|
|
|
1. Sheppard extensions (at least eastward) can be elevated if we have the will
Cost is part of the consideration, if a line is cheap to build then you don’t need to have high ridership,
Why on earth would ridership drop?
I don't see how it is so expensive. When you look at the width of the ROW plus the width of the properties expropriated to facilitate construction of the subway line, and compare that to the width of tunnels holding 4 tracks, I don't see what the problem is. We are paying construction companies and engineers too much of they can't figure this out. What is the expensive part? Are they trying to go straight through or under the subway tunnel? I don't get it.
The one seat rides I can buy, though that could be dealt with to some degree by tweaking the route. (I cannot fathom why, for example, one wishing to go west in Scarborough from McCowan Road would get on to first go much further east.)
I look at this diagram and it says to me "we drew the lines in a near optimal alignment and found problems". It doesn't look at all like an exercise to find various options where the goal is to build the extension underground but rather the goal was to get to the surface quickly. If the EEB is where it is on the map, who draws lines going straight to it without the goal being to say "it can't be constructed"?
The alignment is limited by the curve and elevation limits of the existing Line 5 fleet.
I guess the logical thing to do is to open a new thread called Scarborough East Rapid Transit (SERT)
I'd argue Sheppard's problems start before McCowan. The Sheppard East Corridor like most areas of Scarborough has a lot of low-density sprawl but unlike the areas further south near a street like Eglinton which were built in the 40's and 50's, the areas further north are more recent coming around in the 60's, 70's and 80's and as a result it features some the worst suburbia design (e.g winding streets and cul-de-sacs). There are few pockets of density along the corridor like Bay Mills and Malvern; however beyond that you are banking on pre-existing ridership on the 85 Sheppard East and intercepting riders along the various north-south routes to make up the ridership. It gets even worse once you get past Markham Road.
Yea no I highly doubt a street running LRT would cost $10 Billion unless you include the 30 years of maintenance into the cost like we did with the Crosstown, Finch West, and Ontario Lines which has caused far to much confusion among people over the exact cost of these lines. I actually hate that we have started to do this because now it just creates an inflated number that can be used by bad actors to point at and hoot and howler about how expensive something is while intentionally leaving out the distinction between the actual cost of construction and the 30 years of maintenance. It doesn't help that the media intentionally leaves out this distinction too so they can push whatever agenda Bell or Rogers wants and make the public think these projects are more expensive then they actually are. The Crosstown is a great example of this since the final cost was around $12 Billion but that includes the $4 Billion contract given to Crosslinx to maintain the line for 30 years. Which means we can assume the actualy price tag to build Line 5 was around $8 Billion after cost over runs and delays which isn't ideal but the unfortunate way things just work these days because we have forgotten how to build things (and/or there are a couple too many greasy palms that need to be taken out behind the shed....)New article up on the Scarborough East definitely, totally, for sure, Rapid Transit line:
Eglinton Further East: City Council Reboots Scarborough LRT Plans | UrbanToronto
Toronto City Council approved a motion from Mayor Chow to provide an additional $10 million in funding to move forward theurbantoronto.ca
If this project's business case is estimating slower operations that the current buses, and Line 6 undershot it's business case's projected speeds by 50%, we can assume our stunning Mayor's new pet project will add a good 20 minutes to riders trips, with half the frequency to sweeten the deal. All for the low, low cost of $10 Billion!
A comparison to Hurontario: the loop won't be finished until much later, after their initial 18 km is finished.
I think you're being misled by the government narrative that excuses capital cost inflation by lumping the relatively low cost of 30 year maintenance in with the headline price tag. LRT maintenance doesn't cost $5 billion for 18 km over 30 years, even if Metrolinx habitually overpays on maintenance.
