|
|
|
BurlOak
Senior Member
West was to the west of Kennedy - in the median.
East is still under debate as far as I know.
Leo_Chan
Senior Member
That's almost a given, unless the EELRT plan gets changed to all tunneled.
BurlOak
Senior Member
Moved from Sheppard thread
For Eglinton, I think the Don Mills station is just too deep in order for the line to become elevated before DVP. I thought this station should have been a bit shallower, and moved a bit farther west in order to get it to work. Everything cascades from here. If you can't elevate by DVP, then its hard to elevate before Swift since the terrain is also rising. Then every location from there eastward there is always just not enough space to transition from an underground to an elevated line (remember, it needs to go from track level being about 5m below ground to about 8m above ground - to account for the tunnel roof and the vertical clearance and the supporting bridge structure).
I think we are stuck with cut-and-cover. It stays underground through the DVP - it looks like the bridge could stay. Sort of Old Mill (mini Bloor Viaduct) style over Wynford and the GO line. Need a new bridge at Wynford ($40M) and GO ($100M). It's about 6km from Don Mills to Kennedy - which at $150M extra per km, plus the bridges, puts you at about $1B. From Brentcliffe to Don Mills also needs adjustment due to the poor original planning - maybe $300M. Round up to $1.5B.
I understand that the geniuses who planned Transit City assumed that Don Mills would be an at-grade stop above the Eglinton line station. This means the current construction is no way anticipating an underground station for the transit line that will be on Don Mills. I wonder if this is foreshadowing that the DRL will not have a stop at Don Mills/Eglinton.
For Eglinton, I think the Don Mills station is just too deep in order for the line to become elevated before DVP. I thought this station should have been a bit shallower, and moved a bit farther west in order to get it to work. Everything cascades from here. If you can't elevate by DVP, then its hard to elevate before Swift since the terrain is also rising. Then every location from there eastward there is always just not enough space to transition from an underground to an elevated line (remember, it needs to go from track level being about 5m below ground to about 8m above ground - to account for the tunnel roof and the vertical clearance and the supporting bridge structure).
I think we are stuck with cut-and-cover. It stays underground through the DVP - it looks like the bridge could stay. Sort of Old Mill (mini Bloor Viaduct) style over Wynford and the GO line. Need a new bridge at Wynford ($40M) and GO ($100M). It's about 6km from Don Mills to Kennedy - which at $150M extra per km, plus the bridges, puts you at about $1B. From Brentcliffe to Don Mills also needs adjustment due to the poor original planning - maybe $300M. Round up to $1.5B.
Hopkins123
Senior Member
Yes, this is the perfect, most opportune time to fix the "errors" of the Crosstown Line before any trackbeds are laid down the street median.
The Brentcliffe portal could transition the alignment to a south-of-roadway station at Leslie slightly above grade, which then leads down into the tunnel for the Science Centre Stn then elevates again to cross the DVP with the next station elevated over Wynford and remaining elevated the rest of the way to Jonesville, where it descends into a trench for the station at Vic Park. It then rises out of the trench for an elevated stop east of Pharmacy (serving both the Pharmacy and Lebovic areas), then elevated Golden Mile and Birchmount Stns, then dips underground for possible Ionview? and then Kennedy Stns.
For the eastern extension, to Danforth Rd is underground, then elevated with Torrance/Bellamy and Markham Rd above grade stops to east of Cedar Dr with underground stop at Scarborough Golf Club Rd, then elevated again over Guildwood GO parallel Kingston Rd until Lawrence where it dips underground for the next station and stays underground til it crosses Highland Creek elevated on a bridge to enter UTSC, underground stop then north of Ellesmere/Military Trail surfaces again for the terminus.
JSF-1
Active Member
Why would the stop at VP need to be in a trench if the line is already elevated? Same with Golf Club and Lawrence. Its just needlessly complicated when an elevated station is already out of the way of the roads.
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
Osgoode wasn't designed for an interchange station, but it's getting one.
Queen wasn't designed for an interchange station, but it's getting one.
Pape wasn't designed for an interchange station, but it's getting one.
Eglinton West wasn't designed for an interchange station, but it's getting one.
Eglinton wasn't designed for an interchange station, but it's getting one.
Kennedy wasn't designed for an interchange station, but it's getting one.
Sheppard-Yonge wasn't designed for an interchange station, but it has one.
Don Mills wasn't designed for an underground interchange station, but if deemed necessary, it will have one.
Johnny Au
Senior Member
Kennedy was designed to be an interchange station since 1980 to accommodate the then-under construction Line 3 (which would open five years later).
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
I'm talking about it's interchange with Line 5.
Johnny Au
Senior Member
You should have been clearer.
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
I'm no fan of the Brentcliffe Portal situation. But the time to fix this has passed years ago. Hundreds of millions of dollars, if not more, have already been sunk into this current design. Modifying the design at this stage would result in years of design, and likely have the government paying huge penalties to the contracts. The train has long left the station on this matter. Changing the design at this point is not a realistic proposition. This line will be operational within 39 months.
Last edited:
W. K. Lis
Superstar
Actually, the QUEEN station was designed to be an interchange station with the YONGE station of the QUEEN (streetcar) subway. The BLOOR station was not designed as an interchange station when originally built.
See link.
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
Actually, the QUEEN station was designed to be an interchange station with the YONGE station of the QUEEN (streetcar) subway. The BLOOR station was not designed as an interchange station when originally built.
See link.
This is getting a bit pedantic. It's not designed for the interchange station it's getting. Whatever allowances were made for a future interchange station are being used by the pedestrian underpass. It has no impact on the Relief Line interchange station.
I was not aware that Bloor Station (Line 1) was not designed for the interchange station though. But now that I think about this history, it does make sense. The flying-U was the favoured Line 2 alignment back when the Yonge Line was under design and construction.
Hopkins123
Senior Member
Remember though that the existing Bloor-Danforth Line transitions several times above and below grade during its length, so it's not needlessly complicated if it's advantageous to do so. The three intersections you've highlighted are in fact the most complex ones to tackle, hence why two of them even gets mentioned by the official planners here:
https://eglintoneastlrt.ca/current-work/eglinton-and-kingston-road/
https://eglintoneastlrt.ca/current-work/kingston-road-lawrence-morningside/
Per elevation, I doubt three stations are needed in the general Eglinton/Kingston area within close proximity to eachother so a single stop right as the LRT turns onto Kingston Rd at Golf Club Rd seems like a nice compromise (there'd be no need for the Guildwood Pkwy stop). If at Golf Club Rd, harder to have it above grade due to land constraints and if placed in the parkland walking times to/from Guildwood Pkwy become a bit far. The tunneled section I'm envisioning goes all the way from Cedar/Eglinton to Livingstone/Kingston where the line bridges over the train tracks for an elevated GO Stn stop over the north-side parking lot, Old Mill style. From there the Galloway stop is also elevated but (as per the the link) the West Hill triangle stop is best dealt with underground. This becomes more clearer since Morningside Ave roadway is extremely narrow to handle exclusive lane surface or elevated ROW for LRT and would likely cross Highland Creek on its own separate bridge into the UTSC campus grounds anyway emerging fro the tunnel. I've put a lot of thought into this.
As for VP, elevation too does work but some parts of the station (I'm presuming a station versus just a stop, with bus bays) would be better if dealt with below grade in the triangle with O'Connor/Eglinton Sq and a below grade connection to the mall. I see this more as an open-air trench like Renforth Stn.
drum118
Superstar
May 27
Kennedy Station And Intersection with more up on site
Kennedy Station And Intersection with more up on site