Palma
Senior Member
The structures on the Spadina extension are not simple structures. Architecturally said:
|
|
|
salsa
Senior Member
^ It's not the first time that someone didn't use the quote button properly, but this is hilarious 
.
.Palma
Senior Member
hadn't noticed when i replied, oops^ It's not the first time that someone didn't use the quote button properly, but this is hilarious
Tuck
Active Member
AFAIK its because politicians decided to turn it into a vanity project.
crs1026
Superstar
Well, it's slightly less one sided than that. The city has always been a bit self conscious because the earlier design erred on the side of spartan, functional stations. Some would argue that truly great cities put more emphasis on architectural values. (Although for almost any great architectural subway station you can name, the same city will have a half dozen or more bland ones. Bland works.)
TYSSE was the first new transit project in a long time and it was easy for planners to get caught up in the moment and try to correct that. Hopefully the pricetag in both time and money has sobered the city back up again.
It's not a bad thing that we now have some eyecatching subway stations. It's unfortnaute that they are all one one line that may be a line to nowhere for the next couple of decades. By the time that line becomes a backbone, the TYSSE architecture will probably be passe and no one will marvel at it. Whereas the bland, bathroom-style stations will still be around and will have proven their timelessness.
- Paul
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
How does the cost of TYSSE stations compare to crosstown?
Hopkins123
Senior Member
TYSSE = $370 million per kilometre including stations
Crosstown = $278 million per kilometre with roughly the 15 underground stations each costing $80–$100 million to build and the ten street-level stops $3-$5 million each
crs1026
Superstar
A couple of the TYSSE stations (Pioneer Village being the key one, iirc) became critical path because their complexity challenged the contractor building them. A more basic station might have brought us a shorter time to completion. I don't know what impact this had on overall cost, but beyond hard dollars it argues for keeping things simple.
- Paul
- Paul
muller877
Senior Member
This audit report was a farce if you read it. It compared the actual cost of a P3 to a government managed project. They assumed no cost overruns, increased union costs vs private operator, etc, etc, etc. The auditor general said that in Ontario there is no imperial evidence on this...but we know that is not the case.
A DBFM will of course be better on budget for a gov't run project. No implied profit and a lower financing cost. Of course the benefit to sending it to a private operator is fixing the maintenance, no cost overruns, and a timely completion of the project if the contract is worded correctly. Look at ion in Waterloo vs St Clair.
Red October
Senior Member
Because the TTC is the pinnacle of getting things done quickly and painlessly...
rbt
Senior Member
Both agencies suck at that. Some of Metrolinx's mid-sized projects (Davenport rail-rail grade separation, Burlington station, Union Train shed, ...) run years late.
Metrolinx also has a bad habit of refusing to commit to running service on day #1. It's largely because they don't seem to know whether they can or not. Is another project required first? Did we forget to widen a bridge somewhere? Nobody knows until its staring them in the face.
TTC regularly runs late and over budget but they don't artificially keep scope limited and miss stuff during planning as a result. When they commit to X minute frequencies after construction, it almost always happens the day the contractor leaves.
I'm not a fan of piecemeal upgrades. If we widen this bridge we can run half an extra train; fine, but what's actually required to meet McGuinty's 30 minute frequency promise for all lines? It's been 10 years and they still don't seem to know that; let alone how to hit 15 minute RER frequencies.
Last edited:
David Brake
New Member
Well, there is a lot in flux at the moment with the extensions - particularly the West one. Residents in the public consultation seemed to prefer a Bus Rapid Transit option (which they were promised would be considered), and I am working on a story at the moment about the TTC's expressed desire to examine linking the Crosstown W with the Finch LRT via the airport (and to finish the Crosstown E and W by 2021).
What would you all think of joining Crosstown W and Finch? What route would you think would work?
Steve X
Senior Member
TTC doesn't seem to handle long lines properly. A delay on any part of the line would result in a brief hold on the entire line. Then if they have to shutdown a portion of the line, the entire schedule is affected. All the unscheduled crew changes and short turns would occur to get the operators back to their relief points on time.
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
It's not a ttc problem. Everywhere long lines are a nightmare to manage. It's why our bus routes split at Yonge. Given how different the ridership profiles of Eglinton and Finch are, I'd recommend against making them a single line.
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
People need to stop comparing projects to St. Clair. That project had so much community interference and changes of scope that any comparisons to St. Clair are nonsensical. Ion's LRT, and anything else, would be delayed and over budget if that project scope was modified and legal efforts were put in place to stop construction.