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

muller877 said:
I totally agree with you. My previous post was to give pro's and con's of each route. My view of the optimal route is:

Assumption - Millwood Bridge is NOT strong enough

Pape - Minton Pl. May need to expropriate the last couple of houses on Minton Pl for exit shaft
Bridge over DVP/Don River with slight curve at end. Directly onto center median of Overlea (elevated)
after Thorncliffe, bridge over West Don on angle to go north of Valley Park Middle School
At grade along the west side of Don Mills under power lines (reduce risk of Hydro One complaining). Or slightly elevated...whatever Hydro One permits
vehicle service entrance to Ontario Place closes (assuming at grade under power lines)
Elevated over main entrance of Ontario Place (St Dennis Drive) still on west side of Don Mills (opposite side is residential).
Tracks end just before Eglinton (station box north end is Eglinton, south end near Ontario Place).
engineered so that it can be extended if/when there is demand for tail tracks and/or $$ for extension
Click to expand...
Problem is that the term elevated is poison to nimbyers ears....hopefully the crosstown portion will demonstrate that it's not as bad people assume.
 
Oh the horror of living beside a launch shaft! I think this one will pop up too.

We already have elevated sections in the city. The SRT is elevated from east of Ellesmere to McCowan Station. Keele Station is also elevated.
 
I just don't see elevating the line at thorncliffe working. It would ruin the neighbourhood and skyline and the area is very densely populated.
Steve X said:
We already have elevated sections in the city. The SRT is elevated from east of Ellesmere to McCowan Station. Keele Station is also elevated.
Click to expand...
Those areas need elevated tracks because they cross rivers or creeks, they make more sense to elevate but in my opinion, elevating the line there would not work well
 
Toronto1 said:
I agree with you.

Thorncliffe Park, and Flemingdon Park too for that matter, most likely will not accept an elevated solution.
Click to expand...

Thank goodness the new government will ignore the locals/NIMBY's. They will likely show 2 options with costs. And tell the electorate they are saving $1b+ by not tunneling. And then ignore the "Toronto Star reading, latte drinking" NIMBY crowd.

There won't be months and months of public consultation here. I'm guessing 30 days and a decision will be handed down.

The Toronto Star will scream murder but those in the suburbs of the GTA and Ontario will agree with the PC's (the electorate that got the PC's elected). An elevated solution down a street with a derelict mall on one side and a Costco on the other isn't going to kill anyone.

The added benefit is that there are 2 distinct RFP's and builds that can occur simultaneously. One elevated (DVP North) and the other tunneled (Downtown). Bridge experts can build one and tunneling experts the other.
 
muller877 said:
Thank goodness the new government will ignore the locals/NIMBY's. They will likely show 2 options with costs. And tell the electorate they are saving $1b+ by not tunneling. And then ignore the "Toronto Star reading, latte drinking" NIMBY crowd.

There won't be months and months of public consultation here. I'm guessing 30 days and a decision will be handed down.

The Toronto Star will scream murder but those in the suburbs of the GTA and Ontario will agree with the PC's (the electorate that got the PC's elected). An elevated solution down a street with a derelict mall on one side and a Costco on the other isn't going to kill anyone.

The added benefit is that there are 2 distinct RFP's and builds that can occur simultaneously. One elevated (DVP North) and the other tunneled (Downtown). Bridge experts can build one and tunneling experts the other.
Click to expand...

They don't have to worry about NIMBYism because in Etobicoke, where the Premier is from, there are no hopes of transit expansion. If he really was ignoring NIMBYism, he would be building the rest of the DRL to Pearson, but that goes through his backyard.
 
micheal_can said:
They don't have to worry about NIMBYism because in Etobicoke, where the Premier is from, there are no hopes of transit expansion. If he really was ignoring NIMBYism, he would be building the rest of the DRL to Pearson, but that goes through his backyard.
Click to expand...

He's proposing to build the Eglinton West extension to the airport, and that goes through his backyard too...
 
muller877 said:
Thank goodness the new government will ignore the locals/NIMBY's. They will likely show 2 options with costs. And tell the electorate they are saving $1b+ by not tunneling. And then ignore the "Toronto Star reading, latte drinking" NIMBY crowd.

There won't be months and months of public consultation here. I'm guessing 30 days and a decision will be handed down.

The Toronto Star will scream murder but those in the suburbs of the GTA and Ontario will agree with the PC's (the electorate that got the PC's elected). An elevated solution down a street with a derelict mall on one side and a Costco on the other isn't going to kill anyone.

The added benefit is that there are 2 distinct RFP's and builds that can occur simultaneously. One elevated (DVP North) and the other tunneled (Downtown). Bridge experts can build one and tunneling experts the other.
Click to expand...

Are you aware of the Province's promise for Eglinton West? It's basically the complete opposite of what you're describing. One option, most expensive, down what is effectively a highway.
 
H4F33Z said:
I just don't see elevating the line at thorncliffe working. It would ruin the neighbourhood and skyline and the area is very densely populated.

Those areas need elevated tracks because they cross rivers or creeks, they make more sense to elevate but in my opinion, elevating the line there would not work well
Click to expand...

I had the chance to ride the Canada Line in Vancouver last year. It goes through neighborhoods that are much more dense than Thorncliffe and it appears to fit in quite well. Also, the north side of Overlea is entirely commercial, so the raised track could conceivably be placed on that side of the road to further reduce impact on the community.
 
44 North said:
Are you aware of the Province's promise for Eglinton West? It's basically the complete opposite of what you're describing. One option, most expensive, down what is effectively a highway.
Click to expand...

The province I am almost certain wants it tunelled, even if it is the more expensive option.
 
44 North said:
Are you aware of the Province's promise for Eglinton West? It's basically the complete opposite of what you're describing. One option, most expensive, down what is effectively a highway.
Click to expand...

The Province will only agree to a grade separated alternative. And promised a "portion" underground. Attached is a link to the best map of what is expected to be the proposal.
https://urbantoronto.ca/forum/threads/eglinton-west-lrt-metrolinx.28144/page-30#post-1441159

Eglinton West has about 5 km of 14 km underground (total to the Airport). And I'm guessing it'll be cut & cover to save money.

If the DRL is above ground north of the Don 5 km of the 15 km will not be underground.

They are using a combination of at grade, above grade and below grade for Eglinton West. As so they should for the DRL where it makes sense.
 
57587002_1533513070117020_1357199349024555008_o.jpg

From link.
 
muller877 said:
The Province will only agree to a grade separated alternative. And promised a "portion" underground. Attached is a link to the best map of what is expected to be the proposal.
https://urbantoronto.ca/forum/threads/eglinton-west-lrt-metrolinx.28144/page-30#post-1441159

Eglinton West has about 5 km of 14 km underground (total to the Airport). And I'm guessing it'll be cut & cover to save money.

If the DRL is above ground north of the Don 5 km of the 15 km will not be underground.

They are using a combination of at grade, above grade and below grade for Eglinton West. As so they should for the DRL where it makes sense.
Click to expand...

That's a City map, and doesn't line up with what the Prov is promising. Also if we're to elevate over Overlea for reasons of cost savings and built surroundings, that should be doubly true for the entirety of Eglinton West. It's like the perfect locale. But they're not proposing that.

It's fine to 'guess' what these promises will end up being, which is basically the last twenty pages of this thread (and possibly the next thousand). But to be praising the new gov't for finding the low cost solutions and sticking it to nimbys, when right off the bat we know they're promising the high-cost nimby-appeasing option elsewhere in the city...seems a bit weird to me.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top