AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Fair enough, but that's Mlinx right - besides, I'd spend 70 to save 300+M in a heartbeat.
AoD
Toronto GO Transit: Davenport Diamond Grade Separation | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx
- Thread starter vic
- Start date
Fair enough, but that's Mlinx right - besides, I'd spend 70 to save 300+M in a heartbeat.
AoD
muller877
Senior Member
But they are not spending $70M to save $300M. They are saving $300M to make the right decision. Then they are spending $70M to buy votes in a riding (should we have spend $10-25M in improvements? Yes. But 70...No). And we are getting a lower-volume bridge which we will then have to spend $100M+ in the future to add a 3rd track.
vic
Senior Member
The third track was never actually in the plans to be built. It was always left as an option... i.e. leave space in the corridor in case they need it in the future. It was not taken away.
I have no idea if it makes sense from a cost perspective to build the third track now, or wait until a future date if they might actually need it. That's a pretty big "if", in any case.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
I highly doubt $70M is going to buy you the votes when the project itself is so divisive - it's not going to change any minds. I have relatively few qualms about spending on aesthetics in an area that will be densified in the future in any case.
AoD
salsa
Senior Member
Slides from yesterday's public meeting have now been posted. New renderings are included.
http://www.metrolinx.com/en/regiona..._Davenport_Public_Meeting_Presentation_EN.pdf
http://www.metrolinx.com/en/regiona..._Davenport_Public_Meeting_Presentation_EN.pdf
M II A II R II K
Senior Member
Looks like cars won't be able to pass under it through street connections, including cutting off Wallace Avenue traffic from going under the Guideway.
vic
Senior Member
Correct that the new connections (Paton, and Antler/Lappin) won't allow cars through, but Wallace doesn't change. Where did you get that idea?
Page 10 even shows a car going through....
http://www.metrolinx.com/en/regionalplanning/rer/20160118_Davenport_Public_Meeting_Handout_EN.pdf
Edited to add: Oh...I guess the "Wallace Square" rendering almost makes the road disappear. The renderings around Wallace also seem to turn the adjacent Tower Storage parking lot into a fancifully-paved addition to the square.
Last edited:
Allandale25
Senior Member
Brampton said no to more than $70m north of Steeles for the Main Street portion of the Hurontario Main LRT (now called the "Hurontario LRT" line). If you look at page 39 from the report of the facilitator Brampton hired before they made the final decision, the following chart was provided:
If you take the difference between the full route and stopping at Steeles, it's $317m. The upfront capital savings alone equals $208m and the Minister said this money would go back into the Moving Ontario Forward Fund and a decision would be made at a later date on where to spend it.
Also, in theory, wouldn't there be more money now available because of the savings they gained on the Crosstown LRT project compared to the original budget?
"“Because the private sector was able to come in, take a look at this process and provide the most competitive bid possible, we’ve managed to bring that 30-year contract to design, build, finance and maintain the Crosstown in at $2-billion [less], versus the original internal estimate,” Mr. Del Duca told reporters after speaking at a conference hosted by the Canadian Council for Public-Private Partnerships."
Also, there's the $400M that the Federal government gave to the Sheppard LRT. I could see a scenario where some would lobby to use that money to build the tunnel. While the local MP wasn't at the meeting, she has publicly written about the concerns the community has.
I think the bottom line is that we don't know what's going to happen in 2016 when it comes to transit finances and final budgets. As we saw with Transit City, anything can happen.
crs1026
Superstar
I chuckled at this - I won't be sorry if Brampton sees its LRT money spent elsewhere - but there is a serious point to be made here. That $70 probably did come from somewhere. So - whose project did it come from? Can the Province face that community or interest group and say "we just took the money we earmarked for you and gave it to the Davenport Community" ? If they can't, we have a deficit of transparency and accountability.
- Paul
Allandale25
Senior Member
Not sure what flyinggoats source was for $70M. Happy to correct my post if there's something I've missed. Local media in Brampton have been reporting it's approximately $190M. Here's a few other articles speculating on the amount of money Brampton said to and all of them quote numbers higher than $70M:
1/ The Cambridge Record posted a story on the situation. Here are some key quotes:
"Ontario's Wynne government has also shown it's willing to fully fund light rail transit projects elsewhere, including in Hamilton, Mississauga and Brampton. Which is why local transit advocates were stunned last month when councillors in Brampton actually turned down $400 million in provincial funds for its own light rail transit. "I think you've got every metropolitan area in Ontario looking at that $400 million," said Cambridge Mayor Doug Craig. In Brampton, the decision to turn down the province's transit money has left some deep disappointment. Despite overwhelming public support for the project, councillors couldn't agree on the route the rail line would take through downtown. Brampton city councillor Gurpreet Dhillon said his city had a "historic" chance to build a light rail line that would have revitalized its struggling downtown core as part of an integrated regional transit system. Locally, meanwhile, politicians are looking at the Brampton case and left scratching their heads.
"It's hard for me to understand the rationale behind that decision," Coun. Strickland said. "I think it's a decision they'll regret in the long run ... They've lost that money and the chance to build their community for the future. In some ways, that's a shame."
2/ here is an article from Hamilton.
3/ Here is an interview with Minister Del Duca in September 2015:
"Del Duca said if Brampton disagrees, the LRT will run up to Steeles and the rest of the money – approximately $190 million for Steeles Ave. (Gateway Terminal) to Brampton GO – will go back to the Moving Ontario Forward Plan.“The funding is not allocated specifically to the City of Brampton but to the specific HMLRT project with the Main Street route,” Del Duca wrote.
hawc
Senior Member
Love how they cheat everything in those renderings with big beautiful trees and grass. So misleading. Strip out the big trees and green grass from them and you're left with a long concrete expanse. Which is what it's going to look like at least 7 months of the year even with the pretend trees. Plus it will be decades before those big tall trees are even there at all. Such a cheat. "Community asset" Please.
junctionist
Senior Member
This cynical view is harsh but fair. The concrete pavements won't look attractive after the first year when they'll fade to a dull and dirty grey. The people who created the renderings also added interest to the concrete bridge structure through odd and unrealistic designs applied to the concrete that I've never seen on any structure in Ontario.
salsa
Senior Member
vic
Senior Member
I don't think anyone ever said that this was going to be exactly like the Gardiner. But it's interesting to note, as someone pointed out at the meeting and online, that the diagram compares the highest point of the Gardiner with one of the lower points of the bridge. Not exactly a fair comparison...
crs1026
Superstar
Well, they did imply that pretty directly...but your point is a fair one. The graphic fails to mention that the zoning limit on height is 12-14 m thru most of this zone, It fails to portray the dimensions in context to the prevailing roofline, The point selected is relevant but other points should be shown also.
Looking at all the artsy design details, it really feels like ML has pushed the pendulum waaay far over. Now we have a design that will be hard to match elsewhere and if it is, costs will rise accordingly for every project. No amount of money will make this invisible. The most reasonable goal should be to make it hard to spray grafitti on.
Comparing the linear feet of proposed bridge verus the linear feet of proposed trench, I'm surprised that the community hasn't fractured on this one. The folks in the Wallace - Campbell Park area are asking others to take a big hit so that their stretch remains untouched by this. The tunnel zone is benign but the trench part will be nasty.
My bottom line is that the artwork may be disingenuous, but the photos are what's compelling. This rail line at present is pretty gritty. A bridge is not going to take a pretty scene and ruin it. It's going to simply present a change, that the community didn't ask for. That happens sometimes. If we are this gunshy about elevated transit structures, we will pay a real price. I would say let's just get on with this one, maybe it is good learning.
- Paul