I suspect because if that section was included in Phase I, there would be calls for "might as well just extend it to Eglinton". Terminating a phase at a perpendicular transit line makes sense, IMO. The delineation may only be logistical though, as it sounds like work on north-of-Danforth may proceed relatively concurrently with south-of-Danforth.
Yeah, the latest news from Metrolinx is interesting, to say the least. I welcome it, as it also brings much deeper pockets into play, and instead of doing this thing piecemeal, even if it is done in stages, it can be approached as one massive undertaking, and in the "Regional" interest. The repeated use of that word in the Metrolinx release is clue to how this might well be kicked up a huge notch.
Agreed. The western part of Toronto already has it's relief line. It's called the Spadina Subway. The King West area does definitely need relief, but there are plenty of surface ROW options that can be undertaken as an interim measure. No such options really exist on the northeastern DRL route, unless you want to run articulated buses down Don Mills/Pape every minute or so during rush hour.
Only to a degree, and as we're seeing, the Spadina leg is now poised to serve even more of the *northwest* than the west. Ironically, for me and some others, UPX is the west-end relief line. I dread sitting on subways to get right downtown from Dundas West. I just hop on the UPX, smooth, quick and excellent value considering (for me, a senior) only a buck more or so.
Another thing with DRL West is it will have quite a few intermodal connections that need to be figured out. Assuming it goes to Roncy and Dundas West:
I'm certainly in the camp of "keep boring west after Osgoode", but I think Roncy isn't necessary (I live right at the top of Roncy). The tunnel should attain the Georgetown Corridor at King or Queen. Whether it surfaces there or further northwest is a good question. A leg continuing west to join the Lakeshore West line should also be considered...but this is all based on a massive change of vehicle mode on the Relief Line: Make it RER in tunnel, and connecting as "through-running" onto as many extant Metrolinx lines as possible. Metrolinx is going to have to build a by-pass for Union at some point. Now they're in for a Pound, stone as many birds with one kill as possible. Get RER serving the core of Toronto as well as the edges. The cost increase over subway would be incremental, and save massive amounts in the long term. There's also the great advantage of a long head-shunt for track crossover and storage of vehicles while Osgoode remains the terminus of stage one. That headshunt will waste absolutely nothing when the westerly extension is opened.
however, if tunnel cost = cost of insertion + cost of tunnelling + cost of extraction and the insertion and extraction are substantial and don't change with location, then the incremental cost of an additional 5kms of tunnel may not be that large. Especially compared to a two phase plan which demands a second insertion/extraction.
The end walls for any additional stations might have to be done, but the dig for the stations themselves could be deferred until a later date.
I worry about what two phases means for Queen Street. It could lead to no 501 streetcar for a decade or longer. Personally, I still favour doing the whole thing at once and getting it over with. As others noted, this project has multiple objectives with Yonge relief being one but not the only one.
Absolutely. One thing Crossrail now preaches is when deep tunneling, always overbuild and plan for future expansion, because you can't go back later to do it, at least not in practical terms. And already that foresight is paying off. They're moving to twelve car trains sooner than later. Toronto has an exquisite example of brilliant engineering foresight with the Bloor-Danforth Viaduct, albeit it was intended for CP trains, but whatever, that saved massive amounts of money and time.
How is the Spadina line relief for the west? Just asking.
Only partially, as mentioned prior. UPX is the real west end relief, but like the SSE, only for two points (in my case, from Bloor Station to Union). From Weston, it's an incredible improvement over TTC.
Well, insertion/extraction costs can change. If the former location overlapped with another dig (such as a station) and the new location doesn't, then that's an added excavation cost.
This is a fair point, and something worthy of much greater discussion. I'm with Paul on this, but to do the point justice, examples must be referenced. I'll see what I can dig up later....bad pun, sorry about that. I feel shafted...
Similarly, if you now pass an obstacle which is challenging to tunnel near (such as a subway line like Danforth) then there may be an added extraction/insertion cost on both sides of that obstacle as we've seen on Eglinton twice (around Spadina and Yonge lines).
Dpn't forget that this *at least for the eastern section* is touted to be deep tunneling in bedrock. That changes a lot, not least the amount of stations that are reasonable to build, as *accessing and servicing* deep tunnel is geometrically more challenging and expensive. On the other hand, it lends itself to express running speed.
Derisking the timeline for a project also means taking it in smaller chunks than might be ideal.
Yes, with a limited budget, but when the big picture cost is examined, the best rendered financial model swings the other way. Doing projects like this in dribs and drabs *multiplies* costs, let alone interrupts reaching a much greater end-result. There's also *expertise* that needs to be retained, as well as the TBMs themselves. Toronto has a massive amount of catching up to do. Best we consider this as a long haul project, and if QP is footing much/most of the bill, let them take the initiative....and controversially, especially in this string, make it RER in tunnel connected through to the rest of the system, as other world leading cities are doing.
