[afransen]

The Progressive Conservative Bill Davis imposed the SRT upon Toronto, when the TTC wanted light rail (streetcars) at the time.

Now the (Progressive) Conservative Doug Ford is imposing a "metro" whatever-it-is-called upon Toronto for the Ontario Line.

Be afraid, very afraid.

This is just fear mongering.

 

[sixrings]

Unfortunately they would never extend the subway to Malvern

It’s bypassing Malvern for an express trip to Pickering.

 

[afransen]

At this point, even with a measly cost to build the actual Line at $50m/Km, your total is going to be $100-$150m/km. That might be a bargain compared to what we pay for tunnelling, but if we want to be ultra cost-efficient then elevated is only marginally more expensive and well within the Overton window by comparison.

Even with the property acquisition costs, the land could be developed over once construction is complete, or turned into a linear park.

 

[nfitz]

It’s bypassing Malvern for an express trip to Pickering.

More likely express to Markham under Malvern for Line 2. While Line 4 is express to Pickering.

Though at least if all the current plans are built, Malvern will be a relatively short LRT ride to Sheppard East station, where Line 2 and Line 4 should meet.

 

[MrGoose]

Oh there’s no denying it’s doable. But imagine this; a contemporary underground subway drums up significant resistance from locals. Surface rail even moreso- we put things underground because of it. Now imagine that you are buying up quite a few peoples homes (at least hundreds of pissed residents) through the centre of various neighbourhoods (thousands of concerned residents) because you want to “reuse” something that no longer exists- it’s an alignment that doesn’t really hit any destinations. This situation your describing is comparable to when people suggest reactivating other abandoned corridors that HAVENT been built over. If people aren’t open to losing a trail in a valley 50m away from them, then how is this remotely as possible?

Since this is a question of land acquisition, you would have to pay effectively market rate for each house. Let’s go with a baseline assumption that today, a typical Scarborough home costs $1 million (if this seems high, just pretend it includes legal fees). 100 homes is $100M. Google earth puts 10 homes in the adjacent subdivision approximately 100m, so your gonna pay roughly $100M/km in property acquisition alone. Housing crash? Okay, $50M/km. That’s still an absolutely massive cost most projects hardly even have to factor at all. At this point, even with a measly cost to build the actual Line at $50m/Km, your total is going to be $100-$150m/km. That might be a bargain compared to what we pay for tunnelling, but if we want to be ultra cost-efficient then elevated is only marginally more expensive and well within the Overton window by comparison.

Point is, this isn’t underground because it was the best option. Money wasn’t even a consideration. We could come up with a million better ways to do this and it wouldn’t have put this extension one metre shallower.

Even at 150M/km thats way cheaper than tunneling and building underground stations. If we can save 100-200M per station by building aboveground stations along an expropriated surface ROW and as long as the cost of expropriation isn't double that of tunneling, then we can build transit with huge cost savings.

Not to mention that with a bit of extra expropriation and redevelopment Metrolinx can start generating profits by building TOD within suburban sprawl along these new ROWs.

 

[Sunnyside]

Even at 150M/km thats way cheaper than tunneling and building underground stations. If we can save 100-200M per station by building aboveground stations along an expropriated surface ROW and as long as the cost of expropriation isn't double that of tunneling, then we can build transit with huge cost savings.

Not to mention that with a bit of extra expropriation and redevelopment Metrolinx can start generating profits by building TOD within suburban sprawl along these new ROWs.

I want to agree. But my estimate does not include Ontario construction bloat. $150M should be compared with the costs generally assumed globally for construction- ~150-200M for elevated, ~$250-350 for tunneled. So lets add the Toronto 3x multiplier. $300-450M for at-grade, which sounds about right when we look at at-grade projects with lots of grade separations being planned today, like the iON phase 2, or even stuff like the elevated OL segments. What I'm trying to say is the cost savings will be negligible in the real world because of the hurdles we'd have to go through. The proof in the pudding is that nobody does this except in places like China, because our society is specifically structured to make something like this difficult.

 

[44 North]

The coupler got torn out due to the accident that led to the derailment, not the other way around.

While the cause of the derailment was due to the LIM hitting the reaction rail, they don't know just yet what precipitated that contact.

Dan

ah so glad for UT and posts such as this. Exactly what i came for. So we more or less know what happened, not so much why. I guess in a couple months we'll find out.

 

[Bureaucromancer]

If I were feeling unreasonably positive I'd ask what length of shutdown would be needed to life extend the SRT ten more years with an essentially blank cheque. This could conceivably be used as cover to do that, and keep running until the subway opens if the length of shutdown can be kept managable.

 

[Sandpit]

If I were feeling unreasonably positive I'd ask what length of shutdown would be needed to life extend the SRT ten more years with an essentially blank cheque. This could conceivably be used as cover to do that, and keep running until the subway opens if the length of shutdown can be kept managable.

But cost would still be an issue.

 

[futurebound]

If I were feeling unreasonably positive I'd ask what length of shutdown would be needed to life extend the SRT ten more years with an essentially blank cheque. This could conceivably be used as cover to do that, and keep running until the subway opens if the length of shutdown can be kept managable.

The issue is unless we are willing to install elevators in the rest of the stations by 2025, the line will be forced to shut down anyways.

 

[Bureaucromancer]

The issue is unless we are willing to install elevators in the rest of the stations by 2025, the line will be forced to shut down anyways.

I mean honestly, if exemptions are totally off the table, even a Kennedy STC shuttle get the vast majority of the actual SRT value proposition between now and the subway opening.

 

[Jonny5]

If I were feeling unreasonably positive I'd ask what length of shutdown would be needed to life extend the SRT ten more years with an essentially blank cheque. This could conceivably be used as cover to do that, and keep running until the subway opens if the length of shutdown can be kept managable.

Even in the imaginary scenario of a "blank cheque" where you can squander funds on this extremely inefficient return, it is already well past the point where it can continue to exist without a shutdown. The cars are dead. The equipment necessary is no longer made. There are no replacements which can be simply be purchased and substituted. Those options may have existed ten years ago, though even then it was unlikely, today they are long completely gone. Even unlimited funds cannot stop a long term multi-year shutdown now. We are many years past the point where alternatives ceased to exist.

 

[Aplus23]

Meh it could have been an LRT by now. Enjoy the bus.

Who hurt you? lol Enjoy the summer

 

[turini2]

Yes, I can see the cost of investigating and fixing this... for 4 months of additional service - be a reason why the SRT will never reopen.

Chow needs to push the TTC to spend the money ASAP on bus lanes, signal priority and decent wayfinding for the bus bridge, and work on the SRT corridor as soon as possible...

(basically what Steve said

https://twitter.com/x/status/1683816721218519040

)

If I was Chow, I'd be a little hands off from this situation... and use the poor management/decision making as a reason to boot Leary.

 

[smallspy]

I wonder if this car was recently in for maintenance.

As I understand it, It was out of service for maintenance until about 3-ish weeks prior to the accident. It was then in service almost every day afterwards.

Considering the mileage it would have done in the interim, it seems unlikely that the cause of the accident is related to the maintenance period, but I would also wait to apportion blame until the results of the inquiry come in.

If I were feeling unreasonably positive I'd ask what length of shutdown would be needed to life extend the SRT ten more years with an essentially blank cheque. This could conceivably be used as cover to do that, and keep running until the subway opens if the length of shutdown can be kept managable.

At this point, it's likely no longer feasible to life-extend the equipment - and especially in light of the fact that they are now down at least one and maybe two pairs of equipment.

Which means that the other option is shutting it down and building a busway, or buying new, larger cars and rebuilding the system to handle them. Either way, it's a two to three year shutdown.

Dan