News   Jul 10, 2020
 243     0 
News   Jul 10, 2020
 257     0 
News   Jul 10, 2020
 506     1 

Ontario Line (was Relief Line South, in Design)

smallspy

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 27, 2009
Messages
4,057
Reaction score
3,348
I would anticipate that adding a wye track to an active subway line would either require substantial service disruption (not really feasible), or weekend work meaning it will take an excessive amount of time. Think of how long trackwork takes using weekend shutdowns on the current lines. Wye construction could take a decade at that rate.
It's been done in the past, and it certainly didn't take that long. What makes you think it would take substantially longer this time around?

Dan
 

leopetr

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 8, 2009
Messages
367
Reaction score
15
Must be new to this thread?


Go and look at http://www.east-toronto.ca/downtown-relief-line-update/ to see what the plans were before Doug Ford showed up with his napkins and crayons.

Instead of ADDING to the existing plans, he basically threw those plans away and started all over again with his own plans
Interesting, thanks. That's a lot of property acquisition for a cut-and-cover wye.

Mistake on the diagram: Muriel Ave is mislabeled as Eaton Ave. They're off by one street.
 

W. K. Lis

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
16,937
Reaction score
5,642
Location
Toronto, ON, CAN, Terra, Sol, Milky Way
Interesting, thanks. That's a lot of property acquisition for a cut-and-cover wye.

Mistake on the diagram: Muriel Ave is mislabeled as Eaton Ave. They're off by one street.
OH!! That's why the original "Relief Line" was discarded, because of the mislabel?
 

Tommy521

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 8, 2019
Messages
26
Reaction score
101
Location
Ontario
It's been done in the past, and it certainly didn't take that long. What makes you think it would take substantially longer this time around?

Dan
Line 2 cut and cover sections, as far as I am aware, are made from concrete sections. These are quite easy to see in the photo below:
1581627715518.png

(Source: A view of the construction of the BLOOR-DANFORTH subway through Christie Pits, Transit Toronto)

The way the concrete sections are assembled, there appears to be no interlock between each segment as shown below:
1581627926069.png

(Source: Happy birthday to the Bloor-Danforth subway, CBC News)

As there's no interlock between the segments, any differential displacement could cause substantial problems to the rail track. These are likely not operating like a stiff beam but instead a collection of segmented pipe. Segmented concrete pipe is quite sensitive to differential settlements. If there's excessive cant or twist in the rails, the line could be entirely shut down until the problem could be remediated.

TBM tunneling, SEM caverns, and cut-and-cover all have the ability to introduce settlement. Linearly passing under the sections may not cause a large disturbance, but coming in from either side certainly could. You'd have to very closely monitor ground movement regardless of the method chosen. It's likely that ground freezing would need to be employed to ensure minimal movement. If the process is going to take place over several seasons, that needs to be taken into account. To avoid any tilt, both incoming wye tracks would have to be perfectly in sync. Even the small staging difference of the TBM advancement needed to be taken into account while passing under the station, and TBMs have quite low and predictable settlement curves.

You certainly aren't going to launch a TBM from either side of the wye to meet up at Line 2, so it would be between SEM and/or cut-and-cover. You'd need to remove a substantial amount of housing to perform cut-and-cover, while SEM would be considerably more risky. If you're trying to minimize the size of the cut-and-cover boxes, irregular shaped boxes come with considerable settlement, and it is often irregular and unpredictable.

All the prep work and monitoring required to pull off this kind of maneuver on an active subway line would tkae a considerable amount of time.
There is no way that any of the mining methods for connecting the wyes could be carried out during passenger service. What company would be willing to take on that level of liability, when cant in the rail could result in derailing a passenger filled subway?

Are you going to perform ground freezing indefinitely while performing a large cut-and-cover in a busy intersection and only be able to do work nightly or on weekends? How will you manage all the relocates during the project? It's much harder to just dig around things when you're in tight quarters like that. That level of complexity, in my mind, would require at least early nightly shut downs, not just weekend work. 10 years may be longer, but I would put it in that ballpark. There is a substantial amount of work that needs to be done around the site, not just linking up the rails.

EDIT: Just wanted to clarify, when I say no interlock, I realize there is a lip on each segment that connects to the next. What I mean by this is there is no tie in or dowel holding the segments together. the joint has zero tensile strength, making it very easy to shift from differential settlement. Examples of axial pullout and flexural pullout, both common issues in segmented pipe:
1581630051074.png


1581630068588.png

(Source: xDisp Help Guide, Oasys)
 
Last edited:

officedweller

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
1,874
Reaction score
429
I thought it was pretty much concluded awhile ago that between Carlaw and East Harbour it will be elevated above the rail corridor, one side. With the guideway roughly taking up the equivalent of one track on the expanded corridor. And the guideway wouldn't use regular T columns, but an inverted L, sort of cantilevered and allowing one mainline track below. The two station structures will probably straddle a bit outside the rail corridor though.

The real estate aspect seems a bit unfortunate with the Leslieville station. Obviously the better bet for a station would be Carlaw/Queen, not DeGrassi 500m away with no N/S transit route.
That makes the most sense to me (to have an elevated dual guideway on one side of the corridor)
 

officedweller

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
1,874
Reaction score
429
Since it looks like there will be a separate "Ontario Line" bridge to carry trains from Pape Avenue to Thorncliffe Park, what about including a bicycle & pedestrian bridge within the infrastructure?
That's probably a no brainer if there's no existing alternative.
Funding for the "add-on" would have to come from a separate source, of course.
 
Last edited:

W. K. Lis

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
16,937
Reaction score
5,642
Location
Toronto, ON, CAN, Terra, Sol, Milky Way
That's probably a no brainer if there's no existing alternative.
Funding for the "add-on" would have to come from a separate source, of course.
If wonder where they can scrape some coin from? Let me guess...
1581644789054.png

From link.
 

BurlOak

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 7, 2011
Messages
6,063
Reaction score
1,642
Line 2 cut and cover sections, as far as I am aware, are made from concrete sections. These are quite easy to see in the photo below:
View attachment 230846
(Source: A view of the construction of the BLOOR-DANFORTH subway through Christie Pits, Transit Toronto)

The way the concrete sections are assembled, there appears to be no interlock between each segment as shown below:
View attachment 230847
(Source: Happy birthday to the Bloor-Danforth subway, CBC News)

As there's no interlock between the segments, any differential displacement could cause substantial problems to the rail track. These are likely not operating like a stiff beam but instead a collection of segmented pipe. Segmented concrete pipe is quite sensitive to differential settlements. If there's excessive cant or twist in the rails, the line could be entirely shut down until the problem could be remediated.

TBM tunneling, SEM caverns, and cut-and-cover all have the ability to introduce settlement. Linearly passing under the sections may not cause a large disturbance, but coming in from either side certainly could. You'd have to very closely monitor ground movement regardless of the method chosen. It's likely that ground freezing would need to be employed to ensure minimal movement. If the process is going to take place over several seasons, that needs to be taken into account. To avoid any tilt, both incoming wye tracks would have to be perfectly in sync. Even the small staging difference of the TBM advancement needed to be taken into account while passing under the station, and TBMs have quite low and predictable settlement curves.

You certainly aren't going to launch a TBM from either side of the wye to meet up at Line 2, so it would be between SEM and/or cut-and-cover. You'd need to remove a substantial amount of housing to perform cut-and-cover, while SEM would be considerably more risky. If you're trying to minimize the size of the cut-and-cover boxes, irregular shaped boxes come with considerable settlement, and it is often irregular and unpredictable.

All the prep work and monitoring required to pull off this kind of maneuver on an active subway line would tkae a considerable amount of time.
There is no way that any of the mining methods for connecting the wyes could be carried out during passenger service. What company would be willing to take on that level of liability, when cant in the rail could result in derailing a passenger filled subway?

Are you going to perform ground freezing indefinitely while performing a large cut-and-cover in a busy intersection and only be able to do work nightly or on weekends? How will you manage all the relocates during the project? It's much harder to just dig around things when you're in tight quarters like that. That level of complexity, in my mind, would require at least early nightly shut downs, not just weekend work. 10 years may be longer, but I would put it in that ballpark. There is a substantial amount of work that needs to be done around the site, not just linking up the rails.

EDIT: Just wanted to clarify, when I say no interlock, I realize there is a lip on each segment that connects to the next. What I mean by this is there is no tie in or dowel holding the segments together. the joint has zero tensile strength, making it very easy to shift from differential settlement. Examples of axial pullout and flexural pullout, both common issues in segmented pipe:
View attachment 230851

View attachment 230852
(Source: xDisp Help Guide, Oasys)
That was built using cast-in-place concrete. were those joints created periodically to allow for shrinkage of the concrete to occur at these joints, instead of creates cracks in the concrete. There is a recess shown which likely had a gasket of some sorts between where the next segment is cast, to seal for water
 

officedweller

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
1,874
Reaction score
429
If wonder where they can scrape some coin from? Let me guess...
View attachment 230903
From link.
The Canada Line pedestrian bridge (bolted to the side of the transit bridge) cost $10M in 2008-9.
 

W. K. Lis

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
16,937
Reaction score
5,642
Location
Toronto, ON, CAN, Terra, Sol, Milky Way
At one time, bicyclists and pedestrians were able to walk or ride from Avenue Road & Yonge Blvd. to Yonge & Sheppard pretty much level. No need to go downhill (the good part), but then you had to go uphill (the bad part). Unfortunately the province took that bridge was taken over to be used as part of the 401 over the Don Valley River, without any consideration for pedestrians or cyclists.


An aerial view of Yonge Boulevard (arcing across the middle of the photograph) and the Avenue Road high-level bridge in 1949.
From
link.



From link.


So for the Leaside area, will the province take consideration of users in constructing the Ontario Line bridge, or will they ignore them.
 

smallspy

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 27, 2009
Messages
4,057
Reaction score
3,348
Line 2 cut and cover sections, as far as I am aware, are made from concrete sections. These are quite easy to see in the photo below:
View attachment 230846
(Source: A view of the construction of the BLOOR-DANFORTH subway through Christie Pits, Transit Toronto)

The way the concrete sections are assembled, there appears to be no interlock between each segment as shown below:
View attachment 230847
(Source: Happy birthday to the Bloor-Danforth subway, CBC News)

As there's no interlock between the segments, any differential displacement could cause substantial problems to the rail track. These are likely not operating like a stiff beam but instead a collection of segmented pipe. Segmented concrete pipe is quite sensitive to differential settlements. If there's excessive cant or twist in the rails, the line could be entirely shut down until the problem could be remediated.

TBM tunneling, SEM caverns, and cut-and-cover all have the ability to introduce settlement. Linearly passing under the sections may not cause a large disturbance, but coming in from either side certainly could. You'd have to very closely monitor ground movement regardless of the method chosen. It's likely that ground freezing would need to be employed to ensure minimal movement. If the process is going to take place over several seasons, that needs to be taken into account. To avoid any tilt, both incoming wye tracks would have to be perfectly in sync. Even the small staging difference of the TBM advancement needed to be taken into account while passing under the station, and TBMs have quite low and predictable settlement curves.

You certainly aren't going to launch a TBM from either side of the wye to meet up at Line 2, so it would be between SEM and/or cut-and-cover. You'd need to remove a substantial amount of housing to perform cut-and-cover, while SEM would be considerably more risky. If you're trying to minimize the size of the cut-and-cover boxes, irregular shaped boxes come with considerable settlement, and it is often irregular and unpredictable.

All the prep work and monitoring required to pull off this kind of maneuver on an active subway line would tkae a considerable amount of time.
There is no way that any of the mining methods for connecting the wyes could be carried out during passenger service. What company would be willing to take on that level of liability, when cant in the rail could result in derailing a passenger filled subway?

Are you going to perform ground freezing indefinitely while performing a large cut-and-cover in a busy intersection and only be able to do work nightly or on weekends? How will you manage all the relocates during the project? It's much harder to just dig around things when you're in tight quarters like that. That level of complexity, in my mind, would require at least early nightly shut downs, not just weekend work. 10 years may be longer, but I would put it in that ballpark. There is a substantial amount of work that needs to be done around the site, not just linking up the rails.

EDIT: Just wanted to clarify, when I say no interlock, I realize there is a lip on each segment that connects to the next. What I mean by this is there is no tie in or dowel holding the segments together. the joint has zero tensile strength, making it very easy to shift from differential settlement. Examples of axial pullout and flexural pullout, both common issues in segmented pipe:
View attachment 230851

View attachment 230852
(Source: xDisp Help Guide, Oasys)
I'm well aware of the construction methodologies and their various affects on the ground above, thanks.

But none of that covers on the fact the TTC has already done exactly what you think can't be done, and they've done it in (most of) our lifetime(s).

The wye at Sheppard-Yonge. It was built 25+ years after the original Yonge Line was completed through there. And it certainly didn't take 10 years to construct, and didn't require much more than a couple of weekend shutdowns of the existing line in order to prep the area for construction at the beginning, and then to tear down the hoarding after and tie in the tracks and signal system. Yes, they required some amount of surface area to construct it.

All of the same methods used and lessons learned back then are very applicable today. Yes, there will be expropriation necessary - I don't think for a second that anyone is going to be naive about that and think that everything can be done entirly underground with no surface disruption.

Dan
 

Edward Skira

http://skyrisecities.com
Staff member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
13,732
Reaction score
11,932
Location
Toronto
Statement

Ontario-Toronto Take the Next Step Towards Building the Largest Subway Expansion in Canadian History
February 14, 2020


Following the signing of the "Ontario-Toronto Transit Partnership Preliminary Agreement" with the City of Toronto, Caroline Mulroney, Minister of Transportation issued the following statement:

"Today, the Province of Ontario and the City of Toronto signed a Preliminary Agreement to deliver on our unified plan to significantly expand and modernize the subway network across the Greater Toronto Area (GTA). This agreement forms the foundation for our continued partnership and represents another important step forward to build a transit system for the 21st century faster for the people of the GTA.

Premier Ford and the City of Toronto both share a commitment and responsibility to build transit infrastructure quickly and efficiently to keep people moving, to drive business investment and job creation, and to improve the environment. Through this partnership, we are making historic investments in Ontario's transportation network with the new Ontario Line and three subway extensions - the largest subway expansion in Canadian history.

Working together on these four priority transit projects, we are building a world-class transportation network and developing transit-oriented communities with a greater variety of housing options.This is part of our plan to build new transit faster so people can get where they want to go, when they want to get there."
 

BurlOak

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 7, 2011
Messages
6,063
Reaction score
1,642
At one time, bicyclists and pedestrians were able to walk or ride from Avenue Road & Yonge Blvd. to Yonge & Sheppard pretty much level. No need to go downhill (the good part), but then you had to go uphill (the bad part). Unfortunately the province took that bridge was taken over to be used as part of the 401 over the Don Valley River, without any consideration for pedestrians or cyclists.


An aerial view of Yonge Boulevard (arcing across the middle of the photograph) and the Avenue Road high-level bridge in 1949.
From
link.



From link.


So for the Leaside area, will the province take consideration of users in constructing the Ontario Line bridge, or will they ignore them.
There are 4 routes here to consider.
  1. From 1920 until 1997, highway 11 was straight up Yonge Street.
  2. In 1929, when the Hogg's Hollow bridge was completed, it created a bypass for trucks who could go around the rim of the valley and join back up with Yonge closer to Lawrence. I am not sure, but I think this stayed in placed for a relatively short while.
  3. In the early 1930, the alternate route into downtown was completed, with Department of Highway (DHO) completing the link from Wilson to Hogg's Hollow Bridge and extending Avenue Roads in North York portions that were not yet built.
  4. In the early 1950's, highway 401 was built and it took over the Hogg's Hollow Bridge and Avenue Road, 11A, went straight up to it.

1581699136508.png
 

Top