[innsertnamehere]

I can't tell if that is a joke or not.

regardless, Eglinton is getting redesigned and Metrolinx now has some more money to make sure it is done right, so lets hope. There are currently no spanish solutions in the city, it would be neat to have one.

 

[rdaner]

Where is a good place to find out exactly where the tunneling machines are now?

 

[innsertnamehere]

They aren't very far, the first couple of months of boring is very slow.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Yes insert, slow things are generally boring.

[PUN PUN PUN]

 

[mrxbombastic]

The latest Star article a little while back mentioned the first tbm (Dennis?) Had pretty much reached Keele street so I suspect it has now broken the northern half of the headwall as crews are now driving piles for the southern half of the headwalls in preparation for the second time to pass in the future. It's taken so long cuz engineer + machine and crews must get used to soils and workspace. They also had a prolonged stop to install the conveyor belt systems to haul away the muck.

 

[M II A II R II K]

This is what Eglinton Avenue could look like in 10 years

http://www.blogto.com/city/2013/10/this_is_what_eglinton_avenue_could_look_like_in_10_years/

 

[BurlOak]

This is what Eglinton Avenue could look like in 10 years

http://www.blogto.com/city/2013/10/this_is_what_eglinton_avenue_could_look_like_in_10_years/

I thought they promised that no lanes would be lost to traffic. then I heard that they were removing 2 lanes (the diamond lanes) from Eglinton East. Now this picture shows another through lane being lost.

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

This is what Eglinton Avenue could look like in 10 years

http://www.blogto.com/city/2013/10/this_is_what_eglinton_avenue_could_look_like_in_10_years/

But "streets are for cars"!! Rob Ford says so!

 

[junctionist]

Notice the overhead wires in the last rendering. At one Crosstown meeting, the planners were hesitant to endorse burying the overhead wires saying that it would push up project costs like on St. Clair. But the difference would be trivial on a $4 billion project as opposed to St. Clair, which was supposed to be a mere $60 million. Also, note the lack of street lights in the renderings. That's an area of public realm improvements where we've cut corners in the past--like on Bloor in Yorkville.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

They probably forgot to add the streetlights. A street with no lights is insane.

 

[Adjei]

Notice the overhead wires in the last rendering. At one Crosstown meeting, the planners were hesitant to endorse burying the overhead wires saying that it would push up project costs like on St. Clair. But the difference would be trivial on a $4 billion project as opposed to St. Clair, which was supposed to be a mere $60 million. Also, note the lack of street lights in the renderings. That's an area of public realm improvements where we've cut corners in the past--like on Bloor in Yorkville.

Is this initiative which is being done by the city of Toronto included in the $4 billion crosstown project which is by Metrolinx?

 

[junctionist]

I can't say for certain, but these discussions were taking place at Metrolinx's public meetings. There's no point in doing the improvements they plan on doing without tackling hydro wires. One problem, for instance, is that large trees have to be pruned in a strictly utilitarian manner (often through the centre of the canopy) not to interfere with power lines.

 

[Ozman]

I was at one of the Eglinton Connects meetings this past Tuesday evening. I could only drop in at the start but I spoke with a planner from Metrolinx. He claimed that the east tunnel contract (from Yonge to Brentcliffe portal) had already been awarded and that they would be starting on the launch shaft just up the hill from Leslie "soon". I had not heard that they'd even received proposals yet. He also said that since they were going back to the 2010 EA for the Brentcliffe-Don Mills alignment, the storage track would (again) be east of Laird Station but there would be no storage track at Don Mills. A storage track was originally supposed to be east of Don Mills station as well but I think they found it won't fit between the portal east of Don Mills station and the re-instated Ferrand stop. At one point they were going to have a 3-track/2-platform station at Don Mills to accommodate this (when the tunnel was proposed to extend to east of Don Mills). Now that Leslie stop has been re-instated and the separate LRT right-of-way will end at Brentcliffe portal, they won't be short-turning LRTs at Don Mills, but rather Laird.

So the increased headway will end at Laird and then there will be reduced frequency of service east of Leaside out to Kennedy. It's too bad, considering Don Mills will have more traffic than Laird, especially with the bus terminal there and the future Don Mills Relief Line connection as well.

I called the Crosstown community office the next day to get some clarifications and the very friendly community liaison woman was as usual clueless (or wasn't allowed to speak) about any details. I knew more than she did or so it seemed. She did share that there would be more community meetings coming up in November regarding the Crosstown to reveal the latest plans. I fear (especially since it looks as though the EA won't be amended again) that this will be presenting a fait accompli and the opportunity for influencing change has passed. Maybe we can still fight to restore the third entrance to Laird station (on the NORTH-west corner) which seems to have disappeared when the Reference Concept Designs were revealed for the Central stations.

As an aside: I've read in Metrolinx reports that the storage track at Yonge street has been moved to Avenue Road. I don't know if this is east or west of Avenue station. Does anyone know why it was moved and does this mean that there can be no short-turning at Yonge? I believe the original EA had the storage track east of Yonge which would imply short-turning trains coming from the west. If they move the third track to Avenue (presumably the east side of Avenue station) then trains would be short-turning there. There could be solid reasons for moving storage tracks but operationally this will be nuts. Increased headways between Mt. Dennis (or Allen Road) and AVENUE - not Yonge!!! And increased headways between Mt. Dennis (or wherever) and LAIRD - not Don Mills!!! Silly in my opinion.

Final thought for this morning: the Leslie and Eglinton intersection will be a disaster for both LRT and cars. It works quite well now (for a high-volume intersection) with a 3-way cycle. The LRT will be able to move (both directions) through only one (albeit the longest) of the 3 cycles and so forget about incorporating transit priority here. At least the Metrolinx planner I talked to said that they had restored 2 left-turn lanes going from Eglinton eastbound to Leslie (north). The original EA had that reduced to one left-turn lane which would have had traffic backed up to past Brentcliffe even without the LRT there.
I still can't believe they couldn't find a way to keep the LRT in its own separate right-of-way to east of Don Mills Station. If not underground then at least a south-side (instead of median) alignment. This weak link in the chain will really mess with the LRTs when they could have had reliable scheduling from Mt. Dennis right through to Don Mills, which is of course the most heavily travelled portion. Other than for a future relief line interchange, one wonders whether they should now bother with the expense of burying Don Mills station at all, since the tunnel (and increased headways) will be broken by the median stretch at Leslie anyway.

 

[Rainforest]

As an aside: I've read in Metrolinx reports that the storage track at Yonge street has been moved to Avenue Road. I don't know if this is east or west of Avenue station. Does anyone know why it was moved and does this mean that there can be no short-turning at Yonge? I believe the original EA had the storage track east of Yonge which would imply short-turning trains coming from the west. If they move the third track to Avenue (presumably the east side of Avenue station) then trains would be short-turning there. There could be solid reasons for moving storage tracks but operationally this will be nuts. Increased headways between Mt. Dennis (or Allen Road) and AVENUE - not Yonge!!! And increased headways between Mt. Dennis (or wherever) and LAIRD - not Don Mills!!! Silly in my opinion.

The Avenue Road third track may be intended for short-turning trains coming from east of Yonge, in case any problem emerges west of Avenue. That will be useful for problem mitigation only, not for any scheduled short-turns.

They can still run scheduled increased headways between the Mt. Dennis terminus and Laird. That will be useful for capacity management west of Yonge, but pretty much useless east of Yonge because neither of the Mt. Pleasant, Bayview, or Laird stations will generate much ridership. Essentially, trains short-turning at Laird will make a nearly-empty run from Yonge to Laird for the benefit of the western section of the line.

Final thought for this morning: the Leslie and Eglinton intersection will be a disaster for both LRT and cars. It works quite well now (for a high-volume intersection) with a 3-way cycle. The LRT will be able to move (both directions) through only one (albeit the longest) of the 3 cycles and so forget about incorporating transit priority here. At least the Metrolinx planner I talked to said that they had restored 2 left-turn lanes going form Eglinton eastbound to Leslie (north). The original EA had that reduced to one left-turn lane which would have had traffic backed up to past Brentcliffe even with out the LRT there.
I still can't believe they couldn't find a way to keep the LRT in it's own separate right-of-way to east of Don Mills Station. If not underground then at least a south-side (instead of median) alignment. This weak link in the chain will really mess with the LRTs when they could have had reliable scheduling form Mt. Dennis right through to Don Mills, which is of course the most heavily travelled portion. Other than for a future relief line interchange, one wonders whether they should now bother with the expense of burying Don Mills station at all, since the tunnel (and increased headways) will be broken by the median stretch at Leslie anyway.

The failure to shift the line to the south of the road between the Brentcliffe portal and the Don Mills portal is the biggest mistake of this project. I will not be surprised if, a few years after the line opens, Lawrence East buses will be forced to run to Laird instead of the Don Mills bus terminal, because there will be no room left on the westbound LRT trains at Don Mills.

 

[allabootmatt]

I can't say for certain, but these discussions were taking place at Metrolinx's public meetings. There's no point in doing the improvements they plan on doing without tackling hydro wires. One problem, for instance, is that large trees have to be pruned in a strictly utilitarian manner (often through the centre of the canopy) not to interfere with power lines.

To undertake the kind of work they are proposing and *not* bury Hydro wires in the process would be insane, and the sort of thing that basically no other major city in the developed world would even consider. So I expect that's exactly what will happen.