- Thread starter JasonParis
- Start date
H4F33Z
Active Member
Random question. Can someone confirm if building elevated is faster than tunneling ?
ARG1
Senior Member
It is. Ask Montreal or Ottawa if you want proof.
afransen
Senior Member
I would hazard to say a lot faster. Elevated can be built in parallel for the whole line. Tunneling would require additional TBMs to complete more quickly, and frequently those TBMs are only used for one project then abandoned (to save the cost of digging them out).
Ritachi
New Member
The "Flemingdon Park" station is around 500 metres south of "Science Centre" station, I don't see a need to put a station there, especially when it's so close to "Science Centre".
Rainforest
Senior Member
The station in front of the Science Centre entrance is a lot more convenient both for the residents of highrises on the east side of Don Mills and for the Science Centre visitors, than the station at Eglinton.
The proposed names are odd though. The station in front of Science Centre should be called Science Centre, while the one at Eglinton should get another name.
Amare
Senior Member
Ever since Metrolinx has hired their stupid consultants, many of the station names that they come up with hardly make any sense.
H4F33Z
Active Member
The names will probably change. Names of stations are really important, but it don't matter when the line doesn't even have shovels in the ground.
Last edited:
Amare
Senior Member
Thats exactly what we all thought when the Crosstown Line was being built, only to find out that Metrolinx was sticking with 95% of the names and only changed/modified the other 5%. So yes, it's all about the names.
JSF-1
Active Member
Sure that may be true for the OL, but in case you have forgotten Metrolinx is currently building another line at the moment, with some "interesting" naming choices. I don't even know why you would need consultants to help name a station. Of all the things that go into these types of projects, from the first shovels in the ground, to opening day; naming stations should be the easiest part. Anyone of us on this site could pick names for free, yet those boneheads at Metrolinx are pissing away like 6 figures to hire a bunch of yahoos to put together some arbitrary rules and fancy graphs, for something that can be done as simply as opening Google Maps and picking a name from the area. If Metrolinx was going to pay me like 100K to choose names for the stations, I would do so by simply opening Google Maps and making a list of names; and if they don't want things like duplicate names or cardinal directions that's fine. I or anyone else here could get it done in no more then 10 minutes.
Last edited:
H4F33Z
Active Member
Actually 57 percent of the station names were changed.
micheal_can
Senior Member
For most people, a station name is just a name. It could just be numbered according to the date built. I am going from station 4 to Station 106. The routes I need to take are....
99Messier
New Member
I'd add, Elevated, like cut-and-cover, can be built in parallel for the whole line.
Tunneling requires the TBM's to completely finish before you can start the first station - because the "waste" soil is extracted through the shaft and a station can't break into the tunnels.
Tunneling itself is not that slow, but constructing the launch shaft takes time, and the stations are extremely deep adding to the time (and cost) significantly. Even is you have no stations, emergency exit construction is costly and time consuming in its own right.
officedweller
Senior Member
On top of that, with a twin bore, sometimes (like Vancouver Canada Line) the same TBM is used for both bores.
It is disassembled, transported back to the launch pit , reassembled and sent off again.
For elevated, both tracks are usually on one guideway (side platforms) so it's just one straight shot with more or more launching girders.
Wider structures for switches and sidings may take a bit longer.
It is disassembled, transported back to the launch pit , reassembled and sent off again.
For elevated, both tracks are usually on one guideway (side platforms) so it's just one straight shot with more or more launching girders.
Wider structures for switches and sidings may take a bit longer.
officedweller
Senior Member
Yeah, that does look like a problem.The Leaside Bridge has a bicycle lane and sidewalk that is almost useless in winter for both cyclists and pedestrians.
From link.
That's why when they build the Ontario Line bridge parallel to the Leaside Bridge, they should include bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure.
But with Ontario line, the tunnel portal is below the edge of a cliff, so not sure how accessable a bike path would be for snow clearing equipment.
Maybe there'll be an costed option to add it. That was the case with the North Arm Bridge for Cnaada Line.
The bridge will also be designed by the successful proponent - that's why this rendering is 'conceptual only'.
So it may be cable stayed or extradosed as those are usually cheaper.
Last edited: