[DSC]

OK.......so as we approach forum page 800 (!) has there finally been a conclusive decision to proceed with a course of action??

I doubt it.

 

[crs1026]

This will just get us to 30% design. Unless someone pulls an Avro Arrow and destroys the prototypes, the 30% design for the SRT option is still sitting in an archive someplace. So the apples to apples arguments can continue.

I really do wish the rough-in design had passed. If this thing is going to happen, then going cheap on that item is foolish. And it would be offset costwise if ST could be cancelled.

- Paul

 

[amnesiajune]

OK.......so as we approach forum page 800 (!) has there finally been a conclusive decision to proceed with a course of action??

This just means the LRT is even more dead than it already was. Will its supporters accept that? Probably not.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

So it passed.

 

[salsa]

At the same time, all the bashing of SSE has disappeared from the front page of thestar.....

Probably making room for the next wave of SSE articles.

 

[OneCity]

Probably making room for the next wave of SSE articles.

Naw aside from a summary and the random editorial jab from Royson they are done throwing this level of resource on the topic until the election.

 

[OneCity]

26-18 for the one stop. That's pretty strong support for the subway overall given its been stripped naked to a 6km tunnel. I find it fascinating these same councilors would vote for this but not the design for then Lawrence "rough-in".

 

[zmonkey]

So what does bundling of eg east lrt mean? They will be built at same time? With what money.

They should have done the damn Lawrence station, smart track ruining everything.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

So what does bundling of eg east lrt mean? They will be built at same time? With what money.

They should have done the damn Lawrence station, smart track ruining everything.

Welcome!

 

[jcam]

I really hope that the Infrastructure Bank puts an end to federal funds for projects with non-existent business cases. Ideally, because the bank's aim is to leverage the combination of government and investor money, the investors will require sounds business cases based on fact. That's not to say that you can't quantify qualitative objectives in some way, to account for goals like growth or social equity, but at least you'll have apples to apples comparisons. When that happens, silly projects like this won't ever get this far.

Everyone at a staff level in the City knows this is a boondoggle, but they don't have a choice but to move it forward...everyone knows the sanity ship has sailed with the politicians. Its an indefensible project from prudent use of limited capital infrastructure dollars. If it were a powerplant by OPG or Enbridge, the Ontario Energy Board would never approve it, saying that it wouldn't be a prudent use of ratepayer's dollars. Aren't politicians supposed to play that role for us? I wish we had an independent budget office that vetted business cases and compared long-term operating budgets. Someday it will have to happen........right???????????

 

[zmonkey]

Welcome!

Thanks - I'm only semi new. Used to post a couple years ago when I worked for bombardier, no idea what my log in or email I used was.

So I'm back - bombardier free this time.

 

[amnesiajune]

I really hope that the Infrastructure Bank puts an end to federal funds for projects with non-existent business cases.

There's no "business case" whatsoever for almost any public transit project. The only public transit in Toronto that could survive on its "business case" is the 510 Spadina streetcar, the 35 Jane bus and 25 Don Mills bus. Everything else, including every other streetcar route, relies on big subsidies or passengers who transfer from subsidized bus routes.

 

[LNahid2000]

There's no "business case" whatsoever for almost any public transit project. The only public transit in Toronto that could survive on its "business case" is the 510 Spadina streetcar, the 35 Jane bus and 25 Don Mills bus. Everything else, including every other streetcar route, relies on big subsidies or passengers who transfer from subsidized bus routes.

A business case doesn't equal just profits. It could also include many other positive externalities which the Scarborough subway does not provide.

 

[jcam]

Let me clarify - when you're talking public infrastructure projects and business cases, you're usually comparing the Net Present Value of different project options....taking all the future costs of building and operating, and bringing them to today's dollars. To LNahid2000's point, you're also looking at positive externalities. But from a cost comparison perspective, the goal is to spend the LEAST amount to get the outcomes you want (that's performance based - i.e. get x people to y places, not technology driven). So you may have 3 options that all have negative $$ business cases (i.e. they're not self funding), but you at least know which one diverts the LEAST dollars from other projects in your portfolio.

 

[Johnny Au]

Are you taking the Scarborough line?
Parsley, sage, rosemary, and thyme;
Remember me to the one who made grime,
For once it was a true love of mine.

Who's going to make a Scarborough Fair parody mentioning the Scarborough extension?