lowtrain
New Member
Isn’t a completely separated bike path without any stop lights a safest solution for a cyclist?
|
|
|
turbanplanner
Senior Member
Sorry if th
Gauge it versus how many people are going to use it? There are probably busier corridors.
smably
Senior Member
The cost escalation is unconscionable, but so is the timeline creep. From the Star article linked upthread:
This project seems to be perpetually a year or two away from construction. Back in 2010, there was hope that the railpath extension could be open for the Pan Am games in 2015. In 2016, construction was supposed to start in 2017. In 2020, construction was supposed to start in 2021 or 2022. The city's page still says construction will start in 2023. Now they're saying 2025.
Even when construction gets started, Metrolinx wants to take three years to build it. It took all of three years to build the entire UP Express, including four stations, and a 3km elevated guideway. Yes, there are bridges that add some complexity, but still, three years for a fully designed and funded trail?
My fear is that after all this waiting, we'll get another delay while the cost escalation gets sorted out. We do need transparency on costs, but also I want to know more details on the construction timeline. The city should be asking Metrolinx what it would take to build it in two years instead of three.
This project seems to be perpetually a year or two away from construction. Back in 2010, there was hope that the railpath extension could be open for the Pan Am games in 2015. In 2016, construction was supposed to start in 2017. In 2020, construction was supposed to start in 2021 or 2022. The city's page still says construction will start in 2023. Now they're saying 2025.
Even when construction gets started, Metrolinx wants to take three years to build it. It took all of three years to build the entire UP Express, including four stations, and a 3km elevated guideway. Yes, there are bridges that add some complexity, but still, three years for a fully designed and funded trail?
My fear is that after all this waiting, we'll get another delay while the cost escalation gets sorted out. We do need transparency on costs, but also I want to know more details on the construction timeline. The city should be asking Metrolinx what it would take to build it in two years instead of three.
vic
Senior Member
Reminder that the Railpath isn't just a "bike path", or "bike trail", or "bike infrastructure". That's one part of it. It's always been a pedestrian corridor, park, event space, learning space, nature corridor........ Treating it just like a really expensive bike lane is not quite right.
That said, I'm also curious about how that HUGE cost was calculated. Would love to see an itemized list of costs. There's a lot more required here than just scraping up some grass, dumping gravel, and topping off with asphalt. There's probably going to be grading, retaining walls, sound walls, lighting, other utility moves(?), drainage, landscaping.... Wonder how much of that cost is dedicated to landscaping, art, etc....more than just the basics of getting a path through there.
That said, I'm also curious about how that HUGE cost was calculated. Would love to see an itemized list of costs. There's a lot more required here than just scraping up some grass, dumping gravel, and topping off with asphalt. There's probably going to be grading, retaining walls, sound walls, lighting, other utility moves(?), drainage, landscaping.... Wonder how much of that cost is dedicated to landscaping, art, etc....more than just the basics of getting a path through there.
Northern Light
Superstar
True. However, the corridor already exists, off-road bike trails (basic) are being built elsewhere in Canada for under 1M per km. Clearly the bridges here will skew that number up, and there are other add-ons, the most notable is lighting, but the absolute cost here does not make sense for what is proposed to be delivered, and its not close either.
Efforts are being made to find this out.
True.
With the asterisk that I haven't seen the detailed working drawings.....
- No retaining walls should be required except where new stairwells/ramps are being built.
- Drainage is a given, and not expensive for how this would be handled here.
- Lighting is included and does cost $$, but we're in the low single-digit millions for 2km, at most.
- Landscaping, most of the Rail path before was done with seed mix, a few caliper trees and shrubs, I have yet to see a species, and plant plan for the extension, but this shouldn't be more than 3-5M.
A caliper sized tree,installed is about $750, so 100 would cost $75,000, provide the same budget for shrubs and the same for plugs of ferns/grasses/wildlfowers and seed mix and you get to just shy of a $250,000, but that excludes soil, mulch, landscape plan, seating etc.
- The sound walls/crash walls are a significant issue as they are not required for the benefit of cyclists/pedestrians, they are arguably required for the rail corridor (trail or no trail) to protect adjacent properties/residents, the cost for these is fairly charged to Mx, not the Rail Path.
The Bridges are the most expensive item, but even a generous cost estimate just doesn't get you to 75M per km, or close.
Last edited:
Cabral
New Member
To people suggesting this multiuse path be dropped after community members have been waiting years for this invaluable accessible connection. Here are a few things to consider:
Many people only feel safe enough to venture out on a bicycle on a path like this, away from cars. Many pedestrians in the surrounding neighbourhoods feel cut off from parts of the city due to the current rail tracks. Having to walk around the railway just to get across makes it difficult to get around. This would also give access to the new Exhibition GO and subway station to communities such as Parkdale who otherwise are quite far away from a subway station. It also allows quicker access to the UP, Bloor GO and Dundas West Station for people.
DSCToronto
Superstar
Of course it SHOULD be built and even Matlow was quite firm about that - the problem is the HUGE (and unexplained) MLX cost.
facepalming_brooklynite
Active Member
I guess you have never been on the existing railpath (prior to its disruption by work on the Bloor GO station). This is a very busy corridor and its extension will be extremely valuable both for recreation and bike commuting
Towered
Superstar
Unless specific funding is attached, I feel like deadlines have absolutely no meaning in this city, and there are zero consequences to people at the management level of specific projects for repeatedly missing them. Heads should be rolling over this farcial approach to city building.
Metroscapes
Active Member
I will add to the chorus of those asking for an itemized costing. This has been envisioned as happening, and should have been future-proofed for many years. Dramatic price escalations come out of unforeseen major works, and I'm failing to see what the big surprise is.
Admiral Beez
Superstar
Yes. Absolutely. But if we have $150 million to spend on cycling infrastructure shouldn’t we spend it where it will have the most impact. A few extra meters does not seem the most impactful spend. But don’t get me wrong, I want both the Railpath extension and protected lanes. I’d support tolling the DVP and Gardner to get it.
Last edited:
Metroscapes
Active Member
From Matt Elliott:
toronto.cityhallwatcher.com
Railing against the rail path, and City Hall's island airport debate prepares for takeoff
The Week at Toronto City Hall for the week of August 19 to 23, plus a look at headlines about the West Toronto Rail Path, the AMO Conference, the Island Airport & more
toronto.cityhallwatcher.com
facepalming_brooklynite
Active Member
From Matt Elliott:
Railing against the rail path, and City Hall's island airport debate prepares for takeoff
The Week at Toronto City Hall for the week of August 19 to 23, plus a look at headlines about the West Toronto Rail Path, the AMO Conference, the Island Airport & more
Elliott makes another excellent point:
And Bradford shows what a manipulative populist he is -- writing in the Toronto Sun to use this as a culture-war wedge issue against the mayor
robmausser
Senior Member
Elliott makes another excellent point:
They don't actually want this kind of bike infrastructure off the road. Thats just what they say they want when trying to cancel the on-street infrastructure.
What they really want is nothing.
They don't actually want this kind of bike infrastructure off the road. Thats just what they say they want when trying to cancel the on-street infrastructure.
What they really want is nothing.
facepalming_brooklynite
Active Member
And the complaints all undersell how important and valuable this project really is ("a two-kilometre walking trail" (Matlow), "nice to have, ... not a need to have" (Bradford))