Cut and cover or (God forbid) TBM ?
It's not that long a drive, a TBM for that short a drive and the added station depth would cost a fortune.
I can get behind the tunnelled solution, but let's stay realistic.
- Paul
Cut and cover for the tunnel entrance, partial for Nanwood, and TBM the rest of the way. Two if they somehow explain how they're going to get another one on the opposite side.
One thing they don't really show much is any station concepts. Underground stations could mean anything from a straight down to the track à la Queens Quay, to something more grandiose with mezzanines, fare gates, etc.
From what I understand, the underground station design still has to be done. In the documented I provided earlier, it showed the station design below downtown Brampton GO with one LRV on each side, so it has be thinking it'd be something similar to the subway lines you see in Toronto.
Cut and cover........never will happen and look at how Brampton wants to remove the TBM with out a hole to do so.. The tunneling is a waste of $2 billion and only buying votes and seats
Cut and cover isn't for the entirety of the route, just for the tunnel entrance with partial on Nanwood. Any option provided for the Brampton extension at this point would be a waste of money because only Mississauga received funding for their portion. The Mississauga Loop was in the initial design, then removed, then added again as part of phase two. One could argue that the loop was re-added to buy votes and seats as well. Whether or not you agree with it, Mississauga has to contend with the same issues that Brampton does when it comes to getting things done by the current government. But that's neither here nor there for discussion.
I understand the attitude that any transit is good transit, but tunneling this line into downtown Brampton is a tremendous waste of taxpayer money. Any number of alternatives (median on Main or Kennedy and then the rail corridor) could have delivered the same service for a fraction of the cost and construction time. This is a continued manifestation of the provincial government's usage of transit construction as a political & developer benefits scheme, and a further nail in the coffin of transportation planning as a career within Ontario. Napkin drawings and election promises have choked Ontario’s transportation development for decades and now continue to ensure that the outcome for the taxpayer is always lesser transit for more cost.
We will sterilize two rails on the only rail corridor Eastbound out of downtown to cut costs and avoid a tunnel, and then spend that money on appeasing Brampton’s wants (I don’t support any NIMBY-ism in Leslieville, but the usage of the corridor may prove more expensive in the long run). Scarborough doesn’t get a tunnel on Eglinton; Etobicoke does. Underground stations at Royal Orchard; but no station at Cherry. Mississauga gets a glorified streetcar; Brampton gets a tunnel.
Additionally, what message does this send to the municipalities? Vote down proposed transit with shared costs, be obstructionist in what gets built and permitted, and then get rewarded with a provincially funded two-billion-dollar tunnel for your shitty “Downtown” that is of equal size and lesser heritage than Square One Mall.
At some point, one begins to believe that this extension is devised purely to show off the fact that the province can indeed come up with a worse way of spending money than 200 dollars in the mail.
Median on Main or diversion to Kennedy were already discussed nearly over a decade ago. When the initial conversation about having a LRT in Brampton was announced, there were NIMBY's who lived right along the Main Street corridor who opposed the idea of it strongly. So strongly that you had factions in Brampton City Hall who were vetoing ever building it along Main Street in support of those NIMBY's, and instead suggesting Kennedy Road. McLaughlin, diversions along other inner streets, and other routes that I don't even remember anymore. Not to mention, diverting along those routes does nothing to solve the influx of people coming off the GO train, Go Bus, or arriving by bus to downtown Brampton.
They suggested these routes because they didn't want to lose their long driveway ROW, and were more concerned about their property values than they were about ever using it as a service. They thought that the sight of an above ground LRT was absolutely heinous, and would cause traffic disruptions and so on. This stalled the development in Brampton, and it only recently started back up once the vetoing faction was voted out. None of their suggestions had anything to do with ever running the LRT into downtown Brampton.
Whether or not you agree with the line being done the way it is, comparing Brampton's downtown to Mississauga's City Centre without focusing on the stops in between, or additional variables means you're focusing on only one section of the entirety of the HMLRT. The 502 that travels on Main starts from Hurontario / Sandalwood, makes a few stops before hitting Downtown Brampton, makes a few stops before hitting Gateway Terminal, and then a few stops in Mississauga before hitting Square One. By one point, the bus is already full, and some stops have been skipped because of how full the bus is, and how many people are not getting off because they're all trying to go to Square One. Combine this with the fact that it's rush hour, Main/Theatre, Main/Queen, Main/Welington are completely backed up. People are waiting for a bus to come because the other buses are full. The bus takes longer than the scheduled time because of gridlock.
The tunnel for the LRT will reallocate resources from Brampton Transit's 502 to the incoming 504, and eventually the currently being planned 515, while also ensuring that everyone is able to get on, and be moved around the city to where they need to get to.
Also... I'd like to know what historical significance a shopping mall has when we're talking about moving a significant number of people via different transit solutions between one city to another city. Heritage is one thing, but to suggest that a city must have heritage in order to benefit from something is a little.... Strange to me I suppose.