micheal_can
Senior Member
Notice how other service has been built in Toronto since the Sheppard line has opened? That is the way to go.
|
|
|
afransen
Senior Member
We don't build transit because Toronto has made it catastrophically expensive. We are spending nearly $1b/km on subways. It is madness.
TossYourJacket
Senior Member
Most of the stuff we are building since Sheppard are LRT lines lol. This isn't the point in favour of continuing existing subway lines underground that you seem to think it is. Look at the speed at which Finch is being built, or how fast we built the surface part of the Crosstown. Now look how long it takes to build something underground like the TYSSE, or the underground part of the Crosstown. Part of the reason the Ontario Line is able to get to Eglinton in the same timeframe as the RL only went to Pape is because much of the northern part is elevated. The bizarre obsession this city that transit only has value if we spend billions to hide it underground is silly and counterproductive to actually building transit.
I'm all for extending Sheppard as a subway to Sheppard west, but it would be better if we could elevate as much as possible. As for eastward, I think underground to Vic Park is the one place you can justify an extension underground, but anything beyond that it should be elevated or LRT. It just makes no sense to build less transit, much more slowly, when we have a crisis around a lack of rapid transit in this city.
11th
Senior Member
The long time frame is a problem when we are playing catch up. Ideally the projects should be staggered, so even if it takes 10 years for completion of one project, you'll get something done every few years going forth.
We lost nearly 15 years between Sheppard and TYSSE.
sche
Active Member
Exactly. Even LRT in Toronto is costing more than actual metros in other places.
FWLRT is 11km and is costing $2.5B CAD, which is 227M CAD/km or 179M USD/km
REM is is 67km and is costing $6.3B CAD, which is 94M CAD/km or 74M USD/km
Vancouver's Evergreen extension and Canada line both cost around $100M USD/km
Stockholm's completely underground Barkarby metro extension is costing 115M USD/km.
Athens Line 4, also completely underground, is costing 134 M USD/km
Everything built in Spain has cost under $100M USD/km except for a handful of Barcelona projects at $160M USD/km
etc. etc.
Continental Europe mostly builds for about $100M-300M USD/km with Scandinavia and Southern Europe being cheaper.
Toronto's (actually, North America's) cost problem is frankly embarrassing and ridiculous. It seems the only North American organization capable of building reasonably priced transit lines these days is the CDPQ, even historically good Vancouver is now building the Broadway Subway for $400M USD/km and STM's Blue Line extension is now like 600M USD/km.
44 North
Senior Member
No way FWLRT is $2.5bn. That must be the funny math where it includes 30yrs operating or something. Or have I missed something and it truly is 2.5bn lol? Things cost so much here I don't even know anymore
micheal_can
Senior Member
One could argue that what is being built is what is needed. Right now, an extension of Sheppard makes no sense,regardless of whether it should stay a subway or be converted to LRT.. So, while the bickering continues, other lines are being extended or built where it is needed and where what is needed is attainable. I expect that before Sheppard is extended the YNSE and the Scarborough extensions will open. That is not a bad thing.
But is the extension needed before others? That is the key question with transit construction.
Steve X
Senior Member
The actually cost is around $1.2b.
The rest of the “capital cost” isn’t really capital cost. 30 years of maintenance and refurbishment is included. That doesn’t mean Queen’s Park is paying for all of it. They’ll get TO/TTC to pay them back.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
Don't be fooled by the P3 contract prices, actual construction cost is often a small fraction of the total contract cost depending on the project.
For contracts where it includes years of operations and maintenance, I've heard it's often about half the total contract value. So for a $2.5 billion project, you are looking at $1.2 billion in construction.
sche
Active Member
Whoops, my bad. I did think it was a bit high.
Even at $1.2B though, it's still at $85 USD/km, which is still more expensive than REM, and still more expensive than some Spanish, Nordic, Italian, and Turkish subways. This is a really underappreciated and extremely bad problem.
Tuck
Active Member
Well, REM re-uses a significant portion of track from the Duex-Montagnes commuter line. It they had to dig it all new it would have been more.
Questionable math/examples aside, I agree with your point overall. We pay more and get less, and I'm not sure the government or MX has ever taken a critical look as to why. Maybe it really just comes down to our soil, necessitating deeper tunneling. Or maybe the blame rests entirely on our building standards. Probably both. But, I would not be surprised if there were several other elements at play.
We are approaching a point where it will become impossible to build new subways in Toronto because the cost has inflated so high. As is, neighbourhood stations end up getting chopped (see Yonge north extension) because the only stations that we view as economically viable are major transfer stations.
sche
Active Member
Yes, of course I know that. But I'm comparing it to Finch West, which is literally a streetcar.
nfitz
Superstar
If REM numbers are lower, it doesn't include that new bridge over the St. Lawrence either. It's a completely separate deck for the two LRT tracks.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
~35km of REM runs on an existing rail corridor which is being converted, which is already electrified and fully graded. Even if some small changes on the corridor are needed and stations need to be upgraded, it's insanely cheap because of it.
Another 5.5km run in a highway median, which requires a few new structures but no utility relocations or significant grading. Again, cheap.
Only the remaining 26km are really "expensive" new construction, and even then they are mostly still at grade or elevated corridors other than the tunnel into the airport.
In-median LRTs are quite expensive as not only do they have to build the LRT tracks, they have to build a new 4-lane road, utilities included. That adds a ton of cost. If you can just build the rail line, it's a lot cheaper.
Those new 4-lane roads would need reconstruction at some point regardless though, so it saves the municipality that cost.
The Hamilton LRT is turning into a quite expensive project for example despite being surface running, but it's rebuilding 14km of major arterials for the City of Hamilton and running new modern servicing along the corridor which will support the intensification planned along the corridor in the coming decades, saving the municipality hundreds of millions of dollars.
Another 5.5km run in a highway median, which requires a few new structures but no utility relocations or significant grading. Again, cheap.
Only the remaining 26km are really "expensive" new construction, and even then they are mostly still at grade or elevated corridors other than the tunnel into the airport.
In-median LRTs are quite expensive as not only do they have to build the LRT tracks, they have to build a new 4-lane road, utilities included. That adds a ton of cost. If you can just build the rail line, it's a lot cheaper.
Those new 4-lane roads would need reconstruction at some point regardless though, so it saves the municipality that cost.
The Hamilton LRT is turning into a quite expensive project for example despite being surface running, but it's rebuilding 14km of major arterials for the City of Hamilton and running new modern servicing along the corridor which will support the intensification planned along the corridor in the coming decades, saving the municipality hundreds of millions of dollars.
rbt
Senior Member
Indeed.
I think the trick to reducing transit costs in Toronto is the same as MTO uses for highways; identifying corridors 30+ years before they're needed and ensuring no development or utilities occur within them so construction, when the time comes, is clean and simple.
Last edited: