[crs1026]

Id love to see the Star go after every project like this so we could see every unfinished reports or where all the money goes. They wont.

Even the Star only has so much budget to pay for FOI requests, so they can't hit them all.

If a candidate were really interested in shaking up City Hall, they would run on a platform that all the reports from every consultant hired by the City must be placed in public view. Even that isn't foolproof, because the juciest reports are simply left in 'draft' stage and never completed.... maybe there ought to be a second principle that draft reports not completed after x months go on the public record. And of course some reports are labelled "prepared in anticipation of litigation" - this boilerplate is easily misused to keep things from FOI requests.

My dusty memory seems to think that what was circulated was a staff report, rather than consultants' product? Therein lies another layer of civic non-transparency.

- Paul

 

[DonValleyRainbow]

This report and the other records FOI'ed by the Star were heavily censored, and they are appealing that to Ontario's Information and Privacy Commissioner. This means the IPC office will take a look at it and determine how it moves forward. This could be mediated, and/or sent to adjudication. Sounds like shenanigans that could go on a while, but I do not know how long these things typically go on for, but if the IPC office made a decision to release that info it would be binding. On the other hand, city councillors did not see this information. That could generate some racket and political pressure on Tory's office. But Tory says he's "not afraid" of this stuff going public. I'm not going to speculate whether this report makes the Scarborough Subway look good or bad. I just believe it should be made public and provided to City Council before the project gets green-lit to move forward. Having city tax dollars put towards information on a major infrastructure project that is not publicly released is a dangerous precedent, IMO.

Another outstanding item is Scarborough Transit Action's complaint with Toronto's Auditor General. While the briefing note is raised, the complaint is asking the AG "to investigate the entire decision-making process to determine if the mayor's office and council have properly exercised their responsibilities for stewardship of public funds." All in all it means a lot of scrutiny over the documents used in decision making and how Tory's office stickhandled them.

I will be first to say all of this 'what should have been' stuff is likely to be totally different with how the populace feels at this point, given that we've been going over this for over a decade and people are getting too fatigued to care. But what % design are we at again? I think the one thing that will keep people's attention and concern going is if the costs continue to increase, and the money pot meant for two projects is being prioritized for the one that is more sketchy in terms of justification. It's not like it's easy to find additional money at this point anyway: we have another budget with no tax increases in terms of real (inflation-indexed) dollars, the latest revenue tools being rejected by the parental province, a fast approaching debt ceiling, and some risk in our revenue projections.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

Technically, SLRT and ECLRT were merged, circa 2008 before any analysis was done. When they looked at some numbers, it became apparant that through running the SRT would overload the on-street LRT on Eglinton. The 2 solutions (circa 2009) were to grade-separate, or force the passengers to transfer. The Transit City solution was to force the transfer.
It was 2011 that the Ford merged line came about.

The past 7 years happened because TTC and Miller made the decision to force the transfer.
The past 5 years happened because Councillors and MPP's decided to cancel the Ford plan at any cost. The 5 years and several Billions of dollars are the costs associated with the 2012 effort headed by Stintz.

Fair enough. It is was it is now. Let's move on.

A consultant's report gets buried and kept from the public, and you guys just perpetuate the debates you were already wrapped up in like nothing happened.

This is why I don't bother following this thread.

To be honest I don't know why I keep checking this thread, as if I would get any actual new out of it. If it's just gonna be the same debates from the same members arguing over and over again about which transit plan = respect for Scarborough, then I have better things to do.

Agreed. This is useful news about the politics surrounding this project and worth discussing. Debating back and forth the same lines is not. It's too much work to go back and prune all the repetitive banter, but I think from now on, we should discuss what's current, not rehash the same talking points.

Agreed. Let's move on.

 

[OneCity]

http://www.insidetoronto.com/news-s...ers-with-group-lobbying-for-subway-extension/

 

[44 North]

Technically, SLRT and ECLRT were merged, circa 2008 before any analysis was done. When they looked at some numbers, it became apparant that through running the SRT would overload the on-street LRT on Eglinton. The 2 solutions (circa 2009) were to grade-separate, or force the passengers to transfer. The Transit City solution was to force the transfer.
It was 2011 that the Ford merged line came about.

And a silver lining in all of this is that we've seen some of the most dynamic and open debates concerning technologies and options for Scarborough. Burying reports is obviously a problem, but at least we had options and reports to bury. In other areas we've gotten closed-door dealings and/or plans making the quantum leap from nothing->deep bore heavy rail subways (with no in-between options explored). Whereas for connecting SCC we had options for:

-an LRT line with variations of grade-separatedness (pre-SRT)
-a light subway (i.e what was built)
-an upgraded/improved/lengthened light subway
-a light subway that used standard LRV rolling stock
-a light subway interlined with Line 5
-an open-air extension of Line 2
-an all-underground extension of Line 2
-and even acknowledgement of a GO spur

With the exception of maybe the Queen Subway/RL since the 1950s, I don't think we've been greeted with such broad and open technical discussions.

A consultant's report gets buried and kept from the public, and you guys just perpetuate the debates you were already wrapped up in like nothing happened.

Granted I stopped following the Star's articles about SSE, so I don't know their angle or endgame for the FOI. But skimming over the thousand pages, was much really redacted or buried? It seemed to me like what was omitted on some pages ended up being presented openly on others (e.g paragraphs blacked out, but the same info being shown in tables a few pages down). Also that much of the back-and-forths genuinely related to the dry technical nuances of trying to achieve accurate projections - not just for SSE but also RL and ST.

 

[DonValleyRainbow]

But skimming over the thousand pages, was much really redacted or buried? It seemed to me like what was omitted on some pages ended up being presented openly on others (e.g paragraphs blacked out, but the same info being shown in tables a few pages down). Also that much of the back-and-forths genuinely related to the dry technical nuances of trying to achieve accurate projections - not just for SSE but also RL and ST.

But you cannot conclude with certainty that everything redacted is just technical nuances. It's blacked out.

Also, remember it's less about the quantity of lines that are redacted, but the substance of what is redacted.

Furthermore, even if it can be considered confidential, why aren't our duly elected representatives not privy to this?

 

[ShonTron]

We had lots of debate on the technology, and I'm seeing the same people writing the same posts.

Time for more pruning.

 

[Juan_Lennon416]

We had lots of debate on the technology, and I'm seeing the same people writing the same posts.

Time for more pruning.

Same debates over and over by the same people in other threads and you are only now saying something? Come on!

 

[Hopkins123]

Only another couple hundred million...

David Rider@dmrider
25 mins ago
I am hearing Scarborough subway report/@JohnTory newser tomorrow not a bombshell like past $1B surge in cost of one-stop extension.

Costs expected to rise couple hundred million dollars but remain w-in $3.56B total pricetag that if exceeded would reopen council debate...

@JohnTory expected to soften blow of cost hike w announce. - nu way to do contract, costs more upfront but w more certainty of total cost

Would recycling the SRT corridor as the right-of-way for a Bloor-Danforth extension cost in the $4 billion range like this one-stop subway is costing?

Maybe Glen Murray's proposed solution was the best one after all.

I use to think rebuilding Kennedy Station to be on a diagonal in the hydro corridor to permit the curvature onto the SRT ROW was a waste of funds. Now I'm not too sure.

 

[ShonTron]

Would recycling the SRT corridor as the right-of-way for a Bloor-Danforth extension cost in the $4 billion range like this one-stop subway is costing?

Maybe Glen Murray's proposed solution was the best one after all.

I use to think rebuilding Kennedy Station to be on a diagonal in the hydro corridor to permit the curvature onto the SRT ROW was a waste of funds. Now I'm not too sure.

That's going to be difficult as work has started on the Eglinton-Crosstown part of Kennedy Station. That might be about as expensive as building the Spanish Solution at Bloor-Yonge in another attempt to delay as long as necessary the Relief Line.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

From the March Exec:

Item: http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2017.EX23.1
Report: http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2017/ex/bgrd/backgroundfile-101444.pdf

Renderings (From Attachment 3)

From the Value Engineering Report:

AoD

 

[DonValleyRainbow]

Would recycling the SRT corridor as the right-of-way for a Bloor-Danforth extension cost in the $4 billion range like this one-stop subway is costing?

Maybe Glen Murray's proposed solution was the best one after all.

I use to think rebuilding Kennedy Station to be on a diagonal in the hydro corridor to permit the curvature onto the SRT ROW was a waste of funds. Now I'm not too sure.

The SRT corridor is exactly why I am sympathetic to the Scarborough Subway. IMO, rapid transit should be along a street with development potential, not along backyards and backs of industrial commercial lots.

But there's the catch with the SSE: it's being build along McCowan where it's rife with single-family houses and people ready to go NIMBY-nuclear at the suggestion of re-zoning and taking homes.

Overall, all options as proposed keep costs up, technical challenges daunting, and ridership potential down.

From the March Exec:

Item: http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2017.EX23.1
Report: http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2017/ex/bgrd/backgroundfile-101444.pdf

This report recommends City Council approve a DBF procurement approach for the SSE, subject to negotiating an agreement with Infrastructure Ontario (IO) for project procurement services at a cost not to exceed $15 million.

This is a big chunk of good news! If this is done properly, this will protect the City from cost overruns. While the initial cost is still too steep IMO, it won't be a repeat of TYSSE!

It will mean a risk premium on the pricetag though, so be prepared for another cost increase down the road. Albeit to prevent any overruns.

 

[Cobra]

Table 1 - 2013 Scarborough Subway Extension Funding Plan ($millions)

Federal Contribution:

• $660M
• 19% of the cost

Provincial Contribution:

• $1,990B The Province has committed $1.48B (2010$), less sunk costs associated with the cancellation of the Scarborough LRT project ($74.8M).
• 56% of the cost

City Contribution:

• $910M
• 26% of the cost

Total: $3,560B

The City has not yet entered into contribution agreements with either the provincial or the federal government. This report recommends that City Council request confirmation of both the amount and source of the contributions from both funding partners.

If this project gets submit under the new Infrastructure program of the Federal Government which finance 50% of shovel ready public transit projects this is what would happen:


Federal Contribution:

• $1,780B
• 50% of the cost

Assuming the city contribution stays AS IS:
City Contribution:

• $910M
• 26% of the cost

The province contribution drops at 24% which becomes $854.4M. However assuming they keep their $1.4B commitment (I guess the $1,990B is in today's dollars), there would be a difference of $1,135B.
Enough to go all the way to Sheppard Avenue East?

 

[Cobra]

http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2017/ex/bgrd/backgroundfile-101444.pdf

According to this, using the SRT corridor barely saved any money (up to $500M) and added the inconvenience of shutting down the SRT and most likely incurring increased costs to the TTC and a 6 years nightmare transit scenario in Scarborough.

So we have our answer on why the SRT corridor is a no go.

 

[crs1026]

Just to clarify - in case I missed something - this plan removes the need to rebuild Kennedy station?

And I don't see a direct explanation for why tunnel boring(and a big tunnel at that) is the preferred option. Assuming this is the chosen routing, what would the cost savings be if the extension were built cut and cover instead?

- Paul