Crosstown Line 5 West Extension | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx

Northern Light

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
May 20, 2007
Messages
19,566
Reaction score
45,758
Location
Toronto/EY
I totally get ya here........important to say that......... 😉

But......

Just have to add:

Line 1 - Goodbye to the surface sections between Rosedale - Eglinton stations

This is happening and will happen; albeit, the tracks won't move, they will be decked over.

I think we have to go one step further and bury even the Maintenance and Storage Facilities! These subway trains should not be allowed to see sunlight when they are in service with the TTC!

May happen at Davisville............ study will begin on that this year.
 

daniel_kryz

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 10, 2020
Messages
437
Reaction score
849
I totally get ya here........important to say that......... 😉

But......

Just have to add:



This is happening and will happen; albeit, the tracks won't move, they will be decked over.



May happen at Davisville............ study will begin on that this year.
That actually makes sense as the deck will be used for much-needed housing, parks, and amenities.

I really don't understand why Nunziata is proposing this. Council should have been asking to make the entire, or most of the line, elevated instead of underground. There is ample space and it takes far less time to build. It should've been asked for a long time ago, not when tunneling has already begun on the underground section and the RFPs were issued for elevated guideway + stations. It's ridiculous to see any councillor try to completely change a project that has, in terms of alignment and engineering, already moved beyond the planning stage.
 

TransitBart

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 26, 2016
Messages
2,373
Reaction score
1,710
Location
Leslieville
Its always encouraging to see one's Elected Representatives using their time wisely to bring important issues to the fore...... Cough

Councillor Nunziata has put an urgent member motion before Council asking Metrolinx to bury the elevated portions of the proposed Line 5 extension.


View attachment 399754
As a kid - I took Line 2 to school. Got on west of Old Mill. I loved when the subway travelled over the Humber at Old Mill. I was thinking that the view would be great at Eglinton Flats on Line 5. Gotta love these councillors. Solving all these *real* problems. It's not for no reason that the province removed subway planning from the city.
 
Last edited:

Northern Light

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
May 20, 2007
Messages
19,566
Reaction score
45,758
Location
Toronto/EY
As a kid - I took Line 2 to school. Got on west of Old Mill. I loved when the subway travelled over the Humber. at Old Mill. I was thinking that the view would be great at Eglinton Flats on Line 5

With ya completely.

. Gotta love these councillors. Solving all these *real* problems.

Uh huh.

It's not for no reason that the province removed subway planning from the city.

Well.......in fairness to the City, the City plan had all of Eglinton at-grade; the province are the ones who put most of it underground and the balance elevated.

Its fair to dunk on unhelpful Councillors, lets just not give too much credit to a provincial government that has been less than wise with a $ and less than brilliant at planning in many ways.
 

crs1026

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Oct 16, 2014
Messages
7,933
Reaction score
13,130
^Someone who attended tells me that ML recently held an open house meeting at the Scarlett flats to discuss their plan to cross the parkland. ML likely thought it would be the typical ML non-event where only a few people show up and ML basically basks in the glow of their own brilliance.
Instead, they got a turnout of “roughly 60“ (this was the number I was told, it may or may not be accurate) who objected vociferously to the plan, and have continuing plans to mount an objection.
This may be why Councillor Nunziata has suddenly appeared on the case…. Councillors can’t afford to disregard organized groups with substantial numbers.
I have not heard any of the group’s formal or polished concerns or suggestions, so I don’t have any comment on the merits.
It’s a reality of life in municipal politics that groups of surprised residents jump up and bring forward issues in a mood of alarm.. Hopefully the right things are done and the issues are addressed - perhaps not to everybody’s satisfaction, but in an appropriate manner. We are dealing with transit in Toronto here, so there’s no guarantee.

- Paul
 
Last edited:

CapitalSeven

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 25, 2007
Messages
957
Reaction score
622
Nunziata is one of the howlingest of Toronto's howling idiot politicians. If she thinks something is a bad idea, chances are it has been studied, costed, and approved years before as the best solution. She's what ought to be buried (electorally).
 

Northern Light

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
May 20, 2007
Messages
19,566
Reaction score
45,758
Location
Toronto/EY
It should've been asked for a long time ago, not when tunneling has already begun on the underground section and the RFPs were issued for elevated guideway + stations. It's ridiculous to see any councillor try to completely change a project that has, in terms of alignment and engineering, already moved beyond the planning stage.

This to me is key.

There is at least room for a thoughtful exchange on the virtues and costs of going underground; whatever those may or may not be for this specific project, the time to raise that has long past.

Morever, I don't expect this will achieve anything; (for better or worse) which means its pure grand-standing and time-wasting.
 

crs1026

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Oct 16, 2014
Messages
7,933
Reaction score
13,130
^I’m not defending the Councillor, but her motion is pretty innocuous - likely by design. It does not demand a stop to anything, or an alternative solution…. it merely asks for data on an issue that Ml ought to have thought about and ought to already have plenty of talking points about.
The interesting thing to watch is whether Ml is inclined to just offer their explanation in a constructive manner, versus stonewalling or hiding behind their habitual platitudes and nonresponses.
I recognise that this issue has leapt out of the bushes at the last minute, but that’s the nature of community reactions especially on projects that are being fast tracked. No Councillor who is interested in reelection is going to tell their constituents “Sorry, you’re raising this too late, and we have to keep this moving”. There’s a not so fine line between giving constituents a fair hearing and grandstanding.
There is also the context of a Council which is pretty frustrated with ML on a variety of other issues. Can’t fault Council for having very low tolerance for ML and seizing an opportunity to create a “hot seat”.
As to the merits, I suspect Ml does have perfectly good reasons why it makes sense to go elevated instead of underground by virtue of cost, expediency, and geoengineering. Many UT’ers have been dying to see elevated guideways used in Toronto, and this may be the perfect opportunity to demonstrate their value.
It’s another situation where, handled well, the focus would be on mitigating legitimate concerns re impacts instead of trying to stop the design dead in its overhead tracks. I don’t think the Councillor has placed herself on the wrong side of that - yet, anyways.
I haven’t researched yet, but my source expressed concern that the project will reduce the number of playing fields in the flats. And I’m eager to know how the vegetation might be impacted. So this is still a valid inquiry in my view. Democracy is inconvenient but it’s times like this that determine whether we have good government or not.

- Paul
 
Last edited:

fanoftoronto

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 13, 2010
Messages
582
Reaction score
1,839
Location
Everywhere and Nowhere
This to me is key.

There is at least room for a thoughtful exchange on the virtues and costs of going underground; whatever those may or may not be for this specific project, the time to raise that has long past.

Morever, I don't expect this will achieve anything; (for better or worse) which means its pure grand-standing and time-wasting.

I do want to make it clear that Metrolinx hasn't properly communicated exactly why this segment needs to be elevated.

The entire section between Jane and Scarlett is flood zone meaning a tunnel through this area would need to be super deep, especially the station at Scarlett and Eglinton which would need to be under the Humber river and its valley. Additionally, because it's underground in a flood plain, the annual maintenance would be much higher than regular tunnel sections in order to keep the water out. This makes elevated the much better option when compared on a one-to-one basis.
 

gweed123

Moderator
Staff member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 10, 2009
Messages
7,811
Reaction score
1,528
Location
Burlington
I just wish Councillors would have put up this much of an objection when Metrolinx moved the ECLRT station at Leslie back into the median instead of leaving it on the south side like had been proposed at one point. ATO for the entire line west of the Science Centre would have been great.
 

H4F33Z

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 11, 2019
Messages
471
Reaction score
1,338
Location
Dorset Park, Scarborough
It's clear that this motion will do nothing, and it should. Councilors hear from their constituents and they feel its their job to listen and act on their concerns so it looks they're doing something for the ward. So therefore a report is made.

Fletcher made a ask to Metrolinx to put the line underground in Leslieville

Robinson made an ask to Metrolinx to put the trainyard somewhere else

and now this ask.

But Metrolinx has bigger intentions and have the people actually designing it, and putting the line underground here just wastes more money. I'm somewhat glad these council motions asking to make major unnecessary changes to a multi-billion dollar project are being ignored.
 

Steve X

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 16, 2016
Messages
2,347
Reaction score
1,886
It's clear that this motion will do nothing, and it should. Councilors hear from their constituents and they feel its their job to listen and act on their concerns so it looks they're doing something for the ward. So therefore a report is made.

Fletcher made a ask to Metrolinx to put the line underground in Leslieville

Robinson made an ask to Metrolinx to put the trainyard somewhere else

and now this ask.

But Metrolinx has bigger intentions and have the people actually designing it, and putting the line underground here just wastes more money. I'm somewhat glad these council motions asking to make major unnecessary changes to a multi-billion dollar project are being ignored.
The city is powerless. Ford revoke the ability for Toronto city council to plan any major transit projects. So they can spend hours debating all they want.
 

Towered

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
7,366
Reaction score
7,134
It's clear that this motion will do nothing, and it should. Councilors hear from their constituents and they feel its their job to listen and act on their concerns so it looks they're doing something for the ward. So therefore a report is made.

Fletcher made a ask to Metrolinx to put the line underground in Leslieville

Robinson made an ask to Metrolinx to put the trainyard somewhere else

and now this ask.

But Metrolinx has bigger intentions and have the people actually designing it, and putting the line underground here just wastes more money. I'm somewhat glad these council motions asking to make major unnecessary changes to a multi-billion dollar project are being ignored.
Precisely, it's just classic smoke and mirrors politicking at the local level. A councilor who values re-election needs to be seen to be sympathetic and responsive to community concerns, even though they know damn well that no tangible results will emerge from their "action". It's all just a BS game for them to be able to point at something and say, "look guys, I listened to you and tried to do something about it! Not my fault!"
 

fanoftoronto

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 13, 2010
Messages
582
Reaction score
1,839
Location
Everywhere and Nowhere
Precisely, it's just classic smoke and mirrors politicking at the local level. A councilor who values re-election needs to be seen to be sympathetic and responsive to community concerns, even though they know damn well that no tangible results will emerge from their "action". It's all just a BS game for them to be able to point at something and say, "look guys, I listened to you and tried to do something about it! Not my fault!"

Except a good councilor would get the information and educate their constituents of the merits of going elevated instead of simply saying "I tried to do something, but was turned down. Not my fault!" Reactive rather than proactive.

Insufficient communication on part of Metrolinx to provide the necessary information on the decision to go elevated, and improper grandstanding by a Councilor who is more caring about their re-election than with providing proper information to their constituents on the decision making process.
 

Top