superelevation said:
Ah yes, Metrolinx bulldozing a park in a neighborhood already screaming about a new electric transit service seems sensible . . .
Click to expand...

I was referring to the layout in the most general sense.

It really points to the poor planning behind this project. The most sensible approach is not possible due to space constraints and their commitment to the community (which as @Steve Munro pointed out, is dubious at best).
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
Overrun track in their parking lot?

AoD
Click to expand...

Also, the long-planned south connector across Liberty Village. I could see a southern route direct to Dufferin Street and over to Lake Shore Blvd/Gardiner via the Exhibition grounds needed for keeping the many, many construction trucks out of Liberty Village side streets, which are overcrowded as they are, especially on the east end.
 
asher__jo said:
It's unclear why 153 Dufferin property is required.
Click to expand...
Maybe the vacant rear of the property (fronting Mowat) is required as a temporary construction staging area.
If you look at the construction staging areas for Vancouver's Broadway Subway, at this link, they are quite large (pink areas):

Stations – Broadway Subway Project

www.broadwaysubway.ca www.broadwaysubway.ca
GQPGHJw.png
 
generalcanada said:
so dumb question here but why couldnt they use the millwood bridge and viaduct like they did with the bloor street/prince edward viaduct?

Does it not support trains running below it?
Click to expand...
This was considered during the Transit City studies for the Don Mills LRT. There are problems. First, the bridge does not have a lower deck like the Viaduct. Here is a view of the structure from the DVP:

https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.6978...157.45387&pitch=0&thumbfov=100!7i16384!8i8192

The understructure is the truss that holds up the deck, but it does not have voids in it for a lower subway deck. You can also see the added structure holding up the outer lanes of the bridge. When it was built they were not there, but there was extra strength in the bridge to carry a never-built streetcar line to the Leaside industrial district. The only track ever built for that extension was a short piece of double track on Pape north of the old pre-subway streetcar loop. (A sister bridge to this one is on Bathurst over the Nordheimer Ravine. It was intended to carry streetcars into Forest Hill, but that never happened. As with the Leaside Bridge, the extra strength allowed the bridge to be widened from four to six lanes.)

A further problem is that the curves to follow Pape Ave, then turn north across the bridge, then east into Overlea were considered to be too tight. The new OL trains might not have quite the same constraint, but there is still no room nor spare structural strength in the bridge itself. The only way to get a new RT line of any flavour to Thorncliffe is to cross the valley on a new bridge. A tunnel under the river is out of the question as this would make for very deep tunnels and stations at Pape/Cosburn and at Thorncliffe Park.
 
On the topic of reusing old bridges, the Old Eastern Avenue bridge could be used for the OL in some regard. There'd be little practical reason and it would likely cost more. But as heritage preservation, say forming the centre span for one of the Don crossings possibly. Could look cool.
 
44 North said:
On the topic of reusing old bridges, the Old Eastern Avenue bridge could be used for the OL in some regard. There'd be little practical reason and it would likely cost more. But as heritage preservation, say forming the centre span for one of the Don crossings possibly. Could look cool.
Click to expand...
I think that bridge is designated as a pedestrian connection from East Harbour to Corktown Common.
 
evandyk said:
I think that bridge is designated as a pedestrian connection from East Harbour to Corktown Common.
Click to expand...
There's the non-trivial issue of that bridge terminating at grade with the southbound DVP lanes. I would like to see some interesting repurposing of that bridge though, even if it isn't practical as a crossing point.
 
ear2ear said:
There's the non-trivial issue of that bridge terminating at grade with the southbound DVP lanes. I would like to see some interesting repurposing of that bridge though, even if it isn't practical as a crossing point.
Click to expand...
Knowing the city, they'll probably put a crosswalk across the DVP and let the pedestrians play frogger.

There was a Star article a week or two ago where it said they planned to use an existing bridge to connect East Harbour to Corktown, so I can only imagine this was the bridge they were referring to. I have no real info on that, though
 

Attachments

  • 1623768219194.png
    1623768219194.png
    1,001.7 KB · Views: 207
  • 1623768286397.png
    1623768286397.png
    1,005.8 KB · Views: 191
  • 1623768597315.png
    1623768597315.png
    1.6 MB · Views: 205
Coolstar said:
Renderings from the website.

Atlantic Ave Site.

View attachment 328160

View attachment 328161

Dufferin St Site

View attachment 328162

View attachment 328163

Jefferson Ave Site

View attachment 328164

Queen-Spadina

View attachment 328165

View attachment 328166

View attachment 328167

King-Bathurst


View attachment 328168


View attachment 328169


View attachment 328170
Click to expand...
Guess where new noise complaints about the Major League Soccer, Toronto Indy, CNE, air show, etc., will come from?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top