Toronto Ontario Line 3 | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx

[TheTigerMaster]

There are these things called building permits, zoning bylaws, public consultations, and environmental assessments that are required in Canada and the United States. There's also workplace safety, structural integrity, backlogs of maintenance, a completely different layout of cities, and a significant population difference that must be considered in North America. Even the 4.1 km Minatomirai line in Yokohama Japan (Another country associated with efficiency) took 11 years to build.

Vancouver got the Canada Line from proposal to construction in something like three years. Maybe it was 5 years. I can't remember... either way it was ridiculously fast.

 

[Streety McCarface]

Vancouver got the Canada Line from proposal to construction in something like three years. Maybe it was 5 years. I can't remember... either way it was ridiculously fast.

The Canada line is also severely underbuilt for its current demand, runs aboveground for more than half of its journey, utilizes a P3, and uses unique rolling stock that is completely incompatible with the rest of the system.

 

[adys123]

The Canada line is also severely underbuilt for its current demand, runs aboveground for more than half of its journey, utilizes a P3, and uses unique rolling stock that is completely incompatible with the rest of the system.

It still doesn't invalidate the duration of the process though.

 

[Hopkins123]

The Canada line is also severely underbuilt for its current demand, runs aboveground for more than half of its journey, utilizes a P3, and uses unique rolling stock that is completely incompatible with the rest of the system.

LOL, the same could be said about Toronto's impending Crosstown LRT line.

 

[BurlOak]

It still doesn't invalidate the duration of the process though.

It really was amazing how quickly the Building Canada Fund money was sent out the door following the 2008/09 recession.

Liberals’ two-year infrastructure repair plan could take five years: documents

 

[JGHali]

The Canada line is also severely underbuilt for its current demand, runs aboveground for more than half of its journey, utilizes a P3, and uses unique rolling stock that is completely incompatible with the rest of the system.

Well, going underground was never much of an option for the elevated Richmond parts of the line - the whole city is built on a sandbar in the Fraser delta. Also, I'm not sure why being "aboveground" is at all an issue - it's fully grade-separated.

Very true.

If the Canada Line had 80m platforms for double length trains and better stations (more than one exit each) it would be fantastic.

I was stunned the first time I was in one of those stations. It's like being in the Union streetcar station. For that matter, the new Flexity trains are about the same size as the Canada Line's little trains.

 

[Streety McCarface]

It still doesn't invalidate the duration of the process though.

The point is that as a result of not properly planning the line, they severely underbuilt it to serve the needs of the people. That shortsightedness would not have been present had they spent a little more time during the planning stage.

Well, going underground was never much of an option for the elevated Richmond parts of the line - the whole city is built on a sandbar in the Fraser delta. Also, I'm not sure why being "aboveground" is at all an issue - it's fully grade-separated.

There's no issue with it being aboveground, at all. However, building an aboveground viaduct is much, much easier than building an underground tunnel, especially in downtown Toronto.

 

[Johnny Au]

Well, going underground was never much of an option for the elevated Richmond parts of the line - the whole city is built on a sandbar in the Fraser delta. Also, I'm not sure why being "aboveground" is at all an issue - it's fully grade-separated.

...and Richmond is on an island that is part of the Fraser Delta.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

When the Canada Line was built, there was a lot of controversy regarding the use of temporary foreign workers to construct the line. That's a big part of the reason why they were able to get it build so rapidly and so cheaply.

This is of relevance to Toronto and the Relief Line because one of the reasons the DRL (and various other transit projects) is delayed and rather expensive is due to the limited number of skilled workers available in Ontario and the GTA to construct all these transit lines concurrently. We can't begin construction simply because there isn't enough manpower to get it done. Using foreign workers on the Relief Line would likely allow us to get it built faster, and drive down costs.

Of course, this is a politically untenable option. No politician wants to be the one stealing jobs from thousands of voters. Not even if doing so would provide greater economic benefit in the long run, by allowing hundreds of thousands of daily commuters to move through the region more effectively.

 

[W. K. Lis]

When the Canada Line was built, there was a lot of controversy regarding the use of temporary foreign workers to construct the line. That's a big part of the reason why they were able to get it build so rapidly and so cheaply.

This is of relevance to Toronto and the Relief Line because one of the reasons the DRL (and various other transit projects) is delayed and rather expensive is due to the limited number of skilled workers available in Ontario and the GTA to construct all these transit lines concurrently. We can't begin construction simply because there isn't enough manpower to get it done. Using foreign workers on the Relief Line would likely allow us to get it built faster, and drive down costs.

Of course, this is a politically untenable option. No politician wants to be the one stealing jobs from thousands of voters. Not even if doing so would provide greater economic benefit in the long run, by allowing hundreds of thousands of daily commuters to move through the region more effectively.

Maybe get some Mexicans in? They may want to work less hours.

See link.

OECD ranking
Rank Country Hours
1 Mexico 2,228
2 South Korea 2,124
3 Greece 2,042
4 Chile 1,990
13 United States 1,783
19 Japan 1,713
20 Canada 1,703
33 Norway 1,424
35 Germany 1,363​

 

[Leo_Chan]

Was it outsourced as in workers from the US, or from Asia? Since one is much more comfortable to deal with than the other.

 

[crs1026]

This is of relevance to Toronto and the Relief Line because one of the reasons the DRL (and various other transit projects) is delayed and rather expensive is due to the limited number of skilled workers available in Ontario and the GTA to construct all these transit lines concurrently. We can't begin construction simply because there isn't enough manpower to get it done. Using foreign workers on the Relief Line would likely allow us to get it built faster, and drive down costs.

Of course, this is a politically untenable option. No politician wants to be the one stealing jobs from thousands of voters. Not even if doing so would provide greater economic benefit in the long run, by allowing hundreds of thousands of daily commuters to move through the region more effectively.

A decade ago there was a task force involving people from QP and the construction industry to try and project the need for skilled trades in Ontario and to some degree across Canada. At the time the government was interested in how it could encourage people to choose careers in the skilled trades, which was seeing huge attrition at a time when infrastructure spending was suddenly seen as a political priority.

I haven't stayed close to that forum so I don't know if it was successful or if it is continuing. What was apparent is that the numerical forecasts were next to meaningless because one major demand for skilled trades was in resource industries where business was volatile and projects started and suspended daily. The other major demand was from government funded projects (like transit) where the timing of projects was equally unpredictable thanks to political whims. This was in the era where "the largest town in Newfoundland is/was Fort MacMurray", as the joke went. That has changed, but that's a good example of the problem: nobody saw that change coming either.

My point being - unless we intend as a matter of policy to develop a dramatic oversupply of skilled trades (not a bad policy, in some respects) we continue to be hostages of labour supply, and cost and speed of projects will be affected. This is bigger than transit.

- Paul

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

Are there any online docs from the 1980s DRL plan? The current planning exercise shouldn't be starting from 0, I would imagine they'd base something in the current design on the Network 2011 plan.

Toronto Reference Library is your friend. Doubtful it is online though.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Toronto Reference Library is your friend. Doubtful it is online though.

I do have some images of the plans:

Note they are different schemes from the same "Downtown Rapid Transit Study" dated 1985 - and the alignment varies.

AoD

 

[BurlOak]

Nice to platform less than 30' (9.1m) below road level. Not only less costly, but more convenient for riders. Hopefully the design team smartens up and takes not of this.
(SSE team too).