News   Sep 24, 2021
 1.2K     1 
News   Sep 24, 2021
 1.9K     3 
News   Sep 24, 2021
 1.8K     0 

Ontario Line (was Relief Line South, in Design)

Northern Light

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
May 20, 2007
Messages
14,559
Reaction score
27,663
Location
Toronto/EY
@Steve Munro 's latest post on a topic that's been discussed here. He spoke with the Metrolinx team:


Further to new info being gleaned here.............:

1624571896512.png


That's a considerable added cost in scope that was not in the original proposal.

*****

As to the idea of the Dundas Car to Gerrard Station.....from a POV of meeting the needs of riders of that route, the benefit is probably low; the benefit for the TTC is alleviating overcrowding at Broadview Station.
I expect that there has been at least some, back-of-the envelope consideration to how Broadview would function with yet another route (Broadview extension demands its own streetcar route); and a possible connection to service on Cherry.
I've talked w/some knowledgeable people and the general consensus is that 'fixing' Broadview would not be cheap. It wouldn't be Bloor-Yonge expensive, but it could well involve partial reconstruction of the station.
Shifting Dundas to a new routing might represent a cost savings by reducing the scale of such work, deferring such work, or possibly eliminating it all together.

*****

Of note, there is a trunk sewer under Carlaw and that might impact on construction of new track work.
I think any connection via Carlaw would all but ensure connecting track to Queen were also built for redundancy.
 

Jonny5

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 23, 2007
Messages
3,278
Reaction score
964
On the Dundas car to Gerrard Station, I think this is the tyranny of old plans. I recall seeing this on some very preliminary rough sketch of a possible DRL many years ago (maybe 2015 - it was on the City's plan.) I don't think the TTC specifically is actively considering this at all, and they may not even know of it, but it's a zombie proposal from some long forgotten DRL plan that has simply been carried forward. There was a dotted line on a map sometime around 2015 for a "possible streetcar extension" and it has simply been cut and paste for years since with no actual thought given if they really wanted to do it.
 
Last edited:

Allandale25

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Oct 19, 2007
Messages
6,520
Reaction score
8,530
Further to new info being gleaned here.............:

View attachment 330248

That's a considerable added cost in scope that was not in the original proposal.

*****

As to the idea of the Dundas Car to Gerrard Station.....from a POV of meeting the needs of riders of that route, the benefit is probably low; the benefit for the TTC is alleviating overcrowding at Broadview Station.
I expect that there has been at least some, back-of-the envelope consideration to how Broadview would function with yet another route (Broadview extension demands its own streetcar route); and a possible connection to service on Cherry.
I've talked w/some knowledgeable people and the general consensus is that 'fixing' Broadview would not be cheap. It wouldn't be Bloor-Yonge expensive, but it could well involve partial reconstruction of the station.
Shifting Dundas to a new routing might represent a cost savings by reducing the scale of such work, deferring such work, or possibly eliminating it all together.

*****

Of note, there is a trunk sewer under Carlaw and that might impact on construction of new track work.
I think any connection via Carlaw would all but ensure connecting track to Queen were also built for redundancy.

Definitely a cost but is it possible when the original budget for the OL was announced in the summer of 2019 the government included a bit of a cushion in case stuff like this came up? I can't recall if the IBC or PDBC (or other report) has a detailed breakdown?
 

Northern Light

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
May 20, 2007
Messages
14,559
Reaction score
27,663
Location
Toronto/EY
Definitely a cost but is it possible when the original budget for the OL was announced in the summer of 2019 the government included a bit of a cushion in case stuff like this came up? I can't recall if the IBC or PDBC (or other report) has a detailed breakdown?

There was a cost range given for the O/L.

Certainly, a portion of any range would be devoted to contingencies and unknowns at the time of the announcement.

If nothing else, this would drive things towards the high end of the range.

That said, many of us felt then that the numbers were low-balled; as such, I'm not convinced the budget will stay within the initially indicated range.

Though we lack so many details (and have from moment one) its hard to tell.
 

Allandale25

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Oct 19, 2007
Messages
6,520
Reaction score
8,530
At tonight's meeting, Metrolinx staff said they would get back to the community about the 'underground' option for the OL in from Don River-Pape. The report would be available before the next meeting I heard. Staff said some of their early findings show it could be a cost difference increase of $800 million to over $1 billion and add 15 to 24 months to the construction schedule.
 

generalcanada

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 19, 2020
Messages
162
Reaction score
325
the problem arises is now with the raising of the railway that number is probably at least 100-200 million less.

But this is metrolinx, the plan will happen and litterally wont be cancelled or changed

bet
 

syn

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 26, 2007
Messages
5,147
Reaction score
3,345
@Steve Munro 's latest post on a topic that's been discussed here. He spoke with the Metrolinx team:


I noticed this question it the comments:

Pardon length – and what’s a ballpark for additional costs, or has Steve hit it out of the park?


Steve: TBA. Come back in July or August and they will tell us, or so they said at tonight’s online session.

I'm really curious as to what the additional cost will be - and how far off it will be from simply burying this portion.

Are there any deadlines in July/August which will make these changes permanent?
 

tsm1072

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 11, 2021
Messages
131
Reaction score
388
I'm really curious as to what the additional cost will be - and how far off it will be from simply burying this portion.
Wouldn't this cost have to happen anyway, if not in the Ontario Line budget, it would be in the GO Expansion budget? If you assume this work is happening regardless, which with Metrolinx making GO upgrades, it probably has to; it may add only a negligible amount to the OL cost as they had to build new bridges for the OL anyway. The bulk of the cost may get put into the GO Expansion costs.
 

Allandale25

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Oct 19, 2007
Messages
6,520
Reaction score
8,530
^ Not just for GO expansion. As noted in the Q and A with on Steve's blog post it sounds like there are benefits to the municipal road users, including streetcars, by creating new bridges.

I'm wondering if they'll use any rapid bridge installation strategies. They went span by span for example for LSW between the CNE and Mimico.

 

Allandale25

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Oct 19, 2007
Messages
6,520
Reaction score
8,530
Update from the Pape Area Concerned Citizens for Transit (PACCT). As noted in the update, they have an "action plan": https://www.pacct.info/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/working-plan.pdf

PACCT-Metrolinx "Building Better Transit Neighbourhoods" Action Plan​

On June 23, PACCT held a virtual meeting with Metrolinx. At this meeting, PAACT presented Metrolinx with our action plan, called "Building Better Transit Neighbourhoods."

The complete action plan can be downloaded here, and we encourage all neighbours to take the time to read our list of actions that PACCT expects Metrolinx to fulfill.

By the time you receive this newsletter, a press release will go out to local media and our three levels of government representation will also receive the detailed action plan.

We feel that this plan is a culmination of almost 2 years of PACCT activity, of listening to our members' concerns and priorities, of the PACCT executive reflecting on our meetings with Metrolinx and our government representatives and on PACCT's goal for a net positive Ontario Line outcome for our neighbourhood.

We have asked Metrolinx to respond to the document by July 23.​

***

Release date: June 23 2021

Pape Area Concerned Citizens for Transit (PACCT)
has put together a plan to ensure positive transit-related outcomes for our neighbourhood. This list was developed in conjunction with Metrolinx’s core value of engaging with communities during transit planning and construction. The result is a concise list of transit construction and operation-related concerns that Metrolinx will need to address, and solutions that PACCT believes will mitigate quality of life concerns that will occur in designated transit corridor areas due to transit construction and operation.

PACCT has developed this list by studying transit-related studies from similar transit projects worldwide and by surveying our 350 neighbours to hear their concerns. Our requests are data driven and represent our community’s greatest concerns - all of them reasonable - that are fiscally responsible and aim to have a net positive outcome for our neighbourhood.

Our requests are divided into four categories:

Positive Quality of Life Outcomes - A fully covered Don Valley bridge to eliminate train noise, ecological and sound barrier on south side of the Don Valley, direct revitalization of construction areas with native plant species

Working With Our Neighbourhoods - Like a new neighbour, Metrolinx will have to assimilate into the existing feel and vibe of the surrounding homes and businesses. We need Metrolinx to be receptive to the requests and concerns from our key constituents.

Community Safety - The safety of the people that live, work, play and pass through our neighbourhood is paramount. Proper traffic mitigation, signage and safety measures are needed to ensure safety at all times.

Community Legacy Projects - Transit projects take years to plan and build, but once they are operational, they serve generations to come. Our community desires lasting legacy outcomes that will have a positive impact on future residents and visitors.

PACCT looks forward to working closely with Metrolinx to bring our list of requests to fruition and continue the community consultation that has been so carefully planned and agreed upon.
 

generalcanada

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 19, 2020
Messages
162
Reaction score
325
● A fully covered Don Valley bridge to eliminate train noise and vibrations -
● an ecological barrier and/or sound barrier on the south side of the Don Valley (north side of Hopedale Ave.) to reduce train and DVP noise
● Build under the valley and river, no bridge needed
● Present data about train noise and vibration from comparable projects. (Comparable projects to include: Metro North, Sydney Australia, Honolulu Rail Transit, Hawaii, Elizabeth Line, London, UK. Edmonton LRT, Edmonton AB, and Broadway Subway, Vancouver, BC)
●Provide a layout of the total construction footprint, including construction access for Minton Place/Hopedale/Pape/Stanhope
● Get a written "agreement" re: expropriating cap on 4 house
● Provide a property appraisal to residents with concerns over a potential property value decrease, and potential limitations around their ability to sell during construction (Re: flag on their property title)
● Independent third party to pre-inspect all homes in transit corridor for foundation or structural damage
● Communicate to area residents, well in advance (6 months), of any new changes to the construction area
● Residents who are impacted by tunnelling directly below them should be offered to be put up in a hotel for the duration of the construction
● Residents of Minton Place (end of the street) should be offered the same while there is an increased level of activity in the area where it impinges their ability to move freely in and out of the area.
● Establish a community satellite office trailer on site (roving as construction moves) to deal specifically with community concerns. Staffed 6 days a week. 7 am - 7 pm (M-F) 9 - 5 am (Saturday)
● Ensuring construction stops at 7 pm Monday-Saturday
● Free parking along Pape during construction. The scope of this construction will have an impact on local residents’ ability to use the street for parking due to construction equipment, movement of trucks and vehicles in and out of the area
● Increase street cleaning to once per month during the construction project to offset continual construction dust and debris to residential streets
● No contractor or employee parking on neighborhood streets in order to prioritize resident parking needs
●Replant 2 native species trees in and around Minton Place and Crowthers Woods for every mature tree removed while building the bridge. In an area that is inundated with traffic and construction, The building of this bridge will have a huge impact on our green space. Metrolinx’s responsibility is to ensure that they repair the harm done, by replacing every tree and the vegetation destroyed by their construction. · This would be the smallest of tokens, given that the natural habitats of flora and fauna will be demolished, and in all likelihood, many plant life and the lives of animals will also be taken
● Having our neighbours involved with the complete planning process for the Hopedale-Minton park space. Current suggestions state a lookout and a native plant garden would be the preferred design
● Beautify Pape Avenue with trees. Erect a plaque for the lookout at the park: "Minton Lookout". Has unofficially been called this for decades by the community.
● Create a much-needed pedestrian sidewalk and bike lanes along Millwood from the north end of the Leaside Bridge to Redpath St.

some of theese are actually pretty reasonable, others like asking them to tunnel under the don valley....less so.

definitely not as hostile than the leslieville people
 

Top