News   Nov 25, 2024
Work Advances at Line 5 Condos Near Yonge and Mount Pleasant
 593     0 
News   Nov 25, 2024
Pinnacle Resubmission Bumps Heights of Lakeside Project at Sherbourne and Lake Shore
 855     0 
News   Nov 25, 2024
Toronto’s Construction Boom: Prioritizing Worker Safety in High-Risk Environments
 420     0 

Waterloo Region Transit Developments (ION LRT, new terminal, GRT buses)

micheal_can said:
And this is one thing that makes Ottawa's design slightly better.
Click to expand...
I saw that happening just after testing started. Have seen it in other places, especially for RR of all things.
 
micheal_can said:
And this is one thing that makes Ottawa's design slightly better.
Click to expand...
If Ottawa's is only slightly better than KW then KW wins.

Ottawa's system cost about $168 million per kilometre while Waterloo's only cost about $45 million per kilometre. Had KW paid the same per kilometre as Ottawa, it would have cost about $3.7 billion instead of $0.9 billion!

Ottawa's SHOULD be slightly better. I dare say it should be significantly better at that price difference.
 
KevinT said:
Had KW proposed a design that cost the same per kilometre as Ottawa's it would have died in a vote a long time ago. I'm proud of what we've achieved on our shoestring.
Click to expand...
Absolutely! This is part of the problem with the proposed $4.5-billion for a single subway station in Scarborough. Scarborough could get 100 km of LRT for the same price. Sure a single subway station and 6 km of subway track is indeed far better than 6 km of LRT and one stop - or even 6.

But compare 1 station and 6 km of subway to 100 Ion-like LRT stops and 100 km of track.

We need more subway in Scarborough - but for once, could we actually spend a similar amount of something other than subway?
 
nfitz said:
Absolutely! This is part of the problem with the proposed $4.5-billion for a single subway station in Scarborough. Scarborough could get 100 km of LRT for the same price. Sure a single subway station and 6 km of subway track is indeed far better than 6 km of LRT and one stop - or even 6.

But compare 1 station and 6 km of subway to 100 Ion-like LRT stops and 100 km of track.

We need more subway in Scarborough - but for once, could we actually spend a similar amount of something other than subway?
Click to expand...

The Eglinton Crosstown LRT says hello!
 
Hopkins123 said:
The Eglinton Crosstown LRT says hello!
Click to expand...
The mostly underground Eglinton line is costing $9.1 billion - and that doesn't include the early contracts - like the tunnel itself and the portals near Keele and Laird. That's more than the cost for the other original 6 Transit City lines combined! Even the 8-km "surface" section from west of Leslie to Kennedy includes two underground stations (Don Mills and Kennedy). Other than the unfortunately-designed Leslie intersection, there's really only about 4-km of non-grade separated LRT from west of Bermondsey to Ionview. It's a start ...
 
nfitz said:
The mostly underground Eglinton line is costing $9.1 billion - and that doesn't include the early contracts - like the tunnel itself and the portals near Keele and Laird. That's more than the cost for the other original 6 Transit City lines combined! Even the 8-km "surface" section from west of Leslie to Kennedy includes two underground stations (Don Mills and Kennedy). Other than the unfortunately-designed Leslie intersection, there's really only about 4-km of non-grade separated LRT from west of Bermondsey to Ionview. It's a start ...
Click to expand...
That cost includes 30 years of operations and maintenance as well.. It's not a $9 billion capital outlay.
 
innsertnamehere said:
That cost includes 30 years of operations and maintenance as well.. It's not a $9 billion capital outlay.
Click to expand...
Good point - though I think it's maintenance only, not operations. TTC will be doing operations, and that contract didn't include TTC.

So yes, the capital cost is lower - but as I noted, I didn't add in the two tunnel contracts, for the subway tunnels from near Keele to east of Laird.
 
nfitz said:
Good point - though I think it's maintenance only, not operations. TTC will be doing operations, and that contract didn't include TTC.

So yes, the capital cost is lower - but as I noted, I didn't add in the two tunnel contracts, for the subway tunnels from near Keele to east of Laird.
Click to expand...
nfitz said:
Good point - though I think it's maintenance only, not operations. TTC will be doing operations, and that contract didn't include TTC.

So yes, the capital cost is lower - but as I noted, I didn't add in the two tunnel contracts, for the subway tunnels from near Keele to east of Laird.
Click to expand...
I seem to recall that the actual capital portion is in and around $5 billion, and those initial tunnel contracts IIRC were in the $700 million range.. Meaning total capital outlay in the $6 billion range.
 
nfitz said:
If Ottawa's is only slightly better than KW then KW wins.

Ottawa's system cost about $168 million per kilometre while Waterloo's only cost about $45 million per kilometre. Had KW paid the same per kilometre as Ottawa, it would have cost about $3.7 billion instead of $0.9 billion!

Ottawa's SHOULD be slightly better. I dare say it should be significantly better at that price difference.
Click to expand...
KevinT said:
Had KW proposed a design that cost the same per kilometre as Ottawa's it would have died in a vote a long time ago. I'm proud of what we've achieved on our shoestring.
Click to expand...
nfitz said:
Absolutely! This is part of the problem with the proposed $4.5-billion for a single subway station in Scarborough. Scarborough could get 100 km of LRT for the same price. Sure a single subway station and 6 km of subway track is indeed far better than 6 km of LRT and one stop - or even 6.

But compare 1 station and 6 km of subway to 100 Ion-like LRT stops and 100 km of track.

We need more subway in Scarborough - but for once, could we actually spend a similar amount of something other than subway?
Click to expand...

There are many things that can be used to compare the 2 systems. If it is a contest, Ottawa wins in most categories. The only thing KW really wins at is showing that you do not need 1 million + to have rapid transit. Ion is a game changer. It will make other cities want one. Ottawa's should have been built 30 years ago.
 
micheal_can said:
There are many things that can be used to compare the 2 systems. If it is a contest, Ottawa wins in most categories. The only thing KW really wins at is showing that you do not need 1 million + to have rapid transit. Ion is a game changer. It will make other cities want one. Ottawa's should have been built 30 years ago.
Click to expand...
Comparing the ION to the Confederation Line is like comparing a tangerine to a watermelon. The ION is designed for attracting new ridership and creating an environment to encourage development. The Confederation Line is built upon existing transitway and ridership and is really not a typical LRT. It's built like a full rapid transit line. Yes they should have built it 30 years ago but at least they finally gave up on BRT through the core. Half of the stations in Ottawa are built in places that's difficult to access on foot. I think the ION also wins accessibility as seniors and the disable don't need an elevator to get to the platform.
 
Steve X said:
Comparing the ION to the Confederation Line is like comparing a tangerine to a watermelon. The ION is designed for attracting new ridership and creating an environment to encourage development. The Confederation Line is built upon existing transitway and ridership and is really not a typical LRT. It's built like a full rapid transit line. Yes they should have built it 30 years ago but at least they finally gave up on BRT through the core. Half of the stations in Ottawa are built in places that's difficult to access on foot. I think the ION also wins accessibility as seniors and the disable don't need an elevator to get to the platform.
Click to expand...

The problem is that everyone IS comparing the 2. They have many similarities, but their differences is what too many people want to hammer on. They then want to use those to show how one is superior than the other.. I would argue they are both equally good. In the end, both will have success. Both will change the transit map in their areas for the better.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top