Toronto Ontario Line 3 | ?m | ?s

[TheTigerMaster]

I'm curious; could you elaborate on why you don't see any good MSF locations other than TTC Greenwood?

I took the liberty of examining the route to find potential MSF, locations. This exercise left me with way more questions than answers

Firstly, here is a map of the Ontario Line route (purple), with hazards identified. Specifically, the railway corridor to the north (black), the hydro corridor (red) and the West Don River (blue). The MSF location identified in the BCA is yellow.

Before we can even find MSF locations, we need to figure out how the main trunk of the Ontario Line will even route itself through the Throncliffe/Flemingdon area. The BCA identified the entire segment of the line north of the Don Valley as being elevated or at-grade, but obstacles and hazards in the area make this non-trivial.

I've just now noticed that the hydro corridor crosses Don Mills Road rather close to the ground. This imposes some challenging restrictions on the Ontario Line routing, and I think we can confidently say that the Ontario Line cannot make an elevated crossing of the hydro corridor, without coming dangerously close to the hydro wires. This is admittedly a big assumption of mines, but my understanding is that hydro operators typically do not want anything built near their hydro corridors without sufficient clearance. Hydro wires can sag under load, potentially brining them into contact with an elevated Ontario Line. And then there are the implications of running a high voltage rail line so close to a high voltage hydro corridor. Electrical currents through wires generate electromagnetic fields; the interaction of these fields can have destructive consequences (note: not an electrical engineer). That just sounds like trouble.

Streetview (Link)

This means that the OL will have to cross the hydro corridor either at-grade or underground. This also means that a grade transition will be needed as the line transitions from running elevated alongside Overlea, to running alongside Don Mills Road, either underground or at-grade. My understanding is that curving a rail line, while also performing a grade change, greatly increases the risk of derailment, so this maneuver would require more space than would be required for a simple turn with no change in grade.

The northeast corner of Overlea Blvd and Don Mills Road has a rather large apartment complex (highlighted in red in the above map). Assuming that we're not willing to demolish that apartment complex, its location effectively rules out running the Ontario Line at grade or underground along the eastern side of Don Mills Road. Any crossing of the hydro corridor will need to either in the middle of, or alongside the west side of Don Mills Road.

The next-best option would be to transition the OL from Overlea to Don Mills road through the current location of the Valley Park Middle School (northwest corner of Overlea and Don Mills; also highlighted in red). This would necessitate the demolition and relocation of the school. Assuming the school is demolished, there should be enough room to change from an elevated to at-grade configuration as the line curves to run adjacent to Don Mills Road.

Now nowhere in the community consultation materials did I see Metrolinx identify Valley Park Middle School as being targeted for demolition. That's a pretty massive detail to fail to mention at your "community consultation". Demolishing and rebuilding the school could easily add another $50 Million to $100 Million in project costs, nevermind the logistics of relocating all these students.

Assuming that Metrolinx genuinely has no intent of demolishing the school, there really doesn't appear to be any good locations to make the transition from an elevated Overlea alignment, to an underground or at-grade Don Mills alignment. The school directly abuts both the hydro corridor, and the valley formed by the West Don River branch. Below is an image of the Overlea Bridge, which crosses over the West Don River. It really puts into perspective how challenging the terrain is. I just don't see how the Ontario Line could be routed through this segment without demolishing the school. Any attempt to do so would result in a very wonky routing.

Now even if we were willing to demolish the school, the Ontario Line would still be faced with some massive obstacles. Specifically, the pylons for the hydro towers are located immediately adjacent to the west side of Don Mills Road. There is no room to route the Ontario Line between Don Mills Road and the hydro pylons. The next best option would be to route the Ontario Line on the west side of the hydro pylons (and Don Mills road). However, even that is fraught with obstacles. Immediately west of the hydro pylons is a large drop in ground level due the the edge of the valley formed by the West Don River. So that completely rules out running the Ontario Line at-grade alongside the west side of Don Mills Road.

Another option would be to demolish the school and then relocate the hydro pylons to a location within the West Don River valley. However, that sounds extraordinary expensive, building hydro pylons on such rough terrain sounds challenging, and I suspect that the hydro operator will not want their pylons sitting in a flood-prone valley.

Even if it’s somehow possible to route the Ontario Line completely elevated through Thorncliffe and Flemingdon, including the crossing of the hydro corridor, this routing would still necessitate the demolition of the middle school. The demolition of the school is not something that Metrolinx has disclosed at the community consultations.

I can't help but come to the conclusion that it might not be feasible for the Ontario Line to utilize either an at-grade or elevated alignment through Throncliffe and Flemingdon. Any attempt to route cross the hydro corridor with that grade separation would result in a routing that is very much threading the needle. Underground appears to be the only realistic way to get through the neighbourhood.

Now, none of this even begins to address the location of the MSF...

 

[BurlOak]

I took the liberty of examining the route to find potential MSF, locations. This exercise left me with way more questions than answers

Firstly, here is a map of the Ontario Line route (purple), with hazards identified. Specifically, the railway corridor to the north (black), the hydro corridor (red) and the West Don River (blue). The MSF location identified in the BCA is yellow.



Before we can even find MSF locations, we need to figure out how the main trunk of the Ontario Line will even route itself through the Throncliffe/Flemingdon area. The BCA identified the entire segment of the line north of the Don Valley as being elevated or at-grade, but obstacles and hazards in the area make this non-trivial.

I've just now noticed that the hydro corridor crosses Don Mills Road rather close to the ground. This imposes some challenging restrictions on the Ontario Line routing, and I think we can confidently say that the Ontario Line cannot make an elevated crossing of the hydro corridor, without coming dangerously close to the hydro wires. This is admittedly a big assumption of mines, but my understanding is that hydro operators typically do not want anything built near their hydro corridors without sufficient clearance. Hydro wires can sag under load, potentially brining them into contact with an elevated Ontario Line. And then there are the implications of running a high voltage rail line so close to a high voltage hydro corridor. Electrical currents through wires generate electromagnetic fields; the interaction of these fields can have destructive consequences (note: not an electrical engineer). That just sounds like trouble.

Streetview (Link)
View attachment 228464

This means that the OL will have to cross the hydro corridor either at-grade or underground. This also means that a grade transition will be needed as the line transitions from running elevated alongside Overlea, to running alongside Don Mills Road, either underground or at-grade. My understanding is that curving a rail line, while also performing a grade change, greatly increases the risk of derailment, so this maneuver would require more space than would be required for a simple turn with no change in grade.

View attachment 228465

The northeast corner of Overlea Blvd and Don Mills Road has a rather large apartment complex (highlighted in red in the above map). Assuming that we're not willing to demolish that apartment complex, its location effectively rules out running the Ontario Line at grade or underground along the eastern side of Don Mills Road. Any crossing of the hydro corridor will need to either in the middle of, or alongside the west side of Don Mills Road.

The next-best option would be to transition the OL from Overlea to Don Mills road through the current location of the Valley Park Middle School (northwest corner of Overlea and Don Mills; also highlighted in red). This would necessitate the demolition and relocation of the school. Assuming the school is demolished, there should be enough room to change from an elevated to at-grade configuration as the line curves to run adjacent to Don Mills Road.

Now nowhere in the community consultation materials did I see Metrolinx identify Valley Park Middle School as being targeted for demolition. That's a pretty massive detail to fail to mention at your "community consultation". Demolishing and rebuilding the school could easily add another $50 Million to $100 Million in project costs, nevermind the logistics of relocating all these students.

Assuming that Metrolinx genuinely has no intent of demolishing the school, there really doesn't appear to be any good locations to make the transition from an elevated Overlea alignment, to an underground or at-grade Don Mills alignment. The school directly abuts both the hydro corridor, and the valley formed by the West Don River branch. Below is an image of the Overlea Bridge, which crosses over the West Don River. It really puts into perspective how challenging the terrain is. I just don't see how the Ontario Line could be routed through this segment without demolishing the school. Any attempt to do so would result in a very wonky routing.

View attachment 228466

Now even if we were willing to demolish the school, the Ontario Line would still be faced with some massive obstacles. Specifically, the pylons for the hydro towers are located immediately adjacent to the west side of Don Mills Road. There is no room to route the Ontario Line between Don Mills Road and the hydro pylons. The next best option would be to route the Ontario Line on the west side of the hydro pylons (and Don Mills road). However, even that is fraught with obstacles. Immediately west of the hydro pylons is a large drop in ground level due the the edge of the valley formed by the West Don River. So that completely rules out running the Ontario Line at-grade alongside the west side of Don Mills Road.

View attachment 228467

Another option would be to demolish the school and then relocate the hydro pylons to a location within the West Don River valley. However, that sounds extraordinary expensive, building hydro pylons on such rough terrain sounds challenging, and I suspect that the hydro operator will not want their pylons sitting in a flood-prone valley.

Even if it’s somehow possible to route the Ontario Line completely elevated through Thorncliffe and Flemingdon, including the crossing of the hydro corridor, this routing would still necessitate the demolition of the middle school. The demolition of the school is not something that Metrolinx has disclosed at the community consultations.

I can't help but come to the conclusion that it might not be feasible for the Ontario Line to utilize either an at-grade or elevated alignment through Throncliffe and Flemingdon. Any attempt to route cross the hydro corridor with that grade separation would result in a routing that is very much threading the needle. Underground appears to be the only realistic way to get through the neighbourhood.

Now, none of this even begins to address the location of the MSF...

Very well presented.
The two difficulties you raise are going under the hydro, and making the curve. For the curve, I imagined it occurring well before Don Mills, in behind the school. Another possibility was to dip south of the high school and join Don Mills south of Gateway.
I was also looking at finding a way more through the heart of Thorncliffe, but I think some underground parking gets in the way, and elevated it's too close to residential.

Building pylons in the valley is not that big a deal - compared to simply relocating hydro lines to alternate towers. I assume that the OL running close to a pylon would eliminate the sag factor (to some degree), but you are quite right about large clearances needed between the two.

It would be nice if more info was available.

 

[junctionist]

They’re just hydro wires. Can’t they be buried beneath the Ontario Line?

 

[Kitsune]

Going by a superzoom on the existing map - it almost seems to suggest they want to go under the wires in the valley but are trying to hide it a bit. Between this on and the other don crossing I see a ton of trees getting torn out...

(the hydro corridor is the green block on the left)

 

[44 North]

They’re just hydro wires. Can’t they be buried beneath the Ontario Line?

Or just put taller pylons. Hydro wires I don't see being an issue. Vic Park is an elevated station sitting bellow lines.

 

[smallspy]

They’re just hydro wires. Can’t they be buried beneath the Ontario Line?

Burying high-voltage hydro lines is hugely expensive, on the same scale as building a subway line.

Dan

 

[junctionist]

Burying high-voltage hydro lines is hugely expensive, on the same scale as building a subway line.

Dan

But all you have to do is to bury a small section large enough for the transit corridor as opposed to burying several kilometres of a subway line.

 

[smallspy]

But all you have to do is to bury a small section large enough for the transit corridor as opposed to burying several kilometres of a subway line.

It's more complex than that, unfortunately.

You need to build the entry and exit points into the tunnel. And they need to be kept secure. And because of the voltages involved, they aren't that small.

And while you may think that all you need to do is build 500 feet of underground section there, the reality is that the whole of the green space under the wires from Don Mills to Grenoble is used by the community as a park with multiple playing fields, so you can't just do a small section by Don Mills - it would be the whole stretch back to the East Don River valley and the Don Valley Parkway. That's just about a kilometer in length.

Dan

 

[BurlOak]

Going by a superzoom on the existing map - it almost seems to suggest they want to go under the wires in the valley but are trying to hide it a bit. Between this on and the other don crossing I see a ton of trees getting torn out...

(the hydro corridor is the green block on the left)

You are likely correct.
I added to my previous sketch. If the OL took a more southerly route through Thorncliffe, then going under that Overlea bridge also becomes a possibility. It then is also likely, more easily, to allow for the OL to have minor elevation (to still allow trails to go under) and still have clearance to the hydro lines - and have relatively gradual slopes in doing this.

 

[Northern Light]

I took the liberty of examining the route to find potential MSF, locations. This exercise left me with way more questions than answers

Firstly, here is a map of the Ontario Line route (purple), with hazards identified. Specifically, the railway corridor to the north (black), the hydro corridor (red) and the West Don River (blue). The MSF location identified in the BCA is yellow.

View attachment 228463

To answer your question, let's start w/the BCA's choice of MSF site.

If you measure out the full length portion; and you excluded run-around tracks, entry/exit tracks, employee parking and any other ancillary feature, maybe, maybe you can store 40 trains at the proposed length nicely packed in.

Keep in mind you need a car-washing facility as well as heavy/light maintenance.

Lets now consider that 40 trains is the operational capacity assumption.....what happened to spares?

Where is there expansion room should the line go further north?

***

Now about that access path......

Google Maps

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.

goo.gl

As shown in the link above, there are those pesky hydro wires again.......

So let's assume, valley below be damned, popular community garden screwed, that the exit track begins its elevation immediately south of the hydro wires.

That's very challenging to reach a workable grade. If the tracks are 30ft above Overlea, that's a 6.25% grade.

You could throw extra curve in the approach to lessen the grade, but you probably already need to demolish a building; now there are even more in the way of the approach as you lessen the grade; An approach directly over Beth Nealson/Thorncliffe has other issues, this is a truck route, you can't have narrow lanes, that means 'take' on both sides of the road for structural supports, you can't go over the road until you reach a height that would allow over-size trucks.

***

So let's have a quick survey of other area choices, you have the CP Mainline as a site-limiting factor (a yard could not cross said at grade)

You're still limited by wires in the south, valley in the east, CP is both a western and northern limit.

The remaining sites are even smaller, and more irregular.

Unless you want to level stuff on the south side of the hydro corridor, and run the yard parallel to Overlea. But that limits intensification opportunities, the land is more expensive, the yard more disruptive and there would be substantial employment dislocation.

There are good sized parcels on the north side of CP, but then you need to keep in mind you have get across the CP track at height, then get under the hydro wires to meet the Ontario Line.

Once you're south of the valley, the line is proposed to be underground to riverdale, and the area is mostly residential and would require enormous property takings, and permanent road closures for an assembly.

****

PS for those interested in calculating gradient..........this is a good landscaping site that has a calculator. Works fine for any grade-calculating purpose.

Elevation Grade Calculator

Calculate the grade or incline of an elevation and get the grade as a percent, decimal, rise over run, or an angle in degrees.

www.inchcalculator.com

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Going by a superzoom on the existing map - it almost seems to suggest they want to go under the wires in the valley but are trying to hide it a bit. Between this on and the other don crossing I see a ton of trees getting torn out...

(the hydro corridor is the green block on the left)

Good eye!

So with that in mind, the alignment would be as shown in the map below. Keep in mind the topography of the area when looking at this. At both the western and northern edges of Valley Park Middle School is the edge of the valley formed by the West Don River flood plain. This is not flat land. Again for reference, here is what the Overlea Bridge looks like from the bottom of the valley. We're not talking about navigating over small hill:

And here's a view from over the middle school:

The elevated bridge would start at Overlea (orange), curve northeast, probably run a short segment at-grade at the northwest corner of the middle school (green), before utilizing an elevated alignment (orange) to cross under the hydro corridor. It would then connect to Don Mills Road. These elevated structures over the park would be more than 600 metres long.

I don't know about you guys, but to me, attempting to build an elevated crossing, close under an active hydro corridor, while on the slope of a valley sounds rather precarious to me. I'm not going to say it's impossible, but Hydro One might have some reservations about this plan. As I said in my original posting, any attempt to cross the hydro wires using an at-grade or elevated crossing would very much be threading the needle. Also, a lot of trees would be torn out, and the elevated structure for the Ontario Line would be right beside the school yard; two things that Metrolinx failed to mention at their "community consultation".

 

[TheTigerMaster]

To answer your question, let's start w/the BCA's choice of MSF site.

If you measure out the full length portion; and you excluded run-around tracks, entry/exit tracks, employee parking and any other ancillary feature, maybe, maybe you can store 40 trains at the proposed length nicely packed in.

Keep in mind you need a car-washing facility as well as heavy/light maintenance.

Lets now consider that 40 trains is the operational capacity assumption.....what happened to spares?

Where is there expansion room should the line go further north?

***

Now about that access path......

Google Maps

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.

goo.gl

As shown in the link above, there are those pesky hydro wires again.......

So let's assume, valley below be damned, popular community garden screwed, that the exit track begins its elevation immediately south of the hydro wires.

That's very challenging to reach a workable grade. If the tracks are 30ft above Overlea, that's a 6.25% grade.

You could throw extra curve in the approach to lessen the grade, but you probably already need to demolish a building; now there are even more in the way of the approach as you lessen the grade; An approach directly over Beth Nealson/Thorncliffe has other issues, this is a truck route, you can't have narrow lanes, that means 'take' on both sides of the road for structural supports, you can't go over the road until you reach a height that would allow over-size trucks.

***

So let's have a quick survey of other area choices, you have the CP Mainline as a site-limiting factor (a yard could not cross said at grade)

You're still limited by wires in the south, valley in the east, CP is both a western and southern limit.

The remaining sites are even smaller, and more irregular.

Unless you want to level stuff on the south side of the hydro corridor, and run the yard parallel to Overlea. But that limits intensification opportunities, the land is more expensive, the yard more disruptive and there would be substantial employment dislocation.

There are good sized parcels on the north side of CP, but then you need to keep in mind you have get across the CP track at height, then get under the hydro wires to meet the Ontario Line.

Once you're south of the valley, the line is proposed to be underground to riverdale, and the area is mostly residential and would require enormous property takings, and permanent road closures for an assembly.

****

PS for those interested in calculating gradient..........this is a good landscaping site that has a calculator. Works fine for any grade-calculating purpose.

Elevation Grade Calculator

Calculate the grade or incline of an elevation and get the grade as a percent, decimal, rise over run, or an angle in degrees.

www.inchcalculator.com

Thanks!

What if they used an elevated structure running over the valley, connecting the main trunk at Don Mills Road directly to the MSF at Beth Nealson Drive? It would be expensive, but would also negate the need to cross the hydro corridor. The elevated crossing of the valley would be completely on the north side of the hydro corridor

 

[Northern Light]

Thanks!

What if they used an elevated structure running over the valley, connecting the main trunk at Don Mills Road directly to the MSF at Beth Nealson Drive? It would be expensive, but would also negate the need to cross the hydro corridor. The elevated crossing of the valley would be completely on the north side of the hydro corridor

Do-able; anything is with enough money and political will (give or take the laws of physics) ...

But that's a 600M bridge you just built, assuming you don't want to traverse over top of the Science Ctr or the Archery Range, you would come across at the Science Ctr access road.

It would do some damage ecologically, but it can be off-set if so desired.

But that is one very expensive access track.

The site itself is still barely large enough, maybe/kinda/sorta.

 

[crs1026]

Can't say it's undoable, but it does give one pause.

From Thorncliffe Park and Overlea to the creek itself, on the gentlest possible curve, is just under 1600 feet. At 3% grade, that's a potential 48 foot drop. Then it's 2100 feet to Gateway and Don Mills. That makes me think that it's physically possible (just barely) for a duckunder to be above grade at Thorncliffe Park, dip to intersect the hydro lines below grade, and be back up to a portal around Gateway. Cut and cover in the schoolyard won't create the need to demolish the school building. Perhaps the elevation of the Overlea Roadway would be adjusted to give a bit more clearance on the down slope.

- Paul

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Do-able; anything is with enough money and political will (give or take the laws of physics) ...

But that's a 600M bridge you just built, assuming you don't want to traverse over top of the Science Ctr or the Archery Range, you would come across at the Science Ctr access road

haha, yea

A 600 metre elevated crossing to access the MSF, combined with a 600 metre elevated crossing to navigate the Don Mills/Overlea intersection (see my last post), might result in a whopping 1.2 kilometres of elevated transit hanging over this small corner of park. Do-able, as you said, but everything about this proposal just seems so haphazard and janky.

Also would be rather ironic for the Ontario Line to result in the destruction of some of the natural facilities used by its namesake, the Ontario Science Centre