Recent content by Westey

It's hard to argue this. I didn't think it could get worse than Trudeau but Prime Minister Brookfield is sure giving a run for the money.

The criteria of no work in the water (and no permanent structure in the water) likely came from environmental or hydrology. They probably wanted to improve the hydraulics of the channel by having no piers to obstruct the water (assuming the existing bridge will be replaced during this one's life...

We voted for it, so why expect prosperity.

There are two types of balanced Cantilever design - with precast and with cast-in-place. Typically, they need several miles of bridge before the precast is considered. Also, they prefer to lift the segments from below which requires a bit more access from below - which is harder in a valley...

Thanks, My quick math if this was done in 2012 or so. Eglinton Grade separated to STC = $2B (extra over Eglinton LRT). 8 km elevated extension from STC to Malvern and UTSC = $2B. ($250M/km). 4km B-D extension to Kingston Road. $3B ($750M/km). Total = $7B. what we did. B-D...

I was hoping to have a tunnel there - but I guess it would still be the same effect of not being opened.

I had the B-D line following Eglinton - back when the Eglinton Line was planned to go up to STC (circa 2011). This would have been a 4km extension of B-D, to Kingston (Road, not City), along with a 2km extension of elevated Eglinton Line to Centennial. Then 3km branches to Malvern or UTSC...

I think the same thing happened in Romania and in France. The EU doesn't like a leader and mysteriously they come up with charges against them. Hopefully Hungary can resist the EU authoritarianism.

I guess it's up to Robert Fico to be the voice of reason in Europe. Orban could only do it for so long before the never-ending EU propaganda against him would bear fruit.

First off, it's too embarrassing to close Eglinton from Laird to Kennedy to elevate it. What's done is done and that mistake must be lived with for a while. Maybe at some point in the distant future when there is more of a network (Ontario Line to Seneca, Sheppard Line to Scarborough, etc.)...

It goes back to the Finch West arguement. It was working the way it was designed - but as soon as it opened it was realized that this was not what was wanted. They looked at the data and said that 80% (I'm inventing this) of trips are local, so who cares about overall speed. All that matters...

Usually the option is short frequent trains vs. long infrequent ones. Here you seem to be wanting frequent large trains - all the cost of large infrastructure plus all the costs of frequent surface.

I'd vote 100% elevated. Burying 50% seems to just add a bunch of cost while still having several reliability and bottleneck problems.

I think there is some type of weird contest were voters say they don't care how corrupt or immoral the governments is, they will continue to support them. Currently, the federal Liberal voters are beating the Provincial PC voters 4 to 3 and neither side is ready to blink.

I thought MTO looked at this "Big Bold Idea" back in 2019 or so. That is, the tunnel from 427 to 404. I recall MTO estimate was $50B or so (based on construction costs at the time).