Coolstar
Senior Member
In fact we're well off topic here.
This is why I think the solution on the Yonge line is to move the south bound tracks directly under Yonge. You move the majority of the construction to the street - where localized cut-and-cover and decking can provide a pretty isolated construction site.The simple fact of the matter is that upgrading any facility while keeping it open is demonstrably more difficult and time-consuming than building something from scratch.
If building from scratch, you prevent all public access once, and build the thing, worrying only about staging in a manner that affects how the item will be built.
If something is to be built while still open, the accesses to and from the facility as well as those inside need to be kept open and made safe. Plans need to be made for the staging of the blocking off of areas and making them safe as the construction goes on elsewhere. It costs time and effort to move barriers and re-route traffic flows. Even staging of the construction itself must be done in a way to not only keep the occupants/users safe, but engineered in such a way as to ensure that the construction can be done in safe and realistic manner without adversely affecting the ongoing operations. For instance, you can't build the third floor of a building if the columns and structure up to it haven't been completed yet.
There are far more steps involved in completing the work, and in something like a transit station, far more entities involved as well.
Dan
I'm confused at what the moral of the story is here.
The simple fact of the matter is that upgrading any facility while keeping it open is demonstrably more difficult and time-consuming than building something from scratch.
If building from scratch, you prevent all public access once, and build the thing, worrying only about staging in a manner that affects how the item will be built.
If something is to be built while still open, the accesses to and from the facility as well as those inside need to be kept open and made safe. Plans need to be made for the staging of the blocking off of areas and making them safe as the construction goes on elsewhere. It costs time and effort to move barriers and re-route traffic flows. Even staging of the construction itself must be done in a way to not only keep the occupants/users safe, but engineered in such a way as to ensure that the construction can be done in safe and realistic manner without adversely affecting the ongoing operations. For instance, you can't build the third floor of a building if the columns and structure up to it haven't been completed yet.
There are far more steps involved in completing the work, and in something like a transit station, far more entities involved as well.
Dan
The actual cost is highly speculative and the owners of Hudson's Bay are extremely eager to redevelop, so the likelihood of the project cost being cut in half is probable.For the amount of money this will cost, the city and province should abandon this project. It's crazy to drop this much money for a new platform for 1 of the 4 directions at this station. $1.5B you can build a lot more. For example, why not build a dedicated LRT on Bay St from Bay Station down to Union on the street - re-purpose the HOV lane. It would cost 1/10th of this and would actually provide an alternative.
You could do a similar thing on the other downtown lines - perhaps use the money to improve Dundas and King streetcar service to enable faster connections to Bloor/Danforth. That way people now transferring at Bloor-Yonge have an alternative means to travel. Spend money to make other routes better not to marginally improve flow at a crowded station.
This construction will be a nightmare of epic proportions for 10-15years for very little improvement and a lot of sunk costs.
Yup. I fully expect the city to make an announcement in 6 months with a significantly reduced capital cost here.The actual cost is highly speculative and the owners of Hudson's Bay are extremely eager to redevelop, so the likelihood of the project cost being cut in half is probable.
This is why I think the solution on the Yonge line is to move the south bound tracks directly under Yonge. You move the majority of the construction to the street - where localized cut-and-cover and decking can provide a pretty isolated construction site.
View attachment 278807
For Bloor, I thought about moving the Eastbound platform directly under Bloor. Again, you move construction away from the inside of the Bay tower to the street. I don't know the exact location of tracks in this area, but I think the best I could get is a 150m radius curves to accomplish this (I don't recall what the radius is near Union Station, but I think it's similar).
View attachment 278811
One would hope that it doesn't preclude the future addition of a new southbound platform for Line 1, under Yonge (or two platforms, looking at the old drawing). That might be a cheaper job than this, with the work being shallower, and less interference with the existing station.The problem with this idea is that it only resolves one of the two problems - the issue of platform capacity on the Yonge Line. Platform capacity on the B-D is now a concern as well, and this plan did nothing to fix it.
It's not completely perfect, but the TTC's current plan will go a long way towards resolving both issues.
I'm surprised this is going forward. One of the benefit line items for the DRL/OL is that you get to avoid doing this work. $1 billion dollars gets you half of Vancouver's Canada line: we're spending that to get a couple staircases and not improve rapid transit coverage by 1 meter. Why not put that money towards extending the OL to Sheppard and shave off another couple thousand pphpd on Yonge traffic?
Interesting how the results with OL seem to be better than DRL.This slide from the TTC board meeting should dispel the myth from some people that the Ontario Line is a viable substitute for this project.
View attachment 279412
Interesting how the results with OL seem to be better than DRL.
Interesting how the results with OL seem to be better than DRL.