salsa said:
Scarborough-style transit talk has officially taken hold in Leslieville. From Ben Spurr on Twitter:

Cllr Fletcher moves a motion asking the province to require full transit project assessment for the Ontario Line, make public preliminary reports on Ontario Line, and consider putting the line entirely underground. Fletcher says Metrolinx is "picking up the (Scarborough) RT and moving it to Leslieville." Raised rail isn't working in Scarborough, she says, why is province taking that approach in her part of town. "Don't bury the neighbourhood, bury the Ontario Line," Fletcher says.
Click to expand...
salsa said:
And the motion has carried 23-1 (councillor Pasternak opposed).
Click to expand...

The motivations for this motion are absurd. However, at the very least this might slow down the Ontario Line to the point where the next government can develop a more robust proposal.
 
TheTigerMaster said:
The motivations for this motion are absurd. However, at the very least this might slow down the Ontario Line to the point where the next government can develop a more robust proposal.
Click to expand...
As if premier Del Duca is someone we can trust to do anything right. Regardless, slowing down progress on this line is in the best interests of no one.
 
This is going to play down exactly as the Davenport Diamond, except with even fewer concessions (read: none). Metrolinx has no responsibility or requirement to listen to the city and this is the very reason that transit "takes forever" in this city and languishes forever. The good gets put aside in search of the perfect, and in the mean time nothing ever happens. At a certain point you have to accept the scheme as it is and move forward.
 
Kitsune said:
They should bury it and follow the original route for the RL - down Pape. The previous issue of the ROW being too narrow is easily solved by doing stacked tunnels along that stretch which removes the need to go under the Carlaw interceptor.
Click to expand...
It may not be quite as simple as just stacking the tunnels. Looking at a map of the depth of bedrock, you can see that this section is where the line would transition from shale bedrock to soil. Given the likely gradual incline of the tunnels, this would lead to a relatively long transition zone here if the tunnels are stacked and follow the surface profile. A binocular tunnel arrangement would greatly reduce the length of the transition zone in one area, but would increase the width of the affected area. There would be a trade off between a wider transition zone or a longer transition zone. Additionally, tunnel staging would be a big concern as you would not want the upper tunnel to settle while mining the lower tunnel.

For a bit of background, transition zones between soil and rock are typically where the most volume loss occurs while tunneling using TBMs. Volume loss leads to surface movement, which leads to building/utility damage. In soil sections of a subway line you might expect there to be much more surface movement than in rock, and during the transition zone the TBM will be mining both soil and rock at the same time. As the TBM mines the soil or rock from above can 'fall' down into the cutter head, where it is mined and that volume is 'lost'. This does occur along the entire tunnel, but given rock mines more slowly than soil, areas where the TBM is held back by rock can lead to more soil falling from above, or skipping/bumping along the rock surface further mining excess soil from above.

Different alignments may shift the location of the transition zone to a less critical location, but you risk either building excessively deep (increasing costs of stations/exit buildings/mine sections) or building too shallow (causing excessive surface settlement). Given the proximity to a highly trafficked rail corridor you'd want to avoid any excessive settlements. This is not to say that it is not possible, but there are constraints that need to be considered before saying a ROW problem can be 'easily' solved. If it were that easy, it likely would have been done in the first place.
 
innsertnamehere said:
This is going to play down exactly as the Davenport Diamond, except with even fewer concessions (read: none). Metrolinx has no responsibility or requirement to listen to the city
Click to expand...

Isn't Metrolinx depending on the City of Toronto and the Government of Canada to provide funding for the project?
 
salsa said:
As if premier Del Duca is someone we can trust to do anything right. Regardless, slowing down progress on this line is in the best interests of no one.
Click to expand...

I'd much rather wait a year or two if we're going to get a project that can be more effective in the long term. A rush to do things haphazardly would just cost us billions more in the not too distant future. I'm really not interested in us planning Relief Line 2 in 2030.

That said, yea, Del Duca is not a man to be trusted. His stint as Transport Minister makes that evident
 
TheTigerMaster said:
Isn't Metrolinx depending on the City of Toronto and the Government of Canada to provide funding for the project?
Click to expand...
Nope, not a cent. That's the entire point of the whole "agreement" they made with the city - the province will fund expansion, and the municipality needs to fund maintenance. thus the city building tax Tory passed to hold up the maitenence part for the municipality.

The province has 100% reigns on it. They will apply for federal funding, but the feds just dole out the money and don't get into exact project details.
 
innsertnamehere said:
Nope, not a cent. That's the entire point of the whole "agreement" they made with the city - the province will fund expansion, and the municipality needs to fund maintenance. thus the city building tax Tory passed to hold up the maitenence part for the municipality.

The province has 100% reigns on it. They will apply for federal funding, but the feds just dole out the money and don't get into exact project details.
Click to expand...

I'm not certain that what you've said is correct. See the below except from this CBC article.
If approved, the move would re-allocate nearly $3.8 billion in federal infrastructure funding the city has already acquired to build transit.

City documents show $660 million will go toward building a three-stop subway extension of Line 2 to Scarborough — the Ford government's preferred vision for the project.

The city will also provide $3.16 billion worth of federal dollars for the Ontario Line.
Click to expand...

The way I interpret this, the City will need to provide the federal government with permission to release the $3.16 Billion in funding. I'm not certain if Council has yet authorized the City Manager to direct the Federal Government to release those funds, as this agreement is merely a "preliminary agreement".

The language in the Toronto-Ontario Transit Update indicates that the Preliminary Agreement is merely a starting point for a future Master Agreement, which would be subject to Council approval.
Subject to Council approval, staff will negotiate, enter into, and execute an agreement (the "Preliminary Agreement") with the Province on the basis of these terms, transitioning them into a formal arrangement between the parties. This Preliminary Agreement will form the starting foundation of a more fulsome Master Agreement or series of agreements, which will be negotiated between the parties as the projects advance through their respective lifecycles. These agreements will be subject to future Council approval.
Click to expand...

The letter further elaborates
Subject to Council authorization, this package of terms will be formalized as part of a Preliminary Agreement between the parties. This report seeks authority for the City Manager and any other relevant City official, in consultation with the CEO TTC, to negotiate, enter into, and execute an agreement (the "Preliminary Agreement") on the basis of the identified terms, as presented in the Term Sheet in Attachment 6 and reflecting the two letters received by the City from the Minister of Transportation and the Special Advisor to Cabinet in Attachments 7 and 8.

Following the establishment of the Preliminary Agreement, the City and TTC will continue discussions with the Province to negotiate a Master Agreement or series of agreements that will fully define the role of the City and TTC in the Provincial Priority Projects. It may be necessary to develop and negotiate project-specific agreements given the differing nature of the projects themselves.

The Master Agreement(s) will be negotiated on the basis of the Preliminary Agreement, providing additional details to the terms, as well as addressing additional topics typically contained in a Master Agreement or other applicable agreements related to implementation and future system operations such as City process and approvals, cost- sharing on infrastructure, capital coordination, governance and dispute resolution, and other considerations and protocols related to real estate, traffic management, staffing, operating and lifecycle maintenance accountabilities, and public communications and engagement. This report seeks authority for the City Manager, in consultation with the CEO TTC, to negotiate the Master Agreement(s) which will be subject to future Council approvals.

City and TTC staff will also continue to work with the Province for the purposes of advancing the design of the four priority projects, providing technical input and influencing design considerations to ensure City planning and neighbourhood concerns are addressed as the projects develop further. This involvement is reflective of the Provincial commitment to work collaboratively with the City and TTC on its priority projects.
Click to expand...

Again, I might be misinterpreting what's been written here, but the language here doesn't indicate to me that anything in the Preliminary Agreement is legally binding. It appears to me that the Preliminary Agreement is just setting out the intention for City Council to support the project, on the basis of the Preliminary Agreement, once the Master Agreement is signed. Or in other words, they've given QP the green light to get the ball rolling on the Ontario Line, while the details are being finalized. This might explain why Council unanimously approved the Preliminary Agreement, despite Councillors and Staff raising substantial objections about the project during the Council debate

Elsewhere, it is mentioned that the Master Agreement is expected to be finalized by the end of March, which aligns with the expected commencement of the RFP/RFQ.
 
Last edited:
CityNews version of the Ontario Line map from this clip:

toronto.citynews.ca

Metrolinx seeks feedback for proposed Ontario Line

Metrolinx hosted its fourth in a series of open houses for residents to learn more about the proposed Ontario Line. As Ginella Massa reports, while most agree it is overdue riders say they also want to make sure its done right.
toronto.citynews.ca toronto.citynews.ca

1580426261682.png
 
MisterF said:
Okay it has to be said: this is complete BS. The opposition to the Davenport Diamond overpass was just as strong and it was proposed under a Liberal government in a Liberal part of town. The opposition isn't about partisan politics, it's about a new line that for no reason replaced a line that had widespread buy in from the neighbourhood and could have been under construction by now. This is entirely the premier's fault, and that would be just as true if a Liberal premier did the same.

All over the world new transit lines tend to be put underground in areas that are densely populated and have less room, while being above ground in more outlying areas with more room (like Scarborough). That has nothing to do with politics. Not everything has to be viewed through a partisan lens.
Click to expand...

Exactly, thank you. Everyone is opposed to elevated when it's near them. Hell, people are opposed to everything everywhere which is what happens at any meeting about anything. And this is a pretty tall order all things considered. Not as much as Davenport Diamond since that's an EL using diesel, but close. That some are trying to spin this as a partisan issue - when it's a logical reaction that would happen anywhere - is kinda dumb. Also bringing up ethnicity is pretty low as well and I don't think that belongs here.
 
Allandale25 said:
CityNews version of the Ontario Line map from this clip:

toronto.citynews.ca

Metrolinx seeks feedback for proposed Ontario Line

Metrolinx hosted its fourth in a series of open houses for residents to learn more about the proposed Ontario Line. As Ginella Massa reports, while most agree it is overdue riders say they also want to make sure its done right.
toronto.citynews.ca toronto.citynews.ca

View attachment 228299
Click to expand...
This has to be a pontification from the graphics department as we haven't received any documents revealing much of anything. Just a vague "it's elevated through Leslieville and again in Thorncliffe and Flemingdon Park". Has it ever been confirmed that they are looking at elevated through the Exhibition grounds?

Anyway, looking at the map just makes me think that stopping this thing at Eglinton is still too conservative, we should throw in the extra billion and a half or so to bring it all the way to Sheppard. Elevated or trenched through the wide Don Mills ROW if necessary.
 
TheTigerMaster said:
Isn't Metrolinx depending on the City of Toronto and the Government of Canada to provide funding for the project?
Click to expand...
Ottawa yes, Toronto no. The deal with the city involved the city paying nothing for this line. Now I could see a situation where the province says the city has to pay money to bury the parts of it the city wants buried, but that would require raising taxes so the city will never agree.
 
WislaHD said:
This has to be a pontification from the graphics department as we haven't received any documents revealing much of anything. Just a vague "it's elevated through Leslieville and again in Thorncliffe and Flemingdon Park". Has it ever been confirmed that they are looking at elevated through the Exhibition grounds?

Anyway, looking at the map just makes me think that stopping this thing at Eglinton is still too conservative, we should throw in the extra billion and a half or so to bring it all the way to Sheppard. Elevated or trenched through the wide Don Mills ROW if necessary.
Click to expand...
A wide ROW? Seems like the perfect place to inexplicably bury the whole thing!
 
WislaHD said:
This has to be a pontification from the graphics department as we haven't received any documents revealing much of anything. Just a vague "it's elevated through Leslieville and again in Thorncliffe and Flemingdon Park". Has it ever been confirmed that they are looking at elevated through the Exhibition grounds?

Anyway, looking at the map just makes me think that stopping this thing at Eglinton is still too conservative, we should throw in the extra billion and a half or so to bring it all the way to Sheppard. Elevated or trenched through the wide Don Mills ROW if necessary.
Click to expand...

The 43 second mark shows a board with the elevated / ground and tunneled sections that citytv then made there own document based off. You can also see the display boards here -> http://metrolinxengage.com/sites/de...ds-master-small_file_size-60611173-aoda_0.pdf
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top