KhalilHeron said:
Farrr less than for an entirely new row
Click to expand...
Again, not true. There are far less impacts with the originally approved underground alignment. And a lot less tree impacts as well. There's quite a green belt of very old trees down that corridor that will be wiped out.

Metrolinx has been asked explicitly by both the community and in written requests from council for over a year on what the cost differential is in going underground in this area. That they've not given that information, presumably it's not significant Which is not surprising, given the 13 bridges that are needed along with 4 portals.
 
nfitz said:
Again, not true. There are far less impacts with the originally approved underground alignment. And a lot less tree impacts as well. There's quite a green belt of very old trees down that corridor that will be wiped out.

Metrolinx has been asked explicitly by both the community and in written requests from council for over a year on what the cost differential is in going underground in this area. That they've not given that information, presumably it's not significant Which is not surprising, given the 13 bridges that are needed along with 4 portals.
Click to expand...

In this article, Metrolinx is saying the difference is $800 million dollars just for this section in Leslieville. If burying the entire line it will be magnitudes more..

''Verster estimated it would add $800 million to bury the section of the Ontario Line in question.''


I don't know in which world $800 million dollars and up is "not significant"...
 
Adjei said:
In this article, Metrolinx is saying the difference is $800 million dollars just for this section in Leslieville. If burying the entire line it will be magnitudes more..

''Verster estimated it would add $800 million to bury the section of the Ontario Line in question.''


I don't know in which world $800 million dollars and up is "not significant"...
Click to expand...

The world in which the government is spending billions to bury suburban transit expansions.
 
honestly why are we bending over to these nimbys? do they have legal powers to stop construction or any basis for injunctions for the reasons of personal discomfort? ML has done enough
to provide them opportunity to provide input and theyve accomodated what they can but honestly there is nothing wrong with elevated and there is plenty of precedence on how it can be done right.
they are free to move away but these self serving whines are costing millions of other their convenience, not to mention everyone's taxpayers money.
 
nfitz said:
Again, not true. There are far less impacts with the originally approved underground alignment. And a lot less tree impacts as well. There's quite a green belt of very old trees down that corridor that will be wiped out.

Metrolinx has been asked explicitly by both the community and in written requests from council for over a year on what the cost differential is in going underground in this area. That they've not given that information, presumably it's not significant Which is not surprising, given the 13 bridges that are needed along with 4 portals.
Click to expand...
Trees > Transit

owontsomeonethinkofthetrees.png
 
afransen said:
We can keep sabotaging ourselves by making sure our transit projects are expensive as possible to make sure we don't complete many of them, or we can be grownups?
Click to expand...
we also can't keep arguing the same problems over and over again. even if some of the plans are sub optimal at least something will be built.
 
cplchanb said:
honestly why are we bending over to these nimbys? do they have legal powers to stop construction or any basis for injunctions for the reasons of personal discomfort? ML has done enough
to provide them opportunity to provide input and theyve accomodated what they can but honestly there is nothing wrong with elevated and there is plenty of precedence on how it can be done right.
they are free to move away but these self serving whines are costing millions of other their convenience, not to mention everyone's taxpayers money.
Click to expand...

They haven't. That's the problem.

We've been bending over to NIMBYs for a long time now (see the Scarborough LRT cancellation).
 
I know that y'all are talking about the Riverdale aboveground controversy, but did you know that Councillor Robinson also passed a motion for the province to "consider putting the Thorncliffe portion of the line underground."

This was in part of the few voices in the community who thinks that elevated transit would "significantly disrupt the neighbourhood." One quote from a resident: "It would cause boom boom boom"

The motion went under the radar and will not change anything. Good try though, but it's clear that the residents of Thorncliffe automatically assume transit=subway. So anything else will be met with pushback. Metrolinx should provide better education to show the benefits of elevated transit to residents. The residents of Thorncliffe and Flemingdon are being blessed with high quality transit. I never even thought that our neighbourhood would even get transit in the next ten years.
 
Last edited:
asher__jo said:
The irony of Eglinton W being buried and Ontario being elevated is not hammered enough by the Press. The Leslieville NIMBY's have a point about the widened ROW being an eyesore vs the treed cover that has bordered the rail line.
Click to expand...
im sure they wont mind the "eyesore" when their property values skyrocket when their station is built next door
 
Last edited:
CapitalSeven said:
Isn't it costing twice as much extra to bury Eglinton W in a 330 foot wide field? But that's not significant because suburban vote.
Click to expand...
More than twice. Initial estimate was hundreds of millions for surface section to Renforth. They've literally added $4 billion to the cost. And even more for Scarborough.

So $8 billion is okay to bury lines in Scarborough and Etobicoke - but $800 million downtown is too expensive?!?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top