Cobra
Senior Member
The Infrastructure bank will make easier for cities to continuously expand their network.
|
|
|
muller877
Senior Member
Toronto...maybe. The rest...no.
Most large pension plans need a $1b+ project before they will spend their time/effort/money on a bid. And only a few will look at these projects (i.e. they will charge more than if it is a big project). Ideally 2.5b+ to get competitive bids from around the world.
Finch West, Hurontario and ion are all at that $1b cut-off point. You would have had to package all 3 together to get a large enough project for multiple bids.
And the cities have to pay for these deferred costs in the future. I'm scared some cities will spend like drunken sailors and pass the financing costs onto future generations without a firm plan in place for funding.
M II A II R II K
Senior Member
This rendering shows what the Toronto council-approved and provincially-funded, seven-stop Scarborough LRT would have looked like in its own right-of-way:
https://www.thestar.com/news/city_h...hat-we-know-about-transit-in-scarborough.html
https://www.thestar.com/news/city_h...hat-we-know-about-transit-in-scarborough.html
Cobra
Senior Member
This rendering shows what the Toronto council-approved and provincially-funded, seven-stop Scarborough LRT would have looked like in its own right-of-way:
https://www.thestar.com/news/city_h...hat-we-know-about-transit-in-scarborough.html
That looks like Skytrain so no, it wouldn't look like that. LRT on the RT route was always idiotic to me to begin with
Voltz
Senior Member
Very minor visual difference, the point was that there was to be a rapid transit station right next to a college campus where Tory held a public meeting on Monday to tell everyone that a plan that does not build transit there is better, and that most people at that meeting where unaware of what was to be.
robmausser
Senior Member
Yep. The original plan was to upgrade, refurbish and extend the RT, for a fraction of the cost of the LRT or Subway plan.
The Star is a left leaning paper, and its hilarious they use this picture without realising the implications.
Other than one opinion piece by Royson James at the Star, they champion David Miller's LRT, because they are a liberal leaning paper.
However, the LRT was and is just as misguided and pointless as the subway extension, and opened up the whole debate for subways in the first place.
There was a plan for the RT to be refurbished, extended and upgraded to new trains, and David Miller superseded it for LRT instead, to fit in line with his Transit City legacy.
What this did is raise the cost, and the time it would take to convert the RT to LRT from the refurbishment, which would have meant buses for 8! months while the RT was repaired, and the new trains tested. Instead it was to be shutdown for 36 months for LRT conversion, at $1.4 billion.
This opened up the argument that "hey a subway is only $500 million more (obviously a lowball figure) and it means we won't have to bus people for 36 months"
If we had stuck to the RT conversion plan in place, Scarbrough would already have a nice, rapid transit system out to Centennial College and Sheppard Ave with new, quiet, clean articulated trains right now as we speak.
The LRT is a better solution than the subway, yes, but almost all the transit experts who are not involved in the politics agree this was the best solution.
https://www.thestar.com/news/city_h...lect-of-scarborough-rt-is-shameful-james.html
OneCity
Senior Member
Great post. I prefer the subway to SCC over LRT. Contrary to the Stars insinuation I don't believe the there would much savings if switched back to LRT at this point.
If we are looking for value neither subway or LRT should be discussed. They needed to come clean years ago and admit the Sheppard subway was a mistake and needed to be modified to accept another technology. That would have changed everything.
Voltz
Senior Member
Most of that is ridiculous,
The original plan was not to extend the RT, only refurbish it, that's why the cost was so low, as well that plan had not yet gone through a detailed design phase that would probably have increased the cost.
In the context of 2-3 other LRT lines nearby it made sense to have the RT using the same technology, since it would mean one fewer yard is needed and one less fleet type.
As for the shut down it was stated as little as 8 Months for RT to as much as 3 years for LRT. The actual figure for each was likely closer to the middle for each. And they probably would have decided that rebuilding the tunnel at Ellesmere was necessary either way, so the shutdown could have been fairly close either way.
There can't have been that much of a difference in cost with the extension with RT vs LRT, the infrastructure was similar either way, just different power systems, and again, one less yard with LRT.
As well, the EA was done before it was decided to use LRT, the switch did not cause delay, it was McGunity that delayed it, had he not, it would have been running to Malvern right now, and no one would be clamouring for a Subway.
Cobra
Senior Member
Even one better, why wasn't this thrown in for the RT upgrade plan?
Even better, like Lionel-Groulx in Montreal:
More to the point:
- Cross platform transfer between the RT and the Bloor-Danforth Subway??? Pro LRT pundits were way too happy to make it happen at Don Mills Station as a way to kill Sheppard East subway permanently, yet this was never proposed for Kennedy station
Even better, like Lionel-Groulx in Montreal:
More to the point:
- SRT plateform with MkIII trains at Subway level, make it a cross plateform transfer like intended for Don Mills
- Move Eglinton Crosstown to concourse level
IRT_BMT_IND
Active Member
One platform is not enough to turn subway trains at kennedy.
salsa
Senior Member
"Why can't the left compromise, yadi yada."
"Why can't subway supports put the subway above ground to save money."
Guys, do really want politicians to be the ones deciding what form of transit to build, where the lines and stations should go, etc? Why can't we just put our biases aside and advocate for the best possible transit plan (whatever that happens to be) based on the advice of qualified city staff? Because frankly this subway plan (which is entirely politically driven) as currently proposed is appalling in just about every possible way.
"Why can't subway supports put the subway above ground to save money."
Guys, do really want politicians to be the ones deciding what form of transit to build, where the lines and stations should go, etc? Why can't we just put our biases aside and advocate for the best possible transit plan (whatever that happens to be) based on the advice of qualified city staff? Because frankly this subway plan (which is entirely politically driven) as currently proposed is appalling in just about every possible way.
M II A II R II K
Senior Member
Perhaps it should go back to RT as well as the Malvern line to make it one big circle.
Voltz
Senior Member
Even one better, why wasn't this thrown in for the RT upgrade plan?
More to the point:
Don't get me wrong, today's situation is BS but man did the pro-LRT people did just as much damage by flat out refusing to let go of LRT for the SRT corridor. If the current STC urban plan was still envisioned, there's noting preventing the SRT to go underground at Scarborough Centre and go back up above ground past the new STC downtown district.
- SRT plateform with MkIII trains at Subway level, make it a cross plateform transfer like intended for Don Mills
- Move Eglinton Crosstown to concourse level
Sigh,
The transfer at Don Mills was not a cross platform, is was to be at the east end of the subway platform, the two LRT tracks were to sit just inside of the subway tracks, with a platform in the middle, which would be the subway platform continued east, as well the tunnels were to be reusable for a future subway extension.
And to add to what was already said, the politicians did not do detailed design work on these transit projects,
Cobra
Senior Member
This should have been proposed for the SRT-Line 2 at Kennedy, that's what I'm saying
Lol, you really buy that?
Voltz
Senior Member
Which would put the SRT platform well east of the SRT corridor, with the trains coming out of the ground facing east, these plans were designed by experts who know what they are doing and take into account many details, not just an irrational hatred of the left or pro-LRT people.
And yes, I do buy that, it was in the design drawings.