News   Jul 19, 2024
Menkes' Maison 77 Clarendon Topped Off in South Hill
 800     0 
News   Jul 19, 2024
TTC's Next Big Step: Replacing Rick Leary
 3.6K     7 
News   Jul 19, 2024
Third Phase of Quad Residences Advances at York University
 1.1K     3 

Roads: Gardiner Expressway

muller877 said:
I also have an issue with the incredible 99 year time horizon. Imagine if you had to justify LRT projects based on the same costing. Eglington LRT will cost $20 billion (over 99 years). Who would say yes to that? (I'm just pulling a number out of the hat)
Click to expand...

But that's a big part of the reason why LRTs on Finch, Sheppard and Eglinton were recommended. Their operational costs over the lifecycle to the City were less than the operational costs of our current bus operations. The TTC will be able to drastically cut our costly bus fleet because of those three lines, and the money saved can be used to improve service elsewhere.
 
Last edited:
The 99-year lifecycle cost is necessary because of the history of the Gardiner itself. People are well aware of how much we've been spending over the years to maintain it, and it seems like this wasn't well thought out in the past (when it was constructed). The city spent millions last decade (approx $75m) in minor maintenance. If you look here, the maintenance program for the Gardiner that city council approved in January 2013 estimated that they would spend $662m to rehabilitate the section of the Gardiner from Strachan to the DVP. That's only over a 13 year period.

So yeah, the 99-year cost estimate is important. People need to realize how expensive it is to maintain an elevated expressway.
 
Last edited:
wopchop said:
The 99-year lifecycle cost is necessary because of the history of the Gardiner itself. People are well aware of how much we've been spending over the years to maintain it, and it seems like this wasn't well thought out in the past (when it was constructed). The city spent millions last decade (approx $75m) in minor maintenance. If you look here, the maintenance program for the Gardiner that city council approved in January 2013 estimated that they would spend $662m to rehabilitate the section of the Gardiner from Strachan to the DVP. That's only over a 13 year period.

So yeah, the 99-year cost estimate is important. People need to realize how expensive it is to maintain an elevated expressway.
Click to expand...

Maybe I am not understanding your post but it seems you are picking and choosing when to apply the 99 year calc......perhaps they have spent $662 million over 13 years....but surely they will not spend that every 13 years?
 
TOareaFan said:
Maybe I am not understanding your post but it seems you are picking and choosing when to apply the 99 year calc......perhaps they have spent $662 million over 13 years....but surely they will not spend that every 13 years?
Click to expand...
Obviously not every thirteen years. But certainly more often than once every 99 years.

They also spent millions on extensive repairs in the 90s, but I'm having trouble finding documentation for that.

From this link; the city spends $12m a year on regular maintenance alone, and still has had to do extensive repairs (see the $662m rehabilitation plan that I linked above). Hell, my dad, who works for the City public works, has been doing repairs on the Gardiner for three decades. So no, I don't think that I'm picking and choosing anything, as we've been paying extensive bills related to the expressway (the whole expressway, I'll admit) for decades.
 
Last edited:
wopchop said:
Obviously not every thirteen years. But certainly more often than once every 99 years.
Click to expand...

sure...and there will be years that they spend very little....likely why one of the reports looked at the various options on a NPV basis...bringing/discounting all of the options down to a total cost in today's dollars.
 
TOareaFan said:
sure...and there will be years that they spend very little....likely why one of the reports looked at the various options on a NPV basis...bringing/discounting all of the options down to a total cost in today's dollars.
Click to expand...
Got a link? I'd be interested in reading that.
 
dowlingm said:
Here's the project website - http://gardinereast.ca/ As you can see, there have been *four* rounds of public consultations already.

How much additional info do you think people need on this and how would you suggest it be delivered/pressed on them?
Click to expand...

I do not know exactly how these consultations work. I sent a question to them 4 weeks ago and aside from an auto-generated reply, I have heard nothing. So I imagine I will have to wait a bit longer. Maybe Councillors have the same problem that their questions are just not being answered.

The last time I asked a question at an EA was in December 2012 about the Eglinton Crosstown at Leslie. I still have not heard back on that one either.
 
Ok, I found the staff action report (see link)

If you go to Page 5, it has the $NPV figures.
NPV Gardiner.png
POOM.png

From Page 6-7;

The recommended Remove preferred alternative solution in the Gardiner Expressway East EA, which is based on preliminary estimates, requires capital funding of $417 million from 2020 to 2026. This will result in an increase in required funding of $23 million as compared to the Maintain option. However, it does represent the lowest cost alternative by an estimated $51 million on an NPV basis over a 100-year timeframe.

While the recommended Remove option will require an additional upfront capital investment beyond the Maintain option, the net impact on the City will be substantially less than $23 million, as this initial investment will yield a combination of long term savings from the avoidance of future life-cycle capital replacement costs as well as generate additional revenue from the sale of excess public land made available from freed up area along the current East Deck of the Gardiner Expressway.
Click to expand...

However, I haven't been able to find a report that references $NPV for the Hybrid option.
 

Attachments

  • NPV Gardiner.png
    NPV Gardiner.png
    42.8 KB · Views: 352
  • POOM.png
    POOM.png
    41 KB · Views: 346
Last edited:
dowlingm said:
Picture I just posted on Twitter showing where Google thinks traffic issues are right now:
View attachment 47328
Note the green at Gardiner East, the red northbound from Gerrard. But midtowners like Carmichael Greb and Burnside (both new councillors who received Tory endorsements) are making statements favouring maintain-tweak rather than worrying about how the hell the DVP from the ramps their constituents use is gonna get moving.
Click to expand...

That's another great argument for tearing down the Gardiner. Making it harder to drive means more people will use transit, so the DVP will become less congested. The problem is the DVP is too narrow and there are too many cars feeding into it.
 
I wonder if today won't be a bit of a tipping point. Earlier in the day a poll says tear it down, and then His Tiny Perfectness politely trashes Tory's stance. Who's left on the retain side? Rob Ford? Is this really the hill he wants to dig in on?
 
Lie-brid.

It did start as a hybrid, so the name was apt, but then they pulled a bait and switch, accidentally on purpose.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top