Adjei said:
Yes in what world would tunnelling be cheaper ?
Click to expand...
In Doug Fords world. Far cheaper than tearing down an elevated rail corridor only to rebuild it along with 6 major bridges. Read the reports. The TTC plann was cheaper but folks are missing the point. In what world.is using glass a good idea for sound? It what world is it tolerable for Mx to lie and say that they’re using anti graffiti materials? Have you seen the pic? How’s that looking to you, in your world? This could have all been built so much better, but god to see people defending the moronic use of material that has completely failed an entire community 6-8 kilometres west of Leslieville. Give your heads a shake.
 
mondomarco said:
Nope. You’re wrong. The TTC that was complete with an environmental study (that was disregarded by Mx and Ford) WAS cheaper and the OL budget increased by 2x and still counting. Even still that’s a secondary point to the problem that Mx lied about and committed to using “graffiti proof” material when in fact they’ve gone ahead and used the same garbage that CLEARLY isn’t graffiti proof and barely has any impact on sound. Glass as a noise wall. Even a 20 year year old non engineer would know that’s not gonna work.
Click to expand...
When the TTC built Line 2, they used an existing bridge to cross the Don Valley, the Prince Edward Viaduct. They included a platform and space for rapid transit under the top roadway when it was first constructed in 1918.

They could have done the same with the Leaside Bridge (East York Leaside Viaduct), completed in 1927, but didn't at the time "to save money". Now they have to spend $$$ for a rapid transit only bridge.
 
W. K. Lis said:
When the TTC built Line 2, they used an existing bridge to cross the Don Valley, the Prince Edward Viaduct. They included a platform and space for rapid transit under the top roadway.

They could have done the same with the Leaside Bridge (East York Leaside Viaduct) completed in 1927, but didn't at the time "to save money". Now they have to spend $$$ for a rapid transit only bridge.
Click to expand...
Yes you’re right!
 
W. K. Lis said:
When the TTC built Line 2, they used an existing bridge to cross the Don Valley, the Prince Edward Viaduct. They included a platform and space for rapid transit under the top roadway when it was first constructed in 1918.

They could have done the same with the Leaside Bridge (East York Leaside Viaduct), completed in 1927, but didn't at the time "to save money". Now they have to spend $$$ for a rapid transit only bridge.
Click to expand...
The problem is the Millwood Viaduct wasn't designed to carry a subway on a lower deck it was only built to carry streetcars on its road deck (streetcars that would never come). So that would have needed to be retrofired on and the bridge reinforced. The other issue is running under the viaduct would have complicated or even precluded the possibility of an elevated alignment on Overlea.
 
mondomarco said:
Nope. You’re wrong. The TTC that was complete with an environmental study (that was disregarded by Mx and Ford) WAS cheaper and the OL budget increased by 2x and still counting. Even still that’s a secondary point to the problem that Mx lied about and committed to using “graffiti proof” material when in fact they’ve gone ahead and used the same garbage that CLEARLY isn’t graffiti proof and barely has any impact on sound. Glass as a noise wall. Even a 20 year year old non engineer would know that’s not gonna work.
Click to expand...
Of course the TTC plan was cheaper..... It was only Osgoode to Pape and only planned for minimum headways of 140 seconds AND was planned well before the supply chain complications of the pandemic. Had the TTC plan been costed for today's cost it would cost about the same as the Ontario Line for a much shorter subway line and service much fewer people.
 
JSF-1 said:
The problem is the Millwood Viaduct wasn't designed to carry a subway on a lower deck it was only built to carry streetcars on its road deck (streetcars that would never come). So that would have needed to be retrofired on and the bridge reinforced. The other issue is running under the viaduct would have complicated or even precluded the possibility of an elevated alignment on Overlea.
Click to expand...
This is an interesting topic I hadn’t thought about before but drove on Millwood viaduct just today and noticed they’ve taken 2 car lanes out for bike lanes… Since they have now foregone 2 lanes of vehicular traffic could they not have oriented the OL on one side or the other and had the same -2 lanes reduced as they’ve just now done for bicycles? Hadn’t thought of that before but would also say that the new bridge Mx is building there is probably one of the most impressive parts of the OL and its overall design (and engineering). The proposed bridge near Millwood (and its engineering) are impressive .
 
jordanmkasla2009 said:
Of course the TTC plan was cheaper..... It was only Osgoode to Pape and only planned for minimum headways of 140 seconds AND was planned well before the supply chain complications of the pandemic. Had the TTC plan been costed for today's cost it would cost about the same as the Ontario Line for a much shorter subway line and service much fewer people.
Click to expand...
Fair. I just cannot believe that Mx has learned NOTHING in 10+ years since the UpExpress and idiotic use of glass that is covered in miles of graffiti and highly ineffective at absorbing and creating a sound barrier. Especially when community members like me pointed this out to them about 60 times thru the “community consultations” yet here we are. The exact same materials used, with the exact same outcome of miles of graffiti covered corridors. It’s just so silly and could’ve been prevented if the agency only had some level of aspiration to be better, but they don’t.
 
mondomarco said:
This is an interesting topic I hadn’t thought about before but drove on Millwood viaduct just today and noticed they’ve taken 2 car lanes out for bike lanes… Since they have now foregone 2 lanes of vehicular traffic could they not have oriented the OL on one side or the other and had the same -2 lanes reduced as they’ve just now done for bicycles? Hadn’t thought of that before but would also say that the new bridge Mx is building there is probably one of the most impressive parts of the OL and its overall design (and engineering). The proposed bridge near Millwood (and its engineering) are impressive .
Click to expand...
They expanded the bridge deck to add two (?) car lanes about 20 years ago and when they did (I believe) it excluded the possibility of adding LRT. I'm pretty sure the bridge structure cannot support LRT or Ontario Line trains.
 
mondomarco said:
You obviously haven’t been to the west aend of the city because it’s been completely covered in graffiti for over a decade… 🫠
Click to expand...
Actually, yes I have. I was going to comment on this, but I did not. That's still Metrolinx (or CPKC) property. Maybe we should demand that ML deals with it, because they clearly don't care.
 
mondomarco said:
... Mx lied about and committed to using “graffiti proof” material when in fact they’ve gone ahead and used the same garbage that CLEARLY isn’t graffiti proof and barely has any impact on sound...
Click to expand...
They claimed they could have been cleaned as I've discussed before.
Coolibop said:
This article suggests acrylic. Can be cleaned with water + solvents, but unsure if they remain clear/transparent.

I've seen them all tagged while riding the UP express, and unsure what the point of these are if they are going to remain graffitied.
Click to expand...
Coolibop said:
So far Metrolinx hasn't done much about the graffiti that I've seen along these panels I understand they've paid extra for...let's see if they can easily remove, or bother...
Click to expand...
I'm going to guess it's an indifference to clean... It could be ineptitude of ongoing use of a product that isn't working (perhaps someone signed a large contract) and they are unsure how to correct.... But again, why continue to use...

Could this be something built into the operations contract and maybe we don't see action til line is live?
 
Coolibop said:
They claimed they could have been cleaned as I've discussed before.


I'm going to guess it's an indifference to clean... It could be ineptitude of ongoing use of a product that isn't working (perhaps someone signed a large contract) and they are unsure how to correct.... But again, why continue to use...

Could this be something built into the operations contract and maybe we don't see action til line is live?
Click to expand...
I doubt the operations to clean it will commence once the line is live. There is no massive new budget there. Metrolinx lies and is totally inept. They KNEW this was a problem from other use cases and outright lied to Leslieville by continuing to suggest they have anti graffiti properties. Ahhhh Doug Fords Ontario…
 
JSF-1 said:
The problem is the Millwood Viaduct wasn't designed to carry a subway on a lower deck it was only built to carry streetcars on its road deck (streetcars that would never come). So that would have needed to be retrofired on and the bridge reinforced. The other issue is running under the viaduct would have complicated or even precluded the possibility of an elevated alignment on Overlea.
Click to expand...
As much as that is a problem, that's not the main problem.

The biggest issue is the alignment of the bridge. Just like the Bloor Bridge over the Rosedale Valley, the road bridge's alignment was and is not conducive to the subway's alignment.

It makes sense to re-utilize infrastructure where it's possible to do so, and where it makes sense to do so. But shoehorning new infrastructure into existing just because the capability and capacity exist - and ignoring the pitfalls of doing so - is a horrible use of resources.

Dan
 
mondomarco said:
This is an interesting topic I hadn’t thought about before but drove on Millwood viaduct just today and noticed they’ve taken 2 car lanes out for bike lanes… Since they have now foregone 2 lanes of vehicular traffic could they not have oriented the OL on one side or the other and had the same -2 lanes reduced as they’ve just now done for bicycles? Hadn’t thought of that before but would also say that the new bridge Mx is building there is probably one of the most impressive parts of the OL and its overall design (and engineering). The proposed bridge near Millwood (and its engineering) are impressive .
Click to expand...
The Prince Edward Viaduct was first built in 1918, with provision for rapid transit. The Millwood Viaduct was first built in 1927 with no provision for rapid transit. In the 1950's and 1960's, the old 2-lane township concession roads were being converted from country roads to suburban 4-lane stroads. Where they crossed railway tracks, they built either underpasses or bridges, but with extra space for later conversion to 6-lane stroads. Today, the stroads generally have space for those extra lanes, but they ended up being used for verges (grass or asphalt), which are used in winter for the snow windrows. Little thought for public transit though. Many of the suburban stroads have very little or space for sidewalks for the pedestrians to use. The car was and is the priority.
 
mondomarco said:
In Doug Fords world. Far cheaper than tearing down an elevated rail corridor only to rebuild it along with 6 major bridges. Read the reports. The TTC plann was cheaper but folks are missing the point. In what world.is using glass a good idea for sound? It what world is it tolerable for Mx to lie and say that they’re using anti graffiti materials? Have you seen the pic? How’s that looking to you, in your world? This could have all been built so much better, but god to see people defending the moronic use of material that has completely failed an entire community 6-8 kilometres west of Leslieville. Give your heads a shake.
Click to expand...
But hey, at least from that part of the subway we'll get sick views of the city..... and the graffiti....
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top