News   Jul 16, 2024
News Roundup for July 16, 2024
 336     0 
News   Jul 16, 2024
The Urban Jungle
 447     2 
News   Jul 15, 2024
Sculptural Pre-Cast Panels Now Adorning ANX Near Dupont Station
 1.2K     3 

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

I can't remember if someone already posted this, but I drove by the eastern (Brentcliffe) launch site and they've narrowed the road to two lanes, with lots of equipment.

So it looks like major work on the eastern launch shaft has started (or will soon).
 
At Yonge and Eglinton this morning:

IMG_20140721_082917.jpg
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20140721_082917.jpg
    IMG_20140721_082917.jpg
    88 KB · Views: 388
ehlow said:
I can't remember if someone already posted this, but I drove by the eastern (Brentcliffe) launch site and they've narrowed the road to two lanes, with lots of equipment.

So it looks like major work on the eastern launch shaft has started (or will soon).
Click to expand...

  1. The best plan here was to move the portal to the side of the road and maintain 4 lanes of traffic during construction.
    Scenic_Page_1.jpg


  2. Now that it is down to 2 lanes, it looks like this option is off the table. I imagine the launch shaft and headwall can still be moved south to allow for tunnelling to occur from the south side.
    Scenic_Page_2.jpg


  3. If they miss this opportunity, they will have to start tunnelling from this median location, but choose a different alignment (I believe they can handle 300m radius curves) for the tunnels to get to the "proper" alignment as soon as possible. Then it would require about 100m of the tunnel to be excavated and discarded and rebuilt with cut-and-cover at the south side location, possibly tighter than desirable curves (300m) to be built.
    Scenic_Page_3.jpg


  4. If the tunnelling has already started on this original alignment, then it would require about 120m of the tunnel to be excavated and discarded and rebuilt with cut-and-cover at the south side location, but with possibly tighter radius curves (300m) to minimize the amount of cut-and-cover required.
    Scenic_Page_4.jpg



The real question is at what point will someone realize that there is $1B to be saved by connecting the SRT to the Eglinton line, instead of building Eglinton as an on-street LRT and serving STC by subway. Also, when will people realize that the fate of the DRL is most likely tied to Eglinton being a grade-separated line (without this, Metrolinx will use GO to relieve Y-B and not the DRL).

For this portion through Leslie, until they begin work on the Laird Station headwalls, it will undoubtedly makes sense to switch to the south side alignment. This is because the cross-over and pocket tracks could be moved from the middle of Eglinton at Laird to the south side near Don Mills - this construction savings would significant. Of course there will be some wasted money, but that is what happens when you put your head down and start constructing the wrong thing - instead of thinking first before you build.
 

Attachments

  • Scenic_Page_2.jpg
    Scenic_Page_2.jpg
    78.4 KB · Views: 427
  • Scenic_Page_3.jpg
    Scenic_Page_3.jpg
    78.1 KB · Views: 421
  • Scenic_Page_4.jpg
    Scenic_Page_4.jpg
    78 KB · Views: 446
  • Scenic_Page_1.jpg
    Scenic_Page_1.jpg
    78.2 KB · Views: 438
Last edited:
Sorry, I corrected it. meant it saves $1B (costs $500M more, saves $1.5B) compared to serving STC by subway.
 
WislaHD said:
What do you mean $1b to be saved?

Wouldn't making Eglinton after Don Mills grade-separated (whether elevated or underground) cost a lot?
Click to expand...

That cost savings comes from cancelling the Scarborough subway, and rebuilding the existing SRT alignment instead.
 
Oh that makes sense. That $500m more is if it is elevated I assume?

It'd be interesting if one of the pro-LRT candidates decided to support that. Like say Soknacki, and then Soknacki can go all NIMBY on Chow about how his plan gets rid of the transfer and her's doesn't.
 
I'd love to see Sok support underground ECLRT + SRT. Then he could claim to be a "subway champion", unlike Chow, and hopefully get more support from the subway lovers who would have otherwise voted for Ford or Tory.
 
TheTigerMaster said:
I'd love to see Sok support underground ECLRT + SRT. Then he could claim to be a "subway champion", unlike Chow, and hopefully get more support from the subway lovers who would have otherwise voted for Ford or Tory.
Click to expand...

He wouldn't, because he thinks to rationally and logically to support something that wasteful and unnecessary just to buy votes with sound bites.
 
Actually IMO the underground ECLRT + SRT isn't very wasteful. Especially compared to the subway extension option.

Regardless, why cant Sok compromise his rational nature just once to get into office. Then he has 4 years to be as rational as he wants ;)
 
TheTigerMaster said:
Actually IMO the underground ECLRT + SRT isn't very wasteful. Especially compared to the subway extension option.
Click to expand...

Well, it's not so cheap when you throw in Yonge line capacity constraints. While I think the DRL absolutely needs to go to Eglinton soon, this option makes it a requirement for phase 1 rather than a future phase 2. Either that, or Eglinton line frequencies may be purposefully kept very painfully low to ensure that passengers at Bloor do not get backed up. London Underground uses this kind of scheduling trick in addition to modifying transfer points on the fly to purposefully slow down customers.


The cheapest and best option for folks heading downtown is probably an SRT to a reconfigured Kennedy with GORex service being the easiest/fastest transfer. Spend the cities capital money on GO operations subsidies to run 5 minute frequencies with a free TTC transfer.
 
Last edited:
BurlOak said:
  1. The best plan here was to move the portal to the side of the road and maintain 4 lanes of traffic during construction.
    View attachment 30295

  2. Now that it is down to 2 lanes, it looks like this option is off the table. I imagine the launch shaft and headwall can still be moved south to allow for tunnelling to occur from the south side.
    View attachment 30291

  3. If they miss this opportunity, they will have to start tunnelling from this median location, but choose a different alignment (I believe they can handle 300m radius curves) for the tunnels to get to the "proper" alignment as soon as possible. Then it would require about 100m of the tunnel to be excavated and discarded and rebuilt with cut-and-cover at the south side location, possibly tighter than desirable curves (300m) to be built.
    View attachment 30292

  4. If the tunnelling has already started on this original alignment, then it would require about 120m of the tunnel to be excavated and discarded and rebuilt with cut-and-cover at the south side location, but with possibly tighter radius curves (300m) to minimize the amount of cut-and-cover required.
    View attachment 30293



The real question is at what point will someone realize that there is $1B to be saved by connecting the SRT to the Eglinton line, instead of building Eglinton as an on-street LRT and serving STC by subway. Also, when will people realize that the fate of the DRL is most likely tied to Eglinton being a grade-separated line (without this, Metrolinx will use GO to relieve Y-B and not the DRL).

For this portion through Leslie, until they begin work on the Laird Station headwalls, it will undoubtedly makes sense to switch to the south side alignment. This is because the cross-over and pocket tracks could be moved from the middle of Eglinton at Laird to the south side near Don Mills - this construction savings would significant. Of course there will be some wasted money, but that is what happens when you put your head down and start constructing the wrong thing - instead of thinking first before you build.
Click to expand...

Could not agree more. At the end of the day, the whole point was to eliminate the transfer at Kennedy, and this does that.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top