News   Apr 19, 2024
Shimmering Skyline
 486     0 
News   Apr 18, 2024
Long Term Care Facility to be Built at Hennick Bridgepoint Hospital
 1.2K     1 
News   Apr 18, 2024
Canada's Tallest Tower to be Taller, Again
 9.6K     3 

Golden Mile Secondary Plan Study

Richard White said:
I agree but the cost would have be astronomical. Hundreds of billions of dollars is the likely cost for a subway from Kennedy to the Airport and even for Doug and Rob Ford it would have been political suicide.

They chose the current design because of cost. "Subways! Subways! Subways!" Can only get you so far otherwise we would have alot more subways being built.
Click to expand...

Hundreds of Billions?

Uhhh, no.

Not even remotely.

Its entirely reasonable to suggest putting the portion of this line east of VP underground may not have been politically viable; but it is not reasonable to exaggerate the cost of same by a factor of more than 10x.

A bit of restraint in the hyperbole please.
 
jelbana said:
And if we really can't ever learn as a city to rein in costs from tunneling, building elevated would have been perfectly viable from Laird to Kennedy.
Click to expand...

Yes, but.....probably from Bermondsey.

Elevated due to terrain, the CP main line and the DVP would been a bit pricier at those locations.
 
Richard White said:
I agree but the cost would have be astronomical. Hundreds of billions of dollars is the likely cost for a subway from Kennedy to the Airport and even for Doug and Rob Ford it would have been political suicide.

They chose the current design because of cost. "Subways! Subways! Subways!" Can only get you so far otherwise we would have alot more subways being built.
Click to expand...

lol you're exagerating wildly again, same as when the question about station renos came up
 
Richard White said:
I agree but the cost would have be astronomical. Hundreds of billions of dollars is the likely cost for a subway from Kennedy to the Airport and even for Doug and Rob Ford it would have been political suicide.

They chose the current design because of cost. "Subways! Subways! Subways!" Can only get you so far otherwise we would have alot more subways being built.
Click to expand...
A few people have said it already, but hundreds of billions is a huge overstatement. Possibly one of the biggest I've seen on this site. It would have been expensive, yes. Not that expensive.

Tbh Eglinton probably should have been a full on subway, at least to Kennedy. And if not, a medium capacity system elevated through the portions currently at grade would have been a great compromise. Rob Ford was right.
 
afransen said:
As long as its underground section? I thought such low headways were going to be a problem with traffic signals on above ground portion, leading to bunching.
Click to expand...

I'd be more surprised if there wasn't bunching, even with the 5min setup. Add in any eastern extension and it's almost a guarantee. But there's obviously varying levels of "bunching", and it needn't be the end of the world or chip away at capacity too heavily. Especially with modern traffic signalling and good mgmt. Some cars will trail others, some may lag behind schedule by a couple mins.
 
Undead said:
How are developers proposing new roads/traffic management plans if the City itself doesn't even know where they will build new roads?
Click to expand...

The Golden Mile Transportation Masterplan has outlined a fairly complete road network.

The key new roads, the O'Connor realignment and extension and Golden Mile Blvd (which would be an E-W street roughly bisecting the sites north of Eglinton between same and Ashtonbee) are relatively fixed.

Other streets are a bit more conceptual in how to divy up blocks and may be subject to some variation as developments come forward; though there is a conceptual layout from which to work.

The E.A. is working off the conceptual plan.
 
Reviving this thread to note some interesting lobbying activity, specifically from Smart Centres, on the subject of the new/extended O'Connor Drive.

***

Details for Subject Matter Registration: SM32922​

Decision(s) or issue(s) to be lobbied

Impact of Golden Mile Secondary Plan policies and designations. 1911 and 1921 Eglinton Avenue East which may be impacted by re-alignment of O'Connor Rd and other policies and designations in the Golden Mile Secondary Plan.

***

So here's what got my attention. I don't recall the properties in question being owned by Smart Centre REIT; and I don't it listed in their portfolio.

I do know that Counsel for the owner, as at 2020, expressed concerns over this and other issues associated with the Golden Mile Plan.

Link: https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2020/sc/comm/communicationfile-116533.pdf

The site still seems to be on Sarick's website too.

Hmmm
 
nfitz said:
I'm a bit puzzled how Eglinton and Warden would be effected by the realignment of O'Connor.
Click to expand...

O'Connor is being extended eastward to Warden and via a jog to Civic Road will be connected to Birchmount.

The extension would run north of the mid-point between Comstock and Eglinton.

Image here from p.2 of this thread:

1577401585543-png.222568


The road will run somewhere close to the southern extent of the properties identified above, and what I understand to be a RioCan site to the south.

But somewhere in all this, it appears SmartCentre now has an interest.
 
Northern Light said:
O'Connor is being extended eastward to Warden and via a jog to Civic Road will be connected to Birchmount.
Click to expand...
Yes, I think this is further up the thread. Good refresher though.

But doesn't it make this easier to get to that location? Instead of being caught in the 5-way O'Connor/VP/Eglinton nightmare, you just stay on O'Connor and go up Lebovic. Seems simpler to me. I always avoid O'Connor to get to Warden/Eglinton, and tend to come up Warden instead - which is a bit more of 2 sides of a triangle. (though I've been temporarily avoiding Eglinton completely for ... about a decade or so! :) )
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top