[salsa]

Study is happening:
http://regionalrelief.ca/city-of-toronto/

Hopefully more info & progress this year.

Question: since the study area is only between downtown and south of Danforth, will the possibility of future DRL extensions north to Eglinton / Don Mills and somewhere further west be factored into the route options, even though that's outside the scope of the study area?

 

[nfitz]

Question: since the study area is only between downtown and south of Danforth, will the possibility of future DRL extensions north to Eglinton / Don Mills and somewhere further west be factored into the route options, even though that's outside the scope of the study area?

The study area is shown in the consultation plan on the website above:

.

 

[jcam]

You're right, you can go under buildings, but it's usually industrial or institutional. For TYSSE, there were warehouses and the Schulich Building at York (but that in itself was a headache because they tried and failed to create a grout matrix under the foundations...turns out they didn't need it anyway, but still).

On a street like Pape, you likely wouldn't want to get a bored tunnel that close to residential properties, particularly when they're old houses (concrete condos would be different). I suppose it exists under Everden Road leading up into Eglinton West station, but that's presumably cut and cover, and therefore in the middle of the street.

Bored tunnels are generally used now over cut and cover because of less traffic and local business impact, less property acquisition, and better tunnel sealing and grouting allows you to go deep under all existing utilities.

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

I think it would be a failure if phase 1 didn't extend at least to Spadina or Bathurst.

Though perhaps that will give further incentive to proceed with phase 2? Hopefully.

 

[dunkalunk]

A thought regarding stating, especially if TBMs are going to be used. I'd think it would make the most sense to continue any tunnel boring operations to where TBMs can be reasonably be extracted. For East York, this would mean continuing the tunnelling north until you reach the Don Valley.

 

[JGHali]

I continue to be mystified why Smarttrack keeps getting mentioned as something more than a line on a map with fairly arbitrary stop spacing and generally fanciful promises about capacity.

We will get GO RER, but assuming favourable TTC fare integration, it's not going to have the frequency or capacity to obviate the need for a DRL in some form.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

It may actually make a DRL more necessary, due to increased crowding at Union.

 

[themarc]

I was going to say that Pape would be too narrow for bored tunneling, but looking at the following, it looks like you could fit an LRT tunnel (the Crosstown tunnel diameter is actually a few feet larger than the Spadina-York extension tunnels).
View attachment 40680.

You would therefore need at minimum a 19.5m ROW to accommodate 2 tunnels. The narrowest section of Eglinton according to the link below of Toronto ROWs is 23m between Laird and Bayview and 27m through the center of the city. Pape is shown as having 20m, same as all the downtown streets King, Queen, Richmond, Wellington, Front.

http://www1.toronto.ca/static_files/CityPlanning/PDF/3_row_dec2010.pdf

If you wanted to put in a tunnel like the Crossrail in London, which uses mainline rail technology, you're tunnel OD is 7.2m instead of 6.5m, requiring a minimum ROW of 22.5m. Downtown you have deep basements going to the property lines too, meaning I'm not sure you could even fit 2 bored tunnels underneath, regardless of diameter.

You also couldn't make the 90 degree turns on Pape within that ROW, or up Roncy.

Instead you may have to bump up to 2 trains in one bored tunnel, not something we've done in Toronto. The Evergreen line under construction in Vancouver has one of these for Skytrain-sized (Scarborough RT) train sets with a tunnel OD of approximately 10m. If you wanted to up to mainline rail size with double deck trains, you're looking at a tunnel at least 12m OD. Larger diameter tunnels have inherent problems because of their size...more earth to remove, less optimized to the vehicles travelling through them, more concrete to deal with higher pressures. That's generally why twin bores are preferred.

Who says they have to be side by side - why not stack them in one tunnel?

 

[TransitPolicyChanger]

Who says they have to be side by side - why not stack them in one tunnel?

Through the core I think you are guaranteed to see a cut and cover or mined tunnel for any transit. TBMs would have to be split on two separate roads (not likely be selected). As seen with TYSSE TBMs do tunnel under buildings - but as jcam noted, the type of buildings are not large multi-story towers. The basements and foundations for the buildings downtown cannot be tunneled under. It is a very complicated task to weave a new line through downtown (likely why the $/km are very high). My plan - which i haven't put into writing like some of detailed work of others here - is to rip up Adelaide or Richmond. Cut and cover around existing tunnels/stations, PATH structures, etc. Queen and King should be avoided for the main reason that cut and cover would kill these streets. Richmond and Adelaide, while getting built up very quickly, may still present some opportunities (with a lot temporary works required).

 

[W. K. Lis]

From this link, here are the deepest stations in the Montréal Metro:

The deepest station in the network is Charlevoix. It has stacked platforms, of which the lower (Honoré-Beaugrand) platform is 29,6 metres (97') below ground level. However, its upper platform is 24,4 metres (80') below ground level; both of Lucien-L'Allier's platforms are deeper than this, at 27,1 metres (as are the yellow line platforms at Berri-UQAM, at 27,4 metres).

The shallowest platforms are Angrignon and Longueuil–Université-de-Sherbrooke, at 4,3 metres. (14.1') (The landscaping at Angrignon is artificially sunken, so that the lawn comes down to platform level.)

Station Depth
64 Angrignon 4,3m 64 Longueuil–U.-de-Sherbrooke 4,3m 60 Jean-Drapeau 4,6m 60 Jolicoeur 4,6m 60 Place-d'Armes 4,6m 60 Viau 4,6m 59 Champ-de-Mars 5,2m 58 Université-de-Montréal 5,4m 57 Vendôme 6,1m 56 Atwater 7,6m 55 Saint-Laurent 9,1m 54 Honoré-Beaugrand 9,4m 53 LaSalle 9,8m 52 Pie-IX 10,1m — Jean-Talon (orange line) 10,4m 51 Sherbrooke 10,4m — Berri-UQAM (orange line) 10,7m 48 Laurier 10,7m 48 McGill 10,7m 48 Peel 10,7m 46 Place-des-Arts 11,6m 46 Rosemont 11,6m 45 De Castelnau 11,7m 42 Cadillac 12,2m 42 Jarry 12,2m	42 Préfontaine 12,2m 41 Beaubien 12,5m — Lionel-Groulx (upper) 12,5m 40 Fabre 13,0m 39 Mont-Royal 13,4m 38 Outremont 13,8m 37 Langelier 14,0m 36 Joliette 14,3m 35 Parc 15,1m 34 D'Iberville 15,6m 33 Saint-Michel 15,8m 32 Sauvé 15,9m 31 Square-Victoria 16,2m 30 Acadie 16,5m 29 Lionel-Groulx (lower) 16,5m 28 Édouard-Montpetit 16,6m — Berri-UQAM (green line) 16,8m 27 Crémazie 16,8m 26 Du Collège 17,1m 25 Radisson 17,4m 24 Côte-des-Neiges 17,6m 20 Côte-Sainte-Catherine 17,7m 20 Côte-Vertu 17,7m 20 Georges-Vanier 17,7m	20 Place-Saint-Henri 17,7m 18 Henri-Bourassa 18,3m 18 Monk 18,3m — Jean-Talon (Snowdon platform) 18,6m 16 Assomption 19,2m 16 Guy-Concordia 19,2m 15 De La Savane 19,4m — Snowdon (upper) 19,5m — De L'Église (H-Beaugrand platform) 19,8m 14 Villa-Maria 19,8m 13 Papineau 21,6m 12 Verdun 21,9m 11 Bonaventure 22,6m 10 Frontenac 23,2m 8 Jean-Talon (Saint-Michel platform) 23,8m 8 Plamondon 23,8m 7 Namur 24,1m — Charlevoix (Angrignon platform) 24,4m 6 Snowdon (lower) 24,6m 5 De L'Église (Angrignon platform) 25,6m 4 Beaudry 25,9m 3 Lucien-L'Allier 27,1m 2 Berri-UQAM (yellow line) 27,4m 1 Charlevoix (Honoré-Beaugrand platform) 29,6m
Source: Benoît Clairoux, Le métro de Montréal: 35 ans déjà.Montreal: Hurtubise HMH, 2001

The deepest point in the network is on the yellow line, which reaches depths of 38 metres.

 

[gentlepuppies]

I'm trying to buy a pre-construction condo or loft somewhere close to the vicinity of the future DRL. I'm hoping that I'll luck out with the timing, and reap the benefits not long after move-in day lolol. I've always assumed it will be along Queen, but some of the diagrams here are showing the alignment further south to intersect w/ union??

 

[TheTigerMaster]

We can more or less guarantee you that it won't be on Queen. King is your best bet.

 

[nfitz]

I'm trying to buy a pre-construction condo or loft somewhere close to the vicinity of the future DRL. I'm hoping that I'll luck out with the timing, and reap the benefits not long after move-in day lolol. I've always assumed it will be along Queen, but some of the diagrams here are showing the alignment further south to intersect w/ union??

Too soon. Who knows where it will go.

Do any condos work on that kind of timeframe? There's little chance a DRL will be opening much more 2030.

 

[gentlepuppies]

I'll be 40 and looking for a house by 2030 lol =(

Why isn't this a higher priority? This should have happened before the spadina extension. Don't they know that 905 transit dollars only make people drive to park-and-rides instead of getting them out of their cars?

A condo takes just under 3 years to build, a subway line takes between 3-4 years. I was hoping that the alignment and station locations will be finalized just as I decide to purchase.

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

You are better off investing in a condo along the Eglinton line.

If my parents had the money, I would tell them to buy a second condo in our building due to the proximity to a future Crosstown stop.