Results 1 to 51 of 51

Thread: Eglinton ( Toronto) LRT named Canada’s costliest construction project

  1. #1
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton (belevedre)
    Posts
    6,425

    Default Eglinton ( Toronto) LRT named Canada’s costliest construction project

    this line cost $8.2 billion dollars to built makes it the costliest in Canada

    http://www.thestar.com/news/article/...n-project?bn=1
    Edmonton Rocks Rocks Rocks

  2. #2
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Meadows
    Posts
    1,972

    Default

    Burying, aside from short tunnels, is so stupid. I don't understand why planners are afraid of elevated sections.
    $2.00 $2.25 $2.50 $2.75 $2.85 $3.00 $3.20 $3.25

  3. #3
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    43,976

    Default

    See Paris, London, NYC. Planning ahead and while costly, a good long term investment for certain cities. Much much less disruption and demo to the fabric of the city.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  4. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jstock View Post
    Burying, aside from short tunnels, is so stupid. I don't understand why planners are afraid of elevated sections.
    Works in Vancouver...
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  5. #5
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    43,976

    Default

    Are there basements in most Vancouver homes?
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  6. #6
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Ontario/Alberta
    Posts
    106

    Default

    It's not the planners who are against at-grade or elevated LRT lines, it was Mayor Rob Ford's decision to bury much of the new extension so it would not disturb traffic.

  7. #7
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,135

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jstock View Post
    Burying, aside from short tunnels, is so stupid. I don't understand why planners are afraid of elevated sections.
    Because even the newer elevated sections are still butt ugly.

    Older (Chicage el)
    http://anthonyjstewart.files.wordpre...ago-the-el.jpg

    Newer (Seattle Sound Transit)
    http://i116.photobucket.com/albums/o...n/DSC_0269.jpg

    Probably the best is the bridge is for the Jerusalem Light Rail designed by Santiago Calatrava
    http://www.arcspace.com/architects/c...3jerusalem.jpg
    Last edited by sundance; 03-01-2012 at 09:47 AM.

  8. #8

    Default

    If anything, elevated lines make for interesting public spaces when they're no longer needed for rail. http://www.thehighline.org/

  9. #9

    Default

    $8billion for 19 km's is crazy. That's getting up into HSR pricing (which is for about 300km's). The entire Edmonton proposed LRT network could probably be built for that (if went out as one big P3).
    Last edited by moahunter; 03-01-2012 at 10:10 AM.

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    $8billion for 19 km's is crazy. That's getting up into HSR pricing (which is for about 300km's). The entire Edmonton proposed LRT network could probably be built for that (if went out as one big P3).
    And yet Ford was the 'conservative' choice in their civic election. Rumored $65M just to cancel shovel-ready Transit City.
    I think of art, at its most significant, as a Distant Early Warning system that can always be relied on to tell the old culture what is beginning to happen to it. —Marshall McLuhan

  11. #11

    Default

    ^IMO Ford is an ***** in terms of decisions. He knows he constituents politically though, in Toronto car is king to get to those 401 hugging suburbs, and like it or not, grade LRT has been unfairly equated to their streetcar system.
    Last edited by moahunter; 03-01-2012 at 10:43 AM.

  12. #12

    Default

    In Berlin they have this total waste of space (sarcasm) elevated rail. Lo and behold, fine dining and classy shops underneath. The horror of efficient use of space...

    "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction" - Blaise Pascal

  13. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    ^IMO Ford is an ***** in terms of decisions. He knows he constituents politically though, in Toronto car is king to get to those 401 hugging suburbs, and like it or not, grade LRT has been unfairly equated to their streetcar system.
    He won't last the next election....
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  14. #14
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    43,976

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dusty Bear View Post
    If anything, elevated lines make for interesting public spaces when they're no longer needed for rail. http://www.thehighline.org/
    High line is awesome, but ask me to walk the line (even if done in a similar fashion) along lougheed in Van? no thanks
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  15. #15

    Default

    ^^ You sure about that? I'm not. He's settled down since he was elected. As an ex-Torontonian, I'm not a big fan but people I know there begrudgingly admit he's growing into the job.

  16. #16
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,562

    Default

    I'm all for mass transit but the Toronto idea is very very poorly planned.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  17. #17

    Default

    ^ I don't think he has settled down what so ever... His personal life get in the way of with his work life in a negative fashion. He is cutting services while raising fees on a transit system that already is the highest of self funding in relation to public dollars.

    Ford will continue to humiliate Toronto... I continue to compare him and his brother as the kilpatricks of Canada.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  18. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmcowboy11 View Post
    I'm all for mass transit but the Toronto idea is very very poorly planned.
    Their new idea...

    New York's Burroughs have twice the population, are more dense than Toronto's and even they don't have underground lines. (they use elevated tracks)

    The Subway Extension is a waist of money and will be underused for the population density and possible ridership levels.

    The LRT line, which this thread is about, was largely to be tunneled at key points. Gave more access to fast transit to more areas ripe for development and was cheaper to build and run.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  19. #19

    Default

    ^ Eglinton Avenue between the DVP and Dufferin is NOT suburban in the former city of Toronto. It's actually called "Midtown" and is as urban, if not more so, than Edmonton's downtown.

    Beers on whether or not Ford wins the next election. And remember, I'm not a fan, just passing on what I hear from my friends in Toronto - who aren't either. Ford is not popular with people south of the 401, east of Jane St. or west of the DVP. He is hugely popular in the former boroughs of Scarborough, Etobicoke and North York. (All areas that are still suburban and have the lion's share of population.)

  20. #20

    Default

    I assume our hard earned federal income tax $ is funding this like it did the Vanc olympics which lead to underground transit in downtown Hongkoover. Why is Alberta the only place where people swallow 'we couldnt put the LRT underground (or elevated) because there wasnt any money'

    If I dont have cash, maybe I shouldnt start a business or buy a house. Wat a farking joke. Think about this next time you are idling at 51 Ave.

  21. #21
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Westmount
    Posts
    3,021

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    New York's Burroughs have twice the population, are more dense than Toronto's and even they don't have underground lines. (they use elevated tracks)
    That's not really correct. There are lots of underground lines and stations (or sections of lines) in Brooklyn, for instance.

  22. #22

    Default

    A subway along Eglinton is a great idea. There is really no room to go elevated along most of the proposed route without expropriating land and demolishing very valuable buildings. The street is only 4 lanes along much of the section in question.

    If you look at the 2 neighbourhoods closest to the intersection of Yonge & Eglinton, the population compares with our downtown, if not even higher (34,000 for 'Yonge-Eglinton' and 'Mt. Pleasant West' neighbourhoods combined).

  23. #23
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,384

    Default

    The total route length is 25 not 19 kilometers. 19 kilometers along Eglinton will be underground. The section to Scarborough City Centre will be partly elevated and completely grade separated.

    While going to a metro standard does increase capital costs, it means 30% higher ridership and allows 2 minute headway between trains.

    More information available here: http://www.metrolinx.com/en/projects...wnProject.aspx

    The June 23, 2011 Project Update is particularly informative.

  24. #24

    Default

    [QUOTE=JamesL;411974]
    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    New York's Burroughs have twice the population, are more dense than Toronto's and even they don't have underground lines. (they use elevated tracks)
    That's not really correct. There are lots of underground lines and stations (or sections of lines) in Brooklyn, for instance.[/QUOT]

    That is one area.. The Subway line i took into Brooklyn was elevated.

    " Contrary to its name, the New York City Subway system is not entirely underground; large portions of the system (especially outside of Manhattan) are elevated, on embankments, or in open cuts. A few stretches of track run at ground level. "

    Again outside of Manhattan the majority of track is not underground.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  25. #25

    Default

    Check this out.. it's quiet a good read
    http://johnmcgrath.ca/2011/12/30/den...ays-revisited/



    Here is a snipit.. if you want to find out why he says no.. read the article.

    Even if the inner suburbs aren’t dense enough to support subways now, can’t subways encourage the very density that would make them financially sustainable?

    To which the short answer is: yes, very much. And you can see that happening in Brooklyn and the Bronx in the early decades after subways started making their way through New York. But there’s a problem: we don’t live in the 1920s or 30s anymore, which is mostly a very good thing (we don’t have to worry about prohibition or fascism!) but for subway advocates poses a few real problems. The long answer to Dave’s question ends up being… well, no.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  26. #26
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Westmount
    Posts
    3,021

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    Again outside of Manhattan the majority of track is not underground.
    That's fine, dude. But that's not what your original contention was -- you said that "they don't have underground lines". Just trying to correct the record here. I'm not trying to dispute your larger points on the cost effectiveness of tunneling, etc.

  27. #27

    Default

    ^ fair enough.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  28. #28

    Default Compromise would bring leg of Eglinton LRT back to street level

    Seems a no-brainer (but who knows, what Rob Ford will do):

    A compromise is in the works to relieve Toronto’s transit headache for the new Eglinton light rail line and fulfill the mayor’s election pledge for a Sheppard subway extension.

    A group of Toronto city councillors that includes TTC chair Karen Stintz is proposing that the eastern leg of the new Eglinton Crosstown line run at street level as first planned with the money that saves used to extend the Sheppard subway two stops to Victoria Park. The proposal also would use some of the money to improve TTC service on Finch Avenue West with a dedicated transit corridor.

    The change of plans would free up about $1.5-billion from the Eglinton line’s estimated $8.2-billion price tag and quell rising opposition to the notion of spending money to bury the light rail line in a part of the city where there is room for a street-level track. To work, the compromise also would require a reversal of Mayor Rob Ford’s edict that the entire Crosstown line be put underground.
    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle2313981/

  29. #29

    Default

    O Rob Ford.... He is just getting it from all ends now!

    I love! I still can't believe the absurd amount they are proposing to pay for a minuscule addition to the subway system.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  30. #30

    Default

    The Eglinton Line is anything but miniscule. It would fill a huge hole in Toronto's rapid transit network.

  31. #31

    Default

    The Eglinton Line isn't a subway extension... It's LRT.

    You might want to research the Transit plan again... I'm talking about the subway extension.
    Last edited by edmonton daily photo; 26-01-2012 at 10:47 AM.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  32. #32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    The Eglinton Line isn't a subway extension... It's LRT.
    It would be subway along entire length if Rob Ford had his way. LRT is being used more and more often as subway now, rather than traditional Metro. Rob Ford isn't against LRT as subway for this line, he just hates at grade. And yes, the Eglinton line is part of the Toronto network, it shows on the maps, even if it uses a different technology (most people don't care whether their underground train is an LRT train, or a Metro train, there is debate between above or below ground though).
    Last edited by moahunter; 26-01-2012 at 10:33 AM.

  33. #33

    Default

    ^ You need to research the project... Transit city is MORE than just Eglinton.

    Please note when I say "Minuscule Subway Extension".. I am not talking about the the discussion over the LRT lines that are to be created. I'm taking about the 1. Something billion dollars they are going to pay for a small extension of the subway.

    LRT is not Subway.. They may be designed in the same fashion, but there some fundamental differences.

    System maps clearly lable Subway as subway and LRT as LRT
    Last edited by edmonton daily photo; 26-01-2012 at 10:51 AM.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  34. #34

    Default

    From the Star...

    At city hall Wednesday, councillors from the left, right and centre — from the opposition to Rob Ford’s own executive — were lining up behind Stintz’s plan, which would move a chunk of the proposed underground Eglinton LRT back to the surface.

    This would free up as much as $2 billion in funding to extend the Sheppard subway line at least one stop and add some form of rapid transit along Finch Ave. W.
    Last edited by edmonton daily photo; 26-01-2012 at 10:49 AM.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  35. #35

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    The Eglinton Line isn't a subway extension... It's LRT.

    You might want to research the Transit plan again... I'm talking about the subway extension.
    Sorry. My mistake.

    However what Rob Ford is talking about doing to the Sheppard line is far from miniscule. It goes a long way to completing the orginal good planning and vision for that line.

    Right now it is a line to nowhere, but if it was finished the Sheppard Line would become a huge transit corridor for North York and Scarborough.

    Extending it to VP would "close the loop" and connect it with the Bloor Line in the East.

    It should also be finished along Sheppard to Don Mills which would close the western TTC loop on the north and west sides of the system.

    Just having a station at Bathurst and Sheppard would be a massive addition to the system. There are MANY senior citizens in that area who depend a great deal on transit.

  36. #36

    Default

    Right.. but there is no funding for the full shep line build out. They may get two stops.. and the small subway buildout would come at the cost of the northernmost LRT line which is now being proposed as BRT.

    Transit city


    Rob Fords Subway vision



    Its hard to find the mockup of metrolinx's plan but it shows a very small expansion of the Shepard line.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  37. #37

    Default

    ^ If it's BRT north of Sheppard for another east-west route, that's the way to go. Density from Finch North would not necessitate a subway line.

    I also like the idea of the Eglinton line being a full-grade subway instead of an LRT. I know that idea is still being batted around a bit. The volumes for this route would absolutely be enough to justify that.

    From the subway diagram above, you can see what finishing the Sheppard line would do, complete the northern circle for the TTC and bring a huge amount of new riders to the system.

    I'll bet the citizens of London, Paris and New York are glad civic leaders in the early part of the last century had enough vision to realise the money they spent would build a system that's integral to the quality of life in their cities more than a century later.

    It's not just the debt that we pass on to subsequent generations, it's also the infrastructure.

  38. #38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PJC View Post
    ^ I also like the idea of the Eglinton line being a full-grade subway instead of an LRT.
    My understanding is at the moment two possibilities exist for Eglinton:

    1. LRT underground (yes, this is subway, albeit not metro, but it is not instead of LRT, because it still is LRT)
    2. LRT at grade and underground

    An earlier idea that is dead was transit city LRT at grade the whole way for Eglinton.

    Nobody is suggesting metro for Eglinton like the existing subway, per the article I posted earlier in the thread:

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle2313981/
    Last edited by moahunter; 01-02-2012 at 02:45 PM.

  39. #39

    Default

    Englington will be LRT under both plans.. One calls for complete tunneling and transit city calls for tunneling in high density areas and surface in lower...

    the BRT is the Finch line which was to be LRT under transity city (not yet funded) don't discussed at all in the ford plan and BRT under Metrolinx compromise plan.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  40. #40

    Default

    ^^ There was an article in the Star when I was in Toronto over Christmas that had some musing about Eglinton being a full scale subway line. It was part and parcel to the discussion about the line being above-ground east of the DVP.

  41. #41

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PJC View Post
    ^^ There was an article in the Star when I was in Toronto over Christmas that had some musing about Eglinton being a full scale subway line. It was part and parcel to the discussion about the line being above-ground east of the DVP.
    That is just lunacy... Subway is sooooo expensive.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  42. #42

    Default

    Have you been anywhere near the central areas eglington avenue before? It has more density that just about anywhere in Edmonton.

  43. #43

    Default

    Yes I have been to Toronto and yes I have been in teh central part of Englinton and no Edmonton es no where as dence.. there may be 1-2 neighborhoods that are comprising of some 40,000 - 50,000 people but sugesting that Edmonton as one of the cities with the lowest density in Canada/North America is on the same level as Toronto... no I don't think so.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  44. #44

    Default

    So would you agree, its best the tunnel through the central parts of this route? Surface LRT wouldn't cut it here?

  45. #45

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    So would you agree, its best the tunnel through the central parts of this route? Surface LRT wouldn't cut it here?
    Surface LRT is perefectly fine for Edmonton... Just because we have two neighborhoods (Oliver and Old Strath) that have population densities equal to large metro centers doesn't mean we need to submerge our LRT.. Nor do we have over half a million jobs located in Edmonton's CFD... Nor do we have a metro population of 5.5 million

    Medwards... come on... Trying to compare us to DT Toronto and our needs to that of DT Toronto.. Because our DT has some 80 city blocks of density that equals that of Toronto... Please!
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  46. #46

    Default

    Your whole response to me was about something I wasn't even talking about... remember, this thread is about LRT in Toronto.

  47. #47

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    So would you agree, its best the tunnel through the central parts of this route? Surface LRT wouldn't cut it here?
    Im so confused.. They are tunneling through the central part of this ( The Eglinton route)... they always were..

    Please help me understand what you are asking.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  48. #48

    Default

    I dont get your objection to this project then...

  49. #49

    Default

    This project.. (The Eglington LRT Line) Went from being a combination tunnel and surface route under Metrocity.. to being completely tunneled under Rob Fords vision which he has illegal forced onto Toronto.

    I object to needles tunneling in low density areas, large costly expansions of subway in lower density areas and doing all this at the expense of adequate transit to other neighborhoods that also need access to a higher frequencies system such as LRT or BRT.

    To add to this.. A committee made largely up of suburban councilors and Rob Ford Supporters have stopped any further study on all other routes other than Rob Fords Subway Vision.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  50. #50
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,135

    Default

    Thumbs up for Sheppard subway extension: Report
    Don Peat - Toronto Sun
    Mayor Rob Ford’s Sheppard subway is “doable,” according to a long-awaited report on the transit project.
    Gordon Chong, the chairman of Toronto Transit Infrastructure Ltd., told the Toronto Sun Wednesday his report shows funding of an extension of the Sheppard line is feasible and predicts it could be built for $3.7 billion — $1 billion less than originally budgeted.
    ...
    http://www.torontosun.com/2012/02/01...tension-report

  51. #51

    Default

    ^ lol Doable as long as the project comes in 20-30% under budget and they do a P3...

    Just because something is doable doesn't mean it should be done! The density of the area doesn't warrant a heavy rail system of this capacity.

    Fords plan will be killed just like his budget.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •