Move Toronto: The SOS Plan

[Jupiter]

Thanks, gweed.

The work I'm doing will be ready and online in early June... I'll post about it then because part of the master's project and why I'm doing it online is to try to drum up support for the line. Obviously, other great sites have been created such as the facebook group to do so, but my goal was to provide more detailed information for people (Hense the costing, density figures, etc.)

$320 million/km may be a little low. Consider that Yonge North is $350 million a kilometre, and it will just go up from there. The DRL is bound to be even more expensive, requiring higher property acquisition costs, deeper stations through the downtown, and a new bridge crossing the Don Valley (The bridge will be about $150 million on it's own). The way I arrived at my costs was to use the specific figures from Spadina and Yonge that were broken down into track costs, station costs, and other such things and apply them specifically to the line based on stations, type of construction, and unique challenges. When it's on the site, the full methodology will be up with it, so I'm sure people can tear it apart. It's between 4500-5000 words for the pricing part.

I'll let you know when it's up specifically (www.drlnow.ca) and I wish you luck in your cause. Regardless of what the cost turns out to be, I think we can agree the DRL is not just a good idea, but basically a necessity.

 

[gweed123]

You don't need to take the Danforth extension along Eglinton and up McCowan, especially if an Eglinton subway is also going over that way. Assuming you want to combine the lines at STC, which requires approaching STC from the SE, creating one giant Bloor-Danforth-Sheppard subway isn't a good idea.

I agree that combining Sheppard and B-D into one mega line would be a bad idea. I see STC station as being kind of like St. George is now, with the two platforms for the two different lines one on top of eachother, with a wye allowing for transfers of cars between lines, but not much else. Eventually they could be interlined, and putting the tracks in that way would allow for it, but I definitely agree that separate services would be best.

As for up McCowan, I think that's the routing that would maximize ridership, and allow for the Lawrence and Ellesmere stations to actually get some usage. Yes, Eglinton is going to eventually go there, but that won't be for a long time. Using the current SRT alignment would be an engineering nightmare on its own, and would require a complete rebuild of the Kennedy subway platform.

With the Jane Transit City line weighed down into possible oblivion by its own silliness, you don't need to feel compelled to include it here. By starting it north of Eglinton and once the Spadina extension, the Eglinton subway, and the Finch LRT are factored in, Jane's peak volumes will be totally obliterated. There is no significant number of jobs or stores or schools on Jane, remember, and the plan should be focused on what is necessary, not on what would might be nice if we had a trillion dollars to waste. You'd get more out of, say, a Wilson-Albion line, if you're looking to spread lines across the city for the sake of parity and for the sake of making a map that looks symmetrical.

The part of the Jane LRT that is silliest is the portion south of Eglinton, where the majority of it would need to be tunnelled. I'm sorry, but the ridership numbers don't justify that. However, I think north of Eglinton, particuarly if it acts as an extension of the DRL West, it could get a fair amount of usage. Yes, it's not the most useful line on the books, but I think it has its merits. All we really did was chop of the most expensive (and least useful) part of the line.

Don Mills should not be split up into a subway, an LRT, and a bus. Like Sheppard, that just kills a corridor's potential and kills ridership.

The reason why we chose to not extend the LRT north of Sheppard is because that would involve going to Finch station. And unless the Finch LRT is going the entire way down Finch, running an LRT along part of it may screw with the Finch East bus, one of the most profitable and best run routes in the city. I suppose that downgrading Don Mills to a BRT could be doable though. The ridership probably could justify it. Our biggest fear was that our first plan was seen as 'bashing LRT' too much, in that it wasn't implemented anywhere. By keeping some aspects of Transit City, hopefully it's seen that we're not completely dismissing it, rather just building upon it.

There's no point stopping the Sheppard subway at the GO line in the short term. I know you're trying to keep it "cost neutral" but it's not like the money is all guaranteed and waiting to be spent, and by using ballpark figures you're going to be off by millions, if not billions, definitely more than enough to make excluding such a short segment very counter-productive as far as supporting a 'we've got a better plan' argument goes. What if a newspaper just included the second map and made no mention of future plans and phases?

The reason why we chose Agincourt in the short-term was that is where the Sheppard subway and SELRT routes diverge. Therefore, the SELRT can proceed as planned beyond Agincourt, that's fine by me. All I really wanted on that corridor was for the Sheppard subway extension to not be cut off at its knees by the SELRT. Yes, I agree it's far from optimal, but we needed to make some concessions in order to make everything fit.

And for the newspaper article thing, how many people do you think when they saw Transit City for the first time went "why aren't they just extending the Sheppard Subway?". No plan is ever ideal, but the last thing you want to do is back yourself into a corner.

 

[gweed123]

And to Jupiter: One of the things we're really trying to get away from with this plan is the need to build Cathedral-like stations where they aren't really needed. The Spadina extension is a perfect example of stations that are much bigger than they need to be. Select a few key stations (on the DRL likely only Science Centre, Thorncliffe Park, Pape-Danforth, and Union). All the rest of them can be the same size as the original Yonge line stations.

And that $350 million/km cost strikes me as being enourmously high. I'm not saying you're wrong with quoting that cost, I'm just saying $350 million/km for a subway is rediculous.

 

[Second_in_pie]

I actually agree with most of Scarberian's criticisms. With the Jane LRT, it really is a secondary issue compared to building a real RT network. The only LRT/BRT that I'd include is Finch, just because of the huge peak demand.

I honestly think that $350 million/km is just ridiculously high too, maybe even for a downtown running line. Sheppard, with it's massively overbuilt stations, was less than $200 million/km, and I can't believe that costs would inflate by well over 75% (imagine what Sheppard would have costed without gargantuan stations.) There's still the massive cost savings from using cut 'n cover, trenches, and elevated lines, which could be used as an alternative to boring in a very significant portion of new subway lines.

 

[nfitz]

And that $350 million/km cost strikes me as being enourmously high. I'm not saying you're wrong with quoting that cost, I'm just saying $350 million/km for a subway is rediculous.

$320 million/km is okay, but $350 million/km is ridiculous? The construction inflation index has hit 10% some years recently ... that's simply what one year of delay do to the costs ... well a bit less with the CPI at 2% or so ... but if you use a 2009 start for the Spadina as a baseline, you'll have to escalate at least 5% a year (after increases in the CPI) for your construction. Assuming that construction costs continue to inflate at rates seen over the last decade.

 

[gweed123]

$320 million/km is okay, but $350 million/km is ridiculous? The construction inflation index has hit 10% some years recently ... that's simply what one year of delay do to the costs ... well a bit less with the CPI at 2% or so ... but if you use a 2009 start for the Spadina as a baseline, you'll have to escalate at least 5% a year (after increases in the CPI) for your construction. Assuming that construction costs continue to inflate at rates seen over the last decade.

Yes. $320 million is through one of the densest urban areas in the country. $350 million is through a typical suburban thoroughfare. One is a reasonable, the other sounds like they added every frill in the book. And my debate is not with the inflation, my debate is with the 'cadillac-style' that is being built there. You don't need stations with 30ft ceilings and concourses that go the whole length of the platform. Proposing those type of stations only makes the idea of a subway more unpallitable, because it seems like too much.

 

[Jupiter]

Fair enough.

I really hope you're right in regards to the stations. In my research I contacted some people in a private firm responsible for some recent subway construction. They didn't want their name used, but they gave me estimates of station construciton, and what was interesting is that they noted that only the "most expensive" underground stations should be more than $100 million... yet every single station on the Spadina extention (and I'd bet the same will be true on Yonge too once the costs are revisited) is over $100m. They really don't seem that palatial to me either... looking at the plans they are a little more in depth than the original Yonge stations, but they certainly don't seem incredibly complicated.

Since my project is for academic purposes though I had to be as accurate as I could be, and that meant using the TTC's estimates for station construction as it can be sourced. If they can build stations cheaper, I'd be fully on board with it... and if I can dig up some evidence the TTC CAN do it cheaper now I'd readjust my costs since I really think my estimate will scare people away from supporting the line.

FWIW, where the costs of the Yonge line seem ridiculous are in a couple places. Steeles Station due to it's underground bus terminal is budgeted at $195 million. Richmond Hill Centre is also very high at $160 million. But where the line seems very high priced even relative to Spadina is in terms of engineering costs. While on Spadina this was $301 million, or if you want to look at it another way $35m/km or 14.4% of the project. For the Yonge extention, these costs are estimated at $675 million, or $99m/km, and 28.1% of the project.

If we use the Yonge figures for engineering, the 12.7 km from Spadina to Eglinton is around $1.3 billion. That's even assuming the project is as simple as the Yonge north extension, which seems very optimistic. I really wish I fully understood where that $675 million figure came from, because if future projects don't need to be that expensive that can bring my costs down by a good deal.

 

[gweed123]

Fair enough.

I really hope you're right in regards to the stations. In my research I contacted some people in a private firm responsible for some recent subway construction. They didn't want their name used, but they gave me estimates of station construciton, and what was interesting is that they noted that only the "most expensive" underground stations should be more than $100 million... yet every single station on the Spadina extention (and I'd bet the same will be true on Yonge too once the costs are revisited) is over $100m. They really don't seem that palatial to me either... looking at the plans they are a little more in depth than the original Yonge stations, but they certainly don't seem incredibly complicated.

Since my project is for academic purposes though I had to be as accurate as I could be, and that meant using the TTC's estimates for station construction as it can be sourced. If they can build stations cheaper, I'd be fully on board with it... and if I can dig up some evidence the TTC CAN do it cheaper now I'd readjust my costs since I really think my estimate will scare people away from supporting the line.

FWIW, where the costs of the Yonge line seem ridiculous are in a couple places. Steeles Station due to it's underground bus terminal is budgeted at $195 million. Richmond Hill Centre is also very high at $160 million. But where the line seems very high priced even relative to Spadina is in terms of engineering costs. While on Spadina this was $301 million, or if you want to look at it another way $35m/km or 14.4% of the project. For the Yonge extention, these costs are estimated at $675 million, or $99m/km, and 28.1% of the project.

If we use the Yonge figures for engineering, the 12.7 km from Spadina to Eglinton is around $1.3 billion. That's even assuming the project is as simple as the Yonge north extension, which seems very optimistic. I really wish I fully understood where that $675 million figure came from, because if future projects don't need to be that expensive that can bring my costs down by a good deal.

Very interesting analysis for sure. And yes, on the surface it does strike me that the engineering costs associated with the Yonge extension are significantly higher than the Spadina extension. And there's nothing about the Yonge extension that strikes me as being particularly challenging from an engineering standpoint, unless they found something during the EA, soil analyses, or geo analyses that threw them for a loop.

And the underground bus bay at Steeles is exactly what I'm talking about in terms of superfluous spending. Why can't they just do what they did at York Mills or Eglinton, and build the bus bay at-grade, but underneath an office complex? God forbid the TTC actually get some revenue from the land that they own by putting something other than a station on it. Richmond Hill Centre also made my jaw drop a little bit. Half of Richmond Hill Centre is an f'in parking lot!

 

[kettal]

When will we get a construction inflation index in the negative value?

 

[Asterix]

And my debate is not with the inflation, my debate is with the 'cadillac-style' that is being built there. You don't need stations with 30ft ceilings and concourses that go the whole length of the platform. Proposing those type of stations only makes the idea of a subway more unpallitable, because it seems like too much.

Aren't the stations to be built cut-and-cover? Does that not mean they have to dig a big hole down to the tracks?

Once they build the platforms at the bottom of the hole, what would be the cheaper way of dealing with all the open space above, making 12 - 15 foot ceilings or 30 foot ceilings?

 

[nfitz]

Yes. $320 million is through one of the densest urban areas in the country. $350 million is through a typical suburban thoroughfare. One is a reasonable, the other sounds like they added every frill in the book. And my debate is not with the inflation, my debate is with the 'cadillac-style' that is being built there. You don't need stations with 30ft ceilings and concourses that go the whole length of the platform. Proposing those type of stations only makes the idea of a subway more unpallitable, because it seems like too much.

You have missed my point entirely ... my point was what will cost $275-million per kilometre if you start building now in 2010 dollars, will cost $350-million per kilometre in 2010 dollars if you start building in 2015 (i.e.$385-million in 2015 dollars). Assuming that the construction inflation index continues to run about 5% higher than the consumer price index (and CPI is at 2%). The extra $20-million that might be spent on a station is almost trivial compared to the above-inflation increases in the cost of stone, steel, and labour.

 

[leopetr]

When will we get a construction inflation index in the negative value?

When oil drops to $30/barrel.

 

[saiho]

I personally would like to see a LRT or even a subway (if we fell like there is money to burn) heading towards Kennedy and Steeles as there are 3 large Asian malls (namely P-mall, market village, and splendid china tower) and numerous plazas there. In about 4 years each mall will double in size totaling in over 1.5 million sq feet of mall. Plus 5 mins away another large Asian mall called the Landmark will be finished, effectively screwing the area with more traffic. For those who when to the area to shop already know traffic is already bad enough without doubling the size of each mall and adding a new one. plus there is also the really far future option of extending it to Markham downtown.

 

[Second_in_pie]

^^ I would like to see at least a BRT go up there, and that would be an excellent secondary project after a core subway network is built. A Kennedy/Agincourt Sheppard Subway stop would be a much better terminus than STC or Kennedy on the B-D.

 

[Rainforest]

In the present funding situation, I would dedicate remaining resources to two projects: Finch West LRT, and SLRT conversion / extension.

SLRT would get two branches: one to Malvern Centre, the other along Sheppard to Meadowvale. That would give access to the future Conlins Rd. yard and, hopefully, help Metrolinx retain the federal $300 million allocated for Sheppard.

Defer the rest of SELRT, and Eglinton. Then, create dedicated funding mechanisms for transit expansion. With those in place, resume expansion: DRL East subway first, then Eglinton, and then Sheppard.