BurlOak
Senior Member
Yes, you did. That blue text is a link.
Toronto Ontario Line 3 | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx
- Thread starter JasonParis
- Start date
Northern Light
Superstar
OMG, LOL................you are special.
I did not miss your link to a picture of a guideway.
I knew what one was before that, thanks.
Citation here means for your engineering/construction estimates.
Show evidence that your numbers make sense.
To be clear, there are posters here who don't need to do that, because they have a track record of thoughtful, correct posts, and have established that they generally know what they are talking about.
You are not one of those posters.
You are one who consistently posts on any number of subjects in which you clearly have no expertise and with numbers or 'facts' that you simply made up out of thin air.
So you need to establish the credibility of your numbers.
Midtown Urbanist
Superstar
To be fair, BurlOak is more credible when he isn't talking about the Conservative Party.
His second link is to an MTO cost guide which does cover the subject, check his post again @Northern Light
His second link is to an MTO cost guide which does cover the subject, check his post again @Northern Light
44 North
Senior Member
Ehh, that's not fair. Burloak has been writing about bridges and guideways on this site for many years and is consistent and reliable on the matter. No need to chew-out over citations when they've been given many times in the past.
Anyway I think it's possible we may be overthinking the complexity in this area. If we're using shorter cars (or cars with mid articulation points), which have shorter turning radii, then we're also afforded tighter turning. Much of Skytrain has 80-90m curves. If we go a bit bigger just for the sake of it (100m), even the Overlea-Don Mills curve seems doable. Perhaps some mild expropriation of the grassy edge of properties, but maybe not even.
What I've been dwelling on is the Lower Don crossing. Specifically how the line will go from a level platform transfer on either side of the GO tracks, then a flyover back to 2-track side by side. Somewhere along the way a bridge and portal with lots of stuff in between and below. Definitely some needle threading.
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
How slowly would the train need to travel through such a tight curve? How would that impact maintenance costs (tighter curves = more ware and tear)? What about noise impacts, especially right next to two schools and an apartment building?
I know the TTC has effectively decided against ever building such tight curves, due to how problematic they’ve proven to be.
There’s that conern, in addition to concerns around the expropriation costs to widen the GO corridor, and impacts to the capacity of the railway line. It’s a lot to unpack
Northern Light
Superstar
I have, I apologize for my oversight in missing the second link.
That said, having examined it, its entirely for road projects, and not at all consistent w/constructions costs for rail guideways in contemporary North America.
I would add, construction inflation is far outpacing CPI.
Also, I have find Burl Oak un-credible in most posts. 1/40 or so suprise to the upside. But that's not a good track record.
Northern Light
Superstar
Perhaps you recall posts I do not.
But I have had to correct @BurlOak on his estimations of cost and physical plausibility of construction on multiple occasions. So you'll have to forgive my cynicism.
BurlOak
Senior Member
LRT projects are almost always P3. It is very hard to have published costs, because it's all part of the bid. Thus, I used the highway costs. Even finding published costs of bridges is hard to find form MTO, because every highway project always lumps in a bunch of paving, guide-rail work, etc. I already explained the loading. Highway load are designed to CL625-ONT trucks around here. That 625 kN (~64t) on 5 axles over 18m. It is similar enough to the LRT weights. About 40m spans are common as concrete girders about 2000mm deep can be used. Longer and deeper girders and shipping will become a problem. Braking forces a quite a bit more for trains than traffic, so this also has a small effect on keeping spans a bit shorter, and 2 span are needed to resist these forces (i.e. every second pier is fixed to resist the braking force, and the alternate ones accommodate thermal expansion. Also, at these spans - the live load is roughly equal to the dead load, (likely a bit less), so even if the live load is 20% more, it means maybe 5% more material needed to resist the load.
I have never designed a bridge that came in over $7500/m2 - and I doubt that @Northern Light has either.
Measuring cost of bridge decks in $/m2 (per ft2 in USA) is the industry standard. I am not sure what units you are used to Oz of gold per bushel?
Based on your estimation, what cost would you put on your proposed bridge?
Elevated is cheaper - why do you think Montreal (REM) and Vancouver (SkyTrain) are using it.
Just like cut-and-cover is cheaper than TBM - again, why do you think the did that in Vancouver wherever they could get away with it.
I have never designed a bridge that came in over $7500/m2 - and I doubt that @Northern Light has either.
Measuring cost of bridge decks in $/m2 (per ft2 in USA) is the industry standard. I am not sure what units you are used to Oz of gold per bushel?
Based on your estimation, what cost would you put on your proposed bridge?
Elevated is cheaper - why do you think Montreal (REM) and Vancouver (SkyTrain) are using it.
Just like cut-and-cover is cheaper than TBM - again, why do you think the did that in Vancouver wherever they could get away with it.
pman
Senior Member
Elevated is not only cheaper, it doesn’t necessarily mean the apocalypse. For example, the S-Bahn is a surface/elevated system that traverses a lot of Berlin residential neighbourhoods that seem to do just fine with it. The residential area of the elevated Hackescher Markt station, where my son used to rent, is pleasant lively and liveable. Plus, great transit. I get that a lot of folks in Leslieville want subways, subways, subways. But the cost is becoming so high that we’ll build very little rapid transit if we insist it all be buried. And the NIMBY arguments put forward by Toronto politicians and residents’ associations to oppose pretty much everything always do seem mostly completely uninformed by the experience of the rest of the world.
Northern Light
Superstar
May I inquire if you are fully caught up on this thread?
I ask, because in a series of posts, I explained in detail, with numbers, why your assertion on the Leslieville section is incorrect.
That is not an argument against elevated and/or above-grade track in general, nor in Toronto more specifically.
The problem is this particular segment, in this particular case.
I don't live in Leslieville and have no vested interest here; beyond a proper discussion of costs.
Hackescher Markt station, is lovely; ........but its also 4-tracks wide, not 7 and sited in the middle of a very large road.
Further Berlin real estate is a good deal cheaper than Toronto, a typical home price (incl. condos) is around 350k CAD; rents
Cost of Living in Berlin
Average prices of more than 40 products and services in Berlin, GermanyNov 2024. Prices of restaurants, food, transportation, utilities and housing are included.
Of course rental is a better gauge given the nature of that market; but with median rents in/around $1,200 in Berlin........(1bdrm)
That's also w/the Berlin market on a bit of a tear recently.
Nothing wrong w/arguing for above-grade; nor for arguing for following other global examples; so long as you make an apples to apples comparison, based on facts.
PS, 85% of Berliner's rent, a great many from the government; and so anti-corporate is the mood now, that a referendum is coming on nationalizing a good chunk of the rest!
Last edited:
Kitsune
Senior Member
On the leslie front - the reason the rl was so low was to get under the Gerrard Interceptor and under the foundations of the rail bridge (see http://reliefline.ca/uploads/Ph 4.3 RL Presentation_SAG_Mar 2 2017_Final2.pdf). Pape could go over the interceptor. I'm guessing lighter trains with narrower tunnels could allow the Carlaw option to go over.
It's also kinda funny on all the density at Carlaw/Queen was the reason to shift the alignment.. however now they are now shifting the alignment 1km away in an area with a similar density to Pape. RL Station Evaluations shows under the Degrassi option that it was a very poor option.
Also ... if following the relief line routing you could then maybe pop up back up to grade at Eastern / Railway Corridor to get the Mythical level transfer at East Harbour (which seems pointless without fare integration).
It's also kinda funny on all the density at Carlaw/Queen was the reason to shift the alignment.. however now they are now shifting the alignment 1km away in an area with a similar density to Pape. RL Station Evaluations shows under the Degrassi option that it was a very poor option.
Also ... if following the relief line routing you could then maybe pop up back up to grade at Eastern / Railway Corridor to get the Mythical level transfer at East Harbour (which seems pointless without fare integration).
Rainforest
Senior Member
And even if the fare integration is in place, that level transfer might not achieve what Metrolinx is hoping for: relieving the Union station. In the AM rush: the westbound Ontario Line trains will be sufficiently full by the time they reach the East Harbor station. For a GO train rider, what's the point of hopping off the GO train and trying to squeeze into the OL train. Most will prefer to stay on the GO train till it reaches Union.
In the PM rush: either board the eastbound GO train at Union and possibly get a seat; or take a short ride on a crowded OL train, transfer to the GO train at East Harbor, and get no seat for sure. Again, what's the point of the latter option.
A quick OL-GO connection won't be useless of course; it will help off-peak trips, as well as some trips that aren't downtown-bound. But, Metrolinx is likely in for a disappointment if it hopes for a Union relief.
BurlOak
Senior Member
Good points.
I previously figured the only ones to make transfer would be those going to city hall and for them, only as long as your transfer is easier than union - which almost any transfer would be.
Now that I read this, I think the only ones to transfer would be those going to a non YUS station along Queen, which is quite few.
A transfer is nice for connectivity, but not the driving consideration for the design of the line.
CityStay
Active Member
You're quoting Zillow prices in Berlin, Maryland USA.
Hackescher Markt is on the Stadtbahn which is the east/west line that cuts through the Ringbahn and runs 12 km from Ostbahnhof to Charlottenberg. It then carries on to Spandau in the west and Strausberg in the east. Rents will vary greatly along the entire espanse. It is elevated but is not sited "in the middle of a very large road". Much of it is surrounded by typical Berlin 5-6 storey residential or government buildings and offices in central Mitte. The station itself dates back to the 1880's and is one of only two that wasn't completely destroyed or badly damaged in WW 2. Two tracks carry the S-Bahn while the other two are dedicated to RE, RB and ICE trains which do not stop at Hackescher. The areas adjacent to the Stadtbahn have been built up for over a century and it is not at all comparable to a line being retroactively thrust through an existing suburban N.A. neighbourhood.
Although 80-85% of Berliners do rent less than 40% are subsidized and less than half of those are in state owned buildings, the rest being mostly coops. Only about 15-20% of apartments are run by the city. At reunification, all of the apartments in the East were state owned even as there was a surplus of housing in the West. Many of the buildings in the East were sold to private interests in order to help pay the huge sums necessary to unify services in the two halves of the city. This was very controversial as a great deal of money was made on what was seen as a fire sale of state assets to well-connected vulture capitalists.
The cap has passed and has been ruled constitutional by the Berlin State Court. It will be challenged in the Constitutional Court so it remains to be seen whether it will be ultimately successful. If it is successful it may be adopted - in one form or another - by other German cities. Although suggestions have been made that Berlin buy back some of the social housing that has been privatized over the last three decades there is no "referendum coming on nationalizing a good chunk of the rest!"
Northern Light
Superstar
Odd, I know what the prices are, so when I saw what I expected, that didn't occur to me; but TY for the catch. I have substituted a Numbeo link and the numbers are virtually the same. I have added a caveat that I'm looking at 1brdm units.