Danforth Line 2 Scarborough Subway Extension

[OneCity]

Scarborough Subway Extension - geotechnical and general survey work
January 10, 2017 to December 2017
This week crews will continue preparatory geotechnical drilling and general survey activities, in various locations, for the future Scarborough subway extension of Line 2.

Here

So they're doing work to further the design of the SSE, but they haven't revealed their chosen alignment yet?

To my knowledge all of the previous sampling and surveying has been done in the McCowan corridor. I dont want to speculate until the new 3rd party report comes out. But given the main purpose of the line is to connect SCC to the BDL I just don't see how this route could be the most cost effective.

The latest report has either:

1.wasted a great amount of time and money with zero change in scope
or
2.has been working to build a great case why not use the McCowan corridor

If they are going to build a stop at Eglinton and Danforth I could see the case for this being a reasonable choice. But a Lawrence stop anywhere should be of higher importance and whether or not they do build one (and hopefully we see a stop). There has to be a more cost effective option than tunneling on the McCowan corridor direct to SCC.

I agree with the question... Really, how far away is this report if they are clearly still gathering data on the original route?

 

[TheTigerMaster]

To my knowledge all of the previous sampling and surveying has been done in the McCowan corridor. I dont want to speculate until the new 3rd party report comes out. But given the main purpose of the line is to connect SCC to the BDL I just don't see how this route could be the most cost effective.

The latest report has either:

1.wasted a great amount of time and money with zero change in scope
or
2.has been working to build a great case why not use the McCowan corridor

If they are going to build a stop at Eglinton and Danforth I could see the case for this being a reasonable choice. But a Lawrence stop anywhere should be of higher importance and whether or not they do build one (and hopefully we see a stop). There has to be a more cost effective option than tunneling on the McCowan corridor direct to SCC.

I agree with the question... Really, how far away is this report if they are clearly still gathering data on the original route?

Note that this geotechnical work isn't scheduled to end until December. It suggests that a McCowan is the selected route.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

SRT or Brimley. McCowan is too expensive and time consuming.

 

[OneCity]

SRT or Brimley. McCowan is too expensive and time consuming.

Im assuming the 3rd party consultant has done very little investigation work here if McCowan is moving forward. But again that's just speculation until we see the report. As someone who heavily support the SSE, I would have expected it to be completed in the most cost effective manner, given the fact it was revised to a 1 stop "express". McCowan without stops does not fit in with that criteria. They better add a couple stops if this is the chosen corridor.

We'll see.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

Im assuming the 3rd party consultant has done very little investigation work here if McCowan is moving forward. But again that's just speculation until we see the report. As someone who heavily support the SSE, I would have expected it to be completed in the most cost effective manner, given the fact it was revised to a 1 stop "express". McCowan without stops does not fit in with that criteria. They better add a couple stops if this is the chosen corridor.

We'll see.

Hopefully it does not get too expensive, or that might cancel it. We should not pay 4 billion for a one stop subway.

 

[OneCity]

Hopefully it does not get too expensive, or that might cancel it. We should not pay 4 billion for a one stop subway.

Well that result would make for a disturbing election amongst other dominos which would affect the entire City and not the way even the most hardened opposition would prefer. That said there is no real reason an "express" subway couldn't be elevated for the majority of its route (just like LRT). No reason besides lack of Political will to shut down the RT . And if we are building on the McCowan corridor there is no reason... well there really is no reason unless we are adding stops

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

Well that result would make for a disturbing election amongst other dominos which would affect the entire City and not the way even the most hardened opposition would prefer. That said there is no real reason an "express" subway couldn't be elevated for the majority of its route (just like LRT). No reason besides lack of Political will to shut down the RT . And if we are building on the McCowan corridor there is no reason... well there really is no reason unless we are adding stops

I don't think it would, remember sheppard was canceled before. This should be elevated or there will be problems on both sides. No reason not to use the RT corridor.

 

[BurlOak]

SRT or Brimley. McCowan is too expensive and time consuming.

• Eglinton to Midland north to Gatineau Hydro corridor. 1.8km of cut-and-cover tunnel. No stations.
• Gatineau Hydro corridor to McCowan. 1.8 km of at-grade, trench under Lawrence & Brimley & elevated over Highland Creek. 2 stations, 1 at Lawrence (at Brimley) in trench and 1 in Gatineau corridor (east of McCowan) elevated (back entrance to hospital).
• McCowan to STC (actually at, or immediately east of McCowan - at Town Centre Court). 1.8km of cut-and-cover tunnel. Terminal station at/near STC.
• OR
• McCowan to Sheppard (to CPR yard). 4.5km elevated. 2 Stations, 1 at STC (actually at McCowan / Town Centre Court), 1 at Sheppard / McCowan. (I don't recall who suggested a yard at CPR, but it seems to be a good one).

 

[OneCity]

I don't think it would, remember sheppard was canceled before. This should be elevated or there will be problems on both sides. No reason not to use the RT corridor.

100% agree there is no reason for the RT corridor not be used over a one stop McCowan.

But this extension has massive election implications Municipally and also on the Provincial level. Sheppard was also easily torn up because the decision was supported by the majority of residents west of McCowan few of whom were impressed to have an extra inconvenient transfer to their commute.

This is pure Political suicide for Tory if he cant move this forward. I have an extremely hard time seeing it cancelled. The last thing we need is to re-open this debate.

 

[BurlOak]

Costs?

$250M/km for cut-and-cover and trench and elevated.
$100M for Lawrence & Sheppard stations and STC elevated station ($250M for underground station.

To STC
1.8 km x $250M + 1.8 km x $250M + 1.8km x $250M + $100M (Lawrence) + $250M (McCowan) = $1.8B.

To Sheppard
1.8 km x $250M + 1.8 km x $250M + 4.5km x $250M + $100M (Lawrence) + $250M (McCowan) = $2.4B.

The way to do this is to give a reasonable budget (say $2B), then say we need a grade-separated plan to achieve it. Then ask, for 20% more, can we get value for that extra spending. Instead Toronto seems to find the most expensive solution first and then just asks for the budget to be increased by 50% to 100%.

 

[micheal_can]

• Eglinton to Midland north to Gatineau Hydro corridor. 1.8km of cut-and-cover tunnel. No stations.
• Gatineau Hydro corridor to McCowan. 1.8 km of at-grade, trench under Lawrence & Brimley & elevated over Highland Creek. 2 stations, 1 at Lawrence (at Brimley) in trench and 1 in Gatineau corridor (east of McCowan) elevated (back entrance to hospital).
• McCowan to STC (actually at, or immediately east of McCowan - at Town Centre Court). 1.8km of cut-and-cover tunnel. Terminal station at/near STC.
• OR
• McCowan to Sheppard (to CPR yard). 4.5km elevated. 2 Stations, 1 at STC (actually at McCowan / Town Centre Court), 1 at Sheppard / McCowan. (I don't recall who suggested a yard at CPR, but it seems to be a good one).

View attachment 95999

This is not that bad of an idea.

 

[44 North]

• Eglinton to Midland north to Gatineau Hydro corridor. 1.8km of cut-and-cover tunnel. No stations.
• Gatineau Hydro corridor to McCowan. 1.8 km of at-grade, trench under Lawrence & Brimley & elevated over Highland Creek. 2 stations, 1 at Lawrence (at Brimley) in trench and 1 in Gatineau corridor (east of McCowan) elevated (back entrance to hospital).
• McCowan to STC (actually at, or immediately east of McCowan - at Town Centre Court). 1.8km of cut-and-cover tunnel. Terminal station at/near STC.
• OR
• McCowan to Sheppard (to CPR yard). 4.5km elevated. 2 Stations, 1 at STC (actually at McCowan / Town Centre Court), 1 at Sheppard / McCowan. (I don't recall who suggested a yard at CPR, but it seems to be a good one).

Yeah this seems pretty decent, and good use of the hydro corridor. I think the McCowan/Gatineau station would be redundant if you get one at Brimley/Lawrence, and I doubt cut/cover would be all that feasible on either Midland or McCowan. But I'd get behind this for the cost-savings and added inline station.

 

[BurlOak]

My guess is that things are connected. If you want TBM along Midland, then half the Gatineau corridor would be tunneled as well.
Also, if you go elevated over Highland Creek, it would likely not be possible to do TBM under McCowan because you can't achieve the depth. Thus, your back to tunneling under Highland Creek and the cost of the station just tripled.

Maybe the 2 stations are overkill, but I am not sure how feasible it is for the Lawrence buses to access a station at the back of the hospital.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

• Eglinton to Midland north to Gatineau Hydro corridor. 1.8km of cut-and-cover tunnel. No stations.
• Gatineau Hydro corridor to McCowan. 1.8 km of at-grade, trench under Lawrence & Brimley & elevated over Highland Creek. 2 stations, 1 at Lawrence (at Brimley) in trench and 1 in Gatineau corridor (east of McCowan) elevated (back entrance to hospital).
• McCowan to STC (actually at, or immediately east of McCowan - at Town Centre Court). 1.8km of cut-and-cover tunnel. Terminal station at/near STC.
• OR
• McCowan to Sheppard (to CPR yard). 4.5km elevated. 2 Stations, 1 at STC (actually at McCowan / Town Centre Court), 1 at Sheppard / McCowan. (I don't recall who suggested a yard at CPR, but it seems to be a good one).

Last time building transit in hydro corridors was proposed, I heard there were some kind of safety concerns with running trains beside high voltage lines. So this might not be possible.

But if it is feasible, I'm all in.

 

[Rainforest]

• Eglinton to Midland north to Gatineau Hydro corridor. 1.8km of cut-and-cover tunnel. No stations.
• Gatineau Hydro corridor to McCowan. 1.8 km of at-grade, trench under Lawrence & Brimley & elevated over Highland Creek. 2 stations, 1 at Lawrence (at Brimley) in trench and 1 in Gatineau corridor (east of McCowan) elevated (back entrance to hospital).
• McCowan to STC (actually at, or immediately east of McCowan - at Town Centre Court). 1.8km of cut-and-cover tunnel. Terminal station at/near STC.
• OR
• McCowan to Sheppard (to CPR yard). 4.5km elevated. 2 Stations, 1 at STC (actually at McCowan / Town Centre Court), 1 at Sheppard / McCowan. (I don't recall who suggested a yard at CPR, but it seems to be a good one).

View attachment 95999

Both options look interesting, but I would be concerned about the Highland Creek crossing at McCowan. The subway needs to be high enough to get over Highland Creek, and yet low enough to get under the hydro wires; I am not sure that both requirements can be satisfied at once.

I wish they have another look at the Brimley and Midland options. The Brimley option can save some money because the line would be a bit shorter, terminating at the new station just east of Brimley and north of the existing SRT corridor (a parking lot today).

Midland route would be about as long as McCowan route (it has to turn east towards STC), but some saving may be achieved by using cut-and-cover construction, at least north of Lawrence where residential houses are absent.