kali
Active Member
^not any time soon - 20+ years. the planning is being done so that when the time to build comes, old plans can be quickly updated because much of the leg work has already been done.
|
|
|
- Thread starter BMO
- Start date
robmausser
Senior Member
Not until 2030 at the earliest. Unfortunately these are just EA's designed to ensure the land is reserved for future use.
sche
Active Member
Interestingly, they included what looks to be TBM tunnel cross sections in the EA (pg 18 from https://407transitway.com/brantToHu...4 - EPR - 5 - Preferred Alternative - WEB.pdf ; all other page numbers in this post refer to this document unless otherwise specified.):
The EPR also shows tunnels going under the 403/407 interchange (I would imagine this would be cheaper to do as a big flyover? Seems unnecessary to tunnel):
Sources for the images below, in order:
pg 9
It also shows this extremely long BRT tunnel under the hydro corridor to get to Lisgar GO, as well as what looks to be a horrible connection at Lisgar (A York U Busway type solution would be way cheaper, but I guess that's up to Hydro One. If Hydro One doesn't allow, I'd imagine the Lisgar connection would be deleted if and when this is built, just like the CCTT station on the Mississauga Transitway)
Both of these long tunnels are described as "A combination of cast-in-place box tunnel and bored tunnel with active ventilation" on pg 31.
Hopefully these things are improved if and when this thing is built since these tunnels would be insanely expensive and don't seem super necessary, and that Lisgar GO layout really sucks (well, at least it's better than what's proposed at Bramalea lol, but still bad)
The EPR also shows tunnels going under the 403/407 interchange (I would imagine this would be cheaper to do as a big flyover? Seems unnecessary to tunnel):
Sources for the images below, in order:
pg 9
It also shows this extremely long BRT tunnel under the hydro corridor to get to Lisgar GO, as well as what looks to be a horrible connection at Lisgar (A York U Busway type solution would be way cheaper, but I guess that's up to Hydro One. If Hydro One doesn't allow, I'd imagine the Lisgar connection would be deleted if and when this is built, just like the CCTT station on the Mississauga Transitway)
Both of these long tunnels are described as "A combination of cast-in-place box tunnel and bored tunnel with active ventilation" on pg 31.
Hopefully these things are improved if and when this thing is built since these tunnels would be insanely expensive and don't seem super necessary, and that Lisgar GO layout really sucks (well, at least it's better than what's proposed at Bramalea lol, but still bad)
Attachments
Steve X
Senior Member
By the time there is actual demand for this, eBuses would be well developed and remove the necessary for a strong ventilation system to remove diesel fumes from the tunnel.
ARG1
Senior Member
Wouldn't ventilation also be important for allowing air circulation in the case of an emergency?
Steve X
Senior Member
Ventilation would be needed but the types of ventilators would be different if it was for a electric subway/LRT vs something that actively produces dangerous fumes.
robmausser
Senior Member
They better build the tunnels big enough for LRT upgrade...
jcam
Active Member
That's the thing....for a system like this, wouldn't platooning and autonomous electric buses cover most of the future capacity needs?
Divas S.
Active Member
Making buses autonomous wouldn't have the biggest impact on capacity when you're running vehicles that can only handle around 100 people,
Divas S.
Active Member
if they're worried about buses operating on the surface in their corridor why don't they build it at grade but in a tunnel, like the Rosedale valley bridge?
sche
Active Member
That’d be even worse - Hydro One pretty much doesn’t want anything on their ROW. No buildings or permanent structures, no tall trees, certain clearances for the wires, etc.if they're worried about buses operating on the surface in their corridor why don't they build it at grade but in a tunnel, like the Rosedale valley bridge?
More info: https://www.hydroone.com/business-services/secondary-land-use
TossYourJacket
Senior Member
At a certain point you can only fit so many people per bus. Part of why Ottawa went to LRT was that even with a downtown tunnel the bus frequency needed in the future would have been insane. I forget the exact details offhand but it was something like needing a bus less than every 30 seconds at peak hours.
jcam
Active Member
All I'm saying is, I have a hard time seeing the 407 transitway hitting 30 second peak period headways in the 30 year-lifecycle of the initial road bed construction. Just meaning you likely don't need to 'future-proof' for LRT at this time. And you could even get into bi-articulated buses too on a system like this.
robmausser
Senior Member
road bed is not the issue, its overpasses, underpasses and tunnels. Which have 100 year life cycles.
north-of-anything
Active Member
Can't all the tunnelling west of Lisgar GO be replaced with just running it on street on Argentia? All you'd need is a short underpass either on or west of Ninth Line. At the very least, that area won't have any stops and could easily be widened to add dedicated bus lanes.