News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 8.9K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.1K     0 

Well I don't understand your outrage over the tunnel @TOareaFan. It will be necessary if/when full 2WAD service begins. CN may or may not be holding out service to Bramalea as a negotiation lever for the larger bypass. Nothing rules out that could get resolved, with or without the accompanying bypass, between now and finishing construction on the tunnel. And if not, what difference is made? In terms of real dollars, the price should remain about the same, and the asset will remain there until it comes to be used; the only financial impact will the extra years of maintenance (relative peanuts).

Frankly, I think it is prudent to have it in place sooner than later. I also believe there is a high risk of unexpected complications and schedule overruns, given the age and uncertainty of what lays below the 401. But maybe we must agree to disagree.
 
^ if you or anyone else could guarantee that it is just a matter of time that there will be a level of service that made this additional 2 track tunnel necessary I would say “sure, go ahead and build it”.

I am just nowhere near confident that that is the case and, to me if not other people, $117MM is a lot to spend without knowing you have to......I would just rather see agreement on the trains that produce the need for the tunnel before spending money on the tunnel.

As you point out, I seem to be alone on island fiscal prudence so let’s move on...(ie. if people stop trying to convince me this is wise, i’Ll stop posting on it ;). )
 
TOareaFan said:
^I am just nowhere near confident that that is the case and, to me if not other people, $117MM is a lot to spend without knowing you have to......I would just rather see agreement on the trains that produce the need for the tunnel before spending money on the tunnel.
Click to expand...

I agree with you. I wish Metrolinx planned and funded goals with a clean plan on how to actually achieve those goals. Piecemeal contracts are perfectly fine but this piecemeal project management drives me crazy. TTC does a far better job of saying "we intend to run X service" then building it; perhaps a bit late and with budget issues but they at least know most of the pieces in advance.

That said, since Metrolinx doesn't (publicly) design and build for a target level of service we're left a choice between doing something that advances toward an unknown goal* or doing nothing because they have zero intention of running an EA that packages up everything they need for X into a single bundle, then financing that single bundle.

* Politicians have stated goals for Metrolinx to achieve but Metrolinx staff haven't actually committed to achieving them. The closest they'll come is to say they intend to inform the private partner of the target and let them decide during the tendering process if they want to try to achieve it or change the goal as part of the tender.

While fiscally imprudent today, this tunnel does reduce the challenge for future governments (whether Wynne or someone else) to implement service. Political support tends to increase as cost decreases; quick wins and all that. The sunk cost fallacy often applies to voters too. Voters are more interested in finishing something underway than if it hadn't yet started assuming they don't get misdirected.

So, I'm onboard if only because some young politician in the 2022 election might campaign to finish the job. The risk of nothing being done, and the public losing interest, outweighs the cost of keeping it alive.


I'm also not terribly happy with how the Toronto planning department or Waterfront Toronto have been handling many transit projects either; inefficient operations seems to get overlooked in favour of pretty.
 
Last edited:
TOareaFan said:
^ if you or anyone else could guarantee that it is just a matter of time that there will be a level of service that made this additional 2 track tunnel necessary I would say “sure, go ahead and build it”.

I am just nowhere near confident that that is the case and, to me if not other people, $117MM is a lot to spend without knowing you have to......I would just rather see agreement on the trains that produce the need for the tunnel before spending money on the tunnel.

As you point out, I seem to be alone on island fiscal prudence so let’s move on...(ie. if people stop trying to convince me this is wise, i’Ll stop posting on it ;). )
Click to expand...
Agreed.
 
TOareaFan said:
Just to be clear, that would still only get any additional trains to Malton...right?
Click to expand...

I guess that would depend on how much Metrolinx wanted to try and pressure CN into building more track and making the relatively minor signal modifications to allow them into using the southern-most platform at Bramlea.

So, considering our past experiences.......call it 50/50? No, less?

Dan
Toronto, Ont.
 
TOareaFan said:
^ if you or anyone else could guarantee that it is just a matter of time that there will be a level of service that made this additional 2 track tunnel necessary I would say “sure, go ahead and build it”.

I am just nowhere near confident that that is the case and, to me if not other people, $117MM is a lot to spend without knowing you have to......I would just rather see agreement on the trains that produce the need for the tunnel before spending money on the tunnel.

As you point out, I seem to be alone on island fiscal prudence so let’s move on...(ie. if people stop trying to convince me this is wise, i’Ll stop posting on it ;). )
Click to expand...

For the record, I don’t disagree with you. Except that I may be slightly more optimistic than you that improved/additional service is eventually coming and starting to build the tunnel now will turn out to be a good decision looking back. I share your disappointment on previous missed goals and still missing services as I am one who is directly affected by those things, and will be for a long time yet. Again, we can only hope the bigger picture comes out as ML has planned. And maybe, the additional service we need/crave is just running late and not totally dead on arrival
 
smallspy said:
I guess that would depend on how much Metrolinx wanted to try and pressure CN into building more track and making the relatively minor signal modifications to allow them into using the southern-most platform at Bramlea.

So, considering our past experiences.......call it 50/50? No, less?

Dan
Toronto, Ont.
Click to expand...
I would not be that optimistic that any improved service is coming before the bypass....and I have no idea when the bypass is coming.
 
TOareaFan said:
I would not be that optimistic that any improved service is coming before the bypass....and I have no idea when the bypass is coming.
Click to expand...

Realistically, the key next step and indication of progress would be the public launch of the EA (maybe the first step is a MERX listing for consultants to do the EA?) before the 2018 election, in my mind. I would assume they would have to sign the "Legal Agreement" with CN before that but certainly not an expert. Here's what they've said for a timeframe in case anyone here hasn't seen this before. Not saying I endorse it or agree with the feasibility. This is just what has been presented.

2CB3HnI
.
 
^so +/- 9 years (at a minimum)....perhaps all those 2017 promises were really just 2027 promises made on an IBM Selectric with sticky keys? ;)
 
I read that chart as saying the first 2-3 year tranche is already in motion. ML certainly has lots of paper in its drawers already on this.

We should not assume that this will be an AFP project similar to the GO projects, so the RFQ/RFP process may be different and the timings will be different also. CN will no doubt have views on how the project should be managed. It will be interesting to see how consultation is handled given that CN will not want to be on point for community reaction, but will have its own druthers on what is needed and may not be happy with what the community wants. Certainly 2024 looks iffy and 2027 is more credible.

The first bypass took roughly 1958 to 1965, and there was a lot less red tape back then.

- Paul
 
^ I agree that the chart above appears to suggest that some of the steps can be done at the same time.

Just for reference, the June-December Capital Group Reports lists the "in-service" date for the Kitchener Extension as 2024 (Dec report here). Again, not saying I agree with the timeline, rather I'm just noting what's out there.

For instance, In this May 2017 CBC News article about HSR, they say it will be running by 2025. One would think that would involved the Bypass. Del Duca was interviewed this morning about it and again said 2025 for HSR. I think I've read a more specific quote about more service to KW by 2024-2025. [Did some searching:]

- 2024 "or beyond" was the date mentioned back in 2016 when the initial agreement with CN was signed;
- This article from March 2017 about the federal investment notes 2024.
- This article from January 2017 says "2024"; and
- This article from April 2017 saying it "could take until 2024." and this article which covered the same meeting notes that 2024 "is still the objective,".
 
Last edited:
smallspy said:
I guess that would depend on how much Metrolinx wanted to try and pressure CN into building more track and making the relatively minor signal modifications to allow them into using the southern-most platform at Bramlea.

So, considering our past experiences.......call it 50/50? No, less?

Dan
Toronto, Ont.
Click to expand...
Is it possible that Metrolinx and/or CN wanted to sync first use of Bramalea south platform with any signal changes when Torbram G/S works (completion having slipped in 2018) are completed? Presumably building that platform wasn't cheap but it doesn't seem like there is much pressure on ML to account for monies spent and not utilized...
 
That platform was in use before and just closed in 2015 for 2 year reno/extension for 12 car trains. I’m no expert but I don’t see why that and the Torbram work would be tied together in any way, as far as current service/the proposed uptick to hourly evenings & weekends is concerned, as midday trains currently pass each other within the construction zone at times.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top