Davisville Yard Planning Study

[Observer Walt]

I certainly can't see this as any kind of a high priority given the engineering challenges of building above an active rail yard. There are a number of other TTC sites that could be developed first, including Islington (in progress), the former bus platforms at Yonge and Eglinton, Yonge-Sheppard, Victoria Park, Warden, and the old bus garage site on Lansdowne north of Bloor which has sat vacant for a number of years now. I've probably missed a few others.

 

[CDL.TO]

I don't see how building over a rail yard has to be very difficult. It should be easier than building over a bus terminal, except on a larger scale.

 

[adma]

Look at the Grand Central zone in NYC, f'rexample...

 

[Northern Light]

Deadhead time etc.

First off developing over an active railyard is always a very complex situation.

Brookfield is looking at a major site in NYC right now and the cost and complexity will be extraordinary.

You can't build conventional foundations.

You need to use pilings/pillars to support a platform (to create a level surface from which buildings can rise.)

Yes it can be done, but real estate has to be an extreme premium and massive density on the table to justify the expense and trouble.

I doubt Toronto is there yet.

That said;

Could we just sell the yard?

No, we can't really look at closing Davisville.

Not because we couldn't store cars at Wilson.

But because the deadhead time of getting trains into service at Finch and to Don Mills is very expensive.

2 staff crew (approximately$70.00 an hour pay, benefits and costs of employment) per train, add the electrical power to get the train that far etc.

Your looking at several hundred dollars in dead-head time (time when a train is not in service but is running and staffed)

You apply that to several trains each day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year.

Then factor to in the capital cost of adding a new yard elsewhere as the system expands!

It already cost the TTC more than a little when they closed all their downtown bus yards (Lansdowne, Eglinton and Danforth) and put up a new facility way by Eglinton and Pharmacy.

Now all those buses run out of service for as much as an hour (vs 10-15 min) at the beginning and end of rushhour or the service day.

The TTC may need to look at reopening an urban yard; and has the new problem of where all those suburban streetcars/LRTS from Transit City are to be stored; there is Zero room left at the two existing car hours (Connaught and Russell/Roncesvalles)

Don't forget these new lines will replace 24/7 bus service, which means they likely will run 24/7 as well. So no in tunnel storage of rolling stock!

The thought of building a new east-end subway yard just to serve Sheppard/North Yonge doesn't make much sense.

Were not talking about an acre or 2. Were talking a need for 20-40 acres of land, mebbe more.

Keeping Davisville is cheaper and more cost-efficient.

**

Just to throw one final problem up for the Davisville development idea.

Yellow Creek runs under the yard.

Following roughly an angle aligment from Oriole Park then curving at the low-point on Yonge street where it goes under the cememtary.

This is no small creek, take a look at the out-flow at the south end of the cemetary (the north end of the big valley that St. Clair crosses just east of Yonge.)

**

The TTC should focus on getting its other development sites going.

But should also carefully consider the need to revive the Danforth/Landsdowne yards, or even re-activate Eglinton (but with development overtop.

(though this poses ventilation issues)

 

[unimaginative2]

Very interesting points, Northern Lights. The Hudson Yards in New York are exactly what I was thinking of. Brookfield took a year just to figure out how to build on their Ninth Avenue site. The hardest part is keeping it operating the whole time.

I don't really see why the trains would have to deadhead, though. Couldn't they just run in service to and from Wilson? Even if you were to deadhead, and your figures are correct, the cost couldn't be more than about $700,000 a year. They could get $20 million or more for that much clear land in that neighbourhood, a very fair trade.

As for that creek...wouldn't it be cool if they could somehow return it to the surface as a centrepiece for the development?

 

[Tranplanner]

Perhaps a middle ground could be found? Figure out how much of Davisville is surplus and sell it off, and build over top the rest.

That is exactly what the goal of the planning study is. AFAIK, there are no plans to place buildings over the tracks due to costs, etc.

 

[michaelpelzfox]

This item has been on the city's website for months. It seems to have gone dormant. However, I think what should be done is this:

- Right now the subway runs right up against Yonge Street with the yard's maintenance tracks and buildings to the west. The land mass of the yard actually starts expanding to its full east-west width to the north and south of the yard.

- Any redevelopment should have Yonge Street frontage. To achieve this the main-line subway should shift west as much as possible and a new Davisville Station built to accommodate this.

- The result would free up space parallel to Yonge for maintenance operations below grade, and new development with Yonge frontage.

Just my two cents.

 

[unimaginative2]

I completely agree. That's a very good idea. It would be difficult without closing and relocating the yard, though.

 

[Observer Walt]

Further to Northern Light's points about bus garages: the new Mount Dennis garage near Weston Road and Eglinton is finished or almost so, but the last I heard, they are not planning to actually open it, as a cost-saving measure.

The former garage site on Lansdowne near Bloor has been vacant for years now. I would think it would be logical to put another garage there, if they need one closer to the central part of the city. At one time there was talk of building a new police station there, but apparently that won't be happening.

 

[Northern Light]

Assorted replies

To follow up on a few different ideas/points

**

Running trains in service to Sheppard Line from Wilson etc.

In theory, this works in the middle of the day (ie. between the rush-hours)

But it doesn't work at the beginning of the day, because the trains have to be in place by the time the station doors open. (6am)

So if a train has to leave Wilson at 5, they are not going to open all the stations an hour early!

Similarly, at the end of the day, the station doors must be locked prior to the last scheduled departure from that station for the night.

So trains running back from Finch after 2am, must run out of service.

IF they ran in service, the stations would have to be open, and staffed.

****

Could we 'life' Yellow Creek through the Davisville Yard?

Oooh, I'd love to....but certainly not while the yard is operational.

The natural valley path is about 100M across, the cost of bridging all of those tracks....eeeks!

AS for exposing it as part of a re-development....

I dunno, would take up about 25-30% of the entire yard, and you still have to contend with the main-line tracks being bridged, and whether you intend to keep in buried under Yonge Street (or build a bridge)

****

Moving the main-line to free up Yonge St. Frontage.

Another serious challenge.

To the south of the yard, the tunnel and adjacent lands are already built over, meaning their is little or no possability of re-aligning the tunnels.

Thusly, the main-line track would still have to meet the tunnel at the existing location.

That's a very challending alignment if you want to free up any meaningful amount of development space.

Add to that you still have Yellow Creek underneath to contend with....

And at the base of the little valley on Yonge (the remenant land form of the Yellow Creek Ravine)

You're technically in a floodplain.

Notice how the main-line tracks are elevated at that point?

You would not be allowed to put usuable-space (ie. retail/office/residence) at the base-level with Yonge there.

Parking..maybe.


****

Merry Christmas everyone!

 

[Chuck]

Add to that you still have Yellow Creek underneath to contend with....

And at the base of the little valley on Yonge (the remenant land form of the Yellow Creek Ravine)

You're technically in a floodplain.

Notice how the main-line tracks are elevated at that point?

I think that these points are invalid. It's true that the Yellow Creek once ran through this area, however it is now carried in a storm trunk, identical to the many storm trunks that criss cross the downtown area and other parts of the city. I don't think that there are by-laws that prevent development in the vicinity of a storm trunk, and now that the river flows underground, this is not an active floodplain anymore.

I would also assume that the tracks are elevated due to the local topography, not because this area used to be a flood plain. In short, I believe that there is no reason why development couldn't occur here, much how it occurs in other former flood plains.

 

[Edward]

From what I recall both this yard and the one at Greenwood were built with the idea that in the future towers would be built above them.