[sixrings]

Surely the section between Eglinton and Shepard could be mostly above ground.

If Scarborough doesn't like above ground transit which is out of the way of homes in factory areas you think the nimbys will be happy about elevated on Don mills or running subway like frequencies on go lines behind multi-million dollar homes?

 

[Coolstar]

But really if Tory rejects the deal and we get the Relief Line back, that's at the cost of the entire system being uploaded to some guy who has no idea how the TTC works.

 

[sixrings]

But really if Tory rejects the deal and we get the Relief Line back, that's at the cost of the entire system being uploaded to some guy who has no idea how the TTC works.

Why couldn't the liberals win in the next provincial elections and give the ttc right back to the city. That and give us our councilors back.

 

[Rainforest]

They build subway lines all the time in cities like Hong Kong and Shanghai. These places are so densely packed with highrises, yet they still manage to get built. I don't see how tunnelling under condos on the western side of the OL is overly problematic.

Obviously they succeed over there; that means they do realistic planning. Either they go deep enough to stay clear of any foundation, or they choose a route that doesn't conflict with foundations.

There is no doubt subways can be built through Toronto's city core; it's definitely not the most dense on earth. The concerns are related to a particular route choice (diagonal to the street greed + not very deep to enable the crossing over the river).

 

[Rainforest]

But really if Tory rejects the deal and we get the Relief Line back, that's at the cost of the entire system being uploaded to some guy who has no idea how the TTC works.

The upload shouldn't even be a factor when deciding whether to support OL. If the upload doesn't work, the next government will happily return the formal ownership back to the city.

This is the bigger issue: is the OL plan bad enough to reject it and risk a further delay on any form of Relief Line? Or, is the OL plan far from perfect, but still somewhat useful by adding some downtown-bound capacity? I prefer to let the experts answers those questions, rather than decide based on one's political affiliation.

 

[Rainforest]

I don't think that the extra bit between Sheppard and Eglinton would be that arduous to construct. It is a relatively straightforward subway line on an alignment with relatively few annoyances like utilities, when compared to downtown.

I don't expect that section to be particularly difficult to build, but it is still longer than the western section that may be sliced off in exchange. Osgoode to the Exhibition is about 3.5 km (taking into account the jog down Bathurst), while Sheppard to Eglinton is 6 km.

If the extension to Sheppard can, in fact, be squeezed in for the same cost, or a small premium; then great, I am all for that.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

If Scarborough doesn't like above ground transit which is out of the way of homes in factory areas you think the nimbys will be happy about elevated on Don mills or running subway like frequencies on go lines behind multi-million dollar homes?

Don Mills Rd in that area is a bridge, greenery and offices. the bridle path and lawrence park are out of the way.

Good point. There's certainly a benefit to doing it all at once.

I just wonder if it would be a hard sell politically.

If the city can get back control of the TTC, I'd try to get the current Liberals to agree to funding (or at least mostly funding) the entire line.

That would be a huge boon to their election chances in the GTA.

The chances of this happening are slim unfortunately.

I think a full DRL plus full sheppard east should make everyone be quiet for a while.

 

[BurlOak]

I would think the tunnel can go under condos if it is placed deep enough. However, going very deep may not be possible if the line needs to surface before the Don bridge. He probably has a point here.

Except Vaughan says that the concern is in the Bathurst/King Queen area - not in the Don River area.

A meaningful compromise would be retaining the original (deep tunnel under Queen) alignment of DRL through downtown, while accepting elevated over Overlea and Don Mills, and possibly using a new rolling stock type and full automation.

And eliminate the Carlaw jog. I suspect that added a lot of costs by needlessly making the stations deeper to avoid going parallel and under a major sewer.

The eastern terminus would still be at Science Centre. The western part might have to be shortened to offset the longer tunnel, the terminal station being at Osgode or Spadina in Phase 1. That solution would address the majority of concerns related to constructibility, train size, and the capacity limit.

Tunneling is cheap. keep tunneling to a convenient TBM extraction site - and then just don't build the stations or emergency exits.
Unless of course it's shallow cut-and-cover, in which case you could stop almost anywhere.

 

[BurlOak]

You realize that Toronto's been using that same technology for 40 years of subway construction, right?

Dan

Does this include the areas where the public is actually complaining about noise?

 

[TheTigerMaster]

1) Lifting a massive asset off the City's books isn't that easy; you must replace the asset, unless you lower the associated liabilities otherwise you would destabilize the City's finances.

Anyone want to explain why that is? I know nothing about government finances lol

2) The logistical headaches of trying to break-up a seamlessly integrated system are substantial. You might think, well Toronto can just keep the buses/streetcars; but the things is the operators are cross-trained; transfer policies become issues, including the need for tapping in/out off surface vehicles at stations, and service levels of one part of the system are dictated by what the other part is doing.

*flashbacks to Presto*

 

[TheTigerMaster]

So building a metro under 10 years is ridiculous now?! Only in Toronto maybe (and New York).

The RLS was planned to be constructed in 10 years actually. 2019 to 2029, barring any delays of course.

However planning AND building a subway line in under 10 years is a bit of a stretch

 

[TheTigerMaster]

This is the bigger issue: is the OL plan bad enough to reject it and risk a further delay on any form of Relief Line? Or, is the OL plan far from perfect, but still somewhat useful by adding some downtown-bound capacity? I prefer to let the experts answers those questions, rather than decide based on one's political affiliation.

Yes, it's bad enough. It doesn't even properly achieve its core goal of relieving crowding on the Yonge Line. The line will still be near 100% capacity, even after the OL. The only thing getting the Yonge Line back under capacity is the DRL North. Nevermind the OL capacity concerns.

Any "compromise" that leaves Toronto permanently handicapped with an ineffective transit line is not a compromise I'm willing to take.

 

[TransitBart]

Looks like Adam Vaughan will be listing the ten reasons he's against the OL in this twitter thread. He cited ten reasons at a recent Transportation Futures debate.

On his concern about tunneling under condos, I don't really get the concern. It's it possible as long as it's deep enough? Are there even any condos the proposed route would travel under?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1181890586674176000

Adam, leave the engineering to engineers please. Stick to shit-disturbing. You're good at it.

 

[BurlOak]

Yes, it's bad enough. It doesn't even properly achieve its core goal of relieving crowding on the Yonge Line. The line will still be near 100% capacity, even after the OL. The only thing getting the Yonge Line back under capacity is the DRL North. Nevermind the OL capacity concerns.

Any "compromise" that leaves Toronto permanently handicapped with an ineffective transit line is not a compromise I'm willing to take.

Building a transit line - any transit line - either elevated or cut-and-cover is the highest priority in Toronto. For when it's done, it will make all remaining transit lines more affordable.
Let it be known - whichever area agrees to an elevated or cut-and-cover line will be moved to the top of the priority list.

6 or 7 years ago, i put the at-grade extension of B-D from Kipling to Honeydale Mall (427) as the number 1 priority for this reason.

 

[TransitBart]

The problem is that the automobile users or more actually the non-public transit users keep putting up roadblocks for ANY public transit project.

The problem is actually that the elected leaders (politicians) won't lead.There are no citizens of any kind putting up obstacles to public transit. Prove what you have just said. The statement you have made is a rant. Not a fact.