[Streety McCarface]

You're missing the point.

The $4.6 billion quote is based on old numbers. That base price for the previous option is no doubt much, much higher now. Just as the $2 billion one stop extension is now $4+ billion.

[/QUOTE]

I see what you're saying now, my bad. However, even then, 4.6 was quoted when the 1-stop SSE was increased to around 3 billion, with the majority of extra costs being attributed to the bus terminal at the STC and the decommissioning and life extension of the SRT. It will easily reach 5 billion, yes, but the STC bus terminal will be much smaller, so that cost can be removed.

Considering that this 3-stop extension would still be longer and less expensive than Yonge North (fewer subway stations), is it really that necessary to hate on it that much?

 

[sixrings]

disagreeing with a line isn't "hating on it." I disagree with a lot of things without too much emotions. I will hate on it though if it means the limited funds delays the DRL by 5 or so years.

 

[Streety McCarface]

disagreeing with a line isn't "hating on it." I disagree with a lot of things without too much emotions. I will hate on it though if it means the limited funds delays the DRL by 5 or so years.

I never said there was anything wrong with disagreeing with the line. I disagree with a lot of transit projects in the city, including how this one is being built, but I never called you out for hating on the line. Other individuals in this thread however...

 

[sixrings]

I never said there was anything wrong with disagreeing with the line. I disagree with a lot of transit projects in the city, including how this one is being built, but I never called you out for hating on the line. Other individuals in this thread however...

i think they feel similar to me which is why i commented for them

 

[syn]

i think they feel similar to me which is why i commented for them

You were correct in your evaluation.

It's clear when a project has increasingly less to stand on when you're accused of being a 'hating' for making very fair points.

The one stop extension is likely going to be closer (or perhaps more) than $5 billion, as per city staff. Adding two extra stops isn't going to come cheap, especially with the rate at which the cost of this project has increased.

 

[Rainforest]

I would guess a large chunk of it is from the tunneling. Tunneling alone is already expensive but Deep Bore tunneling is just strapping a rocket to the cost. The only way around this would be to cross the Highland Creek at surface level but the question becomes where? The McCowan alignment does not facility such possibility.

Doesn't it?

1) Some people here suggested a station on the bridge, Old Mill style. That souds reasonable, or at least worth exploring. Note that the north-east corner of Lawrence & McCowan is occupied by woods, and the south-east corner is occupied by a few commercial buildings and parking lots. Expropriation is possible with no much fuss, and for a fraction of the tunneling costs.

2) Another option is to place the Lawrence East station underground and south of Lawrence, the north end of the platform being say 150 m south of the intersection. The Highland Creek bridge is ~ 100 m north of intersection. At the standard 2% gradient, the station can be (100+150) x 0.02 = 5 m below the surface, and the tracks will reach the surface level just before the bridge. Since the water mark is somewhat below the street level, that may be good enough.

 

[44 North]

There's another, simpler reason to consider - the numbers originally given were not based on any real planning, best case estimates based on little knowledge of anything. As planning for it proceeds and reality sets in, the costs rise accordingly.

I don't think that really discounts my theory; if anything it bolsters it. Planning made original napkin estimates using single bore continuous tunnel so as to be quick and easy, as if the surface topography were a 2D plane. They then chose an alignment with topography not optimized for single bore. In other words the original estimates were based off lack of real planning. That's at least my theory. I already believe the better option from most city-building perspectives isn't a Line 2 extension, though do disagree with virtually all SSE detractors that the answer is SLRT (I think that's bad too). Simply upgrading/extending Line 3 has all the checkmarks of being best.

At this point I think going forward we should continue with SSE, but go back to square one in its planning. For the greater good. And that good isn't simply cost-savings, but allowing for at least one inline station. The plan we have now is unprecedented in its lack of local service and will come back to haunt us.

Doesn't it?

1) Some people here suggested a station on the bridge, Old Mill style. That souds reasonable, or at least worth exploring. Note that the north-east corner of Lawrence & McCowan is occupied by woods, and the south-east corner is occupied by a few commercial buildings and parking lots. Expropriation is possible with no much fuss, and for a fraction of the tunneling costs.

2) Another option is to place the Lawrence East station underground and south of Lawrence, the north end of the platform being say 150 m south of the intersection. The Highland Creek bridge is ~ 100 m north of intersection. At the standard 2% gradient, the station can be (100+150) x 0.02 = 5 m below the surface, and the tracks will reach the surface level just before the bridge. Since the water mark is somewhat below the street level, that may be good enough.

That, or something else. We really have a lot of neat infrastructure involving valley crossing or river taming in this city to look to. This is why it's so stupid that we're acting like the *only* way to cross some dinky suburban ravine is by going 100ft deep and disallowing a station. There are so many ways to do it more optimally.

 

[JSF-1]

Because as I have said in another thread a couple of weeks ago, people and politicians have become deluded in the belief that Subways can only be underground even though the Subway we do have disproves this. Not a single one of our lines is entirely underground, even the Sheppard line is actually above ground while it crosses the Don Valley between Leslie and Don Mills; they just decided to enclose the bridge for some silly reason.

 

[syn]

I don't think that really discounts my theory; if anything it bolsters it. Planning made original napkin estimates using single bore continuous tunnel so as to be quick and easy, as if the surface topography were a 2D plane. They then chose an alignment with topography not optimized for single bore. In other words the original estimates were based off lack of real planning. That's at least my theory. I already believe the better option from most city-building perspectives isn't a Line 2 extension, though do disagree with virtually all SSE detractors that the answer is SLRT (I think that's bad too). Simply upgrading/extending Line 3 has all the checkmarks of being best.

At this point I think going forward we should continue with SSE, but go back to square one in its planning. For the greater good. And that good isn't simply cost-savings, but allowing for at least one inline station. The plan we have now is unprecedented in its lack of local service and will come back to haunt us.



That, or something else. We really have a lot of neat infrastructure involving valley crossing or river taming in this city to look to. This is why it's so stupid that we're acting like the *only* way to cross some dinky suburban ravine is by going 100ft deep and disallowing a station. There are so many ways to do it more optimally.

It definitely doesn't - just another factor to consider.

 

[innsertnamehere]

You were correct in your evaluation.

It's clear when a project has increasingly less to stand on when you're accused of being a 'hating' for making very fair points.

The one stop extension is likely going to be closer (or perhaps more) than $5 billion, as per city staff. Adding two extra stops isn't going to come cheap, especially with the rate at which the cost of this project has increased.

please point to me where staff have said this. That would be incredibly expensive, nearly a billion per km.

Early cost estimates are obviously rough estimates, but they counter this by providing huge contingency allocations. They guess the subway will cost, say, $2.5 billion at the time, then add a 30% contingency, bringing it to $3.2 billion. As detailed design proceeds, costs become more certain, allowing the contingency to be reduced. Costs typically end up increasing for the actual estimated cost as well.. meaning that the final estimated cost stays relatively flat.

 

[syn]

please point to me where staff have said this. That would be incredibly expensive, nearly a billion per km.

Early cost estimates are obviously rough estimates, but they counter this by providing huge contingency allocations. They guess the subway will cost, say, $2.5 billion at the time, then add a 30% contingency, bringing it to $3.2 billion. As detailed design proceeds, costs become more certain, allowing the contingency to be reduced. Costs typically end up increasing for the actual estimated cost as well.. meaning that the final estimated cost stays relatively flat.

"However, staff said in the report that because the new $3.35 billion estimate is still based on very little design work being completed at this point, the range of accuracy for that estimate is massive. The estimate, staff said, could be off by up to 50 per cent — putting the high-end estimate at $5.02 billion."

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

I would guess a large chunk of it is from the tunneling. Tunneling alone is already expensive but Deep Bore tunneling is just strapping a rocket to the cost. The only way around this would be to cross the Highland Creek at surface level but the question becomes where? The McCowan alignment does not facility such possibility.

Doesn't it?

1) Some people here suggested a station on the bridge, Old Mill style. That souds reasonable, or at least worth exploring. Note that the north-east corner of Lawrence & McCowan is occupied by woods, and the south-east corner is occupied by a few commercial buildings and parking lots. Expropriation is possible with no much fuss, and for a fraction of the tunneling costs.

2) Another option is to place the Lawrence East station underground and south of Lawrence, the north end of the platform being say 150 m south of the intersection. The Highland Creek bridge is ~ 100 m north of intersection. At the standard 2% gradient, the station can be (100+150) x 0.02 = 5 m below the surface, and the tracks will reach the surface level just before the bridge. Since the water mark is somewhat below the street level, that may be good enough.

How about we find an exit point on Eglinton East and bring it above ground. Same with Victoria Park/ Sheppard and Sheppard East.

"However, staff said in the report that because the new $3.35 billion estimate is still based on very little design work being completed at this point, the range of accuracy for that estimate is massive. The estimate, staff said, could be off by up to 50 per cent — putting the high-end estimate at $5.02 billion."

This is too much. Let's see how Doug will fix this.

 

[OneCity]

How about we find an exit point on Eglinton East and bring it above ground. Same with Victoria Park/ Sheppard and Sheppard East.

This is too much. Let's see how Doug will fix this.

Its possible that he'll demand an expedited review to find areas of savings along this route and above ground options to add the stops. Not sure the savings will be that significant unless he quashes the underground bus terminal. I highly doubt he will risk major delays given the urgency to move forward and who the voters this line is being built for.

If this was at a different stage say 2010, or even 2014 when he thinly lost the Mayors seat and what now cost us the more cost effective RT corridor with Smarttrack being introduced then surely he would have been open finding significant saving to better connect Scarborough Centre. Too much time has already been wasted here. Remember these are part of his strong supporters in Toronto and he was clear repeatedly for decades to better and all Provincial election clear that their party would deliver the subway and add stops. Hard to believe he's going to tell his voters were starting over to delay another 5-10 years That will go against delivering and affect his support next term if things backtrack. Council blew the opportunity to better multiple times pre and post Transit City, and focus now should be on designing the Sheppard subway in the most economical manner.

 

[syn]

How about we find an exit point on Eglinton East and bring it above ground. Same with Victoria Park/ Sheppard and Sheppard East.

This is too much. Let's see how Doug will fix this.

Considering the current extension is almost entirely a political exercise, don't you think they would've found some way to reduce the cost already if it were possible?

Does Tory really want to be one-upped by Ford, or anyone else?

Can Ford be trusted with anything transit related? Him and his late brother had a habit of promising the world, giving ridiculously low estimates and then not delivering anything.

This is the same person who thinks they need to expand the subway to Pickering lol.

 

[OneCity]

Considering the current extension is almost entirely a political exercise, don't you think they would've found some way to reduce the cost already if it were possible?

Does Tory really want to be one-upped by Ford, or anyone else?

Can Ford be trusted with anything transit related? Him and his late brother had a habit of promising the world, giving ridiculously low estimates and then not delivering anything.

This is the same person who thinks they need to expand the subway to Pickering lol.

Tory and Ford will have to find common ground on transit and that will rule out the more cost effective RT corridor for the suwbay. As for trusting Ford on transit, there is no doubt they were responsible for killing Transit City, but they did not hide that in anyway. Also Rob was not the only Mayoral candidate campaigning to stop the SLRT in 2010. It was a top campaign item and if anything Rob delivered on that promise. He was not responsible for details in Transfer LRT, Smarttrack or a one stop subway in anyway. Whether people agree with his brother agreement to build the Sheppard subway and Crosstown to SCC connection or not, his team did work with the Province, and couldn't deliver as council rejected his attempts. Doug has full reign at the Province, and this is and always has been a key front running Toronto item to deliver. Some other LRT projects may be in jeopardy, but the subways are very safe at the Provincial level under this admin

The Pickering subway was nothing more than political opportunism to acknowledge Durham residents who wont be receiving any major rapid transit lines in the near future, while other 905 but will be connecting with subways in the coming decades, rapid transit to Seaton and the airport lands will follow in the coming decades down the road. This was nothing more than planting the seed for that time.