Toronto Ontario Line 3 | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx

[AlvinofDiaspar]

You could say the same for storefronts with the current plan. I agree moving commercial space is probably more harmful to the community but it's not like there's no space. I mean half the neighbourhood is parking lots.

Community core is a stretch. From the images, they've provided it looks like the closest thing to Overlea is a power substation set back a minimum of 30 metres away from the street. If you're counting the core as south of Overlea then it doesn't meet this definition. Mind you this "core" directly south of Overlea is a sea of mall parking lots. Not exactly a community hub. They've done a relatively good job at keeping the facility far from actual residences, so as long as they can do a good job of integrating the facility in with the rest of the community, and hopefully allowing structures to be built on top of it, it's not infringing on the neighbourhood too much minus the forced relocation of businesses.

Because land beside stations are valuable - and it is provincial policy to maximize usage by these lands? We literally have a piece of legislation for this purpose - and boom, the province puts one of the lowest-value land uses right next to a station of their own build. That's hypocrisy.

Also the "core" of a community doesn't just mean physical proximity - it meant the role of the facilities in the community. If you have to "hope", it ain't happening.

AoD

 

[Northern Light]

Then pay them to relocate somewhere local - I am sure the province (and the city) have enough vacant industrial land to make that a possibility.

AoD

I wouldn't be so sure...........

From: https://www.cbre.ca/en/research-and-reports/Toronto-Industrial-MarketView-Q1-2021

1.6% is a pretty low vacancy rate for industrial land.

Warehousing in the GTA is down to 0.5%; and as I noted in the Woodbine Centre thread, I have sources telling me that that mall has been purchased by Amazon (I presume, but do not know, for warehousing space).

If Amazon is buying malls; and vacancy rates are that low, replacement land would be hard to come by. We are talking a few contiguous hectares.

 

[44 North]

I don't think forced relocation of a factory the size of Tremco is the right answer. Places like that should be encouraged to stay. North of Eglinton to Sheppard not too much in the way of potential MSF sites (and where there are you run into the same thing: schools, places of worship located in an industrial area).

Thinking...if a wye + spur were made around Broadview a MSF could be located in the Port Lands south of Lake Shore.

 

[KhalilHeron]

Because land beside stations are valuable - and it is provincial policy to maximize usage by these lands? We literally have a piece of legislation for this purpose - and boom, the province puts one of the lowest-value land uses right next to a station of their own build. That's hypocrisy.

Also the "core" of a community doesn't just mean physical proximity - it meant the role of the facilities in the community. If you have to "hope", it ain't happening.

AoD

They've already shown interest in building OL stations that allow for development on top. Nothing stopping them from doing that here, in fact, it would likely be more lucrative here as the some is far bigger.

 

[44 North]

They've already shown interest in building OL stations that allow for development on top. Nothing stopping them from doing that here, in fact, it would likely be more lucrative here as the some is far bigger.

They showed interest in doing that with Crosstown ten years ago. I wouldn't hold my breath.

 

[KhalilHeron]

They showed interest in doing that with Crosstown ten years ago. I wouldn't hold my breath.

not 100% sure but i'm pretty sure i heard one of the crosstown stations was designed for a future development to be built on top of it. It could turn into a greenwood scenario where that never happens though.

 

[W. K. Lis]

At least with the Ontario Line, less land would be expropriated for it than the Scarborough Expressway. Ditto for the Line 2 extension.

From link.

 

[Allandale25]

Recieved tonight from Pape Area Concerned Citizens for Transit (PACCT):

Metrolinx: Investigative Drilling & Sampling to Start on May 10
Hello Neighbours,
PACCT has been notified that Metrolinx will commence environmental sampling as early as May 10.

"The drilling work will begin at the Hopedale Avenue location before moving to the Minton Place location, and is anticipated to last up to three weeks at each location. As work is taking place on public roadways, the contractor has raised the possibility that a few driveways in each work location may be blocked intermittently during drilling hours, but a spotter and associated traffic control crew will always work with residents to move in, out and around the work zone whenever necessary. Please see attached for the notice which contains further details.

We will be dropping off hard copies of notices to residents today, and will also have a member of our team on site the morning of the work start date, in order to liaise with the contractor’s representative and answer any questions residents might have. In the meantime, residents are always welcome to contact us directly if they have any further questions ahead of work beginning."

If there are any problems or concerns once drilling has commenced, please email Ontarioline@metrolinx.com and copy us on all communications.

 

[superelevation]

No, but that doesn't excuse foolish decisions either. We have the opportunity to make a very wise decision and maximize the capacity here. Doing otherwise just makes it that much harder to improve the network.

You can keep maximizing capacity with no end, Yonge Line still doesn't even use the whole platform with the TRs. There is lower hanging fruit than even the RL for using funds.

It will be a success compared to doing nothing at all. But it won't be best value for money. We are losing ~ 30% of capacity for maybe ~ 15% cost saving.



Just 4 tracks can possibly work, but that requires more advanced interchanges at both Scarborough Junction and the west end of this corridor (either approaching Union, or wherever the lines split again further west). To operate perfectly with 4 tracks, you need to dedicate one pair for express and the other pair for local. For example, both LSE and Stouffville local eastbound use the southmost track, while LSE express, Stouffville express, and VIA eastbound use the next track. But then they need to regroup at Scarborough Junction and not cause a conflict with the westbound services, that requires grade separation.

So, the cost of adding OL to the corridor is more infrastructure elsewhere, and it looks like Metrolinx is not on board with that, they don't want to grade separate Scarborough Junction.

But we are not losing 30% and we are not saving 15%, OL capacity is stated at max of 30k ppdph, TR's are 36k ppdph, over 80% for OL, a bit part likely being a higher maximum frequency due to better acceleration and deceleration characteristics + PSDs, another big part being a more efficient interior layout which we refuse to use on the regular subway. Forcing the line to be tunneled absolutely does not help value for money . . . .

Having to add a gs at Scarborough junction in the future is fine, you do not need express / local to "operate perfectly" will just need to operate mostly local.

Oh yeah a dinky trolley pole was no match for that weather. Still it's a vulnerability with aerial power. And there are advancements in third rail design and de-icing measures.

I'm still in third rail camp.



Wouldn't be surprised if they "cancel" the Eglinton tunnel by Doug's house. I put cancel in quotes because the project would still continue. Just not deep underground.

And it's a long tradition. NDP fast-tracked a subway under their leader's Eg West riding, next gov't cancels it. Current gov't fast-tracks a subway under their leader's riding, next gov't cancels it. It's just the way it goes.

There is a reason new subway systems overwhelmingly use panto, third rail has a lot of problems, icing is just one of them . . .

 

[syn]

You can keep maximizing capacity with no end, Yonge Line still doesn't even use the whole platform with the TRs. There is lower hanging fruit than even the RL for using funds.

On the Yonge Line?

I think it's painfully obvious that's not true.

This is very short-sighted approach to transit expansion.

It's amazing how the OL is the only project where we have to save money. For the others, anything goes. Sadly, it's not saving any money in the long run.

Penny wise, pound foolish.

 

[44 North]

You can keep maximizing capacity with no end, Yonge Line still doesn't even use the whole platform with the TRs. There is lower hanging fruit than even the RL for using funds.

Infinite capacity? I hope the Perimeter Institute has a Yonge Subway wing lol.

There is a reason new subway systems overwhelmingly use panto, third rail has a lot of problems, icing is just one of them . . .

Maybe not "overwhelmingly", but pantos are being used more frequently. I still prefer 3rd rail for a new subway system into the core. Smaller profile, smaller tunnels, looks better open air. It's good.

And then what? Line 1, 2, 4 should permanently remain underground because third rail has "a lot of problems"? For someone calling themselves super elevation surely you'd be a bit more flexible.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

You can keep maximizing capacity with no end, Yonge Line still doesn't even use the whole platform with the TRs. There is lower hanging fruit than even the RL for using funds.

1. Low hanging fruit? Such as what? Keep in mind any Yonge Line capacity enhancements will cost several billions at a bare minmimum. A seventh car on Yonge Line will not necessarily improve capacity, as Line 1 capacity is also limited by platform and station crowding. Every dollar spent on Yonge Line capacity enhancements could more effectively be spent on OL capacity enhancements.

2. In the event that the OL is extended to Sheppard, the line would be at least 70% full on Day 1 of revenue service. That does not provide a comfortable buffer, and it certainly precludes any extensions beyond Sheppard and into York Region. Further, if MX intends to use the OL to divert RER passengers from Union, capacity constraints will prohibit OL extensions beyond Eglinton.

 

[drum118]

I will post this here as well cross post elsewhere as it has to do with elevated systems. This based on a report problems pertaining to Hawaii LRT which is a light metro that is years late and over budget that was just reported on.

Honolulu's rail project plagued with wheels too thin and tracks too wide​

One also needs to look at Montreal REM issues as well.

The person lives in Vancouver and a transit advocate makes this comment.

Here we have the big problem with light metro. Unlike modern light rail, which is modular and interchangeable and flexible, light metro tends to be proprietary, as one company's light metro is not designed for another company's light metro.

Vancouver is a perfect example.

Currently we have three light metro lines, the Canada line, the Millennium Line and the Expo Line all with their own problems.

The Canada Line is a conventional railway, operating conventional EMU's and not compatible in operation with the proprietary Expo and Millennium Lines, due to the fact that kinematic envelope is much smaller for the E & M lines and they are also powered by Linear Induction Motors or (LIM's)

The Expo Line is that UTDC's proprietary ICTS/ALRT system, powered by LIM's and has tight curvatures and tight clearances.

The Millennium Line is Bombardier's rebuilt ICTS/ALRT/ALM system marketed as Advanced Rapid Transit (ART). Using an Innovia bodyshell, the ART cars are longer, a little wider and have larger wheels and trucks/bogies.

Now ALRT cars can operate on ART tracks and visa versa, they cannot operate with each other in coupled sets and as the ART cars have longer and larger trucks/bogies, they have great difficulty with the switches or points on the ALRT Expo Line; the cars must travel through the switches at a low speed and there is is much protest and flange squeal when they do.

Alstom now owns the proprietary light metro system now called Movia Automatic Light Metro and Translink is more than worried that they will dump the system altogether as no one else, except Vancouver wants the damn thing.

But the big problem facing the regional transit system is that the Expo and Millennium Lines, especially the Expo line, needs a mid life rehab before its capacity can expand beyond the current 15,000 pphpd and needs about $3 billion to complete it, including replacing all the switches with high speed switches.

The Canada Line needs a $1.5 to $2 billion rehab, just to increase its capacity beyond 9,000 pphpd and this must be done before any expansion of the line is considered.

TransLink is well aware of this but at this point they do not want to shock the taxpayers with bad news until their $4.6 billion, 12.8 km extensions of the Expo and Millennium Lines are well under way and i will add this, for $4.6 billion, not a car will be taken off the road.

I think the good Burghers of Honolulu are going to be in fincial shock one their light metro opens and under performs wonderfully.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

1. Low hanging fruit? Such as what? Keep in mind any Yonge Line capacity enhancements will cost several billions at a bare minmimum. A seventh car on Yonge Line will not necessarily improve capacity, as Line 1 capacity is also limited by passenger throughput and platform crowding. Every dollar spent on Yonge Line capacity enhancements could more effectively be spent on OL capacity enhancements.

2. In the event that the OL is extended to Sheppard, the line would be at least 70% full on Day 1 of revenue service. That does not provide a comfortable buffer, and it certainly precludes any extensions beyond Sheppard and into York Region. Further, if MX intends to use the OL to divert RER passengers from Union, capacity constraints will prohibit OL extensions beyond Eglinton.

1. Yonge capacity improvement isn't optional even with OL considering densification patterns.
2. That's what concerns me about OL - there is zero word of the impact of extension northward to capacity requirements.

AoD

 

[turini2]

scoooooop

https://twitter.com/x/status/1392143455577591816