scarberiankhatru
Senior Member
Overbuilding at Steeles station alone could add over $20M/km. Little bits can add up to big pricetags.
|
|
|
Transit City: Sheppard East Debate
- Thread starter unimaginative2
- Start date
Overbuilding at Steeles station alone could add over $20M/km. Little bits can add up to big pricetags.
nfitz
Superstar
When you look at the Yonge extension, Spadina Extension, Sheppard line inflated from 1995 to 2009, Eglinton West line inflated from 1995 to 2009, then they are all over $300-million per kilometre; and personally I find the Sheppard stations, with the bare concrete floors and walls, pretty minimal - I see no grossly oversized bus bays.
The only way you are going to significaly reduce construction costs is go the Yonge route, and build in a trench, or go cut-and-cover and close-down the road for 5-years.
And all this for a stretch of Sheppard that has lower demand than the piece that has already been opened!
Let's push ahead with this, and the other LRT projects; push the Yonge and DRL Phase 1; and then in 2020 when it's time to start thinking about what comes next revisit the demand for subway to places such as Scarborough Centre, Mississsauga Square One, Donlands, Weston, etc.
Rainforest
Senior Member
I'd like to respectfully disagree with some of your numbers:
1) The "current project" cost consists of Sheppard LRT funding (0.95B) and the "bypass" portion of Finch LRT funding. Based on the length of the "bypass" versus Finch W, the latter is about 350M. So, the total cost is about $1.3B.
2) As a cost-saving measure, the subway can be extended to Agincourt at this time, while the STC section can be deferred. We would still get a decent network even if the Agincourt to STC connection remains served by express bus.
3) The cost of Spadina extension is 270 M / km if the "contingency fund" is not taken into account. Sheppard would be built later and hence the inflation would tend to raise the cost, but on the other hand, stations of the minimal Sheppard extension would be less complex. Only two stations - Vic Park and Agincourt - would even need bus bays. Other stations - Consummers, Pharmacy, Warden, Birchmount - can be as simple as Bessarion. In contrast, Spadina extension is going to have elaborate VCC, York U, Steeles W stations.
So I'd think that 300 M / km would be a realistic estimate for Sheppard extension (perhaps even on higher end). Times 5.5 km (Don Mills to Agincourt), that comes to $1.65 B.
I agree with your estimate for the Sheppard LRT east of Agincourt - $0.5B.
Then, the total cost estimate for the subway - LRT combo project comes to $2.15B.
Extra funding needed above the current project: 2.15 - 1.3 = $0.85B. This is a nontrivial amount, but it is relatively modest on the scale of the planned transit investments in GTA. I believe that the benefits of Sheppard subway extension justify that cost.
Last edited:
Rainforest
Senior Member
Just a thought - Sheppard LRT might actually work better if it starts east of Agincourt.
Lower peak-point demand (west of Agincourt is subway) and shorter length (lesser risk of bunching) would mean that they can run single cars instead of 2-car trains, but operate on a higher frequency - 3' or 4' instead of the currently planned 5'.
That, in turn, means shorter wait times for the majority of riders, and a possibility of branching: Meadowvale - Zoo branch, and Malvern Centre branch.
Lower peak-point demand (west of Agincourt is subway) and shorter length (lesser risk of bunching) would mean that they can run single cars instead of 2-car trains, but operate on a higher frequency - 3' or 4' instead of the currently planned 5'.
That, in turn, means shorter wait times for the majority of riders, and a possibility of branching: Meadowvale - Zoo branch, and Malvern Centre branch.
Last edited:
nfitz
Superstar
Fair enough ... whose to say if the back of my envelope is correct!
I wasn't even considering the Finch/Don Mills section ... I was just looking at the Sheppard LRT project. I'm not sure that 0.95B is fair ... the last report I saw indicated that that cost was for surface LRT to Don Mills, and didn't cover the cost of tunelling the LRT under 404. According to the May 28th report to the TTC, $110-million will be added to the $0.95-billion. The $1.1 billion I mentioned is really $1.06-billion if you don't round, being the sum of the $0.95-billion and the additional $110-million. Thes would be $1.41-billion if you include the connection to Finch.
Sure, it's an option.
Budget contingency is there for a reason. Look at the recent reports on Spadina; the estimated construction costs are coming in high. Part of this is that the price index for this type of construction has been very high in the 2-3 years since it was costed. Look at the last 3 complete years - the increases were 12.28%, 10.24%, and 5.09%. That's an increase in construction cost of 30.1% in only 3-years. This could eat the entire Spadina contingency right there, even without any changes in design, unanticipated geologic conditions, contaminated land, etc. Eliminating contingency is a sure-fire way to exceed your budget.
I think it's a little low, but not impossible ... okay, $1.65-billion to Agincourt.
Agreed.
I think it's a bit of a cheat to use the Finch money (and there's no indication that the amount promised for Finch actually is enough to build that piece). But ignoring Finch then your argument would be that it would cost $1.05-billion to build that.
And it's a fair argument. But $1-billion IS a lot. And what would we rather see it spent on? Personally I'd rather see that $1-billion spent on the Don Mills LRT. Eglinton to Steeles on Don Mills is 10.5 km; of which 2.1 km is already funded as part of Finch. So 8.4 km of LRT is needed north of Eglinton, which would cost only $504-million! The remaining 5-km to Danforth is a challenge, but if they could find a surface route (Donlands/Leaside Bridge), the 5-km could be done for $300-million or so ... say $850-million with upgrades at Donlands station. Isn't that a better use of the money?
kEiThZ
Superstar
Rainforest laid it out well. That's exactly how I would do it. It's not an unreasonable proposal at all. As for where that on billion would come from...can the Morningside LRT and replace it with BRT and bus lanes (where it's too narrow for BRT). That line is the least needed of the bunch. Also, in light of the Kingston BRT, it makes sense to have a consistent sytem all along Kingston.
As for cost. I think 2.15 billion is a fair estimate, since it's no where as difficult to work on Sheppard East as it is along the Yonge corridor which will require serious mitigation measures to keep traffic flowing during construction. I actually think it could even be lower if you start the LRT at Agincourt. Some of the most complicated project costs occur at Don Mills with the tunnel underneath and the common platform having to be built all at once. Some money could be saved by simply extending the subway which has already been pre-positioned (if you will) to cross the 404. But the biggest savings from cutting back the LRT come from not having to run it through narrower portions of Sheppard East (like Agincourt for example). Using subway through here simply makes construction easier. And finally there's the grade separation at the GO station. Another challenge for the LRT that could be eliminated if the subway ran till there, since by the point the LRT would be underground at the common platform.
As for cost. I think 2.15 billion is a fair estimate, since it's no where as difficult to work on Sheppard East as it is along the Yonge corridor which will require serious mitigation measures to keep traffic flowing during construction. I actually think it could even be lower if you start the LRT at Agincourt. Some of the most complicated project costs occur at Don Mills with the tunnel underneath and the common platform having to be built all at once. Some money could be saved by simply extending the subway which has already been pre-positioned (if you will) to cross the 404. But the biggest savings from cutting back the LRT come from not having to run it through narrower portions of Sheppard East (like Agincourt for example). Using subway through here simply makes construction easier. And finally there's the grade separation at the GO station. Another challenge for the LRT that could be eliminated if the subway ran till there, since by the point the LRT would be underground at the common platform.
Rainforest
Senior Member
This is a good point. However, LRT construction is not immune to cost overruns, either ... and I am not sure whether the announced funding for Finch and Sheppard E includes contingency. If not, then we should exclude contingency from the subway estimates, too, for the sake of consistency.
No, not a cheat: the announced funding is for Finch line from Humber College to Don Mills station. Since the "bypass" section east of Yonge won't be needed if Sheppard subway is extended to Agincourt, funding saved on that "bypass" can and should be applied towards the subway extension.
Even Steve Munro is skeptical about all-surface option for Don Mills LRT. And even if (bold if) such layout is feasible, Don Mills LRT without DRL would put more stress on Yonge / Bloor interchange and Yonge south.
The key to good transit in the Don Mills corridor is the eastern wing of DRL. But DRL will cost at least 2 billion, even just to reach Bloor. So, those 0.8B or 1B spent to upgrade the Sheppard corridor, are unlikely to be a deal-breaker.
Btw, those 2.1 km of LRT on Don Mills between Sheppard and Finch, might be a mixed blessing. If they take 2 out of 6 lanes of traffic there, but do not continue with futher LRT construction any time soon, that short LRT section might actually hinder the operation of 25 Don Mills bus.
Given the network benefits that would come with the longer Sheppard subway, I think that it is worth adding those 0.8 - 1 B to the bill. (My position on Eglinton is opposite, since a full subway solution there would incur much greater extra cost, at least 3 or 4 B.)
Rainforest
Senior Member
Cost overruns
Another concern: although neither subways nor LRT lines are immune to cost overruns, in this particular corridor (Finch East - Sheppard East), an LRT cost overrun would be a much greater PR disaster than subway overrun.
Reason: while in most other cases we compare costs of X km of subway versus X km of LRT, in this corridor we have to compare the cost of 5.5 km of subway (Don Mills - Agincourt) versus 13 km of LRT (Yonge - Finch - Don Mills - Agincourt) and a complex underground Don Mills station. In other words, LRT competes on cost while being in an unfavorable position.
Therefore, if the subway (or subway-LRT mix) solution ends up costing, say 2.5 B instead of 2.15 B, the sentiment will be "OK, but at least we have a subway". But if a similar overrun happens on the LRT-only project (say it climbs to 1.7 B), the reaction will be "We could have built subway for virtually same money". And that will not help future LRT projects in GTA at all.
Another concern: although neither subways nor LRT lines are immune to cost overruns, in this particular corridor (Finch East - Sheppard East), an LRT cost overrun would be a much greater PR disaster than subway overrun.
Reason: while in most other cases we compare costs of X km of subway versus X km of LRT, in this corridor we have to compare the cost of 5.5 km of subway (Don Mills - Agincourt) versus 13 km of LRT (Yonge - Finch - Don Mills - Agincourt) and a complex underground Don Mills station. In other words, LRT competes on cost while being in an unfavorable position.
Therefore, if the subway (or subway-LRT mix) solution ends up costing, say 2.5 B instead of 2.15 B, the sentiment will be "OK, but at least we have a subway". But if a similar overrun happens on the LRT-only project (say it climbs to 1.7 B), the reaction will be "We could have built subway for virtually same money". And that will not help future LRT projects in GTA at all.
nfitz
Superstar
Very true; I assume there is contingency built in, as that is standard engineering practice ... but I haven't seen a break-down.
Except in your proposal you provide service along Sheppard, and from Agincourt to Scarborough Centre. In the funded projects there is service along Sheppard East, Finch East, and Don Mills. You completely sacrifice the service on Finch East and Don Mills, without providing any of the connectivity that service does. And while I'm not convinced that Finch to Don Mills Station service is optimum (in my mind, a Finch East LRT AND and a Don Mills LRT are optimum), you're still stealing from one project to fund a different one.
A very good point! Perhaps they should be careful to make sure the buses can run along the track in that section. The other option is breaking the service into 2 (or 3). How much of the traffic passes through Don Mills Station? I use the piece from 401 to Pape a lot, but I don't have enough familiarity with what happens north of the 401.
Last edited:
Rainforest
Senior Member
Unfortunately, the funded projects are detrimental, rather than beneficial, for the service on Finch East. I agree that full Finch East LRT is desirable at some point. But not an LRT stubway that runs to Don Mills only. In fact, once TTC works out and publishes details on the "bypass" and its effect on Finch East bus, vocal opposition from Finch East residents can be expected.
And the frequency of Finch East buses is so high that they won't be able to share lanes with LRT and keep running to Yonge.
For Don Mills, you proposal about sharing the lanes between LRT and buses probably should work.
Breaking the Don Mills service into 2 parts (north an south of Sheppard) should work, too; but only if they proceed with Don Mills North - Leslie - Hwy 7 LRT pretty soon, so that the nothern service becomes LRT.
Breaking into 3 parts (buses from the north running to Finch / Don Mills, and people taking LRT from there) does not seem appealing.
kettal
Banned
I fail to see how the Finch East bypass is relevant to Sheppard's extension, regardless of if it is subway or light rail. Maybe if Sheppard was to be mothballed from Don Mills to Yonge you'd have a point. I think somebody at Metrolinx just liked the idea of interlining Finch with Don Mills.
Last edited:
Rainforest
Senior Member
In a certain way, it is relevant. Metrolinx funded the "bypass" in order to create a continuous Finch W - Sheppard E crosstown LRT line. But I do not think that such crosstown link can work very well - it is way too long. Indeed, it will be 1.5 times longer than Eglinton Crosstown, and will not benefit from the faster tunneled section in the centre like Eglinton will.
Therefore, if we cannot provide an effective link across all of the northern 416 - LRT is too slow, while subway from Kipling to Meadowvale would be incredibly expensive - maybe we should use the funds to improve trips that can realistically be improved?
If so, then redirecting the "bypass" funding for the extension of subway to Agincourt is a good option. It will facilitate trips from eastern North York and northern Scarborough (and to some extent from Markham) to Yonge / North York core. In future (subway extension to Downsview), trips to York U and Yorkdale will be improved as well. At the same time, the rest of Sheppard East will still get LRT service, with the modal transfer occurring at Agincourt instead of Don Mills.
waterloowarrior
Senior Member
Why is there a rush to get Sheppard built ASAP?
"Once you sink that first stake, they'll never make you pull it up."
-Robert Moses
"Once you sink that first stake, they'll never make you pull it up."
-Robert Moses
W. K. Lis
Superstar
Why such a rush? Don't want another anti-transit Premier, like Mike Harris, to do what he did with the Eglinton West subway. Destroy transit use and projects for another 10 years.
Last edited:
Second_in_pie
Senior Member
Alright, so if we get another totally anti-transit premier, we'll be better off than if we did nothing.
But if we don't? A couple years down the road we'll be reaching the limits of our system and will be kicking ourselves for building LRT instead of subway.
And even if we get an anti-transit premier, Metrolinx should be able to continue to provide relatively adequate funding through the worst of such a regime. With their implementation of new funding sources like congestion charges, they should have a solid source of non-government funding that can continue system improvements even if the province retreats.
And who's to say we'll get another anti-transit premier? I know the voters won't ever elect second Harris, and a future premier will have to be able to counter McGuinty's transit offensive, which will most probably have to come with their own transit plan of some sort.
I honestly think that that argument's becoming invalid. It used to exist as a "there's a possibility that we'll get an anti-transit premier," but now I see little chance of that happening, and transit projects will still be able to get funding even if such a thing occurs.
EDIT: I don't want to say "I'll be laughing at all you pro-Transit City advocates a couple years down the road when the network crumbles to bits," because I hope our network doesn't turn out like that. I'm holding on to the idea that the plan will be changed to create a true transit network where individual needs are assessed and responded to. Even if it does turn into a big LRT disaster, I hope that there will at least be parts that work. I don't think that Sheppard, Eglinton, Don Mills or the RT extension will work, but I hope that they do. But if it all goes to bits, I'll be laughing while crying. Both very hard
But if we don't? A couple years down the road we'll be reaching the limits of our system and will be kicking ourselves for building LRT instead of subway.
And even if we get an anti-transit premier, Metrolinx should be able to continue to provide relatively adequate funding through the worst of such a regime. With their implementation of new funding sources like congestion charges, they should have a solid source of non-government funding that can continue system improvements even if the province retreats.
And who's to say we'll get another anti-transit premier? I know the voters won't ever elect second Harris, and a future premier will have to be able to counter McGuinty's transit offensive, which will most probably have to come with their own transit plan of some sort.
I honestly think that that argument's becoming invalid. It used to exist as a "there's a possibility that we'll get an anti-transit premier," but now I see little chance of that happening, and transit projects will still be able to get funding even if such a thing occurs.
EDIT: I don't want to say "I'll be laughing at all you pro-Transit City advocates a couple years down the road when the network crumbles to bits," because I hope our network doesn't turn out like that. I'm holding on to the idea that the plan will be changed to create a true transit network where individual needs are assessed and responded to. Even if it does turn into a big LRT disaster, I hope that there will at least be parts that work. I don't think that Sheppard, Eglinton, Don Mills or the RT extension will work, but I hope that they do. But if it all goes to bits, I'll be laughing while crying. Both very hard
Last edited: