Toronto Eglinton Line 5 | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx | Arcadis

[ThenWhat]

The plan was going to be changed to build the tunnel all the way to Don Mills, since it was easier to launch the TBM's from there, plus the obvious benefits to the operations of the line. But the local community group loudly complained about losing the stop at Leslie, and it seemed like the Liberals were going to lose the upcoming election, so they had to revert back to the already planned alignment and award the construction contract for the eastern tunnels. Of course, the same community group then later complained about construction activity on the surface at the portal.

Yes, it should have been planned differently from the start, but they didn't.

Yes, I have also heard that version. But what community group was that? There were just trees and Toyota dealership around the planned Leslie stop at the time.

 

[nfitz]

Yes, I have also heard that version. But what community group was that? There were just trees and Toyota dealership around the planned Leslie stop at the time.

I thought it was more about the Ferrand stop at the time; but same EA change proposal.

We certainly discussed it at length about 1000 pages ago. And have discussed the south-side alignment at Leslie numerous times now.

 

[bearcat]

I thought it was more about the Ferrand stop at the time; but same EA change proposal.

We certainly discussed it at length about 1000 pages ago. And have discussed the south-side alignment at Leslie numerous times now.

I don't doubt this lol, but this thread is 1772 pages long and almost 17 years old, I was just hoping for a summary .

 

[nfitz]

I don't doubt this lol, but this thread is 1772 pages long, I was just hoping for a summary .

I'm not sure anyone remembers the deal about the EA, and why Metrolinx walked away from all their proposed changes. I don't remember being the election at the time, but they were certainly spooked, and time was of the essence - with the TBM already in the ground.

The centre alignment was in the first EA, and we've been saying it's silly here for 15 years now. I've suggested, but no one else is on board, that they squeeze a third vehicle lane on the north side for eastbound turning traffic only. And then eliminate the intersection for cars staying on the south side. Cross the traffic over at the two Portals. Whether the rail overpass is up for that kind of modification I don't know.

 

[Voltz]

That doesn't explain it though. Why does the Leslie stop require the LRT to run in the center of the road between the two portals and not on the south side? I understand the Leslie stop required the LRT to be on the surface there, but why couldn't the ends of the tunnels and exits from the portals be done with a slight curve to the south and have the LRT run on the south side so there is no conflict with with Eglinton & Leslie intersection. Is there some technical reason that could not be done?

It could have been done, they just didn't. Another explanation is all the time that was wasted on Rob Ford's plan to have it underground all the way to Kennedy, plenty of time was lost which could have been used to modify the alignment at Leslie, and make other changes.

Another Idea I would consider now is raising the eastbound lanes at Leslie with a bridge over the LRT tracks and westbound lanes to Leslie street.

 

[robmausser]

That doesn't explain it though. Why does the Leslie stop require the LRT to run in the center of the road between the two portals and not on the south side? I understand the Leslie stop required the LRT to be on the surface there, but why couldn't the ends of the tunnels and exits from the portals be done with a slight curve to the south and have the LRT run on the south side so there is no conflict with with Eglinton & Leslie intersection. Is there some technical reason that could not be done?

No, but for some stupid reason the original plan was for it to run in the centre of the road. Why it was designed that first way, we will never really know. Incompetence is the best answer.

Once they noticed the mistake, it became a "too many cooks" situation, as it often does in government. Some people then said "well why dont we just take this opportunity to tunnel all the way to Don Mills, since it has advantages?" then some people said "but the cost will be too much for a Leslie stop", and then the Leslie stop people said "dont kill our stop" and then in the corner a cracked out Rob Ford said "SUBWAYS SUBWAYS SUBWAYS"

So the decision was left to just leave it be because opening up just created arguments and opportunities to make the situation worse.

Welcome to government!

 

[robmausser]

Yes, I have also heard that version. But what community group was that? There were just trees and Toyota dealership around the planned Leslie stop at the time.

It was the condo developers around the area. The plans for those condos have been in the works for a long time.

 

[Steve X]

No, but for some stupid reason the original plan was for it to run in the centre of the road. Why it was designed that first way, we will never really know. Incompetence is the best answer.

Once they noticed the mistake, it became a "too many cooks" situation, as it often does in government. Some people then said "well why dont we just take this opportunity to tunnel all the way to Don Mills, since it has advantages?" then some people said "but the cost will be too much for a Leslie stop", and then the Leslie stop people said "dont kill our stop" and then in the corner a cracked out Rob Ford said "SUBWAYS SUBWAYS SUBWAYS"

So the decision was left to just leave it be because opening up just created arguments and opportunities to make the situation worse.

Welcome to government!

I don't think the Don Mills Station was originally part of the initial plan. This is initially a "streetcar" route design before the announced Transit City in the mid-2000s. TTC designed a shorter grade separated portion, east of Black Creek to Laird with everything else in the middle and Kennedy Station TBD. It made more sense originally since a south side tracks design would need to be shifted back to the middle via a signalized crossing over the eastbound lane. Then they decided to do Don Mills underground but didn't shift the tracks. The Brentcliffe Station was dropped somewhere along the way. The final EA prepared by the TTC has the station.

ML came along and took over the project in 2010. Rob Ford did try to tunnel the entire line and have it hooked onto the SRT. Without a supportive premier, that went no where. After a year and a half wasted, ML and the city has agree to go back to the original plan.
Then ML proposed 2 modifications, 1) Grade seperate Mount Dennis to the western portal by a bridge over Black Creek and a partially underground station replacing both the Weston and Black Creek stops. 2) Extend the tunnel to Don Mills. This would remove the Leslie stop and move the excavation shaft further east. There was so many design flaws with this plan. They would either have to move the shaft somewhere east of the railway but before Don Mills or have it east of Don Mills. This means tunneling under the Don which would lead to some serious climbing to get back to the surface or have a deep Don Mills Station which would have trouble reaching the surface before the DVP.

By the time the realize the tunnel extension won't work, they ran out of time. Who knows why they didn't propose a south side alignment initially. They also realize sending one EA amendment (grade separation to Mount Dennis Station) for city council approval was a pain in the ass, they said screw it.

 

[bearcat]

I don't think the Don Mills Station was originally part of the initial plan. This is initially a "streetcar" route design before the announced Transit City in the mid-2000s. TTC designed a shorter grade separated portion, east of Black Creek to Laird with everything else in the middle and Kennedy Station TBD. It made more sense originally since a south side tracks design would need to be shifted back to the middle via a signalized crossing over the eastbound lane. Then they decided to do Don Mills underground but didn't shift the tracks. The Brentcliffe Station was dropped somewhere along the way. The final EA prepared by the TTC has the station.

ML came along and took over the project in 2010. Rob Ford did try to tunnel the entire line and have it hooked onto the SRT. Without a supportive premier, that went no where. After a year and a half wasted, ML and the city has agree to go back to the original plan.
Then ML proposed 2 modifications, 1) Grade seperate Mount Dennis to the western portal by a bridge over Black Creek and a partially underground station replacing both the Weston and Black Creek stops. 2) Extend the tunnel to Don Mills. This would remove the Leslie stop and move the excavation shaft further east. There was so many design flaws with this plan. They would either have to move the shaft somewhere east of the railway but before Don Mills or have it east of Don Mills. This means tunneling under the Don which would lead to some serious climbing to get back to the surface or have a deep Don Mills Station which would have trouble reaching the surface before the DVP.

By the time the realize the tunnel extension won't work, they ran out of time. Who knows why they didn't propose a south side alignment initially. They also realize sending one EA amendment (grade separation to Mount Dennis Station) for city council approval was a pain in the ass, they said screw it.

Thanks! That's exactly what I was looking for.

 

[smallspy]

There's another reason why the alignment stayed in the centre of the road. I know people on here don't like to hear this, but the reality is that the line was designed not just to improve transit reliability and capacity, but also to either minimize or improve the effect on auto traffic on Eglinton. Between Leslie and Don Mills will be the western access to the new neighbourhood on the former Celestica/IBM lands. During the design stage, it was felt that the auto traffic in and out of this would be high enough to cause backups on the LRTs if there was an intersection, so it was felt prudent to maintain the grade separated access that existed previously. (Doing so also allows for improved pedestrian and active transportation access to ET Seton Park and the pathway system.) This is also the same reason why it was decided to keep the ramps to Wynford further east, rather than building an at-grade intersection and filling in the overpass as was suggested during the EA process.

I don't think the Don Mills Station was originally part of the initial plan. This is initially a "streetcar" route design before the announced Transit City in the mid-2000s. TTC designed a shorter grade separated portion, east of Black Creek to Laird with everything else in the middle and Kennedy Station TBD. It made more sense originally since a south side tracks design would need to be shifted back to the middle via a signalized crossing over the eastbound lane. Then they decided to do Don Mills underground but didn't shift the tracks. The Brentcliffe Station was dropped somewhere along the way. The final EA prepared by the TTC has the station.

By the time the TTC/City of Toronto started doing their public engagement on the project in 2003 and 2004, Don Mills Station was going to be buried as it has since been built. (The track configuration was going to be different, but that's neither here nor there.)

ML came along and took over the project in 2010. Rob Ford did try to tunnel the entire line and have it hooked onto the SRT. Without a supportive premier, that went no where. After a year and a half wasted, ML and the city has agree to go back to the original plan.
Then ML proposed 2 modifications, 1) Grade seperate Mount Dennis to the western portal by a bridge over Black Creek and a partially underground station replacing both the Weston and Black Creek stops. 2) Extend the tunnel to Don Mills. This would remove the Leslie stop and move the excavation shaft further east. There was so many design flaws with this plan. They would either have to move the shaft somewhere east of the railway but before Don Mills or have it east of Don Mills. This means tunneling under the Don which would lead to some serious climbing to get back to the surface or have a deep Don Mills Station which would have trouble reaching the surface before the DVP.

The Mount Dennis stretch had already been grade-separated by this time. When the decision was made to run full service to the then-Weston Station, it was felt that there would be too much service crossing Black Creek.

The issue of vertical alignment wasn't really a big deal as they had lots of room between Brentcliffe and Don Mills to drop the line under the West Don River. The new issue that came up was that it was now far more expensive to build a station at Leslie as it was going to be very deep - I think the number was something like 120 feet under the intersection. The cost was so high that the whole idea for a station there was dropped soon after.

By the time the realize the tunnel extension won't work, they ran out of time. Who knows why they didn't propose a south side alignment initially. They also realize sending one EA amendment (grade separation to Mount Dennis Station) for city council approval was a pain in the ass, they said screw it.

It would have involved reopening the EA. As some of the construction contracts had already been let, it was felt that changing it would delay the project by too much.

Dan

 

[Voltz]

There was so many design flaws with this plan. They would either have to move the shaft somewhere east of the railway but before Don Mills or have it east of Don Mills. This means tunneling under the Don which would lead to some serious climbing to get back to the surface or have a deep Don Mills Station which would have trouble reaching the surface before the DVP.

I don't remember that being the case, I saw the design plans for the tunnel to Don Mills and the station, it worked just fine and surfaced east of Don Mills the same way it does now. The design also removed the need for a massive underground structure at Laird for crossover and storage tracks, and made use of the Science Center parking lots for the launch portal construction activity.

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

Yes, I have also heard that version. But what community group was that? There were just trees and Toyota dealership around the planned Leslie stop at the time.

Many former auto dealerships & gasoline stations & parking lots have been or will be developed as mixed-use condos along current rapid transit lines. We can see the same along Line 5 in the future, if not right now.

The Toronto Botanical Garden (TBG) and Edwards Gardens is a botanical garden located at 777 Lawrence Avenue East, at Leslie & Lawrence. Can see it expanded southward to Eglinton Avenue and Line 5, but likely not while (Mayor) Doug Ford is in power.

 

[bearcat]

Between Leslie and Don Mills will be the western access to the new neighbourhood on the former Celestica/IBM lands. During the design stage, it was felt that the auto traffic in and out of this would be high enough to cause backups on the LRTs if there was an intersection, so it was felt prudent to maintain the grade separated access that existed previously. (Doing so also allows for improved pedestrian and active transportation access to ET Seton Park and the pathway system.) This is also the same reason why it was decided to keep the ramps to Wynford further east, rather than building an at-grade intersection and filling in the overpass as was suggested during the EA process.

But this would/could have been an at grade T-intersection (perhaps just east of the current underpass) that would not interfere with the LRT that's along the south side, no? The underpass under Eglinton could still be kept for pedestrian and cyclists to cross under the LRT.

 

[Mind_the_gap]

But this would/could have been an at grade T-intersection (perhaps just east of the current underpass) that would not interfere with the LRT that's along the south side, no? The underpass under Eglinton could still be kept for pedestrian and cyclists to cross under the LRT.

Even then, the ramps could've been maintained with proper railroad crossing gates/bells/lights. I understand this was the reason given, but it still sounds like horseshite why this couldn't be adopted.

 

[TOtramz]

Assuming if the remaining operators had their trainings completed and signed off last week (according to smallspy), today (monday) would be a great day to start simulated service! Otherwise, I don't think there is any hope left of having a Sept opening

Anyways, perhaps someone more knowledgeable than me can confirm or deny that it has indeed begun or not.