Highway 401 Transit and Auto Tunnel

[DirectionNorth]

This caught my attention:
"The 27-kilometer (17-mile) long tunnel"...
"at a cost of approximately 25 billion Norwegian kroner (about $2.4 billion). "

Seriously? Compare that transit tunneling costs on Ontario...

The main cost driver of underground (and TBH overground) transit are the stations and systems. Tunnelling is not really where the budget goes, it's all the downstream effect of tunnelling (ie. stations) that eat money. At least, that's how it works in most of the world.

At Metrolinx, the main cost drivers are consultants and contingencies. Keep in mind that the comparable projects in Italy might be cost half of the same thing here in Toronto. (source)

I have not looked closely at road tunnels, but I would imagine that interchanges, ventilation, and (possible?) underwater mitigation measures are where the cost comes from.

In theory, you could build that tunnel in Toronto for $100 million/km, possibly even less, assuming we adopted Norwegian practices (we wouldn't, even looking at Kitchener-Waterloo is impossible). In practice, I'd expect the thing to come out at multiple times of what the Norwegian example costs. If Doug wants to add interchanges onto this thing, that's easily another few billion added on.

Perhaps it doesn't include 50-years of operations and maintenance costs? And rolling stock? And signalling?

Maybe it's just the tunnelling contract - which if you recall from the numbers released for TYSSE and Eglinton were a pittance compared to the entire project cost.

Norway builds equivalent infrastructure for far, far less than we do.

 

[duty free]

This caught my attention:
"The 27-kilometer (17-mile) long tunnel"...
"at a cost of approximately 25 billion Norwegian kroner (about $2.4 billion). "

Seriously? Compare that transit tunneling costs on Ontario...

Seoul's GTX-A.

81 km for $5.4 Billion CAD. That's the dream.

 

[nfitz]

At Metrolinx, the main cost drivers are consultants and contingencies. Keep in mind that the comparable projects in Italy might be cost half of the same thing here in Toronto. (source)
View attachment 701561

All that shows is the accounting is different. It's easy enough to run the budget in year $0 than year of spending $, and get rid of the escalation. It doesn't make the cost any different.

And Metrolinx includes not on the borrowing costs to build it, they include decades of operating and maintenance. This makes it not possible to do a comparison so simply. Really the only thing that surprises me is that in Italy's "Systems's" cost is so much more proportionally.

And come on ... Italy? Aren't they notorious for large-scale systemic cost increases because of the impacts of organized crime?

 

[DirectionNorth]

All that shows is the accounting is different. It's easy enough to run the budget in year $0 than year of spending $, and get rid of the escalation. It doesn't make the cost any different.

And Metrolinx includes not on the borrowing costs to build it, they include decades of operating and maintenance. This makes it not possible to do a comparison so simply. Really the only thing that surprises me is that in Italy's "Systems's" cost is so much more proportionally.

And come on ... Italy? Aren't they notorious for large-scale systemic cost increases because of the impacts of organized crime?

They already removed O&M cost before calculating the data. You can see for yourself, even Finch West slower-than-a-bus-T cost $2.3 billion ($230 million/km) before a single passenger had boarded a tram, per Metrolinx's latest board meeting. And escalation is lower elsewhere because they do not use 35% contingencies (what the fu-), not because they don't know what inflation is.


These days, Italian infrastructure corruption is somewhere between Germany and Norway. And it's not just Italy; Spain, France, the Nordics, South Korea, etc. all have low costs. Maybe our overlords at the TTC and Metrolinx can learn from another city for once.

 

[nfitz]

They already removed O&M cost before calculating the data. You can see for yourself, even Finch West slower-than-a-bus-T cost $2.3 billion ($230 million/km) before a single passenger had boarded a tram, per Metrolinx's latest board meeting. And escalation is lower elsewhere because they do not use 35% contingencies (what the fu-), not because they don't know what inflation is.

That's not how contingency goes.

If you use 0% of your contingency you are on budget. If they plan on using all their contingency, every time, it's just a book keeping tick to keep the initial numbers down.

When we've dug down here on some of these "comparisons" we've seen that the cheaper one doesn't expensive things like land acquisition (which, hey, is free in some brutal backwards tyrannical military dictatorships), rolling stock, vehicle yards, control centre upgrades, incidental road allowance and hydro rebuilds (which is what destroyed the St. Clair budget - not the actual streetcar work).

 

[nfitz]

These days, Italian infrastructure corruption is somewhere between Germany and Norway. And it's not just Italy; Spain, France, the Nordics, South Korea, etc. all have low costs. Maybe our overlords at the TTC and Metrolinx can learn from another city for once.

That's what we said about Quebec too, after the 1970s and 1980s. But it turned out to be far worse than anyone ever expected.

Still, it's not like there's a magic button that makes the grass so much greener there. It's often the same companies and systems. Same technology. Sometimes even THE SAME design engineers. I don't know why people go to such extent to create dialogues about how it's our problem, and not just the nature of the beast. How late was the Elizabeth Line?

Though at least they had the sense to run service simulation for more than 30 days before getting any riders on it! It feels to me that Line 4 was longer than that, from the late-at-night vibrations you could feel at that movie cinema on Bayview, many months before it opened.

 

[TRONto]

They already removed O&M cost before calculating the data. You can see for yourself, even Finch West slower-than-a-bus-T cost $2.3 billion ($230 million/km) before a single passenger had boarded a tram, per Metrolinx's latest board meeting. And escalation is lower elsewhere because they do not use 35% contingencies (what the fu-), not because they don't know what inflation is.


These days, Italian infrastructure corruption is somewhere between Germany and Norway. And it's not just Italy; Spain, France, the Nordics, South Korea, etc. all have low costs. Maybe our overlords at the TTC and Metrolinx can learn from another city for once.

The Finch LRT construction contract was signed at about $100m/km (as reported on this site). The data in table 1 as per the asterisk looks like an all in cost.

 

[Bordercollie]

Do any of you know about Induced demand? No matter how many lanes of highway you build, it will never be enough.

Induced demand is the economic and urban planning principle where increasing the supply of a good or service (like adding highway lanes) leads to a rise in its consumption, often negating initial benefits and returning to previous congestion levels or worse. More roads make driving seem easier, encouraging more trips, longer commutes, and new developments, ultimately filling the new capacity and creating a cycle of demand for even more infrastructure. It's a key concept in transportation, showing that building more roads often doesn't solve traffic jams long-term.

That's why building a tunnel will just create more traffic.

Have you seen the lanes they added between Mississauga and Milton? It's already at capacity.

Freight bypass for trucks using trains. Tax incentives for trucks to use rail to bypass Toronto. Perhaps a way to transport drivers with the trucks so they can continue after the bypass. Hamilton to Oshawa and then Barrie to Hamilton or Oshawa using existing corridors.

Canada already transports more freight by rail than almost any other country.

Bus lanes on the 401 or a mid town corridor like the proposed GO LRT through green corridors. Finch, Sheppard and Eglinton LRTs are nice but they serve local customers. We need a way to transport people across regions.

Perhaps a inter urban express service like VIA that goes from Hamilton to Oshawa. With limited stops.

 

[narduch]

Do any of you know about Induced demand? No matter how many lanes of highway you build, it will never be enough.

Induced demand is the economic and urban planning principle where increasing the supply of a good or service (like adding highway lanes) leads to a rise in its consumption, often negating initial benefits and returning to previous congestion levels or worse. More roads make driving seem easier, encouraging more trips, longer commutes, and new developments, ultimately filling the new capacity and creating a cycle of demand for even more infrastructure. It's a key concept in transportation, showing that building more roads often doesn't solve traffic jams long-term.

That's why building a tunnel will just create more traffic.

Have you seen the lanes they added between Mississauga and Milton? It's already at capacity.

Freight bypass for trucks using trains. Tax incentives for trucks to use rail to bypass Toronto. Perhaps a way to transport drivers with the trucks so they can continue after the bypass. Hamilton to Oshawa and then Barrie to Hamilton or Oshawa using existing corridors.

Canada already transports more freight by rail than almost any other country.

Bus lanes on the 401 or a mid town corridor like the proposed GO LRT through green corridors. Finch, Sheppard and Eglinton LRTs are nice but they serve local customers. We need a way to transport people across regions.

Perhaps a inter urban express service like VIA that goes from Hamilton to Oshawa. With limited stops.

Even the studies of the Bradford Bypass show that the local roads in Bradford will eventually be just as busy as they are now.

Don't get me started on the 413 either. That highway will be no panacea.

 

[nfitz]

Even the studies of the Bradford Bypass show that the local roads in Bradford will eventually be just as busy as they are now.

What do the studies show about local roads will be eventually without the Bradford bypass?

 

[narduch]

What do the studies show about local roads will be eventually without the Bradford bypass?

The article I read didn't state that.

But do we really need to spend billions on a highway on environmentally sensitive lands so a town of 24,000 people can get to the 400 two minutes faster?

 

[2323]

But do we really need to spend billions on a highway on environmentally sensitive lands so a town of 24,000 people can get to the 400 two minutes faster?

It's not necessarily about speed per se, it is about redirecting through traffic from local roads and Downtown Bradford where it doesn't need to be. This is the model we should be aiming for- through roads for cars should be separate from valuable space in our cities. It's why the Netherlands and a lot of other great cities are able to be are good as they are. They purposely build freeways to take through traffic away from inside the city. The classic urbanist "paradises" Amsterdam, Copenhagen, Barcelona etc. all have expansive freeway bypass networks.

 

[2323]

It's a key concept in transportation, showing that building more roads often doesn't solve traffic jams long-term.

12 lanes moving at 40km/h is still more people than 6 lanes at the same speed. Not that we should endlessly expand highways, but don't we want more people taking trips? That improves people's mobility. Obviously if we can make those trips on transit it is superior, but freeways will always be necessary in some cases and not all trips can be made on transit. You have to keep in mind the 401 is the through route across southern Ontario.

 

[Bordercollie]

12 lanes moving at 40km/h is still more people than 6 lanes at the same speed. Not that we should endlessly expand highways, but don't we want more people taking trips? That improves people's mobility. Obviously if we can make those trips on transit it is superior, but freeways will always be necessary in some cases and not all trips can be made on transit. You have to keep in mind the 401 is the through route across southern Ontario.

But induced demand means if you build it people will use it and it will become chocked. And then you have to build more lanes.
And during rush our it's worse than 40kmph.

 

[2323]

And then you have to build more lanes.

After a certain point it becomes unrealistic or unreasonable to keep expanding. Aside from the frivolous 401 tunnel proposal, there really isn’t much to realistically do to the 401 across Toronto proper except maybe some lane reconfigurations. The 400 will be fully built out in the coming years. 407 is already fully built in many sections. Eventually you have to seriously consider alternate modes either way. So it’s not a never ending cycle but I don’t think we should just ignore these trips. If you want it to be a never ending cycle that’s where you get into the whole 401 tunnel idea. All I’m saying is that it’s not a bad thing to expand highways within reason.