, I'll take bets on it right now), and b) if this project doesn't get the final go-ahead (something something 'downtown gets all the transit', something something 'Etobicoke/North York/Scarborough deserves more subways').
Click to expand...
It got nothing to do with UPX and only effect GO.

Why should I be happy about reporting things not complete??

I guess you wouldn't report things that are wrong with your car when it the manufacturer fault in the first place??

Anyway, what has this to do with the DRL in the first place?? The DRL is decades behind schedule and will be decades before you ride it. It will be many decades before the line is built where it will do most good for the city after it opens.
 
W. K. Lis said:
Wonder if Pape & Danforth will evolve into a Yonge & Bloor 2.0 in the decades after the DRL is built?
Click to expand...

Nope, because NIMBYs.

Wonder if Eglinton & Don Mills will evolve into a Yonge & Eglinton 2.0 in the decades + 10 after the DRL is built?
Click to expand...
Nope, because we are dedicated to condo-in-the-park(ing lot) design for Eglinton and Don Mills with auto-centric arterial roads. See the plans for the Celestica site.

If it was up to me, the Celestica site (and the entirity of the area between Leslie and Wynford, Barber Greene to Science Center) would be subject to this: (Link)

Then it would become the new Yonge&Eglinton, or perhaps something even better. We are not so forward thinking though. With the DRL, we could have an entire dense downtown-like area built to house a significant part of our upcoming population boom just 15-20 minutes subway ride away from our downtown core.

Instead, we will build a couple condos.
 
Hopkins123 said:
I hate the seeming trend of consolidating stops. The gap between Danforth and Cosburn is too far to not have a stop in-between. Mortimer should have its own stop. It's far enough away from Cosburn to be viable in its own right (there's a college campus only a block away). And there'd be no need to sustain bus service along Pape between Pape Stn and O'Connor if they were to do so.
Click to expand...

This has been discussed earlier in the thread.

Two stations, one at Mortimer, and the second at Gamble with the southern end of the station box reaching Cosburn can be adequate stop-distance.

Danforth --> Mortimer = 780m
Mortimer --> Gamble = 554m

Plus a Gamble station box would be one block south of the East York Community Centre, and 3 blocks from O'Connor (which shouldn't have a stop).
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top