Platform 27
Active Member
Unless you're a time traveller from the future, you haven't ridden a Mark III train. Nobody has. They're still years away from entering service.
|
|
|
SRT to be shut down for refurbishment (2015)
- Thread starter ibhattac
- Start date
M II A II R II K
Senior Member
I thought there were a few Mark 3's in service.
CDL.TO
Moderator
I believe he is from the future and is talking about the Mark One-Hundred and Eleven.
BurlOak
Senior Member
It is also interesting to note that the TTC report you refer to found the Mark II to be less expensive - about 25% less (http://www.toronto.ca/srtstudy/pdf/s...lan-report.pdf). It was also significantly less disruptive.
The answer to the question of the Ellesmere tunnel is also not straightforward. It was on another thread and it appears that there is no firm answer. (http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/showth...onstruction-(LRT-specific-discussion)/page226). Answers have varied from probably will fit, to will not fit.
nhui06
Active Member
I still think if they convert the Sheppard line into a BRT, can't they allocate to the savings to extend the BD subway to Sheppard? This makes the most sense IMO.
That's the approach that I've been advocating for. It would cost an additional ~$300 million to extend it to Sheppard (beyond the SRT refurb + $600 million from Sheppard East). A bit extra, but by no means a deal breaker for a city the size of Toronto.
JayBeeGooner
Active Member
The TTC report also mentions the expansion potential for ART is limited compared to LRT. Much less disruptive in the short term, yes, but the TTC will be stuck with the same problems as the current SRT: Orphan proprietary technology will limited expansion potential. The Metrolinx report states expanding using ART vehicles is more costly than LRT, and expansion is being pursed.
BurlOak
Senior Member
The above 2006 TTC report considered a B-D extension to STC and concluded it was most expensive.
In rough terms, it is about 8 km to Sheppard @$350M/km = $2.8B
Cancelling the SRT to Sheppard is about $1.5B, even if SELRT is cancelled in its entirety ($1.0B), there would still be a $300M shortfall.
My math may be off a bit, but I think the cost estimates provided in OneCity were very optimistic.
I had the same numbers. But like I said above, taking on $300 million for a city the size of Toronto isn't exactly a deal-breaker, especially considering that all of Transit City is being covered by the Province and the Feds.
ssiguy2
Senior Member
Truly frightening how Toronto subway costs are $350 million/per km in the suburban wastelands.
nfitz
Superstar
The costs for a really urban setting would be frightening. The Second Avenue subway costs in New York City are about $1.25 billion/km, if they come in on budget. This is a similar price to the 1-station, 1.6 km extension of 7 Train for $2.1 billion - $1.31 billion/km.
I doubt the Downtown Rapid Transit Line along King to St. Andrew would cost that much downtown, but I doubt it would be as cheap as $350 million/km.
diminutive
Active Member
Though SAS/NYC itself is super anomalous by global standards, even amongst "real urban settings." It's frankly a disaster. Infrastructure costs in the USA are insane. Amtrack's >150 billion dollar HSR comes to mind.
I think the average cost worked out to around 450m-500m/km in the DRTES? A Yonge extension to Hwy7 is about 420m/km, which is troubling (do we really need an underground bus terminal next to Centerpoint's parking fields? Really?) I have no idea why this is nearly 40% more expensive than the Spadina extension per km. Spadina hasn't even opened and already 40% premium?
nfitz
Superstar
Still a guestimate until they done enough design work to cost out properly.
Inflation. The rule of thumb for construction price index in Ontario for estimating in recent years is about 5% a year. Some use 4%, but it's been over 10% some years, when you look at historic data, though might be more appropriate currently.
A 40% increase would be 8.5 years of inflation at 4%, and only 7 years at 5%.
Spadina funding was approved in March 2006 by the province, and March 2007 by the feds, and the first construction major started in November 2009.
We're already pushing 8 years past when Spadina funding was first announced, and 3 years past when shovels hit the ground. If shovels hit the ground for Yonge in 2016, it's easy to see why the cost might be 40% higher, simply based on inflation.
diminutive
Active Member
Though when the Spadina funding was first announced the per/km cost was on the order of 250m/km, with the cost going up past 300m considering cost at time of delivery. So you're double counting inflation a bit, no? Going off the original announced price, we've seen nominal RT cost inflation on the order of 6.4% p.a. Adjusting to 2012 dollars would bring that down to 5.2% p.a.
Over the long run this is clearly something of an existential issue for public transit. It can't really be a systemic alternative to cars if it faces such rapid and sustained cost growth. The odd line will get funded if the political stars align (Spadina...) or if the benefits are clearly huge (DRL?), but expansion will be erratic and limited. LRT's cost inflation is even worse. When Transit City got proposed in median LRT was supposed to cost ~50m/km. With OneCity that's almost doubled.
This should be very troubling for transit activists. It's clearly not sustainable for capital costs to increase at twice the larger economy for ever.
Last edited:
W. K. Lis
Superstar
If, however, we could (hopefully not) do as they did in China and just build around those who object to some project. That should keep the price down.
From National Post:
See other photos at this link.
From National Post:
In one Chinese province, the government literally paves a highway around homeowners who refuse to move
The new highway Wenling, Zhejiang province in China is wide, well paved and almost finished. Almost finished except for the five-storey house sitting right in the middle of it.
Luo Baogen and his wife from Xiazhangyang village did not feel they were being offered enough compensation to relocate when Chinese government decided to build a highway where their house was. So the government built the highway … leaving the house in the middle of the road.
Although they occupy only one unit, the neighbouring rooms have been left standing for their safety, reports Chinadaily. No other units are occupied as all the couple’s neighbours have moved out.
Not all aspects of the building are created equally. The couple’s bedroom is in good repair with a hardwood floor. The unit still has electricity. However, the kitchen is mostly demolished.
During most of the Communist rule in China private ownership of property was abolished, but recently the laws have been tightened up making it illegal to demolish property by force without the owner’s agreement.
This has lead to a series of incidents in China where odd, old homes are left untouched in the middle of massive construction sites. These houses are often called “nail houses†in reference to old, gnarled nails that can not easily be pulled out of boards.
Below is the house of Yang Wu and his family. In 2004, Yang refused to sell and the construction company dug a giant pit around his house. Yang and his family then broke into the construction site, created a set of makeshift stairs to the building and raised a Chinese flag on the roof.
Yang, a martial arts champion, then challenged all comers to enter the house and attempt to throw him out. The property gained status as the “hardest nail house†in China.
The property was eventually demolished in 2007, and it is unclear if Yang actually did get his payday.
See other photos at this link.