Richmond Hill Yonge Line 1 North Subway Extension | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx

Aussming a BRT/LRT is built from RHC to Steeles (very unlikely), with subway extended. Would cut and cover be used to build the tunnels and station(s). How would the underground bus terminal be built?
 
Cobra said:
Oh well, Metrolinx already agrees with Toronto's rational that the Relief Line is needed for a RH extension, hence the York Region Councillors losing their minds in the media. Hell, I think we'll demonstrate (if it hasn't been done yet) that Relief Short is not enough and it will take Relief Long to allow Yonge to accommodate the extra ridership from York
Click to expand...

It's been done. City Planning's network study claims that, with Relief Line Short, the Yonge Line will be running at 36,000 pphpd in 2031. That's 100% of capacity. No room for additional projects to be feeding into the Yonge Line.

The Metrolinx Yonge Relief Network Study is slightly more optimistic. They claim that the Yonge Line will be operating at 32,300 pphpd with the Relief Line Short, about 90% capacity. The YNSE, however, will bring the line to around 100% capacity, if it is built.

Despite slight difference in numbers, both numbers paint the same picture: The Yonge Line is at capacity. The Relief Line Short will not adequately address Yonge crowding. The Relief Line Long is very much a prerequisite project for any northern or easter transit connection that will feed into Yonge - this means Yonge North and Sheppard Subways in particular.
 
TheTigerMaster said:
It's been done. City Planning's network study claims that, with Relief Line Short, the Yonge Line will be running at 36,000 pphpd in 2031. That's 100% of capacity. No room for additional projects to be feeding into the Yonge Line.

The Metrolinx Yonge Relief Network Study is slightly more optimistic. They claim that the Yonge Line will be operating at 32,300 pphpd with the Relief Line Short, about 90% capacity. The YNSE, however, will bring the line to around 100% capacity, if it is built.

Despite slight difference in numbers, both numbers paint the same picture: The Yonge Line is at capacity. The Relief Line Short will not adequately address Yonge crowding. The Relief Line Long is very much a prerequisite project for any northern or easter transit connection that will feed into Yonge - this means Yonge North and Sheppard Subways in particular.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the information!
 
Leo_Chan said:
I'm not saying the full YNSE, just Finch to Steeles. Would Toronto/North York accept cut and cover?
Click to expand...

Well. Yonge especially south of Steeles is a very busy bus corridor, so it would be difficult to do cut and cover there. But I do recall plans to build the section from Finch to Cummer as cut and cover.
 
Voltz said:
Well. Yonge especially south of Steeles is a very busy bus corridor, so it would be difficult to do cut and cover there. But I do recall plans to build the section from Finch to Cummer as cut and cover.
Click to expand...
Yes, I think we discussed it in this thread only a few years ago.

Also the section from Richmond Hill station to near 16th Avenue is cut-and-cover.
 
nfitz said:
Yes, I think we discussed it in this thread only a few years ago.

Also the section from Richmond Hill station to near 16th Avenue is cut-and-cover.
Click to expand...

Was there a breakdown the cost per kilometre of the cut-and-cover sections vs the bored sections in the EA? Would be nice for an apples-to-apples comparison of the costs of both methods.
 
its hard to know since the part is going to double as a small train yard with storage for several trains.

I also don't believe the stretch from the existing tail tracks at Finch to Cummer / Drewry is very far - not worth bringing in the TBMs for such a short distance. The TBMS will just start at Drewry and go up to Highway 7 from there.
 
Cobra said:
LOL, The great and mighty Richmond Hill would never accept cut and cover.
Click to expand...

Serious question - do you know the geography here? Or the governance structure?
Only the terminal station would be in RH and it's basically in what is now a parking lot so it would definitely be cut and cover.

And it's not Richmond Hill's subway. It would be (and is) a York Region Rapid Transit Corporation project. Yonge Street is a York Region ROW, though it's the border between Markham and Vaughan. It's amusing that people think because it's the "subway to Richmond Hill" that it goes THROUGH Richmond Hill but I'd kind of expect anyone on this thread to know the truth. It's maybe 200m into Richmond Hill so, no matter how mighty they are or aren't, it's entirely irrelevant. It literally goes a block into RH , not even to High Tech Road.

(And do you think municipality's "Accept" construction methods in that way? They did cut and cover at Yonge/Sheppard, back in the day. It's not for anyone to "Accept," it's a question of what the EA shows is the most sensible construction method.)

The distance from the blue dot to Highway7. That's the entirety of "mighty" Richmond Hill's geographic jurisdiction.

RHC.JPG


Anyway, to actually answer Leo's question, I can't imagine they'd actually do a BRT and subway. It's worth remembering the EA for the BRT was done and ready to go before the McGuinty subway announcement. And, yeah, the subway stations (in Markham and Vaughan, not Richmond Hill) were planed as cut and cover, as I recall.

Yeah - from p.84 of the Enviromental Project Report (regarding RH terminal station)
"Positioning of the cross-over track and subway station (which require cut-and-cover construction..."

"For some portions of the subway line, excavation by a TBM is not practical or
economical. This includes:
• Stations – The large spans (station platform widths), relatively short lengths and
complicated spatial arrangements normally preclude economical tunnelling.
• Cross-overs – Similar to the three track structure, the cross-overs for Finch
Station, Steeles Station and Richmond Hill Centre Station have special structural
configurations and require the placement of special track work.
In these instances cut-and-cover is the preferred method of construction. In addition,
where the alignment can be close to the surface and access from the surface during
construction results in negligible adverse environmental effects, cut-and-cover can be
more economical than tunnelling."

EDIT: From the report, all cut-and-cover (Fig 4-19 is a map):
• From the north end of the Richmond Hill Centre Station to the end of the
proposed tail tracks north of Richmond Hill Centre Station
• From the south end of Royal Orchard Station to 100 m south of the East Don
River; and,
• From the south end of the Cummer/Drewry Station to the existing tail tracks north

Everything in light blue is C&C:
cutandcover.JPG



So in one sentence you managed to be wrong on multiple levels. Impressive.
 

Attachments

  • RHC.JPG
    RHC.JPG
    35.1 KB · Views: 452
  • cutandcover.JPG
    cutandcover.JPG
    132.8 KB · Views: 460
Last edited:
TJ O'Pootertoot said:
Serious question - do you know the geography here? Or the governance structure?
Only the terminal station would be in RH and it's basically in what is now a parking lot so it would definitely be cut and cover.

And it's not Richmond Hill's subway. It would be (and is) a York Region Rapid Transit Corporation project. Yonge Street is a York Region ROW, though it's the border between Markham and Vaughan. It's amusing that people think because it's the "subway to Richmond Hill" that it goes THROUGH Richmond Hill but I'd kind of expect anyone on this thread to know the truth. It's maybe 200m into Richmond Hill so, no matter how mighty they are or aren't, it's entirely irrelevant. It literally goes a block into RH , not even to High Tech Road.

(And do you think municipality's "Accept" construction methods in that way? They did cut and cover at Yonge/Sheppard, back in the day. It's not for anyone to "Accept," it's a question of what the EA shows is the most sensible construction method.)

The distance from the blue dot to Highway7. That's the entirety of "mighty" Richmond Hill's geographic jurisdiction.

View attachment 97839

Anyway, to actually answer Leo's question, I can't imagine they'd actually do a BRT and subway. It's worth remembering the EA for the BRT was done and ready to go before the McGuinty subway announcement. And, yeah, the subway stations (in Markham and Vaughan, not Richmond Hill) were planed as cut and cover, as I recall.

Yeah - from p.84 of the Enviromental Project Report (regarding RH terminal station)
"Positioning of the cross-over track and subway station (which require cut-and-cover construction..."

"For some portions of the subway line, excavation by a TBM is not practical or
economical. This includes:
• Stations – The large spans (station platform widths), relatively short lengths and
complicated spatial arrangements normally preclude economical tunnelling.
• Cross-overs – Similar to the three track structure, the cross-overs for Finch
Station, Steeles Station and Richmond Hill Centre Station have special structural
configurations and require the placement of special track work.
In these instances cut-and-cover is the preferred method of construction. In addition,
where the alignment can be close to the surface and access from the surface during
construction results in negligible adverse environmental effects, cut-and-cover can be
more economical than tunnelling."

EDIT: From the report, all cut-and-cover (Fig 4-19 is a map):
• From the north end of the Richmond Hill Centre Station to the end of the
proposed tail tracks north of Richmond Hill Centre Station
• From the south end of Royal Orchard Station to 100 m south of the East Don
River; and,
• From the south end of the Cummer/Drewry Station to the existing tail tracks north

Everything in light blue is C&C:
View attachment 97840


So in one sentence you managed to be wrong on multiple levels. Impressive.
Click to expand...
So the train storage facility north of RHC will be cut and cover? No wonder they plan to remove the Bantry bridge over the train tracks and divert traffic. It all makes sense now :)
 
wonder if the plans have changed now that the Royal Orchard station isn't happening. I guess we will see when the detailed design resumes. They had quite a bridge planned over the river, but if they can go deep due to the lack of proximity to a station, they may switch to an entire TBM run deep underneath of it.
 
innsertnamehere said:
wonder if the plans have changed now that the Royal Orchard station isn't happening. I guess we will see when the detailed design resumes. They had quite a bridge planned over the river, but if they can go deep due to the lack of proximity to a station, they may switch to an entire TBM run deep underneath of it.
Click to expand...
The 2012 Conceptual Design report doesn't include Royal Orchard station, and notes that the East Don River "bridge is required regardless of whether Royal Orchard Station is included as part of the project".
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top