Woodbridge_Heights
Senior Member
The hell it isn't. I'll look up the EA's but I bet that the actual route deviates from keele more than this one.
- Thread starter 299 bloor call control.
- Start date
The hell it isn't. I'll look up the EA's but I bet that the actual route deviates from keele more than this one.
Fresh Start
Banned
Lol, if you consider having a guideway fly over vacant parking lots and over the outer decking of one single building (Schulich School of Business) as infringement, then you sir have no clue what urbanity and making proper conservative use of land space is even about. All of three housing buildings on the southeast corner of Ian McDonald and the Chimneystack would have to be torn down, but nothing else. Examine the area on StreetsView, its a minor loss with huge gain potential (probably close to $1 billion in savings if the majority of the TYSSE could be built above grade). And students wouldn't give a fig either way. Neither would UPS if they can still make use of the parking spaces that would lie underneath the guideway. Better than the massive expropriation of their lands the underground option WILL result in: http://www.york.ca/NR/rdonlyres/fwq...nyi6dd6os2ezqbyhgtdlb6gajb/Apr+16+Spadina.pdf
Last edited:
Fresh Start
Banned
I know some people here like to be spoonfed, so I'll save y'all some trouble and just show you the alignment I chose more zoomed in:
Perfectly straight line, no defects.
Perfectly straight line, no defects.
jwill
Active Member
I really don't think York U wants an elevated subway running over the roof of their business school, plowing through some touwnhouses, and cutting their prime expansion sites into odd shapes. Not to mention the noise and vibration problems.
An important question is whether an elevated section is going to save money in the long run. With maintenance costs for the structure and the exposed rails, and extra wear and tear on the trains and possible delays due to weather is it really worth it? And will adjacent developments be as successful next to a noisy subway line?
And how would an above-ground option affect the "massive expropriation"? Doesn't the TTC still need to expropriate land to build an elevated guideway?
An important question is whether an elevated section is going to save money in the long run. With maintenance costs for the structure and the exposed rails, and extra wear and tear on the trains and possible delays due to weather is it really worth it? And will adjacent developments be as successful next to a noisy subway line?
And how would an above-ground option affect the "massive expropriation"? Doesn't the TTC still need to expropriate land to build an elevated guideway?
Last edited:
EnviroTO
Senior Member
Are you suggesting that York University might think heavy rail passing by the windows of classes and residences might create noise and distraction?
Justin10000
Banned
http://www.vivanext.com/assets/files/enviroAssess/subways/spadina/ExecutiveSummaryPart5.pdf
I just saved you the trouble. For the record Fresh Start have drawn these types of alignments on another board, and was thoroughly criticized for not taking subway design constraints into account.
Your picture shows your line going over 4 buildings, one that was recently built. 4 Builidngs(including a new one) would have to be torn down. It even veers disturbingly close to another building. Before you call anyone "clueless" make sure you cannot be corrected. Tell me this, oh great guru of urbanity, why would the University consent to having student housing torn down for an elevated subway line? I assume you know how elevated metro structures are built. They are huge construction zones. Why would the University want that sort of construction on their land? It's not a minor loss. It's loss of reveniue for the University, since those students will have to be housed elesewhere. You couldn't even prove there will be any savings, since the majority of the line will be underground, and you claimed there will be saving only if the majority of the line is aboveground. I would wager your idea would cost MORE, because your going to have to hire a separate contractor to build the elevated structures and portals. It's highly unlikely York will allow any demoliition of buildings, so the structure would have to rise high over the buildings. I personally love the sounds of trains on elevated structures. I doubt student trying to study would be happy.
You should have read the link before posting it. That reoprt has absolutely nothing to do with York University, it pertains to the subway in York Region. And the reports should have given you an indication why an elevated structure was not reconmended. Not to mention, the reports makes no mention of major land expropriation in Toronto, only York Region(Being a report released by York, afterall).
Elevated structure in York University: Impractical and costly. Just admit it, subway construction is expensive.
hkric88
Active Member
Perhaps I am just a fool; I keep reading this thread because it says 'Spadina Subway Extension UPDATES" yet for some reason all I find are pages of pointless argument about finalized plans.
Sorry for being so foolish.
Sorry for being so foolish.
Fresh Start
Banned
The argument is not pointless at all if it exposes the design flaws being used in constructing this line. It's important to know why TYSSE is costing at $304 million/km through largely low-density sprawl where the air rights above station stop locations are being completely squandered on seas of endless parking lots and other non-productive land uses. If the alignment fringed the campus above-grade, rather than run right through it underground, it would cost significantly less which is all my images sought to reveal. There's no point to having a forum if we aren't allowed to question things, particularly when people with an agenda choose to cite TYSSE as a justification not to expand the subway system any further.
Justin,
The link provided makes reference to UPS. That's what I meant when I said "their lands". The only thing preventing an above-grade option is political will. Engineers have achieved far trickier guideways through constricted land areas. The small tremors that will impact students everytime a train passes underneath will probably have greater effect than ambient noise outdoors that can be further nullified by noise barriers.
Last edited:
Justin10000
Banned
Not talking about UPS here! Talking about York University! Much of the land of Hydro Land anyways. UPS will not give up any land for cheap. It's not a matter of what can be achieved, it is a matter of how much it will cost. Running an elevated section through York could cost just as much as an undergroind section considering the obstacles in te way, and now you propose putting ugly sound barriers on the guideway! Not only is your alignment wrong, you want to make the runningway even uglier, and costlier with noise barriers. Awesome. I doubt students will notice any tremors considering the noise mitigation techniques the TTC utilizes in the tunnels.
Edward
Senior Member
What's so special with the UPS lands? They would be expropriated at market value like any other land needed by the TTC.
Justin10000
Banned
Never knew the TTC(which is run by the City of Toronto) had jurisdiction over York Region.
Woodbridge_Heights
Senior Member
York Region wouldn't/couldn't act on behalf of the TTC/Toronto? They are in fact the ones benefitting from the extension...
For York U. The university owns all the buildings so it is not like they have to expropriate any property from owners, they own it and they could change the usage if they wanted to. The fact that they built a new building (depending on how new, if it was in the last 10 years when the subway was in the plans) in the path of the subway indicates to me that they did so without concern to the impact it would have on subway construction and furthermore what subway construction would have on the building.
Conrad Black
Senior Member
Somebody is buying/expropriating land in York region for three stations so there's no reason they couldn't do the UPS lands as well if necessary.
jwill
Active Member
I've lived above a subway tunnel (on the ground floor) and about a block away from an elevated electric commuter railway (on the fifth floor). There is no comparison, elevated is much more disruptive. I would never want to live or go to school that close to an elevated subway.
The land your proposed elevated line goes over is not "non-productive land uses." Its expansion space necessary for the future growth of the university. With an elevated subway cutting through they will become unusable and likely remain as surface parking lots for the future.
Woodbridge_Heights
Senior Member
Why weren't platform edge doors considered in the original station design? One would imagine that this technology would be built in to all future stations since the TTC wants to implement it on the entire YUS. Did the designers just find out about this requirement?