News   May 01, 2024
Four-Tower Complex North of Finch Station Grows in Resubmission
 981     1 
News   May 01, 2024
TMU Urban and Regional Planning Alumni Celebrate 25th Annual Spring Reception at Little Canada
 283     0 
News   May 01, 2024
Ballin' Out for Charity: Toronto's Real Estate Basketball Event Scores Big for Youth Empowerment
 343     0 

Toronto Crosstown LRT | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx | Arcadis

wopchop said:
All good points, as well. I'm not saying that what I said is the only factor, but to say it isn't a factor in tendering large projects is wrong IMO.
Click to expand...

I think the real question is why couldn't this be tendered as smaller projects to speed up the process and allow for a staged opening of segments as they are completed? Is cost really the only thing holding that back? If so, would you know how significant the cost difference would be?

Ie. The portion from Black Creek to Eglinton West could have been phase 1, Eglinton West to Yonge, or right to Leslie as phase 2, and the surface portion as phase 3.

And would the savings in staff (bus drivers), diesel, and equipment make up for the increase in cost to get phase 1 opened sooner? Surely the city and TTC would save quite a bit of money by no longer having to run buses along Eglinton West if that portion were to open sooner. Also factor in the cost of gridlock, lost ridership from construction delays, lost business, etc.
 
Tuscani01 said:
I think the real question is why couldn't this be tendered as smaller projects to speed up the process and allow for a staged opening of segments as they are completed? Is cost really the only thing holding that back? If so, would you know how significant the cost difference would be?
Click to expand...
It likely could have, but as TransitPolicyChanger said, cash flow was likely a major contributing factor. The Province has only budgeted so much per year for the project, and the tenders needed to take into account the ability to actually pay for the work to be done.
 
wopchop said:
It likely could have, but as TransitPolicyChanger said, cash flow was likely a major contributing factor. The Province has only budgeted so much per year for the project, and the tenders needed to take into account the ability to actually pay for the work to be done.
Click to expand...
Its all political - not technical. Size is a factor but not one that should have seen this not overly complex project (only complex parts will be at the interchange stations) stretched out this long.

We have worked on bidding for station design - the RFPs came out so late in the process (compared to tunneling) and were all lumped together as one contract - when I think the station designs should have been 100% well over a year ago.
 
I never said it was technical? Pretty sure that I admitted that it was a political and business decision, but okay.
 
Tuscani01 said:
I think the real question is why couldn't this be tendered as smaller projects to speed up the process and allow for a staged opening of segments as they are completed? Is cost really the only thing holding that back? If so, would you know how significant the cost difference would be?

Ie. The portion from Black Creek to Eglinton West could have been phase 1, Eglinton West to Yonge, or right to Leslie as phase 2, and the surface portion as phase 3.

And would the savings in staff (bus drivers), diesel, and equipment make up for the increase in cost to get phase 1 opened sooner? Surely the city and TTC would save quite a bit of money by no longer having to run buses along Eglinton West if that portion were to open sooner. Also factor in the cost of gridlock, lost ridership from construction delays, lost business, etc.
Click to expand...

I believe the Keele to Oakwood section of the tunnel will be turned over to Crosslinx sooner than the Eglinton West to Brentcliffe section, however it doesn't make sense to operate the LRT to Oakwood and then have everyone transfer to buses to get to Eglinton West. Eglinton West will be one of the last stations to be built since it is the west end of the Allen to Yonge tunnel and will need to be under the controlled of the tunnel contractor until the TBM's reach Yonge.
 
When the line was first funded, the plan was to open the first phase next year, from Eglinton West to Kipling.

Then the funding was pushed back, delaying everything to when the last phase was planned to be done, also the western section was cancelled.

Going for a P3 model probably contributed to delays as well, since they have to tender everything out at once, not individual sections as they become ready.
 
I take it that there'll be an all day bus service running above the tunneled sections, especially given the distances between some of the stations.
 
M II A II R II K said:
I take it that there'll be an all day bus service running above the tunneled sections, especially given the distances between some of the stations.
Click to expand...

The distances between the underground stations on Eglinton Avenue are about the same distances as on Bloor Street and Danforth Avenue. There is no "local" bus service on Bloor & Danforth, when the subway is running.

Would like to see a "local" bus service on Eglinton, especially since we can assume that the escalators and elevators will be out-of-service at times for maintenance (see link for planned maintenance), and the buses would then be able to provide accessibility at all times. However, if they do, they had better provide 10 minute headway or better service. The 97 Yonge bus, that parallels the Line 1 on Yonge Street, has headways of between 15 to 30 minutes. Not acceptable.
 
Tuscani01 said:
I think the real question is why couldn't this be tendered as smaller projects to speed up the process and allow for a staged opening of segments as they are completed? Is cost really the only thing holding that back? If so, would you know how significant the cost difference would be?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't imagine tendering it separately would work well. It's much easier to have one consortium develop the whole thing to avoid conflicts, confusion, errors, etc. Also less mobilization costs and overhead.

Also, I worked in the Crosslinx Transit Solutions consortium before tender closed, so I saw quite a bit of how it worked. A large portion of the score for the tender was the architectural consistency between stations along the line. Metrolinx wants the whole line to feel continuous and have a similar feel, while maintaining distinct character at each station. You can't have that continuity if a different architect is working on each segment.
 
corys said:
I wouldn't imagine tendering it separately would work well. It's much easier to have one consortium develop the whole thing to avoid conflicts, confusion, errors, etc. Also less mobilization costs and overhead.

Also, I worked in the Crosslinx Transit Solutions consortium before tender closed, so I saw quite a bit of how it worked. A large portion of the score for the tender was the architectural consistency between stations along the line. Metrolinx wants the whole line to feel continuous and have a similar feel, while maintaining distinct character at each station. You can't have that continuity if a different architect is working on each segment.
Click to expand...

Any idea what kinds of consistency we'll be seeing? Is it more akin to the identical designs we see on most of the Line 2 and Sheppard stations, or will there be lots of variation in artwork like on Yonge Line.
 
Much more similar to the Yonge line. The constant theme across the stations will be things like signage, finish materials, the architectural style, and wayfinding.
 
Nooooo... lol. I went to that McDonald's only once, the parking garage was neat. Didn't even park in it, parked in the surface lot up top, but it was neat.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top