Ritachi said:
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".
Click to expand...

Edge to edge, I measured the distance closer to 575m, which is not far off of the 650m average distance between station stops on Line 2 between Keele and Sherbourne.

The southern station would do a better job of actually serving Flemingdon Park residents than the Crosstown station. I've put a rough box around the residents and businesses that would be a shorter walk:

1602212422566.png


Ideally there would be a pedestrian bridge over Don Mills south of St Dennis. Frankly, that intersection is borderline dangerous to cross as a pedestrian during rush hours.... too many motorists doing 80++km/h in a signed 60 zone, running reds, turning without looking, and so on.
 
H4F33Z said:
Keele Keelesdale
Dufferin Fairbank
Eglinton West Cedervale
Bathurst Forest Hill
Bayview Leaside
Leslie Sunnybrook Park
Don Mills Science Centre
Ferrand Aga Khan Park and Museum
Bermondsey Sloane
Victoria Park O'Connor
Lebovic Hakimi-Lebovic
Warden Golden Mile

Actually 57 percent of the station names were changed.
Click to expand...
Well I give respect where respect is due, you proved me wrong on the percentage of name changes. And you remember why the station names were changed right?

If you do, then you would know what the concerns are with the station naming conventions as they currently stand.
 
officedweller said:
Yeah, that does look like a problem.
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.
Click to expand...
Cheapest is probably prismatic beams with constant spans of maybe 35m. Probably concrete I-griders would be cheapest as well (look at ECLRT @ Black Creek or UPE @ YYZ.
  • If the valley is deep enough, possibly increasing spans to 45m might be worthwhile, but since there are several kilometers of elevated at normal height, it is likely cheaper to use 35m spans and build a few extra tall piers at Don Valley, rather than having to worry about changing the depth of the superstructure in the one portion.
Look at Canada line - when possible they use constant depth superstructure.
If you are crossing a major river of 150m+ navigation channel and of considerable water depth, then you need an alternate form, and above about 130 to 150m main span, the extradosed starts to take over from the haunched pre-stressed box girders.

1602212362939.png
1602213247651.png
1602212486983.png
 
Amare said:
Well I give respect where respect is due, you proved me wrong on the percentage of name changes. And you remember why the station names were changed right?

If you do, then you would know what the concerns are with the station naming conventions as they currently stand.
Click to expand...
We really need a better way of naming stations. We're trying to name them like a city that's full of tons of tiny distinct neighbourhoods like London, while being... not that. I kind of wish we just listed the street and the neighbourhood in the station names, like how Bay has Yorkville listed underneath on the station walls, because there's not likely to be two stations on the same street in the same neighbourhood. But maybe there's a better solution out there, because Metrolinx's convention is a mess (like, who thought having Eglinton Station on the Eglinton Line was a good idea?)
 
kotsy said:
toronto.ctvnews.ca

Toronto homeowner ready to 'fight tooth and nail' against expropriation for Ontario Line

Metrolinx is reassuring dozens of Toronto homeowners after letters were sent out raising fears about expropriation to make way for the Ontario Line— a subway project proposed to run between Ontario Place and the Ontario Science Centre.
toronto.ctvnews.ca
Click to expand...
Karen Urban is with Pape Area Concerned Citizens for Transit, a local advocacy group, which supports the need for more transit.
Urban however said she’s hearing from homeowners who are not satisfied with the way they learned about the project coming to the neighbourhood.
“Show us the options prior to pre-determining a route. And that is what we are talking about,” said Urban.
Click to expand...

Someone probably needs to tell Karen that they did exactly that in early 2018.... but I'm guessing she wasn't paying attention yet as she didn't create her transit advocacy group until after the Ontario Line was announced in 2019.

I'm also going to guess that the real estate agent who facilitated selling that property to the couple in October 2019 neglected to tell them that their house was right along the line of the already-published Ontario Line route. I'd even go so far as to bet that the people who sold the property, sold because they knew what was coming. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 
This part of the UrbanToronto piece really struck me:
The line proceeds northward above Don Mills to its final stop at the future Science Centre Station on the Eglinton Crosstown light rail transit line, now under construction. Metrolinx has altered its plans here, too, building the new Ontario Line station above the Crosstown station on the northeast corner of the Don Mills / Eglinton intersection, instead of the southwest.

This may end up being a complex transfer point for passengers, since the Crosstown station is underground and the Ontario Line stop is above-ground. One of the ironies of having Toronto transit planning constantly in flux is the fact that Science Centre Crosstown Station was built underground so passengers could easily connect with the future Relief-Line subway. Now that the Ontario Government has scrapped the underground Relief Line concept and replaced it with an elevated Ontario Line station here, the opportunity for easier transfers seems lost.
Click to expand...
Maybe I'm missing something but this plan (the Ontario Line in general) seems pretty ill-considered compared to the Relief Line. I also wonder if the smaller, shorter trains are going to result in a Canada Line-type scenario where the Ontario Line will be running over capacity soon after opening. And all the added turns in the new alignment don't seem desirable from a speed/operational perspective.
 
Last edited:
OL will have a capacity slightly less than Line 1 today, but more than line 2 (30k pph?). Projections have opening day ridership at 380k (for reference, Line 2 has about 550k, and Line 1 has about 800k). Of course, this line is quite a bit shorter than the other two, so ridership density will be fairly high, but still well within capacity.
 
kotsy said:
toronto.ctvnews.ca

Toronto homeowner ready to 'fight tooth and nail' against expropriation for Ontario Line

Metrolinx is reassuring dozens of Toronto homeowners after letters were sent out raising fears about expropriation to make way for the Ontario Line— a subway project proposed to run between Ontario Place and the Ontario Science Centre.
toronto.ctvnews.ca
Click to expand...

Interesting that the folks featured in the article at 158 Hopedale Ave are upset (the street number is visible in the image on the article) when it doesn't look like the OL and the portal will actually touch their property.

1602252269629.png

That said, I'm certainly not a construction expert/civil engineer so maybe a lot of land near the portal will be needed. Are the lines/portal on the Metrolinx map showing the OL route even to scale? cc @crs1026 @smallspy

Maybe this is why Metrolinx said in the letter that the property "may" be needed. So I'm a little surprised the neighbours at 156 Hopedale and 15 and 17 Minton Place weren't profiled. Although maybe they didn't move in so recently. I had to visualize this so my annotated maps below.

1602252144581.png


1602252227028.png
 
slapped_chicken said:
OL will have a capacity slightly less than Line 1 today, but more than line 2 (30k pph?). Projections have opening day ridership at 380k (for reference, Line 2 has about 550k, and Line 1 has about 800k). Of course, this line is quite a bit shorter than the other two, so ridership density will be fairly high, but still well within capacity.
Click to expand...

I am confused as to why line 2 would have less capacity than line 1 if they can run the same equipment.
 
Allandale25 said:
Interesting that the folks featured in the article at 158 Hopedale Ave are upset (the street number is visible in the image on the article) when it doesn't look like the OL and the portal will actually touch their property.

View attachment 275237
That said, I'm certainly not a construction expert/civil engineer so maybe a lot of land near the portal will be needed. Are the lines/portal on the Metrolinx map showing the OL route even to scale? cc @crs1026 @smallspy

Maybe this is why Metrolinx said in the letter that the property "may" be needed. So I'm a little surprised the neighbours at 156 Hopedale and 15 and 17 Minton Place weren't profiled. Although maybe they didn't move in so recently. I had to visualize this so my annotated maps below.

View attachment 275235

View attachment 275236
Click to expand...

The drawings that Metrolinx has released aren't engineering drawings, so they can't really be viewed with having too much accuracy.

That said, anyone who has been paying any attention to the developments of the line - which admittedly, isn't many beyond places like here or the transit community - would have seen this coming from a mile away. As warrens pointed out, it's not completely out of the realm of possibility that the previous owner of 158 Hopedale saw the early plans and said "peace!" to the prospect of having to live with several years of construction very close to his-or-her property - or worse.

I'm not entirely surprised really that no one has yet gone to interview the owners of the properties on the west side of Pape at Cosburn. According to those early maps, and assuming, again, any accuracy, there may be as many as 20 businesses that will be forced to close or move. Do they know what they might be in for?

Dan
 
micheal_can said:
I am confused as to why line 2 would have less capacity than line 1 if they can run the same equipment.
Click to expand...
Line 2 still uses block based signalling rather than the ATC that is currently under construction on Line 1 (it is already turned on between Queen and VMC). ATC means that trains can travel far closer to each other, thus operate at much higher frequency.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top