Toronto Crosstown LRT | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx | Arcadis

[diminutive]

The question is what kind of Heavy Rail? Subways, UPX and GO trains all fall into that category. Although at first glance building a TTC subway line makes the most sense, building a GO compatible S-Bahn type system could also work and relieve congestion in some other places.

In North America at least, isn't the distinction between GO/UPX and subways mostly regulatory in that GO/UPX conform to federal regulations and standards? In Japan "commuter rail" and "subway/metro" are more or less indistinguishable from each other.

Re. DRL technology, I would by highly suspicious of running it as part of a Federally regulated railway. We'd pretty much screw ourselves out of every lightweight EMU on earth.

That said, I would be highly supportive of using the DRL as a kind of regional route as well. The typical DRL end-points (DM/Elginton, DW) seem ripe for radial commuter lines near or along existing GO lines or hydro rights of way.

Also, if a substantial part of the GO network was transferred to this new route, the issue of getting across downtown could be simplified. Instead of a tunnel, we could segregate two tracks from the existing rail corridors and maybe four platforms at Union. No super expensive tunnel needed. Since the two tracks could handle >30 trains per hour, there wouldn't be any overall loss of rail capacity.

The obvious downside to that is whatever commuter lines fed into this central corridor would need to be segregated as well and turned into 'metro systems, which would imply hundreds of kilometers of new 'metro.' Since the long term GO/REX/WTF service requirements on many corridors seem to implicitly require much of this anyways though it could be a worthwhile tradeoff.

EDIT: Just to be consistent with some earlier posts of mine, if we are going to end the DRL @ Dundas West and Eglinton, or even more so simply Pape-Spadina, then I'd say best to build it as a kind of mini-metro technology to save whatever construction costs possible (Smaller tunnels, smaller trains, smaller stations). A Pape-King-Spadina route's demand in 2031 is only ~12k pphpd. Full bore subway isn't really necessary for those demand levels, and since most of them are existing riders avoiding BloorYonge there wouldn't be much new revenue to offset it. But if we start adding in regional routes I think a full bore heavy rail system is warranted.

 

[ssiguy2]

There are so many different technology choices today that what is Metro/subway and what isn't is not clear except in one situation............all Metro/subway lines can be, atleast hypothetically, automated. You can use any form of technology you want but only complete and total segregation is the definition of a true Metro/subway system and whether is runs at-grade, elevated, underground or a combination is also irrelevant.

This is why Manilla's LRT, Vancouver's SkyTrain, and Tokyo's Monorail are all considered Metros but Calgary's CTrain or Edmonton LRT are not despite both being rapid transit and Edmonotn having the entire downtown section underground. Id the DRL is to be totally grade separated then obviouslly LRT is the worse possible option due to the tunnels costing more than the other three as does elevation but offers the lowest capacity.

It makes total sense for Eglinton to have atleast a "roughed-in" underground or elevated station at Don Mills for a potential DRL connection. This is what Vancouver did with the Canada Line at 33rd Ave. The station is not open and there are no plans to open it anytime soon but eventually as the area builds up the station will be opened. By having it already roughed=in, they have made that option MUCH less costly and disruptive. If the TTC had any forsight they would have done the same with Spadina's new Sheppard West station and especially considering how much they are paying for these suburban stations.

 

[adeel]

Assuming there's no major change to the land use in the area. Can we really predict what the land use is going to be in the 2100s - particularly at the intersection of Leslie and Wickstead? I'm not saying we should spend much on this - just make sure we don't do something that could be avoided that would make a future station impossible.

Is there a leslie and wicksteed (sp?) intersection? Doesn't leslie end at Eglinton?

I don't think there is any need at all for a leslie station. I drive by the area every Thursday. As I see it by driving, leslie ends at eglinton, and there is nothing of note at leslie that would require putting a stop there.

 

[UD2]

Assuming there's no major change to the land use in the area. Can we really predict what the land use is going to be in the 2100s - particularly at the intersection of Leslie and Wickstead? I'm not saying we should spend much on this - just make sure we don't do something that could be avoided that would make a future station impossible.

Perhaps one could avoid assuming that those who suggest something don't know the area. Until about 2 years ago, I used to drive through that intersection to get to work, day after day.

1. Leslie never meets Wickstead; It ends at Eglinton. Are you thinking Laird? I would agree with you that Laird could be fully redeveloped in the next 30 - 50 years.

2. I'm not suggesting anything. Driving through the area one would notice that the northwest, southwest, due south, and southeast of the intersection resides a deep valley that is neither developable nor should be developed. While the Northeast, the only developable space, sits on a large incline and would not only be costly to redevelop, but also house what seems to be a very profitable newly built Toyota dealership complex, which should remain there for the time being.

3. I'm all for planning for 2050, but I couldn't care less about what'll happen at 2110, and rightfully so. Nobody, 100 years ago, could have correctly planned for our current day infrastructure needs while driving down the road in their Ford Model T, and our world today is only changing ever faster. As for 2050, I don't think we would be filling in the Serena Gundy Park for condominium developments during this time and I don't believe a possible mid scale development on one street corner of an intersection can justify the building of a subsurface transit stop.

 

[nfitz]

Is there a leslie and wicksteed (sp?) intersection? Doesn't leslie end at Eglinton?

1. Leslie never meets Wickstead; It ends at Eglinton. Are you thinking Laird? I would agree with you that Laird could be fully redeveloped in the next 30 - 50 years.

I'm amused that so many here are commenting on what the area needs, that don't know the area. While Leslie does stop at Eglinton, there is another small piece further south between Vanderhoof and Wickstead. Essentially Vanderhoof curves to the south where it turns into Leslie which stops at Wickstead - though the road ROW continues south to Thorncliffe Park Drive (and of course reappears near the lake).

Google Maps is wrong, BTW ... but if you jump into Google Streetview you can clearly see Leslie Street signs at both Research Road and Wickstead Avenue. The correct road names are visible on the City of Toronto mapping tool - http://map.toronto.ca/imapit/iMapIt.jsp

And certainly, if you drive through the area, the Leslie St signs are quite visible at Wickstead!

I don't think there is any need at all for a leslie station.

Currently, I agree. But what if there was 50,000 people living in the Leslie/Wickstead area in 50 years - the area is ripe for redevelopment.

 

[smallspy]

It makes total sense for Eglinton to have atleast a "roughed-in" underground or elevated station at Don Mills for a potential DRL connection. This is what Vancouver did with the Canada Line at 33rd Ave. The station is not open and there are no plans to open it anytime soon but eventually as the area builds up the station will be opened. By having it already roughed=in, they have made that option MUCH less costly and disruptive. If the TTC had any forsight they would have done the same with Spadina's new Sheppard West station and especially considering how much they are paying for these suburban stations.

To say that "everything should be roughed-in" is wasteful in the extreme. There are situations where it should be done, and others where it shouldn't.

If anything is built, it will then have to be maintained - no matter how "roughed-in" it is. Does it make sense for something to be built that will then sit unused, empty, and draining resources for 100 years? You think that the TTC doesn't do any work to the roughed-in station at Queen?

No, what needs to be done is to figure out what the plan is for that location, and build accordingly. Downsview Station may not have a box roughed-in for a western extension of the Sheppard Line, but it was planned for it to happen, and so as many of the underground utilities were built out of the way as reasonably possible to help the process. The same with a future station at Willowdale on Sheppard. If no station is projected for 20 or 30 years at Leslie and Eglinton, than make it so that one CAN be built in the future if necessary, but don't waste any more time, money and effort than is necessary.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[GenerationW]

I'm amused that so many here are commenting on what the area needs, that don't know the area. While Leslie does stop at Eglinton, there is another small piece further south between Vanderhoof and Wickstead. Essentially Vanderhoof curves to the south where it turns into Leslie which stops at Wickstead - though the road ROW continues south to Thorncliffe Park Drive (and of course reappears near the lake).

Great for useless trivia buffs but meaningless for everyone else. For most if not all practical purposes, that stretch of Leslie starts/ends at Eglinton.

 

[UD2]

I'm amused that so many here are commenting on what the area needs, that don't know the area. While Leslie does stop at Eglinton, there is another small piece further south between Vanderhoof and Wickstead. Essentially Vanderhoof curves to the south where it turns into Leslie which stops at Wickstead - though the road ROW continues south to Thorncliffe Park Drive (and of course reappears near the lake).

Google Maps is wrong, BTW ... but if you jump into Google Streetview you can clearly see Leslie Street signs at both Research Road and Wickstead Avenue. The correct road names are visible on the City of Toronto mapping tool - http://map.toronto.ca/imapit/iMapIt.jsp

And certainly, if you drive through the area, the Leslie St signs are quite visible at Wickstead!

Currently, I agree. But what if there was 50,000 people living in the Leslie/Wickstead area in 50 years - the area is ripe for redevelopment.

in this case i stand corrected about Leslie meeting Wickstead. However, the intersection you're talking about have no impact on this discussion.

 

[BurlOak]

I don't think there is any need at all for a leslie station. I drive by the area every Thursday. As I see it by driving, leslie ends at eglinton, and there is nothing of note at leslie that would require putting a stop there.

Thats another advantage to running at grade on a south side alignment (portal in hillside, bridge over West Don, twin tunnels through CPR embankment), It would be much easier to add a Leslie street station in the future. This could serve Leslie (intersection and buses) and a future GO on the CPR tracks.

 

[drum118]

I understand the reason why Metrolinx is calling for a 2 year shut down of this line when it comes time to built the Leslie Station.

The line is below the river level and is a twin bore where the North York Centre was a square box line. Easier to build a station using a square box than a bore as well keeping the line open during the construction.

Being that deep and a twin bore, it will require a huge deep hole to be dug just to get to the line and then cutting out of the tunnel bores to put in the box for the station.

It goes back to the idea of keeping the line on the surface along the south side and going under the CP track bridge. It will be far cheaper doing this than what is plan.

 

[gweed123]

I understand the reason why Metrolinx is calling for a 2 year shut down of this line when it comes time to built the Leslie Station.

The line is below the river level and is a twin bore where the North York Centre was a square box line. Easier to build a station using a square box than a bore as well keeping the line open during the construction.

Being that deep and a twin bore, it will require a huge deep hole to be dug just to get to the line and then cutting out of the tunnel bores to put in the box for the station.

It goes back to the idea of keeping the line on the surface along the south side and going under the CP track bridge. It will be far cheaper doing this than what is plan.

I agree that the 'south side of Leslie' is probably the better approach, but either of those is better than the in-median design they had previously, so I'm going to take what I can get at this point .

 

[Rainforest]

I always thought that the south-of-the road option is the best solution for this stretch, and was surprised when they decided to just tunnel all the way to Don Mills.

However, is it possible that they know something that we don't know? The cost of two portals, the bridge over West Don, and the CPR underpass actually exceeding the cost of continuous tunneling?

 

[BurlOak]

I always thought that the south-of-the road option is the best solution for this stretch, and was surprised when they decided to just tunnel all the way to Don Mills.

However, is it possible that they know something that we don't know? The cost of two portals, the bridge over West Don, and the CPR underpass actually exceeding the cost of continuous tunneling?

I would guess that maybe it is cheaper to design with only a tunnel - all be it a longer tunnel. The bridge over the West Don and the CPR tunnels would involve several different designs - which would be more work. However, the shorter tunnel seems less expensive and the bridge and CPR tunnels could be built by separate crews so the Contractor would prefer it since these tasks would not be on the critical path. I imagine the Contractor would probably propose the south side option and pocket some of the savings for themselves.

 

[gweed123]

I would guess that maybe it is cheaper to design with only a tunnel - all be it a longer tunnel. The bridge over the West Don and the CPR tunnels would involve several different designs - which would be more work. However, the shorter tunnel seems less expensive and the bridge and CPR tunnels could be built by separate crews so the Contractor would prefer it since these tasks would not be on the critical path. I imagine the Contractor would probably propose the south side option and pocket some of the savings for themselves.

That's a very likely reason. I also suspect it has something to do with TBM launch sites. It's probably a lot easier for them to take up a corner of the Science Centre parking lot (Provincially-owned land too) for a few years, where there are no residences around, rather than trying to squeeze into an area on the south side of Eglinton near Laird. Just look at how hemmed in the Black Creek launch site is. With the parking lot, they can fence off a much larger area and do their work with only a minimal disruption to traffic.

 

[nfitz]

in this case i stand corrected about Leslie meeting Wickstead. However, the intersection you're talking about have no impact on this discussion.

It's a semi-vacant industrial wasteland, so it does have little impact. But what will it be in 50 years? What if it's a dense urban area with a pedestrian walkway to near where Leslie station would be?

Great for useless trivia buffs but meaningless for everyone else. For most if not all practical purposes, that stretch of Leslie starts/ends at Eglinton.

I mentioned the intersection simply in having a discussion about how the area could change in 50 years. Surely anyone who frequents the area is well familiar with that intersection, as it's the back-up way to get from Leslie to Thorncliffe when there Don Mills Road trouble (Leslie to Brentcliffe to Vanderhoof to Leslie to Wickstead to Beth Nealson to Overlea). But as often is the case, the "experts" don't frequent the area often enough to actually know the area properly.