News   Jul 15, 2024
Sculptural Pre-Cast Panels Now Adorning ANX near Dupont Station
 46     0 
News   Jul 15, 2024
Resubmitted Agincourt Condo Proposal Bumps Height, Reduces Parking
 329     0 
News   Jul 15, 2024
News Roundup for July 15, 2024
 533     0 

Toronto Crosstown LRT | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx | Arcadis

Here's another question...............
Why does it cost $1.2 billion to simply transfer SkyTrain over to LRT and take a truly unbelievable 4 years to do it? How is it that Vancouver's new 11km Evergreen SkyTrain line costs only $1.4 billion {including a one km tunnel} with 7 new stations and is only going to take 3 years? How is it that Calgary's new 8km elevated/at grade/tunneled West LRT with 100 meter stations is only costing $800 million and taking only 3 years?
Maybe it's Vancouver's dirt cheap real estate or not having to build to earthquake standards or maybe it's due to the very low wages of Calgary. Then again it may, just may, be because Toronto refuses accountability for their scarse transit funds and Toronto hands out transit infrastructure contracts the same way Montreal hands out it's highway & road contracts.
 
sixrings said:
it should be noted that all the staff only work on two stations each.l so it is possible that some staff are more informed then others. i found this out because i showed up at 855 and they were almost paking up and i wanted to ask questions about the eglinton west design of the lack of a south entrance but no one had worked on that project. instead people were only familiar with the keele and caledonia stations. the one question i shouod have asked is will caledonia somehow connect to the go network.
Click to expand...

My concern was also a lack of entrance on Keele (north). There will be a south entrance on Keele south at Eglinton and two on Eglinton on the north side (one on the east and one on the west side of Trethewey). I thought it was unnecessary to have 2 at Trethewey and there should, be 1 entrance on Keele north for the residential area north of Eglinton and Keele or at least keele and Yore Rd. The way one of them explained it was that the station box was only so big. Actually quite small – the size of the LRT. So if they put an entrance on Keele north or at Keele and Yore Rd, they would need to excavate and build a foundation for the stairs/escalators to go down a level to where the LRT will be.

They also have to expropriate one of the houses on Keele north and they have already been notified.. I had forgotton that there are a few houses on keele just north of Eglinton which could also explain why there would be no entrance on keele north. I feel that the station entrances should not be right on Eglinton because Eglinton should be reserved for retail, shops, etc. When you go to the Jane subway on Bloor for instance or even the Ossington station on Bloor the station entrances are not on Bloor. The Jane entrance is off Jane north of Bloor and the Ossington station again is north of Bloor off of ossington. The way one of them explained it the entrances on the outside would be covered so there would be protection from the elements. So it would seem like the Keele station would be prominently displayed. Not sure if that’s the only way they think people will take it – if they see it.
 
Last edited:
BurlOak said:
Possibly the City wrote a poor RFP document and there was too much wiggle room for the Contractor. But it is just as likely that it was the City (and not the Contractor) that cheaped out. The City saw the cost savings and decided the savings were worth the aggravation. There is aggravation with all types of construction - if the cost savings are large enough, the city can put up with a lot more complaints.
Click to expand...

The city wrote a bad RFP and got stuck with the results because of Olympic timing constraints. They've indicated they will not allow cut & cover again.
 
Last edited:
ssiguy2 said:
Here's another question...............
Why does it cost $1.2 billion to simply transfer SkyTrain over to LRT and take a truly unbelievable 4 years to do it? How is it that Vancouver's new 11km Evergreen SkyTrain line costs only $1.4 billion {including a one km tunnel} with 7 new stations and is only going to take 3 years?
Click to expand...

Because you are only getting half of the costs and timeframe.

The EA and some of the detailed design for the Evergreen Line was finished in 2010 - last I checked, that was 2 years ago. The project was okay'd in 2008, which means that it will take 8 years from the time it was funded. Then there is the cost of the vehicles, and their storage (or expansion of the maintenance facility) - neither of which is included in that $1.4bil.

Generally when we cost things out in Toronto, they include everything - EA, detailed design, vehicles, etc., along with the timeframe to encompass all of the work to do be done. The $2.6bil for the Vaughan extension includes the 10 TR trains, the new connection to and the expansion of Wilson Yard, as well as the millions of dollars required for detailed design. Remember that the first tender for construction on the line - the launch shaft at Steeles West - was only awarded in March of 2010. 5 and a half years of construction to build an 8.6km fully-tunnelled line - the extension to Vaughan - actually sounds about right in terms of time.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.
 
leopetr said:
Canada Line was supposed to be bored but the contractor cheaped out and used cut and cover, digging up the street for years and putting lots of businesses out of business.

Canada Line has very short stations and accordingly low capacity. It was running at capacity shortly after completion and will need to be upgraded soon.

There's a single-tracked section on the Canada Line, creating a built-in bottleneck.

Parts of the Canada line are elevated which is cheaper than tunnelling. Only the SRT rebuild part of Eglinton will be elevated.
Click to expand...

Even though Canada Line has ridiculously short platforms it probably could accomodate much more frequent headways (automated systems can go as low as 90 seconds) if the single track turnarounds at YVR and Richmond were rebuilt as double track. Surface light rail cannot efficiently run more frequently than every 5 minutes with full signal priority. Also the Transit City proposal was poorly designed by LRT standards because it had too many minor stops, small islands rather than real stations as stops, no pedestrian overpasses/underpasses at stops and no crossing arms. If you are running a high capacity LRT line it needs to be designed similar to the Calgary C-Train system or I refuse to support it.
 
andrewpmk said:
Even though Canada Line has ridiculously short platforms it probably could accomodate much more frequent headways (automated systems can go as low as 90 seconds) if the single track turnarounds at YVR and Richmond were rebuilt as double track. Surface light rail cannot efficiently run more frequently than every 5 minutes with full signal priority. Also the Transit City proposal was poorly designed by LRT standards because it had too many minor stops, small islands rather than real stations as stops, no pedestrian overpasses/underpasses at stops and no crossing arms. If you are running a high capacity LRT line it needs to be designed similar to the Calgary C-Train system or I refuse to support it.
Click to expand...

Agreed
 
andrewpmk said:
Real LRT in Calgary:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZqVBqYsmLs

If LRT on Eglinton or elsewhere does not resemble this, then I am opposed to it. Elevated is better of course.
Click to expand...

The Eglinton LRT would more resemble the Paris LRT. But I believe that the Eglinton LRT would be a little faster:
[video=youtube;iwGS0cS0ujo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iwGS0cS0ujo[/video]
 
Voltz said:
Those ridership numbers are that high because existing riders on on the Bloor Danforth would switch to the Eglinton line if it were tunnelled. Blowing billions to give those exiting riders another route is irresponsible and unnecessary.
Click to expand...

and your an expert because...???

The numbers are there and Eglinton deserves a subway (tunnelled or elevated)

Funny how you use numbers to crucify Sheppard but find some excuse to dismiss numbers that justifies subway technology as early as 2031 and by 2050, it more than justify the technology
 
TheTigerMaster said:
The Eglinton LRT would more resemble the Paris LRT. But I believe that the Eglinton LRT would be a little faster:
[video=youtube;iwGS0cS0ujo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iwGS0cS0ujo[/video]
Click to expand...

That kind of line belongs on Finch not on Eglinton with the ridership they are anticipating
 
Solid Snake said:
and your an expert because...???

The numbers are there and Eglinton deserves a subway (tunnelled or elevated)

Funny how you use numbers to crucify Sheppard but find some excuse to dismiss numbers that justifies subway technology as early as 2031 and by 2050, it more than justify the technology
Click to expand...

Voltz is right about people just switching to the Eglinton Line. I actually read a Metrolinx or TTC report (I can't remember which one) that said the exact same thing as him a few days ago.

And I don't know what about Voltz makes him an expert, but he seems to have a far better understanding of the topic then you do.
 
TheTigerMaster said:
Voltz is right about people just switching to the Eglinton Line. I actually read a Metrolinx or TTC report (I can't remember which one) that said the exact same thing as him a few days ago.

And I don't know what about Voltz makes him an expert, but he seems to have a far better understanding of the topic then you do.
Click to expand...

Was it that report?
http://www.metrolinx.com/en/project...lintonScarboroughCrosstownUpdate_Feb72012.pdf

Underground has more benefits than at grade and would attract double the ridership justifying subway. That report is February 2012 and they do mention that it would complement the Bloor-Danforth line.

So by offering an alternative to riders by offering them a shorter travel time to have access to rapid transit by decreasing their travel time on the bus is bad???

Nope, I think my understanding on the topic is more than fine
 
The thing with Eglinton is that it's a very weird situation. By that I mean that if it is interlined with the SLRT, then Eglinton East will need to be grade separated, because surface along that stretch would be at the upper limits of what surface can handle. But if they aren't interlined, people will continue to use B-D, and complete grade-separation won't be necessary.

The question of interlining needs to be answered first.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top