[officedweller]

And that would be ok if the original low budget of $9BN were maintained but we’re at 3x original estimates for utilitarian plain buildings… as usual with Mx somebody’s pockets are getting lined. Getting hosed seems to be the Canadian way. Le sigh.

I think a lot of the cost may be because of the really deep station excavations.

 

[ChesterCopperpot]

And that would be ok if the original low budget of $9BN were maintained but we’re at 3x original estimates for utilitarian plain buildings… as usual with Mx somebody’s pockets are getting lined. Getting hosed seems to be the Canadian way. Le sigh.

The original "low budget of $9BN" was for the construction costs only.
The $27BN number includes for the operations, maintenance and rolling stock for 30 years as well as construction.

 

[generalcanada]

The original "low budget of $9BN" was for the construction costs only.
The $27BN number includes for the operations, maintenance and rolling stock for 30 years as well as construction.

thats a cop out and you know it. nevermind the fact that 9bil was to include the 30 year costs.
look at the publicized contract values
rssom is 9 bil which isn't just maintenance it's track, systems and vehicles
southern civil is 6 billion for all the stations concrete shells
joint corridor costs are hidden
pape tunnel is 2 billion at least with full prices yet to be mentioned
elevated guideway and northern section is another 2-3 billion.

 

[Northern Light]

The original "low budget of $9BN" was for the construction costs only.
The $27BN number includes for the operations, maintenance and rolling stock for 30 years as well as construction.

This is correct; but worth adding, the pure construction costs are tracking well above budget, to my understanding.

 

[kotsy]

There is 1 crest piece for the Lower Don Crossing in place and a support for the other.

 

[Red October]

It’s a pretty obvious gradient to me: something functional and spectacular > something functional > something spectacular > nothing at all.

But I also think we tend to underestimate the intangible effects of beautiful spaces and thoughtful design. I definitely believe our whole society would be in a better mood if our common spaces were more spectacular.

Agreed. We deserve nice things. It does matter, even if people would say aloud that they don't care.

 

[crs1026]

Seems to me we can have transit that is acceptably attractive without spending the moon or pushing for grandiose.

There's a bit of a hierarchy of needs - functionality first (hint: public washrooms, escalators) and then artistry (space, light, materials). ML seems to value engineer the aesthetic out, but then find ways to spend the higher price tag anyways. We can do better.

Nothing wrong with declaring that transit infrastructure will be simpler and other aspects of our public realm will be where we add the oomph . I'm happy to take an austere subway or GO train to see a performance at Massey Hall, hopefully my butt will be in the seat at the venue for longer than it's on the tram.

And since we are turning many parts of our streetscape into soulless caverns anyways, having a pretty transit system is hardly putting the emphasis where it belongs.

- Paul

 

[NY99]

I think you can divide the debate about transit architecture into two camps:

- how grandiose should stations be?
- how much attention should there be on finishes, ornamentation, and flourish?

It bothers me how much these two issues are conflated. A grandiose station requires a great deal more “hard costs” like excavation and installation, while a well-finished station can be done for significantly cheaper. The Line 1 Vaughan extension went all in on the former, while often neglecting the latter (leaking concrete platform-level walls, anyone?).

Even the Eglinton line, despite standardizing station design, went pretty big on the airy cavernous feel to their stations — all while having the character of a solitary confinement wing.

I’ll take a slightly more “cramped” station which has colour and beautiful finishes than one with grand architectural expression any day.

I’d be worried about East Harbour not because of the standard station design, but because it looks so STERILE. A brick exterior with a fun little cornice, a feature wall with a mural of flowers or some crap, a general avoidance of all-white, little things like that can make a station pleasant at a much more affordable price than, say, a massive undulating platform canopy. Thats what we should be advocating for with East Harbour.

 

[Natika33]

I think you can divide the debate about transit architecture into two camps:

- how grandiose should stations be?
- how much attention should there be on finishes, ornamentation, and flourish?

It bothers me how much these two issues are conflated. A grandiose station requires a great deal more “hard costs” like excavation and installation, while a well-finished station can be done for significantly cheaper. The Line 1 Vaughan extension went all in on the former, while often neglecting the latter (leaking concrete platform-level walls, anyone?).

Even the Eglinton line, despite standardizing station design, went pretty big on the airy cavernous feel to their stations — all while having the character of a solitary confinement wing.

I’ll take a slightly more “cramped” station which has colour and beautiful finishes than one with grand architectural expression any day.

I’d be worried about East Harbour not because of the standard station design, but because it looks so STERILE. A brick exterior with a fun little cornice, a feature wall with a mural of flowers or some crap, a general avoidance of all-white, little things like that can make a station pleasant at a much more affordable price than, say, a massive undulating platform canopy. Thats what we should be advocating for with East Harbour.

Could some "nice to have" features be added later? I am all for aesthetics, but can also appreciate the hierarchy of needs. Perhaps we should view most of the stations as "works in progress" and push for competitions later that can add art and other flourishes. For East Harbour though - it's going to be an important hub and could benefit from some upfront investment, at least to make it more airy & spacious given we expect it to handle larger crowds than other stations, no?

 

[Northern Light]

Seems to me we can have transit that is acceptably attractive without spending the moon or pushing for grandiose.

There's a bit of a hierarchy of needs - functionality first (hint: public washrooms, escalators) and then artistry (space, light, materials). ML seems to value engineer the aesthetic out, but then find ways to spend the higher price tag anyways. We can do better.

Nothing wrong with declaring that transit infrastructure will be simpler and other aspects of our public realm will be where we add the oomph . I'm happy to take an austere subway or GO train to see a performance at Massey Hall, hopefully my butt will be in the seat at the venue for longer than it's on the tram.

And since we are turning many parts of our streetscape into soulless caverns anyways, having a pretty transit system is hardly putting the emphasis where it belongs.

- Paul

Broadly agreed.

I think you effectively said this, but I think it bares stating explicitly, Mx delivers among the most expensive transit projects and stations on Planet earth. For the budgets in question, I would not only expect architectural grandiosity, and top tier finishes, I would expect every conceivable amenity. A retail palace, a food hall, the seating should recline, and the leftover 150M can endow the station with a 5M per year operating subsidy for complimentary shoe-shine, wait-staff serving subsidized $1 canapes, and $6 cocktails (Happy Hour only!)

Of course, I'd be happy to see just a decently attractive station as outlined by @NY99 above and put the remaining 300M per station into an endowment for lower prices and better service.

 

[NY99]

Broadly agreed.

I think you effectively said this, but I think it bares stating explicitly, Mx delivers among the most expensive transit projects and stations on Planet earth. For the budgets in question, I would not only expect architectural grandiosity, and top tier finishes, I would expect every conceivable amenity. A retail palace, a food hall, the seating should recline, and the leftover 150M can endow the station with a 5M per year operating subsidy for complimentary shoe-shine, wait-staff serving subsidized $1 canapes, and $6 cocktails (Happy Hour only!)

Of course, I'd be happy to see just a decently attractive station as outlined by @NY99 above and put the remaining 300M per station into an endowment for lower prices and better service.

300M per station in savings… put that sh*t right back into further expansion.

Finch west and Eglinton West (the Mt Dennis to Renforth portion) weren’t even our busiest surface routes to begin with. Dufferin, Lawrence East, Finch East, Sheppard… lots of ground still to cover!

 

[generalcanada]

2 posts from MX recently.
apperently they discovered an old CN steel girder

GO Expansion on Instagram: "Construction at the East Harbour Transit Hub has revealed a peek into an important chapter of Toronto’s rail history. During recent demolition, a century-old Canadian National Railways steel girder was recovered, providin

249 likes, 7 comments - goexpansion on February 25, 2026: "Construction at the East Harbour Transit Hub has revealed a peek into an important chapter of Toronto’s rail history. During recent demolition, a century-old Canadian National Railways steel girder was recovered, providing a rare...

www.instagram.com

And apperently the main East harbour station building is starting construction

Construction starts on East Harbour’s main building

The new east-end hub is set to become Toronto’s second-busiest transit station.

www.metrolinx.com

 

[TorontoPotential]

2 posts from MX recently.
apperently they discovered an old CN steel girder

GO Expansion on Instagram: "Construction at the East Harbour Transit Hub has revealed a peek into an important chapter of Toronto’s rail history. During recent demolition, a century-old Canadian National Railways steel girder was recovered, providin

249 likes, 7 comments - goexpansion on February 25, 2026: "Construction at the East Harbour Transit Hub has revealed a peek into an important chapter of Toronto’s rail history. During recent demolition, a century-old Canadian National Railways steel girder was recovered, providing a rare...

www.instagram.com

And apperently the main East harbour station building is starting construction

Construction starts on East Harbour’s main building

The new east-end hub is set to become Toronto’s second-busiest transit station.

www.metrolinx.com

I really hope that girder is somehow incorporated as a decorative focus inside the otherwise austere station! Would be super cool to have that old rusty girder hung up in a plain / modern setting to give some character and preserve some history at the same time!

 

[Smiffy]

Today:

The crest of the lower don bridge is complete!

 

[kotsy]

Got another angle of the Lower Don Crossing with the complete crest as as shots of the cut and cover tunnel from a January CLC document.