Toronto Ontario Line 3 | ?m | ?s

[steveintoronto]

I have a feeling the province is still going to be vague about the details. They for some reason like to keep the public on cliffhangers.

I've Googled for a good fifteen minutes, can't find any reference, albeit it does sound familiar.

I think that there's not only a detailed plan at Metrolinx, there's a number of them, but none that will add detailed substantiation to the one the F Boys dropped their jaw on.

More than anything, I'd like to know where the "bridge is cheaper than a tunnel" claim comes from. I've seen a number of Toronto 'experts' claim that it does make sense. lol...it flies in the face of known practice elsewhere. There's every reason *not* to bring a deep-tunnel to the surface, over a bridge, and back down to the deep depths again. All to save money. Makes me wonder on 'Toronto expert' advice.

I'm building an elevator to the Moon. Honest. It will save money from going the long way round.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Three Card Monte is easier to follow than the sleights of hand (sleight of hands?) being dealt at this time.
It's at the point where "committed" "budgeted" and "funded" mean as much as "I love you" from a prostitute. The truly troubling aspect is that so many still fall for it.

No wonder this QP regime wants to make it difficult to sue them.

The hoi polloi falling for it is expected - for forumers to fall for it from someone with zero track record of delivering transit is troubling.

AoD

 

[steveintoronto]

someone with zero track record of delivering transit

And that's the dull edge both sides of the sword. Investors also can't take someone like this seriously. It's not how you do business, and any smart corporation would fire someone fronting for them dissing clients and treasured customers.

I'm at the point of dying to hear the words of a consortium stepping in to offer explanations of how they plan to build this, what's involved, the return they expect, and what they will pledge in return to the Public...ultimately their customers.

Can you imagine flying with an airline featuring Foaming Ford as your Captain? "Open for Business"...phhhh...what kind of business? Buck a beer? Hash-tag...

 

[steveintoronto]

^ Serendipity!

And that's the dull edge both sides of the sword. Investors also can't take someone like this seriously. It's not how you do business, and any smart corporation would fire someone fronting for them dissing clients and treasured customers.

Example writ large, and Siemens and others will and have been watching closely:

Cancellation of German-owned Ontario wind project prompts warning from Berlin
SHAWN MCCARTHYGLOBAL ENERGY REPORTER
OTTAWA
PUBLISHED JULY 23, 2018UPDATED JULY 24, 2018
72 COMMENTS
Ontario’s move to cancel the contract of a German-owned wind energy project represents a black mark for the province in the eyes of foreign investors, Berlin’s ambassador to Canada, Sabine Sparwasser, warned Monday.
The German government and multinational companies have taken note of Premier Doug Ford’s decision to pull the plug on wpd AG’s White Pines wind project in Prince Edward County, as well as the bill now before the legislature that will allow the province to set limits on what compensation is provided, Ms. Sparwasser said in a telephone interview.
“Obviously, every incoming government has the right to change policy direction,” she said. “But to have a unilateral cancellation pushed through by law that way is unsettling for the company, but is also something that will unsettle other potential investors." [...]

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/bus...ed-ontario-wind-project-prompts-warning-from/

Addendum: Subsequent to the above, and to repeat what I posted prior on the Class 717 being so especially apt for the 'Ontario Line'

GTR selected Siemens to supply the fleet in December 2015. The operator organised a separate competition to finance the order, and a deal worth more than £200m was signed by the Rock Rail Moorgate joint venture of Rock Rail Holdings and Aberdeen Standard Investments in February 2016. According to Siemens, this is the first time that UK rolling stock financing is being provided through a direct long-term investment by pension and insurance companies.

https://www.railwaygazette.com/news...w/great-northern-class-717-emus-unveiled.html

Note that reference to Siemens!

Financial Services
Siemens achieves financial close for Thameslink Rolling Stock Programme
Munich, 2013-Jun-27
Siemens Financial Services (SFS) – the financing arm of Siemens – contributed to the completion of a 25-year financing package for Thameslink. In this context SFS is participating in the equity and debt components of the overall project, which will finance both the manufacturing of train carriages and the construction of two depots.
Thameslink is set up as a public-private partnership between the Department for Transport and the project consortium Cross London Trains (XLT). SFS acts via Siemens Project Ventures GmbH as equal shareholder in XLT next to private equity investors 3i and Innisfree in the total £177 million equity. The Thameslink Rolling Stock Programme (TRSP) also includes a contract for the construction and lease of two depots – at Hornsey and Three Bridges – financed through an innovative receivables purchase agreement between SFS and Siemens UK.
"By combining leading technology with innovative financial solutions, the project demonstrates Siemens' ability to make large-scale infrastructure projects happen even in volatile market environments," says Roland Chalons-Browne, CEO of Siemens Financial Services.
In addition to providing capital to the project, SFS acted in an advisory and arranging capacity playing a vital role in securing the overall debt financing. Next to a group of 19 banks, lead by SMBC, BTMU, Lloyds and KfW IPEX, the European Investment Bank was a major lender to the facility.
[...]
Siemens achieves financial close for Thameslink Rolling ... - Global
https://www.siemens.com/press/en/pressrelease/2013/financial.../sfs201306006.htm


Financing a 'key factor' in Siemens' Thameslink win
www.railtechnologymagazine.com/.../financing-a-key-factor-in-siemens-thameslink-w...
Aug 16, 2013 - The head of the Siemens division responsible for putting together the fundingpackage for the Thameslink rolling stock deal says the financing ...
Siemens selected as preferred bidder for Thameslink Rolling Stock ...
https://w3.siemens.co.uk/.../siemensselectedaspreferredbidderforthameslinkrollingstoc...
Jun 16, 2011 - Siemens and Cross London Trains (XLT) (a consortium consisting of finance partners Siemens Project Ventures GmbH, lnnisfree Limited and ...
Siemens pushed on Thameslink rail finance | Financial Times
https://www.ft.com/content/7c4a86b8-236b-11e2-a66b-00144feabdc0
Oct 31, 2012 - Pressure is mounting on Siemens to secure the financing for a controversial train order amid signs that ministers are concerned that the fallout ...[...etc...]

-: Google

Take a big guess as to who won't be calling the F Brothers? (Ford and Fedeli)...or any other German or EU interests calling them for that matter. Perhaps not even BBD since their Transportation Division HQ is in Germany.

Ya really know how to impress people Dougie Boy...Maybe Lionel might put in a bid? The F brothers shid on people, then complain about the smell. They don't get it, most everyone else does.

 

[micheal_can]

It is clear where demand is. It is also clear where it isn't.

Demand is on Yonge Line. Demand is also west of the city.

So, the East (North) end should be somewhere parallel to Yonge. The West (W-E-S-T) should be south of the Gardner/QEW. Swinging it back up north is rather pointless.

 

[44 North]

The hoi polloi falling for it is expected - for forumers to fall for it from someone with zero track record of delivering transit is troubling.

AoD

But it's a map, and it's new, that means it's for realz! Yea this is my view, but it's not necessitated on any one party or leader (tho with Ford it's sort of nuff said). They're all to be viewed with skepticism. NDP, PC, Lib, fed, provincial. Am eager to see the technical doc however.

It is clear where demand is. It is also clear where it isn't.

Demand is on Yonge Line. Demand is also west of the city.

So, the East (North) end should be somewhere parallel to Yonge. The West (W-E-S-T) should be south of the Gardner/QEW. Swinging it back up north is rather pointless.

Hm, definitely not pointless. Line 2 is 85-100% full between St George and Ossington, which is pretty telling. Also St George is getting kinda jammed, tho obviously better passenger mobility than Y+B. Barring any massive fare change up, am not expecting those numbers to decrease.

 

[BurlOak]

I strongly suspect that we will see a Phase 1 + Phase 2 Ontario Line project, likely due to costs or political realities. I'm guessing the south-of-Danforth segment gets completed first, in line with DoFo's Ontario Place plans.

I would say staggered opening - but not a separate contract. Phase 1 would be from the Millwood bridge southward. That is where they switch from tunnel to bridge, so it's an obvious pause point. Also, this lets the bridge crew get to work, which is a different specialty than the tunneling and station crews. When the tunnels and stations are finished south - they would move north. I am not sure where the other break point would be - it depends to some degree on the location of TBM launch/exaction points. They could also tunnel all the way to Ontario Place, but then concentrate on the stations from City Hall to Cosburn, and open that portion first and then move on to the Osgoode (or Spadina) and West stations. This stagger would party spread the funding out a bit, but also would allow an earlier opening to be achieved. It also reducing the amount of concurrent work being performed, and as there are more construction sites, the worker quality would drop - especially since there would be multiple subways being worked on at once.

 

[lead82]

Phasing would not work if the technology selected needs a new yard, which realistically can only be built near Thorncliffe Park. Which means you might as well go to Eglinton for phase 1. Maybe the Osgoode to Exhibition/OP is a phase 2 opening. Time will tell if and when any of this gets built.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

^ Nobody wants it to fail. It's not a bad idea. The issues deserving pushback include:

- Ford has slagged TTC and City Planning as incapable of planning and executing transit construction. Actually, the staff and engineering work on the DRL is pretty solid and it is reaching a defined level of completion and defensibility. It's quite reasonable to point out that the Ford-ML plan, in contrast, is at a much earlier stage, and its technical feasibility is based on much less due diligence.
- It's also quite reasonable to look at ML's performance on its projects and challenge whether their track record is really any better.
- Ford/ML have claimed that his version will be cheaper than traditional TTC subway. The onus is on Ford/ML to substantiate this. Again, their design is at a much less developed point and their cost data is less developed, so this assertion does not rest on data.
- Ford claims that his version will meet all foreseeable demand, even though it is physically smaller. Once again, the onus is on Ford to prove that assertion. Yeah, the City may have tainted its earlier forecasting (especially wrt the Line 2 Scarboro debate) but two booboos don't make a good plan. This to me is the show stopper - building a line that proves to be too small in the longest term is not appropriate.
- The routing at Exhibition/Ontario Place needs to be established in far more detail, particularly in relation to other things eg Liberty Village, new transit to the Humber, etc.

Ford/ML are counting on the city and the voter to be so sick of transit debates that they just roll over and say, get on with it. Sorry, but due diligence is due diligence. Ford/ML need to demonstrate their due diligence. That' not seeking failure, although one suspects that Ford/ML are further out on the limb than they claim, and any number of these arguments might fall apart with proper examination.

- Paul

+1

I'd also like to add that Ford has played a role in the broken transit planning at Toronto council and now he's lambasting council for their indecision.

 

[syn]

If this entire line can't be up and running by 2027 then it will have NOTHING to do with planning or construction and EVERYTHING to do with Toronto politics. Vancouver's 13 station, 17 km Millenium Line was announced and completely built within 28 months. From Clark's announcement, shovels were in the ground within 8 months and it came in $50 million under budget. Yes it is elevated but so will much of the OL line will be and the ENTIRE route was under construction at the same time. None of this Toronto crap where they build one part and then when it's done they move onto the next section. One of the advantages of PPP is that they don't do things on government time...……...they sooner they get building, the sooner they get paid and the amount they get paid is contractual regardless of whether it takes them longer to do it or not.

With a PPP the government sets all the parameters and then the private companies start building with very heavy fines if they don't bring it in on time and they assume 100% of any cost over-runs. Unlike a government, there are real financial consequences if they don't get it in on-time and o-budget, none of this "escalated dollars' crap. PPP also holds the governments foot to the fire as the penalties for the next government trying to cancel or shorten it not only costs them massive one time penalties but more importantly on-going ones for all the money they were projected to make over the course of the project......…….the government has to pay for the whole damn line even if it doesn't get built so needless to say, they get built.

Toronto having a subway at all is a result of "Toronto crap".

Looking at the big picture, Toronto has proven itself to be excellent at building higher order transit. The first subway was built and funded entirely by the city.

Things started going wrong when higher levels of government began interfering. That interference has continued throughout the decades, and increasingly made transit a political priority rather than a practical one.

 

[pman]

Toronto having a subway at all is a result of "Toronto crap".

Looking at the big picture, Toronto has proven itself to be excellent at building higher order transit. The first subway was built and funded entirely by the city.

Things started going wrong when higher levels of government began interfering. That interference has continued throughout the decades, and increasingly made transit a political priority rather than a practical one.

That’s a good point. The original Spadina subway alignment and Scarborough RT were ordered by the province under Davis. Harris chose to support the Sheppard subway while filling in tunnelling that had been started for an Eglinton subway. And Sorbara rewarded his Vaughan pals with the Spadina extension. So a bipartisan provincial history of shame, or at least subordinating demand-based planning to political expediency.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

That’s a good point. The original Spadina subway alignment and Scarborough RT were ordered by the province under Davis. Harris chose to support the Sheppard subway while filling in tunnelling that had been started for an Eglinton subway. And Sorbara rewarded his Vaughan pals with the Spadina extension. So a bipartisan provincial history of shame, or at least subordinating demand-based planning to political expediency.

Can't blame it entirely on the province - political expediency - even within Metro Council - certainly has a lot to do with it (see Ed Levy's Rapid Transit in Toronto p. 116 onward)

AoD

 

[syn]

That’s a good point. The original Spadina subway alignment and Scarborough RT were ordered by the province under Davis. Harris chose to support the Sheppard subway while filling in tunnelling that had been started for an Eglinton subway. And Sorbara rewarded his Vaughan pals with the Spadina extension. So a bipartisan provincial history of shame, or at least subordinating demand-based planning to political expediency.

Let's not forget about things like Amalgamation. If we still had the Metro system of government, Scarborough (for example) and it's politicians would have to deal with the practical realities of extending the subway to STC. Unlike now, where it's easy to blame 'downtown' councilors for not wanting to help people out east, Scarborough would have to figure out what they could & couldn't fund and what would be in the best interest of it's citizens.

 

[ssiguy2]

Conversely, it was TORONTO elected Mayor Lastman who spearheaded a subway in the suburbs, it was a TORONTO elected Mayor Miller who created a transit plan that didn't even consider the a downtown relief but quite the opposite having LRT funnel even more people onto the already overburdened current subways, and it was a TORONTO elected Mayor Ford who cancelled the Scar LRT and the Sheppard East LRT. Those were TORONTO electoral decisions that had nothing to do with Queen's Park and everything to do with TORONTO politicians trying to make cheap political gains and complete political inertia.

Instead of Toronto looking out the window for scapegoats, they should first look in the mirror.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

If this entire line can't be up and running by 2027 then it will have NOTHING to do with planning or construction and EVERYTHING to do with Toronto politics. Vancouver's 13 station, 17 km Millenium Line was announced and completely built within 28 months. From Clark's announcement, shovels were in the ground within 8 months and it came in $50 million under budget. Yes it is elevated but so will much of the OL line will be and the ENTIRE route was under construction at the same time. None of this Toronto crap where they build one part and then when it's done they move onto the next section. One of the advantages of PPP is that they don't do things on government time...……...they sooner they get building, the sooner they get paid and the amount they get paid is contractual regardless of whether it takes them longer to do it or not.

With a PPP the government sets all the parameters and then the private companies start building with very heavy fines if they don't bring it in on time and they assume 100% of any cost over-runs. Unlike a government, there are real financial consequences if they don't get it in on-time and o-budget, none of this "escalated dollars' crap. PPP also holds the governments foot to the fire as the penalties for the next government trying to cancel or shorten it not only costs them massive one time penalties but more importantly on-going ones for all the money they were projected to make over the course of the project......…….the government has to pay for the whole damn line even if it doesn't get built so needless to say, they get built.

And how many years of engineering were required before getting to the point of construction starting?

Considering that the detailed design actually started in late 2006, the 10 years that it took for the line to open doesn't seem so out-of-line with what happens elsewhere in North America, eh?

Dan

Never mind that the Canada Line is far from exemplifying quality infrastructure. The project was built quickly and cheaply, and it shows. The 10 year old line is woefully underbuilt, and already hitting its capacity limits. Similar story with REM in Montreal, and the same thing will happen with Ontario Line too.