Update on the Ontario Line to next week's Executive Ctte.

The key note will be that Mx has rejected any undergrounding here whatsoever.

Report Link: https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2021/ex/bgrd/backgroundfile-168614.pdf

From said report:

1624888742016.png

***

1624888654321.png
 
Northern Light said:
Update on the Ontario Line to next week's Executive Ctte.

The key note will be that Mx has rejected any undergrounding here whatsoever.

Report Link: https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2021/ex/bgrd/backgroundfile-168614.pdf

From said report:

View attachment 330827
***

View attachment 330826
Click to expand...

I'm curious what the 'significant community impacts during operations' are, and how they compare to above ground community impacts. Will they actually release this report or will we only get paraphrased bits and pieces?

Why would deep stations be an issue with a partial underground implementation? You could still go above ground at East Harbour.

Interesting how the deep stations aren't an issue anywhere else. Just the OL. I assume riders on Eglinton West and the SSE will magically float to the surface?
 
syn said:
I'm curious what the 'significant community impacts during operations' are, and how they compare to above ground community impacts. Will they actually release this report or will we only get paraphrased bits and pieces?

Why would deep stations be an issue with a partial underground implementation? You could still go above ground at East Harbour.

Interesting how the deep stations aren't an issue anywhere else. Just the OL. I assume riders on Eglinton West and the SSE will magically float to the surface?
Click to expand...
Nine storys deep...
 
syn said:
I'm curious what the 'significant community impacts during operations' are, and how they compare to above ground community impacts. Will they actually release this report or will we only get paraphrased bits and pieces?

Why would deep stations be an issue with a partial underground implementation? You could still go above ground at East Harbour.

Interesting how the deep stations aren't an issue anywhere else. Just the OL. I assume riders on Eglinton West and the SSE will magically float to the surface?
Click to expand...
Watch them use high-speed elevators on those lines, while every possible cost will be cut on the OL, because the OL doesn't buy them as many votes.
 
I warned you people about the Scarborough RT man 3 years ago. He wants his toy light metro line come hell or water. It should be built as standard subway. End of story.

Scarborough endured the disasterous undersized tin cans for 35 years but it's closing soon and we can't have a Toronto without a monument to Mr. SRT. Trying to put it underground here or there misses the point. No one should be humouring him or his bad ideas.
 
evandyk said:
View attachment 331001
Click to expand...
The Washington Metro has two very deep stations that happen to be next to each other: Forest Glen and Wheaton.

Forest Glen station is so deep (at 60 metres below the surface), it has six high-speed elevators (and an emergency staircase):

1280px-Forest_Glen_station_elevator_hall%2C_train_level.jpg

en.wikipedia.org

Forest Glen station - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

Forest Glen station does not have publicly accessible staircases (except during an emergency) nor escalators.

The next station to the north, Wheaton, has North America's longest escalator at 70 metres long with a vertical rise of 35 metres (angled at 30°). It takes two and three-quarters of a minute to ride from end to end.

1280px-Wheaton_station_long_escalator_03.jpg

en.wikipedia.org

Wheaton station (Washington Metro) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

The reason the two stations are so deep is to be within bedrock given the thick layer of soft soil in the area. After all, Washington, DC was built on a swamp.
 
syn said:
How deep will they be on the SSE?

Where, exactly, would it be 9 storeys deep on the Ontario Line?
Click to expand...
The mention Gerrard/Carlaw before if built underground. The single story up would make it way easier to transfer from the 506.

I wished they said that it's too damn deep and stick the Eg West LRT on an elevated structure. I would presume Dougy's daughter complain that would make it too noisy to hear the trains passing by at night.
 
Steve X said:
The mention Gerrard/Carlaw before if built underground. The single story up would make it way easier to transfer from the 506.

I wished they said that it's too damn deep and stick the Eg West LRT on an elevated structure. I would presume Dougy's daughter complain that would make it too noisy to hear the trains passing by at night.
Click to expand...

If I recall, that was based on the exact alignment Metrolinx has now. There were other possibilities, ones it seems they really didn't explore. It's hard to see this as anything more than a token gesture.
 
Steve X said:
The mention Gerrard/Carlaw before if built underground. The single story up would make it way easier to transfer from the 506.

I wished they said that it's too damn deep and stick the Eg West LRT on an elevated structure. I would presume Dougy's daughter complain that would make it too noisy to hear the trains passing by at night.
Click to expand...
Eglinton West is pretty shallow though at about 20m (unfortunately not Bloor-Danforth levels, but its nowhere near the travesties of Scarborough or Vaughan) .
 
Allandale25 said:
Northern segment meeting coming up and slight shift in the route as detailed in the post: https://blog.metrolinx.com/2021/06/...ne-route-invited-to-virtual-open-house-event/

Map here:

View attachment 331557
Click to expand...

Hmm, at first glance, this increases the amount of quality forest that will be impacted.

The old route had a shorter cross-section of forest, and made use of an existing access road, this one does not.

New route can be seen below w/distance line; old route would be just to the right where you see an access road.

1625067711522.png


I'm guessing they couldn't come to an agreement with Hydro One or found it too technically challenging to navigate that route.

(speculation on my part)

That access road follow the hydro pylons visible here in streetview, looking off the Millwood Bridge:

1625067875454.png
 
Northern Light said:
Hmm, at first glance, this increases the amount of quality forest that will be impacted.

The old route had a shorter cross-section of forest, and made use of an existing access road, this one does not.

New route can be seen below w/distance line; old route would be just to the right where you see an access road.

View attachment 331578

I'm guessing they couldn't come to an agreement with Hydro One or found it too technically challenging to navigate that route.

(speculation on my part)

That access road follow the hydro pylons visible here in streetview, looking off the Millwood Bridge:

View attachment 331579
Click to expand...

I assume the OL will need to be a certain distance above those hydro wires in the streetview picture you provided?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top