[Steve X]

No, but for some stupid reason the original plan was for it to run in the centre of the road. Why it was designed that first way, we will never really know. Incompetence is the best answer.

Once they noticed the mistake, it became a "too many cooks" situation, as it often does in government. Some people then said "well why dont we just take this opportunity to tunnel all the way to Don Mills, since it has advantages?" then some people said "but the cost will be too much for a Leslie stop", and then the Leslie stop people said "dont kill our stop" and then in the corner a cracked out Rob Ford said "SUBWAYS SUBWAYS SUBWAYS"

So the decision was left to just leave it be because opening up just created arguments and opportunities to make the situation worse.

Welcome to government!

I don't think the Don Mills Station was originally part of the initial plan. This is initially a "streetcar" route design before the announced Transit City in the mid-2000s. TTC designed a shorter grade separated portion, east of Black Creek to Laird with everything else in the middle and Kennedy Station TBD. It made more sense originally since a south side tracks design would need to be shifted back to the middle via a signalized crossing over the eastbound lane. Then they decided to do Don Mills underground but didn't shift the tracks. The Brentcliffe Station was dropped somewhere along the way. The final EA prepared by the TTC has the station.

ML came along and took over the project in 2010. Rob Ford did try to tunnel the entire line and have it hooked onto the SRT. Without a supportive premier, that went no where. After a year and a half wasted, ML and the city has agree to go back to the original plan.
Then ML proposed 2 modifications, 1) Grade seperate Mount Dennis to the western portal by a bridge over Black Creek and a partially underground station replacing both the Weston and Black Creek stops. 2) Extend the tunnel to Don Mills. This would remove the Leslie stop and move the excavation shaft further east. There was so many design flaws with this plan. They would either have to move the shaft somewhere east of the railway but before Don Mills or have it east of Don Mills. This means tunneling under the Don which would lead to some serious climbing to get back to the surface or have a deep Don Mills Station which would have trouble reaching the surface before the DVP.

By the time the realize the tunnel extension won't work, they ran out of time. Who knows why they didn't propose a south side alignment initially. They also realize sending one EA amendment (grade separation to Mount Dennis Station) for city council approval was a pain in the ass, they said screw it.

 

[bearcat]

I don't think the Don Mills Station was originally part of the initial plan. This is initially a "streetcar" route design before the announced Transit City in the mid-2000s. TTC designed a shorter grade separated portion, east of Black Creek to Laird with everything else in the middle and Kennedy Station TBD. It made more sense originally since a south side tracks design would need to be shifted back to the middle via a signalized crossing over the eastbound lane. Then they decided to do Don Mills underground but didn't shift the tracks. The Brentcliffe Station was dropped somewhere along the way. The final EA prepared by the TTC has the station.

ML came along and took over the project in 2010. Rob Ford did try to tunnel the entire line and have it hooked onto the SRT. Without a supportive premier, that went no where. After a year and a half wasted, ML and the city has agree to go back to the original plan.
Then ML proposed 2 modifications, 1) Grade seperate Mount Dennis to the western portal by a bridge over Black Creek and a partially underground station replacing both the Weston and Black Creek stops. 2) Extend the tunnel to Don Mills. This would remove the Leslie stop and move the excavation shaft further east. There was so many design flaws with this plan. They would either have to move the shaft somewhere east of the railway but before Don Mills or have it east of Don Mills. This means tunneling under the Don which would lead to some serious climbing to get back to the surface or have a deep Don Mills Station which would have trouble reaching the surface before the DVP.

By the time the realize the tunnel extension won't work, they ran out of time. Who knows why they didn't propose a south side alignment initially. They also realize sending one EA amendment (grade separation to Mount Dennis Station) for city council approval was a pain in the ass, they said screw it.

Thanks! That's exactly what I was looking for.

 

[smallspy]

There's another reason why the alignment stayed in the centre of the road. I know people on here don't like to hear this, but the reality is that the line was designed not just to improve transit reliability and capacity, but also to either minimize or improve the effect on auto traffic on Eglinton. Between Leslie and Don Mills will be the western access to the new neighbourhood on the former Celestica/IBM lands. During the design stage, it was felt that the auto traffic in and out of this would be high enough to cause backups on the LRTs if there was an intersection, so it was felt prudent to maintain the grade separated access that existed previously. (Doing so also allows for improved pedestrian and active transportation access to ET Seton Park and the pathway system.) This is also the same reason why it was decided to keep the ramps to Wynford further east, rather than building an at-grade intersection and filling in the overpass as was suggested during the EA process.

I don't think the Don Mills Station was originally part of the initial plan. This is initially a "streetcar" route design before the announced Transit City in the mid-2000s. TTC designed a shorter grade separated portion, east of Black Creek to Laird with everything else in the middle and Kennedy Station TBD. It made more sense originally since a south side tracks design would need to be shifted back to the middle via a signalized crossing over the eastbound lane. Then they decided to do Don Mills underground but didn't shift the tracks. The Brentcliffe Station was dropped somewhere along the way. The final EA prepared by the TTC has the station.

By the time the TTC/City of Toronto started doing their public engagement on the project in 2003 and 2004, Don Mills Station was going to be buried as it has since been built. (The track configuration was going to be different, but that's neither here nor there.)

ML came along and took over the project in 2010. Rob Ford did try to tunnel the entire line and have it hooked onto the SRT. Without a supportive premier, that went no where. After a year and a half wasted, ML and the city has agree to go back to the original plan.
Then ML proposed 2 modifications, 1) Grade seperate Mount Dennis to the western portal by a bridge over Black Creek and a partially underground station replacing both the Weston and Black Creek stops. 2) Extend the tunnel to Don Mills. This would remove the Leslie stop and move the excavation shaft further east. There was so many design flaws with this plan. They would either have to move the shaft somewhere east of the railway but before Don Mills or have it east of Don Mills. This means tunneling under the Don which would lead to some serious climbing to get back to the surface or have a deep Don Mills Station which would have trouble reaching the surface before the DVP.

The Mount Dennis stretch had already been grade-separated by this time. When the decision was made to run full service to the then-Weston Station, it was felt that there would be too much service crossing Black Creek.

The issue of vertical alignment wasn't really a big deal as they had lots of room between Brentcliffe and Don Mills to drop the line under the West Don River. The new issue that came up was that it was now far more expensive to build a station at Leslie as it was going to be very deep - I think the number was something like 120 feet under the intersection. The cost was so high that the whole idea for a station there was dropped soon after.

By the time the realize the tunnel extension won't work, they ran out of time. Who knows why they didn't propose a south side alignment initially. They also realize sending one EA amendment (grade separation to Mount Dennis Station) for city council approval was a pain in the ass, they said screw it.

It would have involved reopening the EA. As some of the construction contracts had already been let, it was felt that changing it would delay the project by too much.

Dan

 

[Voltz]

There was so many design flaws with this plan. They would either have to move the shaft somewhere east of the railway but before Don Mills or have it east of Don Mills. This means tunneling under the Don which would lead to some serious climbing to get back to the surface or have a deep Don Mills Station which would have trouble reaching the surface before the DVP.

I don't remember that being the case, I saw the design plans for the tunnel to Don Mills and the station, it worked just fine and surfaced east of Don Mills the same way it does now. The design also removed the need for a massive underground structure at Laird for crossover and storage tracks, and made use of the Science Center parking lots for the launch portal construction activity.

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

Yes, I have also heard that version. But what community group was that? There were just trees and Toyota dealership around the planned Leslie stop at the time.

Many former auto dealerships & gasoline stations & parking lots have been or will be developed as mixed-use condos along current rapid transit lines. We can see the same along Line 5 in the future, if not right now.

The Toronto Botanical Garden (TBG) and Edwards Gardens is a botanical garden located at 777 Lawrence Avenue East, at Leslie & Lawrence. Can see it expanded southward to Eglinton Avenue and Line 5, but likely not while (Mayor) Doug Ford is in power.

 

[bearcat]

Between Leslie and Don Mills will be the western access to the new neighbourhood on the former Celestica/IBM lands. During the design stage, it was felt that the auto traffic in and out of this would be high enough to cause backups on the LRTs if there was an intersection, so it was felt prudent to maintain the grade separated access that existed previously. (Doing so also allows for improved pedestrian and active transportation access to ET Seton Park and the pathway system.) This is also the same reason why it was decided to keep the ramps to Wynford further east, rather than building an at-grade intersection and filling in the overpass as was suggested during the EA process.

But this would/could have been an at grade T-intersection (perhaps just east of the current underpass) that would not interfere with the LRT that's along the south side, no? The underpass under Eglinton could still be kept for pedestrian and cyclists to cross under the LRT.

 

[Mind_the_gap]

But this would/could have been an at grade T-intersection (perhaps just east of the current underpass) that would not interfere with the LRT that's along the south side, no? The underpass under Eglinton could still be kept for pedestrian and cyclists to cross under the LRT.

Even then, the ramps could've been maintained with proper railroad crossing gates/bells/lights. I understand this was the reason given, but it still sounds like horseshite why this couldn't be adopted.

 

[TOtramz]

Assuming if the remaining operators had their trainings completed and signed off last week (according to smallspy), today (monday) would be a great day to start simulated service! Otherwise, I don't think there is any hope left of having a Sept opening

Anyways, perhaps someone more knowledgeable than me can confirm or deny that it has indeed begun or not.

 

[smallspy]

But this would/could have been an at grade T-intersection (perhaps just east of the current underpass) that would not interfere with the LRT that's along the south side, no? The underpass under Eglinton could still be kept for pedestrian and cyclists to cross under the LRT.

It would have been modified to an at-grade T intersection had the LRT alignment been shifted to the south side, yes. But the current underpass would have been unnecessary, and thus would have been filled in. Keeping it was not recommended if they could help it.

In any case, it was just one of many things that they looked at. Not the final straw, however.

Dan

 

[Cyrobyte]

Assuming if the remaining operators had their trainings completed and signed off last week (according to smallspy), today (monday) would be a great day to start simulated service! Otherwise, I don't think there is any hope left of having a Sept opening

Anyways, perhaps someone more knowledgeable than me can confirm or deny that it has indeed begun or not.

It's strange how a month or two ago everyone was saying that this line will open in September but now that seems shaky

 

[goodcitywhenfinished]

It's strange how a month or two ago everyone was saying that this line will open in September but now that seems shaky

One more year! One more year! One more year! #keepthewaitalive

 

[nfitz]

It's strange how a month or two ago everyone was saying that this line will open in September but now that seems shaky

I thought the word was July 27, a few weeks ago.

A September opening was never going to happen. Personally I'd be surprised if it doesn't open by August 31. That's still almost 4 months away.

But if it doesn't open in August, the next possible date is October 12.

 

[Cyrobyte]

I thought the word was July 27, a few weeks ago.

A September opening was never going to happen. Personally I'd be surprised if it doesn't open by August 31. That's still almost 4 months away.

But if it doesn't open in August, the next possible date is October 12.

These are based on the TTC board periods. The current board period started on May 11 yet the revenue service demonstration didn’t start so a July opening seems impossible to me. I might be wrong through

 

[nfitz]

These are based on the TTC board periods. The current board period started on May 11 yet the revenue service demonstration didn’t start so a July opening seems impossible to me. I might be wrong through

July is indeed looking iffy.

I don't see how they don't follow the board periods, given the significant change in buses that won't work if Eglinton isn't running - or vice-versa.

 

[TOtramz]

July is indeed looking iffy.

I don't see how they don't follow the board periods, given the significant change in buses that won't work if Eglinton isn't running - or vice-versa.

Does the revenue demonstration have to start on the start date of the new board? The buses don’t have to change until the line is actually opening right