It's funny re-reading that article 5.5 years later with knowledge of everything that's gone on with Eglinton and Metrolinx. What a culture of absolute refusal to be transparent and accountable to the public.
 
T3G said:
Is it NIMBYism? There's a lot of reasons to oppose the surface alignment. Like the fact that it kneecaps any future ability to expand the Lakeshore East corridor.
Click to expand...

Is there enough room to build a 6 track GO corridor between Gerrard Square and Scarborough GO? If so, then that would be the only valid reason I've heard to oppose elevated rail through that corridor, otherwise not so much.

Opposing elevated rail is the equivalent of opposing major rapid transit network expansion in my opinion.
 
81-717 said:
First time hearing anyone opposing the GO/OL alignment and wanting the OL to be underground through there ...
Click to expand...
I'm confused - which section are we talking about here. The combined GO/OL corridor west of Strachan? With the huge, well publicized, outroar about the change from underground to overground in Riverdale/Leslieville, I'm somewhat confused.

duty free said:
Is there enough room to build a 6 track GO corridor between Gerrard Square and Scarborough GO? If so, then that would be the only valid reason I've heard to oppose elevated rail through that corridor, otherwise not so much.
Click to expand...
My understand is yes. I'm not sure all the way out to Pickering though.
 
T3G said:
Is it NIMBYism? There's a lot of reasons to oppose the surface alignment. Like the fact that it kneecaps any future ability to expand the Lakeshore East corridor.
Click to expand...
Genuine Question, but doesn't it make more sense to build the metro with frequent close station above ground, and build whatever express tracks we want for LSE underground? Like sure, tunnels that would have to carry bilevels would be larger than OL tunnels, but at the same time you will almost certainly not build any stations for a theoretical LSE expansion tunnel. There is also the matter of whether we really need LSE Expansion in the future, particularly if Alto is going to run via the Belleville Sub instead of some combination of Kingston or Uxbridge Subs.
 
duty free said:
Is there enough room to build a 6 track GO corridor between Gerrard Square and Scarborough GO? If so, then that would be the only valid reason I've heard to oppose elevated rail through that corridor, otherwise not so much.
Click to expand...
Is there room to build a 6 track corridor anywhere along the LSE corridor? Looking at satellite views along the future OL corridor, it looks like there were only 3-4 tracks to begin with, and that is the case all the way through to Scarborough GO. Now, expropriation could change the equation quite a bit, but as it stands I'm not aware of this being an option on the table in the first place.

Also, what elevated rail? Is the plan not to run the metro flush with the current heavy rail tracks? If anything, building elevated rail, situated high enough to fit a BiLevel under, would surely be the better plan to future proof LSE expansion.

ARG1 said:
Genuine Question, but doesn't it make more sense to build the metro with frequent close station above ground, and build whatever express tracks we want for LSE underground? Like sure, tunnels that would have to carry bilevels would be larger than OL tunnels, but at the same time you will almost certainly not build any stations for a theoretical LSE expansion tunnel. There is also the matter of whether we really need LSE Expansion in the future, particularly if Alto is going to run via the Belleville Sub instead of some combination of Kingston or Uxbridge Subs.
Click to expand...
I haven't seen any numbers to suggest one solution to be better than the other, but as metros tend to be more nimble and therefore better able to climb hills, I would think putting the metro underground would win out. Unless you have really, really long access ramps into the LSE tunnels, but then the question becomes, where do you put those.

As for whether we'll need LSE expansion? No idea, but IMO it's better to have an option and not need it, than to need it and not have it.
 
The physical width of the corridor is not as relevant as the number of existing civil works that would have to be rebuilt or enhanced.

Before anyone dreams about six tracks, consider what operators across the pond are doing with four tracks.

DB was not wrong to envision a dramatically different operation.... they just underestimated what it would take to get there. Hopefully Onxpress is not intent on maintaining status quo.

- Paul
 
ARG1 said:
Genuine Question, but doesn't it make more sense to build the metro with frequent close station above ground, and build whatever express tracks we want for LSE underground? Like sure, tunnels that would have to carry bilevels would be larger than OL tunnels, but at the same time you will almost certainly not build any stations for a theoretical LSE expansion tunnel. There is also the matter of whether we really need LSE Expansion in the future, particularly if Alto is going to run via the Belleville Sub instead of some combination of Kingston or Uxbridge Subs.
Click to expand...
In any ideal world, perhaps.

But we live in one that isn't. And the way that the rail corridor interacts with the neighbourhoods around it doesn't allow what you are suggesting.

Dan
 
T3G said:
Heaven forbid anyone should have higher expectations out of forum discourse than childish, unfounded attacks on other people.
Click to expand...
I know it hurts being wrong, and wildly misrepresenting reality then being proven wrong about it. It's ok, just do the slightest bit of research next time.

Still waiting to eat my hat.
 
Early morning walk today (Saturday) with the dog in Seton park. Crew already at work pre-7am doing some concrete pouring for the bridge pillar.

PXL_20250920_104115115.MP.jpg
PXL_20250920_104358863.MP.jpg
PXL_20250920_104237378.MP.jpg
PXL_20250920_105424400.MP.jpg
PXL_20250920_104416089.MP.jpg
 
So they make you walk under a couple of arches? I don't think I'd care to do that when they are moving, especially if lifting objects from one side to the other.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top