salsa
Senior Member
The only "bitching" I'm seeing right now is coming from you.
Toronto Ontario Line 3 | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx
- Thread starter JasonParis
- Start date
The only "bitching" I'm seeing right now is coming from you.
Cobra
Senior Member
100% agree. We need that line sooner rather than later and it seems that under this model, they can fasttrack a lot of the usual steps and get shovels faster.
I cringed reading some of Toronto council crying on Twitter calling for the status quo and defending the shorter line.
Eglinton (some relief to the Yonge line) to Exhibition GO (Union station Relief) is the best outcome for this line.
44 North
Senior Member
Dunno bout a sigh of relief. We had a deal with the Prov/Metrolinx and things seemed to be working both smoothly and amicably. City studies the south portion, Metrolinx the northern section. Things would naturally tie in to the point it could potentially be all one shot construction. The City portion was done, but Mlinx reneged, didn't present their findings, then concocted something else in the dark. And we still don't know what that something is yet. That's not good faith.
As for supposedly crossing Lower Don above grade, if such is the case, I'd be keen on seeing how. Not saying it can't be done, however with Bayview, FPL, GO, existing development I really can't see it. We've all considered this in the fantasy thread years ago. So maybe we're reading too much into it and is in fact below-grade.
Oh give it a rest dude. Seriously. Not one week ago you were trolling the board saying if the RL wasn't a hefty mainline train running among VIA, GO, and freight that Toronto is dumb, everyone is dumb. Now when it's the complete opposite - narrow light subway trains - you're claiming this is the best solution. How the heck did you do a complete 180 over the course of 48hrs??
Cobra
Senior Member
Liberty Village definately should get a proper station and I think it will. If one of the bid due propose it, they'd have an advantage.
As for Front & Bathurst, wouldn't that be redundant if the line does end at Exhibition GO Station?
Midtown Urbanist
Superstar
Big time. They should have waited at least a day to see the proposed alignment and stations included in the budget.
They have been made out to be massive fools.
alexb
Active Member
Bids are not going to have different station plans, this stuff will be sorted out and finalised before it goes out for a RFQ.
As for stations put one at Bathurst/Fort York and the Exhibition one should be on Lakeshore. Let the RER stations at Exhibition and King-Liberty take care of Liberty Village.
M II A II R II K
Senior Member
So it's either Ontario Place or Exhibition, not both, unless they're two separate stops.
BurlOak
Senior Member
I think you mean the one called Sunlight Park Road?
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6554171,-79.3487176,527m/data=!3m1!1e3
I see it doing the following - starting from the east:
- Launch Shaft (going eastward) on South side of Eastern, east of the rail corridor.
- The railway is on an embankment there, so it would come through the embankment and be roughly at-grade. This is not tunneled, just regular shored construction.
- It would go along the south side of the parking lot, switching from partly underground to elevated.
- In the 250 to 275m, it would have to climb from roughly elevation -2m to 7m to clear the DVP. That a bit less than 4%.
- In the next 100 to 125m, it would have to climb another 2m to clear the rail line. It would actually peak a bit before this, and be on it's way down at the point of the rail line.
- In the next 225 to 250m it would be descending through Corktown Common.
- I don't think it can make it, so likely Bayview would have to ramp up maybe 1 or 2m to go over this partially buried line.
- In the 100 to 150m through Lawren Harris Square to Eastern, it would become fully underground - and this would likely be a TBM launch or extraction site.
The other problem heading even farther east is that the line needs to be very deep to be under the sewer of Carlaw (where it would going parallel to Carlaw). If it just went under Carlaw and continued east until Pape, it wouldn't need quite the clearance to the sewer so it could be shallower. This depth of track may mean descending from at-grade to full depth could not be done in the 450m to Carlaw. This is another close call.
EDIT:
After looking at some elevations from the plan (Steve Munro's site - https://stevemunro.ca/2018/04/29/relief-line-south-station-and-alignment-plans/ ), I am going to say that this is physically not possibly. The Line would have to be starting low under Carlaw and climbing rapidly, then having a flat spot for the Broadview Station, then climbing again to clear the Richomond Hill GO, then switching to deeply descending to go under Bayview,. I think it would probably take 8% grades to pull this off - which can't be done (5 or 6% is likely the max). Thus, I will put this idea to rest. (there still might be a small benefit in taking the line to Pape instead of Carlaw, because the elevation could be closer to the sewer when passing at right angles to it compared to going parallel to it. This would make the Queen Station and Gerrard Station shallower, and make the grade from Gerrard to Danforth more reasonable (just under 3.0% instead of 3.4%).
Last edited:
Kitsune
Senior Member
... why not just move Exhibition so the end of platforms are at Dufferin. Then run the line to Dufferin and have a stop at Strachan.
BurlOak
Senior Member
I'd guess you need a TBM launch shaft near this area. You also want to maintain GO service at the station keep the Harbourfront LRT (streetcar?) open.
The most logical place is just south-east of BMO field
salsa
Senior Member
The only people who has been made out to be massive fools, are those who still haven't learned a darn thing from SmartTrack or the Scarborough subway debacle. A case study in how council was lied to and misled every step of the way to the point that literally every single assumption turned out to be completely wrong from what was originally promised.
We are in the early stages of yet another iteration of this broken planning process. Another line on a map that looks very good but which every media reporter has made clear that this is all preliminary, is subject to change at anytime, and is still missing a lot of critical details despite "waiting a day". Of course I would like this plan work out as promised. That would be great. But as a rational person, I need to see their homework first. The fact that the mouth pieces from Queens Park and Metrolinx are already demonstrating serious credibility issues in public interviews and have hired the same Google Map-consultants that gave us SmartTrack, should have been an early warning sign to not put too much faith in this plan at this time. And yet some of you are doing exactly that.
adys123
Active Member
I agree with this post wholeheartedly. There is a significant amount of politicization of planning in North America and transportation infrastructure in Toronto is a good example of that.
The fact that the Province has no costing details except probably less than a Class 5 estimate and basically no other details finalized except manufacture brochure talking points is a grave concern. The relief line as a whole needs to be able to handle future capacity; early projections already show above heavy rail metro level of ridership. We cannot stand for an under-capacity line that we'll have to fix in the future, with a relief line for the Ontario Line.
The worst part of this entire plan is that Toronto will very likely have no say, this is just based on all the other 'consultations' they have held for other issues.
Comically, they advertise this as the best and newest technology free from the technologically outdated Line 2, of which they're planning on extending into a heavily suburban area. They're focus on putting a lower capacity mode in the densest part of the city is the first warning sign that they have no idea what they're doing and that is never sound planning.
ssiguy2
Senior Member
I am bitching because of this stupid idea that people think that thinner trains won't have the capacity. Newsflash, most major systems on this planet do NOT use Metro cars 3.0 meters or wider...……….they are the exception not the rule. Capacity has little to do with the width of the trains and far more to do with frequencies and station lengths. Vancouver's CL trains are 3 meters wide compared to 2.4 for MK1 and 2.7 for MK111 and yet the Canada Line doesn't have near the capacity of the SkyTrain routes due to their 90 second frequency and larger stations.
If someone hates this plan then fine but spare me this asinine idea that thinner Metro cars won't have the capacity.
Translude15
Frank the Tank
Judging by the route, Exhibition terminus can either remain a branch and a western extension can continue along Queen. Alternatively, the route can continue from Exhibition and extend north along Dufferin. I recall hearing Adam Vaughan (who is highly critical of this plan), during his time as a city councillor, claiming the Yonge Line should have travelled west to the Ex and then north along Dufferin instead of the route it takes today. Perhaps this is an opportunity to provide higher order transit for that corridor which badly needs it.
In terms of the location of an Exhibition station, I don't see how any other alignment away from the GO/TTC loop makes sense. Development potential exists on the southern edge of LV by the tracks as well as on the NE end of the Ex grounds towards Dufferin. If Metrolinx talks about relieving Union Station, wouldn't this node be a perfect Union West for the Lakeshore line? Garrison Point would also warrant a station before Exhibition as well, likely at Strachan. This would serve western LV pretty decently.
In terms of the location of an Exhibition station, I don't see how any other alignment away from the GO/TTC loop makes sense. Development potential exists on the southern edge of LV by the tracks as well as on the NE end of the Ex grounds towards Dufferin. If Metrolinx talks about relieving Union Station, wouldn't this node be a perfect Union West for the Lakeshore line? Garrison Point would also warrant a station before Exhibition as well, likely at Strachan. This would serve western LV pretty decently.
steveintoronto
Superstar
Not to mention the flooding issues with open portals that low in the Don Valley. If the proposal is to deep tunnel both sides from the river, it would actually be far cheaper, easier, and performance-wise far superior to just stay in tunnel.
The claim that a bridge will be cheaper is indicative of how totally un-thought-out this whole proposal is. I'm still waiting for a grown-up to present an engineering analysis, but grown-ups are in abject absence at QP right now.
And absolutely no presentation of any plan with a Metrolinx stamp on it.
The DRL as proposed by the City was also an absurdity in many ways, with no hope of financing it. This latest iteration is no better.
Still waiting for a plan from someone (almost inevitably private) who does know what they're doing, how to finance it, and how to make it work while keeping politicos at a safe distance.
Last edited: