|
|
|
Ontario Line North of Eglinton (was Relief Line North) (Speculation)
- Thread starter jaybe
- Start date
micheal_can
Senior Member
My mistake. I was thinking north of Washago.
micheal_can
Senior Member
So, with that new redesign, how would all the CN freight traffic get to the MacMillan Yard? That line is heavily used by CN Freight trains. (I was a little confused where the Bala Sub met the Newmarket Sub.)
steveintoronto
Superstar
You build new trackage beside it north of the York Sub. That's been discussed a few times in recent posts, at least twice by @gweed123, by others and myself. I think using TTC gauge and third rail in such an exposed region is a massive mistake, but no matter what the gauge and rolling stock, many birds can be stoned with one kill by running the line up to RH using the Bala sub alignment.
Thread specifically devoted to discussion surrounding the Relief Line North proposal. I've moved the posts from the past few days about the RL North into this thread.
Last edited:
Fritter
Active Member
Newmarket and Bala don't meet until Washago. Bala sub south of the York sub is owned by Metrolinx and is now used rarely by freight. North of the York sub, it is CN's mainline to the rest of Canada. GO's Richmond Hill service is limited by the Major freight use beyond the diamond with the York Sub. VIA's Canadian is the only scheduled passenger train on the York sub, and only between the diamond with the Newmarket Sub, and the Bala sub diamond. GO sometimes uses the York Sub as an emergency diversion.
If it wasn't for the abandoned portion of the Newmarket Sub between Allendale and Longford Mills, the Canadian would use the Newmarket Sub all the way up to Washago.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
GO used it last night actually for Barrie trains.
It really is too bad the Newmarket sub was abandoned between Barrie and Washago. Would have allowed the Northlander to run through a much more population dense area - likely making it a much more feasible service.
Though not having a rail line along Barries waterfront is pretty nice I guess..
It really is too bad the Newmarket sub was abandoned between Barrie and Washago. Would have allowed the Northlander to run through a much more population dense area - likely making it a much more feasible service.
Though not having a rail line along Barries waterfront is pretty nice I guess..
Streety McCarface
Senior Member
It can make for some damn good photos though.
Leo_Chan
Senior Member
Here are the Public Meeting Materials PDFs uploaded
Kitsune
Senior Member
quoting @Leo_Chan from relief line south (as this thread split is going to get confusing at times)
It's interesting as when you look at the relief line north progress map, you will see the TPAP is scheduled for 2020. It definetly gives the appearance that they are accelarting RLN and that at most it may open in the mid 2030s ... vs early 2040s.
It's interesting as when you look at the relief line north progress map, you will see the TPAP is scheduled for 2020. It definetly gives the appearance that they are accelarting RLN and that at most it may open in the mid 2030s ... vs early 2040s.
mdrejhon
Senior Member
It certainly feels like RLN is being accelerated -- maybe they even can manage to keep the same tunnel boring machines drilling northwards, and piggyback construction. RLN to at least Sheppard will be massively useful regardless of route (except Option 1).
Like what Ottawa is doing, building Phase 2 LRT immedately after Phase 1 LRT completion, and with some of the same resources.
At the worst, even if it is not consecutively chained construction -- the TPAP gives them two shovel-ready election cycles to wait for funding. And RLN reaches closer to the suburbs so it probably has easier all-party support.
Like what Ottawa is doing, building Phase 2 LRT immedately after Phase 1 LRT completion, and with some of the same resources.
At the worst, even if it is not consecutively chained construction -- the TPAP gives them two shovel-ready election cycles to wait for funding. And RLN reaches closer to the suburbs so it probably has easier all-party support.
Last edited:
I don't think continuous TBM dives is really being factored in here, especially considering that north of Danforth you only have a km or two before you hit the Don Valley, where it would need to be extracted anyway. If anything though, I think what they may do is, since they know that the RL will be using Pape until it hits the Don Valley, to TBM that stretch in one go, even if the RL only goes to Danforth.
mdrejhon
Senior Member
Speaking of interlining DRL and RH line....
It is one of the top 10 questions at the Metrolinx Town Hall this Monday, so it probably will have some kind of statement/comment to this regards:
That said, if it ever happens, it would be metro/subway trains, single deck level boarding, not the original big BiLevel trains.
It is one of the top 10 questions at the Metrolinx Town Hall this Monday, so it probably will have some kind of statement/comment to this regards:
That said, if it ever happens, it would be metro/subway trains, single deck level boarding, not the original big BiLevel trains.
Attachments
Kitsune
Senior Member
RLS shows the relief line at 87 meters at the end of the Wye... why is that signifcant? Following a pape alignment straight, roughly The DVP sits at 97 meters, the bottom of the Don River sits at 83 meters. Following Overlea, your again looking at 97 meters to get under the Don River East. That funky alignment that skips to VP after Eglinton? The Don River West sits at 109 meters roughly. So it seems they may be planning on just tunneling under the valley. No fancy double deck bridges.
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
Oh wow. I had no idea that the Don Valley was that shallow. The difference in high between the bottom of the valley and the surrounding areas is just 40 metres.
At the Pape terminus of the Relief Line South, the tunnel rests at 90 metres above sea level, while ground level is at 110 metres. At the bottom of the Don Valley, 2.0 km to the north, ground level is at 78 metres above sea level. Lets say they want the tunnel though the valley to be 10 metres below the surface of the valley (same depth as Line 2); that would put the tunnel at 68 metres above sea level. Do the math, and that's a grade of just 1.1%. A subway train can easily handle that grade change.
Of course, the slope between Pape Station and the bottom of the Don Valley isn't constant. Nevertheless, this does indicate that tunnelling under the Don Valley could be plausible.