Toronto Eglinton Line 5 | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx | Arcadis

[Aplus23]

By the end of the year, a lot of the surface section should be completed with tracks laid

By the end of the year, the 3 most western stations should be completed far enough for train testing. (Mount Dennis / Keesedale / Caledonia)

The stations that are being mined will take the longest to complete and that's where the delay will come from if they're going to be delayed at all

 

[nfitz]

The stations that are being mined will take the longest to complete and that's where the delay will come from if they're going to be delayed at all

I'm more worried about Kennedy - which is more an open pit, rather than mined (as far as I know at least); and the Line 1 interchange stations. I doubt any of the mined stations will preclude through operation by mid-2021, even it trains don't stop.

 

[Aplus23]

I'm more worried about Kennedy - which is more an open pit, rather than mined (as far as I know at least); and the Line 1 interchange stations. I doubt any of the mined stations will preclude through operation by mid-2021, even it trains don't stop.

I think they have started to proceed building up at Kennedy station, which wasn't even a pit about 2 months ago. They have made substantial visual progress at that site over the last couple of months. Agreed the interchange stations are also the ones the furtherst behind compared to some of the others.
I really think someone is being cheap because it's not like they have full crews working on each station.

 

[Steve X]

I wonder if that's the date that crosslinks plans to hand it over to Metrolinx and the TTC for training and not actual operations?

The commissioning part of "testing and commissioning" meant training operators to run the line. Substantial completion means the project is ready for revenue service. I suppose training will actually start in summer 2021 to figure out any operation issues.

I'm more worried about Kennedy - which is more an open pit, rather than mined (as far as I know at least); and the Line 1 interchange stations. I doubt any of the mined stations will preclude through operation by mid-2021, even it trains don't stop.

I don't think Kennedy is that far behind compared to other stations. Kennedy being over to the side gives them a more relaxed schedule than the ones in the middle of the intersection. Most of the stations are decked over for traffic thus the covered up pits. Some are at the same stage as Kennedy but we just can't see.

The most difficult station is Eglinton. They dug both sides but they still have to dug under Line 1. Unlike Kennedy where they can do it anytime without shifting traffic, Eglinton has both traffic and the subway to schedule around.

 

[nfitz]

The commissioning part of "testing and commissioning" meant training operators to run the line. Substantial completion means the project is ready for revenue service. I suppose training will actually start in summer 2021 to figure out any operation issues.

That seems very late if it's to open in late summer (September)! Above we noted that IO said "commissioning and training for the service will be carried out through to 2021 ". Surely that would mean training is starting a lot earlier. I wouldn't be surprised if they start training in late winter or earlier!

 

[EastYorkTTCFan]

By the end of the year, a lot of the surface section should be completed with tracks laid

I still don't get why these need to be done by now. wouldn't 200 make more sense instead of having tracks put in place leading to know where for a year and a half?

 

[ViveleCanada]

I still don't get why these need to be done by now. wouldn't 200 make more sense instead of having tracks put in place leading to know where for a year and a half?

It's probably just how the stars aligned. VIVA had a similar debacle back in 2016 when the Rapidway to VMC was completed, but the subway wasn't yet finished so the rapidway went unused for about half a year, before they decided to reroute a YRT route onto it. Probably to at least get some use out of it. I would figure this is the same scenario as the original completion date was late 2020. If anything, this gives them more time to fix any bugs, allow drivers to familiarize themselves with the arrangement and will hopefully avoid the scenario like the Sydney Metro with multiple teething problems in the opening week.

 

[Steve X]

I still don't get why these need to be done by now. wouldn't 200 make more sense instead of having tracks put in place leading to know where for a year and a half?

I don't see why you have a problem with them completely early. The decision was made back in 2014 when ML accepted Crosslinx' proposal to do most of the surface trackwork in 2019. It gives them time to correct mistakes.They have to organize all the permits and preconstruction work. It gives time time incase delays like the Queensway/Roncy intersection project is pushed back a year

 

[thettctransitfanatic]

I don't see why you have a problem with them completely early. The decision was made back in 2014 when ML accepted Crosslinx' proposal to do most of the surface trackwork in 2019. It gives them time to correct mistakes.They have to organize all the permits and preconstruction work. It gives time time incase delays like the Queensway/Roncy intersection project is pushed back a year

Let's not start with Queensway Roncy and other deferred projects in general. Let's just not start..

 

[rbt]

Article and video describing, from a high level, the excavation process for Yonge & Eglinton.

Metrolinx Press Room

Find the latest Metrolinx news, project updates and more.

blog.metrolinx.com

 

[EastYorkTTCFan]

Article and video describing, from a high level, the excavation process for Yonge & Eglinton.

Metrolinx Press Room

Find the latest Metrolinx news, project updates and more.

blog.metrolinx.com

and people wonder why I'm skeptical about the September opening date. Something like this could take longer than planned or something could happen that they didn't plan for during something like this.

 

[KevinT]

Article and video describing, from a high level, the excavation process for Yonge & Eglinton.

Metrolinx Press Room

Find the latest Metrolinx news, project updates and more.

blog.metrolinx.com

I'm no engineer, but... (I know, I know)

Wouldn't it make more sense for the needle beams to sit on top of the side cradle beams to transfer the loads directly on to them rather than being bolted up underneath them? Seems to me to be asking a lot from the bolts! Wondering if the video's creators just misunderstood the engineers and got it wrong...

 

[BurlOak]

I'm no engineer, but... (I know, I know)

Wouldn't it make more sense for the needle beams to sit on top of the side cradle beams to transfer the loads directly on to them rather than being bolted up underneath them? Seems to me to be asking a lot from the bolts! Wondering if the video's creators just misunderstood the engineers and got it wrong...

It look like its for space. By scaling, I will assume that the cradle beam is 3m deep, and the needle beams 1m deep. The way they did it, the bottom of the needle beam is level with the underside of the Yonge Line station box. When the needle beam is inserted, its underside would 1m below the station box. As you can see towards the end, this stuff is left in place and becomes useless space - 1m of useless space.

Your suggestion would have the needle beam under the station box, and the cradle beam being below that. This would lead to 4m of useless space.

It looks like once the project is completed, all these beams are cast into a giant slab, so the connection of these beams is not a concern for the full 100+ design life. Despite this, enough bolts, and adequately tightened (see Nipigon River Bridge for what happens when they are not tightened properly, or properly designed), are not subjected to fatigue stresses so even long term performance is not a concern.

I doubt it governs, but supporting the load under the cradle beam is a bit more stable than having the load added to the top of the cradle beam. With vibration of the station, the needle beams could move laterally, potentially trying to tip over the cradle beams. This of course can be designed for, so it's not a huge deal.

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

It look like its for space. By scaling, I will assume that the cradle beam is 3m deep, and the needle beams 1m deep. The way they did it, the bottom of the needle beam is level with the underside of the Yonge Line station box. When the needle beam is inserted, its underside would 1m below the station box. As you can see towards the end, this stuff is left in place and becomes useless space - 1m of useless space.

Your suggestion would have the needle beam under the station box, and the cradle beam being below that. This would lead to 4m of useless space.

It looks like once the project is completed, all these beams are cast into a giant slab, so the connection of these beams is not a concern for the full 100+ design life. Despite this, enough bolts, and adequately tightened (see Nipigon River Bridge for what happens when they are not tightened properly, or properly designed), are not subjected to fatigue stresses so even long term performance is not a concern.

I doubt it governs, but supporting the load under the cradle beam is a bit more stable than having the load added to the top of the cradle beam. With vibration of the station, the needle beams could move laterally, potentially trying to tip over the cradle beams. This of course can be designed for, so it's not a huge deal.

That "useless" space would be a good location for wiring conduits, piping, HVAC, and fire controls.

 

[robmausser]

and people wonder why I'm skeptical about the September opening date. Something like this could take longer than planned or something could happen that they didn't plan for during something like this.

Honestly its usually not these parts of the project that delay but moving parts. Such as the trains, doors, signals, switches etc

It looks tough but static buildings are an engineers dream. Stuff that moves are the real nightmares. Moving parts = failure potential.