Toronto Spadina Subway Extension Emergency Exits | ?m | 1s | TTC | IBI Group

Komiksulo said:
And if you're going to be digging down and excavating a large station box, isn't it cheaper to have the box walls go all the way up to grade, leaving a large volume open, rather than putting in a strong, expensive roof and backfilling? I seem to remember reading that in relation to some of Montréal's stations. And really, why do we roof and backfill a station? It it just because it's under a road?
Click to expand...
This is true. That is another benefit of cut-and-cover. TBM needs to be at least 10m depth and usually more. Cut-and-cover can be shallow (i.e. many of downtown stations), which don't need to spend as much on building an underground multi-story building. Earth presure, temporary shoring, dewatering costs all go up exponentially with depth too. Finally, shallow stations are more convenient because its easier to get from street to platform.
 
Considering the land usage the TYSSE is routing through, one can't help but wonder if at least $1 billion could've been saved had they opted to build more of the line with cut-and-cover instead of TBM and bridged over the 407 instead of tunneling underneath it.
 
Hopkins123 said:
Considering the land usage the TYSSE is routing through, one can't help but wonder if at least $1 billion could've been saved had they opted to build more of the line with cut-and-cover instead of TBM and bridged over the 407 instead of tunneling underneath it.
Click to expand...
About 6 months ago, I had to run an errand up that way. I had never been in the area, but was absolutely shocked to find them tunneling a subway through a region of that density. Whether it should have been a subway is debatable. It seems way harder to justify the tunneling method used.
 
Only if the density in the area will be higher than it was before they started. However, I can them tunneling under the Downsview airport's runway and the railway tracks as being about the only reason for tunneling, otherwise.
 
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/201...ticians-take-none-of-them-seriously-hume.html

Subway budgets, timetables, politicians — take none of them seriously: Hume
It's no surprise any more that projects like the York subway extension are behind schedule and over budget.

By: Christopher Hume Urban Issues and Architecture, Published on Sun Jan 17 2016

Passengers won’t get a free ride on the new Toronto-York Spadina subway extension, but it seems contractors and bureaucrats and their masters will. That was the only possible conclusion when word came down last week that the cost of building the TYSSE — as it’s now called — has risen $400 million. And so a project originally pegged at $2.6 billion will now cost $3.2 billion. Given that there’s still at least a year to go before opening day, set for early 2017, there will further opportunities for increases.

Excuses abound: Work began 18 months late, the design was changed, contractors performed poorly . . . the usual stuff. Usual, that is, in Toronto, a city where public projects routinely go over budget and take longer than promised. Indeed, the TTC and the public sector in general as an appalling record of building and delivering on time.

Little wonder that people — taxpayers — have grown so cynical about government and its agencies. Politicians haven’t helped much, either. When they’re not pandering, they’re prevaricating.

Clearly, Toronto has a problem. Actually, it has a number of problems starting with a tendering process that encourages and rewards lowballing estimates. Figures are chosen, announced and duly carved in stone. They become the benchmark by which success is measured. Often, though, they are largely notional, a starting point, an amount below which the price will never dip.

In some jurisdictions, bids are chosen from the middle of the pack. The most expensive proposals are discarded, but so are the lowest. The idea is to avoid the cheapest-is-best mindset that prevails close to home. There’s also a better chance, however marginal, that these estimates will be closer to the mark.

In Toronto’s case, estimates aren’t taken seriously, except by the public. But because they represent little more than an opening gambit, they rarely reflect reality. Cost overruns are as inevitable as the perception of failure.

When those overruns are caused by the public sector, whether political and/or bureaucratic, people respond, understandably, with anger. The St. Clair Avenue streetcar right-of-way, though transformative, is still thought of as a fiasco because its botched construction lasted fully five years.

When philanthropists Judy and Wilmot Matthews gave $25 million last year for auniquely innovative scheme to turn space beneath the Gardiner Expressway into a multi-faceted urban destination, they made one stipulation: it had to be done by July, 2017. In other words, the city has no choice but to get its act together, or else.

Political interference, however well intentioned, can be a huge obstacle. In Toronto, where transit plans come and go with each passing mayor, chances of getting anything done are low to nil. The process unfolds in a state of permanent flux. Light rail becomes a subway; a subway becomes light rail. Much-needed subway lines are dismissed for political concerns; lines through low-density neighbourhoods are preferred for the same reasons.

In a system where political expediency takes precedence over policy, it’s easy to forget the passengers in whose name our time and treasure are squandered. As David Quarmby, “designer” of Transport for London, that city’s super-transit agency, explains it, though the mayor chairs and appoints the organization’s board, the focus on passengers keeps players on the same page.

“The whole ethic of the TfL is built around passengers,” he says. “It eliminates the squabbling; the results have been spectacular.”

It helps, too, that TfL has sole responsibility for London transit. As the agency’s history proves, a single authority with a strong governance structure can survive even the transition as dramatic as the one from Ken Livingstone to Boris Johnson. As Toronto’s experience makes clear, that could never happen here.

 
crs1026 said:
People who study big project performance will be quick to point out that it's extremely common for this to happen. The staff report is pretty candid about this particular project - it's a bit of a list of the key "don't"s for a big project -


As nfitz pointed out, the good news is, the recovery strategy seems to be working and hasn't uncovered a whack of new costs. Heads did roll. There is no news in this latest report, it's the recovery playing out as expected. Time to start counting the months remaining.

- Paul
Click to expand...
how do we really know heads rolled?
 
Palma said:
how do we really know heads rolled?
Click to expand...

There were announcements in the press that certain named management individuals left the TTC project organization.
Were they the biggest fish in the pond? Not necessarily.
Did they go under favourable terms? Haven't a clue.

- Paul
 
playing devils advocate here but where exactly would we put the transition from below ground to above ground (without expensive property acquisition/expropriation). Much of the Steeles W to Sheppard W (now Downsview) is developed with buildings above. Coming out of Steeles W the line goes right into a curve to head North to 407 station and VMC station, and I thought there was some rule about curves and grade changes at the same time due to rail vehicles not liking that combination.

How long a straight stretch would be need to get from below ground to above? And can that fit into the space between Steeles W and 407 station. All while clearing the CN tracks, and high tension power lines that are there etc etc.

I know we'd all prefer that the line go above ground and save a few $$$ but was it actually feasible without extreme grades and curve radii?
 
Woodbridge_Heights said:
playing devils advocate here but where exactly would we put the transition from below ground to above ground (without expensive property acquisition/expropriation). Much of the Steeles W to Sheppard W (now Downsview) is developed with buildings above. Coming out of Steeles W the line goes right into a curve to head North to 407 station and VMC station, and I thought there was some rule about curves and grade changes at the same time due to rail vehicles not liking that combination.

How long a straight stretch would be need to get from below ground to above? And can that fit into the space between Steeles W and 407 station. All while clearing the CN tracks, and high tension power lines that are there etc etc.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I agree that at first blush it seems like more could have been above ground but I'm not sure the reality works. I think a lot of the land (if not all of it) between Steeles and 407 is owned by UPS and/or TRCA (Black Creek is right there) so land acquisition might have been expensive and/or impossible.
 
My belief is that as a cost-saving measure, the line could've been run in the open air north of the CN rail and hydro corridors. Similar alignment, but above ground - with 407 Station an open-air station in the same location it is now, and the line run elevated within Jane's roadway allowance to Hwy 7. Even though it's a very wide suburban arterial, the boulevards tell me there's still ample unused right-of-way that could've been utilized.

And does anyone know the story with this parcel, just east of the UPS building and across the street from the whimsical Pioneer Village station entrance? Is it municipal and leased, or are there plans to develop? Surprised there's still an active farm so close to a station.
 
44 North said:
And does anyone know the story with this parcel, just east of the UPS building and across the street from the whimsical Pioneer Village station entrance? Is it municipal and leased, or are there plans to develop? Surprised there's still an active farm so close to a station.
Click to expand...
It's probably leased as a sod growing field. That's a pretty popular option for landowners who want very low risk and maximizing income is second to flexibility. There was a sod field like that adjacent to Burlington GO Station for a long time despite it having been leapfrogged by development since the 80's.
 
44 North said:
My belief is that as a cost-saving measure, the line could've been run in the open air north of the CN rail and hydro corridors. Similar alignment, but above ground - with 407 Station an open-air station in the same location it is now, and the line run elevated within Jane's roadway allowance to Hwy 7. Even though it's a very wide suburban arterial, the boulevards tell me there's still ample unused right-of-way that could've been utilized.

And does anyone know the story with this parcel, just east of the UPS building and across the street from the whimsical Pioneer Village station entrance? Is it municipal and leased, or are there plans to develop? Surprised there's still an active farm so close to a station.
Click to expand...

The distance from the CN Rail line to the middle of the 407 is under 800 m. Would that be enough space to bring the tracks above ground high enough to clear the highway (there are on/off ramps for Jane/hwy 400 in the area so you'd have to be at height well before those ramps), so how much must the track climb from below ground to approx 6 M above the roadway (to provide clearance for the highway)? Say about 10 M? 10 M over 500 M is a slope of 2% which I think is at the upper range of acceptable grades, a quick google search was not able to bring up the actual number the ttc uses.

So as I said I think it was just easier to keep the line underground rather than try to thread the needle, curve coming out of Steeles W station, to pass under the CN line, to elevating sufficiently above 407, to flattening out and constructing the station.
 
Jonny5 said:
It's probably leased as a sod growing field. That's a pretty popular option for landowners who want very low risk and maximizing income is second to flexibility. There was a sod field like that adjacent to Burlington GO Station for a long time despite it having been leapfrogged by development since the 80's.
Click to expand...

FWIW, that land is zoned for "Prestige Employment."
As Jonny5 basically said, agricultural land isn't taxed (or is taxed very low?) so lots of times landowners will grow stuff on vacant land until they're ready to use it.

(Also, FWIW, the TRCA/Black Creek owns a big chunk on the west side of Jane too and north side of Steeles too. It's not part of the public park but they have some heritage buildings there.)
 
Woodbridge_Heights said:
The distance from the CN Rail line to the middle of the 407 is under 800 m. Would that be enough space to bring the tracks above ground high enough to clear the highway (there are on/off ramps for Jane/hwy 400 in the area so you'd have to be at height well before those ramps), so how much must the track climb from below ground to approx 6 M above the roadway (to provide clearance for the highway)? Say about 10 M? 10 M over 500 M is a slope of 2% which I think is at the upper range of acceptable grades, a quick google search was not able to bring up the actual number the ttc uses.

So as I said I think it was just easier to keep the line underground rather than try to thread the needle, curve coming out of Steeles W station, to pass under the CN line, to elevating sufficiently above 407, to flattening out and constructing the station.
Click to expand...

2% seems reasonable. I don't think it can go much steeper than that though. If 407 station's location were moved a bit further north and cantilevered above the highway, the grade could be done pretty low possibly. And perhaps it's easier to keep a line as deep bore. But is it? It'd be costlier for one, and because of the amount of de-watering through a high water table, it could be seen as a bit more complex. The type of environment north of Steeles is very conducive to elevated infrastructure, so imo it should've been considered at least.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top