News   Nov 22, 2024
 686     1 
News   Nov 22, 2024
 1.2K     5 
News   Nov 22, 2024
 3.2K     8 

Toronto Crosstown LRT | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx | Arcadis

Are you kidding me?
After "detailed constructability analysis" they realized its impossible to build a tunnel running on top of an already-under-construction tunnel that was not designed to support the load. This updated concept seems like a good thing though, operationally, financially, and from a marketing/political perspective (the EELRT will likely now become the fabled 'Scarborough LRT')
 
Are you kidding me?

EDIT: after reading, It actually doesn't sound terrible. It's just frustrating that Scarborough is always getting compromise, compromise, compromise. And literally no one at Metrolinx had the foresight that Line 5 was eventually going to be extended east??
Nope don't like it.
 
After "detailed constructability analysis" they realized its impossible to build a tunnel running on top of an already-under-construction tunnel that was not designed to support the load. This updated concept seems like a good thing though, operationally, financially, and from a marketing/political perspective (the EELRT will likely now become the fabled 'Scarborough LRT')
Yea I kind of figured there would be a conflict the SSE tunnel. We don't know what the exact alignment to Kennedy will be but it would be nice if some kind of non-revenue connection was made to Line 5 likely along the overpass linking to Line 5 around at Ionview, but I can see the opposition to that. Having the EELRT permanently segregated from Line 5 would be dumb if we this line is built to the same standard as Line 5 (if its not than were going to have 3 separate incompatible LRT systems in the city). The line may as well be called the Scarborough-Malvern LRT if this is the route we are going. I would also guess this will be Line 7 meaning the Bathurst bus will be renumbered. Anyone want to lay bets on the line colour?
 
Are you kidding me?

EDIT: after reading, It actually doesn't sound terrible. It's just frustrating that Scarborough is always getting compromise, compromise, compromise. And literally no one at Metrolinx had the foresight that Line 5 was eventually going to be extended east??
Eglinton East LRT was rebranded from the Scarborough Malvern LRT which never was intended to interline with the crosstown in the first place. There was no planned extension in 2012 when the finalized all the plans.

Seems like ML made all the plans with Scarborough subway and GO rail without an extension in mind. TO came along and wanted this LRT that they have no interest to be part of the Crosstown. ML and the PCs don't seem to like it and ignored it. So there we are.
 
In the report, the council is leaning toward the at-grade solution for Kennedy. Why not reuse the RT platforms , and bridge over the rail corridor? Is there a grade or height limitation preventing this from being feasible, or is it just finance?
 
In the report, the council is leaning toward the at-grade solution for Kennedy. Why not reuse the RT platforms , and bridge over the rail corridor? Is there a grade or height limitation preventing this from being feasible, or is it just finance?
Finance.

According to the preliminary estimates of the new plan, it's about $2billion cheaper than the original plan that would tie-in with the Crosstown. Elevating the line over the Stouffville Line would eat up most of those savings.

Dan
 
Eglinton East LRT was rebranded from the Scarborough Malvern LRT which never was intended to interline with the crosstown in the first place. There was no planned extension in 2012 when the finalized all the plans.

Seems like ML made all the plans with Scarborough subway and GO rail without an extension in mind. TO came along and wanted this LRT that they have no interest to be part of the Crosstown. ML and the PCs don't seem to like it and ignored it. So there we are.
transit city existed before ML was formed so it wasnt exactly their problem with the original plans.....
 
transit city existed before ML was formed so it wasnt exactly their problem with the original plans.....
ML is a name only and has been around since GO Transit was form. It been known as different names over that time. In 2006, a new origination was created by the government along with more power that is currently ML.

Transit City came out in 2007 as a wish list plan by the province.
 
ML is a name only and has been around since GO Transit was form. It been known as different names over that time. In 2006, a new origination was created by the government along with more power that is currently ML.

Transit City came out in 2007 as a wish list plan by the province.
uh what? Isn't Transit City Dave Miller's grand plan? I thought the province's wishlist was the big move...
 
uh what? Isn't Transit City Dave Miller's grand plan? I thought the province's wishlist was the big move...
Transit City existed as a City Plan after the province was willing to fund various transit plan presented to them.

The Big Move was an Regional Plan like RER is today with various NON GO plans added to it. Since ML has taken over the subway system, they have come up with a plan for the OL that is opposite to what TTC wanted as the DRL that is now part of the Big Move. This includes the Yonge extension as well the Crosstown Line Phase 1.

In Nov 2006 at a Transit Summit meeting, various transit system presented wish list plans as well future plans to the various representations from all levels of government who were in attendant including the Deputy Minister of MTO. Various round tables were held on various plan for ML to look at as well how transit could be made better for everyone. Those ideas/recommendations were submitted to the Minister of MTO by me along with my own ideas as to quick fix to the Big Move plan and other things.
 
ML is a name only and has been around since GO Transit was form. It been known as different names over that time. In 2006, a new origination was created by the government along with more power that is currently ML.

That is not true at all.

Metrolinx was always envisioned as much more of a planning organization than an operating one. That's why it sits above GO, who reports to it.

Other than for specific lines, GO never had any regional planning motives within its purview. That was always the resposibility of other organizations, such as TOTOA.

Dan
 

Back
Top