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

44 North said:
My view is that if they can forward a complex concept of a portal below a brand new roadway bridge, I feel like a simpler concept of a standalone rail bridge immediately west of Yonge could be doable.
Click to expand...
Negative effects of a separate bridge:
- higher ongoing maintenance costs (inspecting and maintaining two structures instead of one)
- more damage within the valley
- higher maintenance for the trains (at least one S-curve will be required to shift the alignment out from under Yonge - curves have a substantially higher running maintenance cost as, for instance, the rails need to be replaced about twice as often)
-->If the Royal Orchard Station is to be located directly under Yonge, a second S-curve will then be required to bring the alignment back under Yonge. Not only does the cost equation come back into play, but now there's a potential geometric issue - is there enough room to locate a broad-enough S-curve without a speed restriction?
- does not remove the existing road bridge out of the floodplain

There might be others as well - this is what I came up with in about 30 seconds.

So, with all of the above points listed.....is it still worthwhile?

Dan
 
smallspy said:
Negative effects of a separate bridge:
- higher ongoing maintenance costs (inspecting and maintaining two structures instead of one)
- more damage within the valley
- higher maintenance for the trains (at least one S-curve will be required to shift the alignment out from under Yonge - curves have a substantially higher running maintenance cost as, for instance, the rails need to be replaced about twice as often)
-->If the Royal Orchard Station is to be located directly under Yonge, a second S-curve will then be required to bring the alignment back under Yonge. Not only does the cost equation come back into play, but now there's a potential geometric issue - is there enough room to locate a broad-enough S-curve without a speed restriction?
- does not remove the existing road bridge out of the floodplain

There might be others as well - this is what I came up with in about 30 seconds.

So, with all of the above points listed.....is it still worthwhile?

Dan
Click to expand...
Dan, i think your think of having 2 structures side by side . I believe the plan / idea was to do something like the Bloor Danforth bridge where the road is above and the subway is directly below the road and not shifted off Yonge street.
 
Sky High Arch said:
Dan, i think your think of having 2 structures side by side . I believe the plan / idea was to do something like the Bloor Danforth bridge where the road is above and the subway is directly below the road and not shifted off Yonge street.
Click to expand...
He's responding to these comments by 44North:

44 North said:
Trouble wrapping my head around why their rejected bridge option was double decker. Not exactly Bloor Viaduct level clearance, and it'd be hugely over-engineered when there's space beside. I think they wanted to omit it for...reasons, so they stacked the deck.
Click to expand...
44 North said:
Why a double decker bridge as the de facto option though? Obviously that's a nonstarter for several reasons. And you don't need to play coy on the matter of politicization. Parties don't want to ruffle feathers, esp in certain ridings. A bridge most def would ruffle feathers - as it has in the past, present, and future. Perhaps yes it is physically improbable or cost prohibitive to build one. I'm leaning on the side of no, and using Metrolinx's own reasoning elsewhere as to why.
Click to expand...
44 North said:
\Tell me about it. This is what I'm talking about. Royal orchard is still on the table, and as noted it in the report would be extremely deep. And even if dropped completely there's still knock on costs of going that kind of depth. Likely massive pumps at the bottom, taller emergency exits, deeper stations beyond the area, added energy of having trains ascend this hill.

My view is that if they can forward a complex concept of a portal below a brand new roadway bridge, I feel like a simpler concept of a standalone rail bridge immediately west of Yonge could be doable.
Click to expand...
 
smallspy said:
Negative effects of a separate bridge:
- higher ongoing maintenance costs (inspecting and maintaining two structures instead of one)
- more damage within the valley
- higher maintenance for the trains (at least one S-curve will be required to shift the alignment out from under Yonge - curves have a substantially higher running maintenance cost as, for instance, the rails need to be replaced about twice as often)
-->If the Royal Orchard Station is to be located directly under Yonge, a second S-curve will then be required to bring the alignment back under Yonge. Not only does the cost equation come back into play, but now there's a potential geometric issue - is there enough room to locate a broad-enough S-curve without a speed restriction?
- does not remove the existing road bridge out of the floodplain

There might be others as well - this is what I came up with in about 30 seconds.

So, with all of the above points listed.....is it still worthwhile?

Dan
Click to expand...

A couple mild s-curves are a given and yeah wear and tear + a speed reduction. Possibly noise. Dealbreaker? Damage within the valley is negligible when looking with an apolitical lens.

Higher ongoing bridge maintenance is an interesting one. A narrow low-level RT bridge vs a large medium-level hybrid structure. For the latter six lanes of traffic on top, two rail lines below, seasonal deluges of sodium chloride; built by the prov, owned by TTC I think, but also co-owned by York Region for the highway on top. Sounds maintenance-heavy. Fixing YR's flood-prone roads isn't Metrolinx's job so I wouldn't combine costs with a separate bridge.

Then ultimately this hybrid road/rail bridge has been rejected twice, and the go-to is an extremely deep tunnel which seems pretty silly in such an area. All things considered I think a separate subway bridge is worth a look (if it's deemed doable).
 
^

Media Advisory - Ottawa, Ontario - Canada.ca

Members of the media are invited to attend an important virtual infrastructure event with the Honourable Catherine McKenna, Minister of Infrastructure and Communities; the Honourable Mary Ng, Minister of Small Business, Export Promotion and International Trade and member of Parliament for...
www.canada.ca www.canada.ca
 
duffo said:
whatever happened to the ontario line opening first? seeming unlikely at this point if federal funding is being confirmed for the YNSE first.
Click to expand...
Theoretically if Yonge North is somehow magically finished first (which is extremely unlikely since its behind in terms of design), you can open it to only run during off peak hours and weekends only, meanwhile you push the RH Line for rush hour trips. If Yonge North finishes first, it would only be for just a few months so it wouldn't be a big deal.
 
duffo said:
whatever happened to the ontario line opening first? seeming unlikely at this point if federal funding is being confirmed for the YNSE first.
Click to expand...

The City of Toronto's official position remains they're not opening it until Ontario Line is open. But as said above, in the unlikely event these projects start chugging forward and the YNSE is done first, Toronto can decide to only operate it under limited conditions. In theory, I guess they could stick to their guns and just not run trains north of Finch (though I bet they'd at least run to Steeles!) but I imagine the political pressure to not any trains on a perfectly good segment of subway will be too great to resist.

Let's be honest, new ridership isn't going to overwhelm the system on Day 1 or even Year 1, if the OL is underway but a little bit behind schedule. All you get is riders who now haul down to Finch getting on further north, which is generally a good thing. If we're talking a gap of years between the 2 projects, and condos are going up everywhere north of Steeles, that's a different matter. But that really should not be an issue for anyone to worry about at this point, IMHO.

Undead said:
Fingers crossed the Feds will top up the money needed to build all the stations.
Click to expand...

Still 5 or 6 people on this forum hoping they provide only enough money for it go to Steeles.
Good luck! 😬
 
I'll say this much: It's easy to be cynical about how we build transit in this country and this province.
It's easy to complain, depending on your personal bugaboos, about a subway to Richmond Hill or what's happened with the DRL or the 3-stop SSE or an underground Crosstown extension or whatever.
It's definitely fair to criticize the Ford family for their role in mishandling transit over the past 10 years.
And, sure, it's easy to be annoyed by all the pols gladhanding and posing for re-election campaigns.

BUT these are 4 important projects, each overdue in its way, moving forward through the kind of inter-governmental cooperation that has been sorely lacking, pretty much forever. So, whatever the projects' individual flaws, this is a good news story and, at least for a few hours, I'll give Ford and Trudeau credit for it. Hopefully cooperation will be a long-term thing and not just a one-off.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top