|
|
|
Getting over $500 million (assuming $60 million/km) to get the line to Renforth isn't in the cards right now. Doing the LRT right (grade-separated at intersections at least), would put that up to at least $700 million. That's definitely not in the cards right now. A temporary BRT for under $100 million could potentially be. It's a quick win, and it's a cheap win.
And there's a difference between a TEMPORARY transfer and a PERMANENT transfer. The transfer at Jane would have been the former, the transfer at Don Mills for the SELRT would have been the latter.
I'd rather have a bare bones BRT up and running at the same time as the LRT, than have nothing running until at least 5 years after the LRT opens while the planning and construction is going on the west segment. If the BRT is in place, that $600 million difference can go into improving transit somewhere else (Finch for example).
Selling off that corridor right now is a dumb idea. Period. At least wait until the project is under construction.
smallspy
Senior Member
What kind of temporary BRT are you expecting for under $100mil? Pre-empting traffic lights and snazzy new stops are about all that could be built with that kind of money.
Dan
Toronto, Ont.
Monarch Butterfly
Superstar
Selling that portion of land means that it would be unavailable for a wide trench to be used for a heavy rail rapid transit (a Subway), but could leave a narrow room for a light rail rapid transit right-of-way.
Dedicated ROW BRT with at-grade intersections can be built for about $15 million/km. It's literally just a roadway. No sewers or anything. The only spot where it would be wider than a 2 lane road would be at stops, where it would be 3 lanes (as stops would be farside stops, so on opposite sides of the intersection).
Just look at the York U Busway through the hydro corridor. That's the type of roadway I'm talking about.
An in-median LRT or a grade-separated LRT? I think the corridor should be preserved in its entirety until an alignment and configuration is chosen.
smallspy
Senior Member
And since you can't actually build anything without storm drains, how much will they add to the cost?
Which is fine, but it's also a bad example as it doesn't have any stops. If anything, a better example would be the VIVA rapidway at Warden (although admittedly the stop shelters there are overkill).
Agreed. Too bad our mayor and the City's manager feel that the City needs the money pronto.
Dan
Toronto, Ont.
sixrings
Senior Member
However an increased number of residents in walking proximity of Eglinton could cause justification of a extended LRT line to its original terminus, Pearson. Id bet though the residents in the future would be against elevated transit across the street from their condos. As a result it looks like ROW, or underground will be the future. It would have been better to have just said it was going to be elevated from Jane to the airport so that all future development would have known of this fact and the NIMBYism could have been kept to a minimal.
Rural roads don't have storm drains, they just have swales on the side to collect and funnel away water. Storm drain implies an actual pipe, which I'm saying we don't need.
A couple bus shelters is marginal in the cost of the overall project. Look at Iris Station on the Ottawa Transitway for what I have in mind. In fact, this section of the Transitway in general is pretty much what I'm proposing.
Attachments
Paleo
Active Member
Do you remember who is mayor right now?
The same people that shamelessly admit that they want to toss the entire Waterfront Toronto plan out for a quick cash grab just so they can trumpet to the masses that they froze property taxes for 2012!
smallspy
Senior Member
Except that this would be built in Toronto. A ditch and swale will eventually lead to a stream - that will not happen in Toronto. Water run-off needs to lead somewhere (preferably a treatment plant), ergo you need to build storm drains.
Dan
Toronto, Ont.
There are many instances where open ditches and swales lead to a city storm drain. Very few open ditches in neighbourhoods lead to streams, most lead to controlled storm drains. It was very common in 1950s and 1960s subdivisions to have swales in the front yard that lead to 1 or 2 actual storm sewers in the neighbourhood. The vast majority of the streets that cross the Richview corridor are equipped with storm sewers. The swales will only have to bring the water there. Not to mention that since most the Richview corridor would still be permeable surfaces, these swales would be dry most of the time, and would only actually carry water in storm events.
It's not rocket science. In fact, it's pretty basic engineering. I know how this concept works. I have a swale in my front yard that leads to a storm catch basin at the end of the block. Half the block drains towards the west storm CB, half the block drains towards the east CB.
Last edited:
Ravager
New Member
I find this project a engineering nightmare. Dont get me wrong I love what they are doing.
They will hit old pipes and old lines from the past.
How would they deal with these issues?
They will hit old pipes and old lines from the past.
How would they deal with these issues?
I don't think it'll be as bad as you think it may be. Much of Eglinton was still in farmland in the late 40s and early 50s (Eglinton west of Scarlett was still called Richview Sideroad), and any pipes laid after that are probably pretty well documented. People tend to think of Eglinton as being 'central Toronto', but not that long ago it was considered to be the edge of Toronto.
If they were digging in downtown, where development history stretches back hundreds of years, then yes a case could be made for there being undocumented pipes, etc. But around Eglinton I would imagine there would be many fewer surprises, at least from the perspective of unknown pipes.
TransitPolicyChanger
Active Member
You cannot construct a new roadway without new catch basins. Additionally, because you are converting from an absorptive medium (grass and plantings) to a hard surface (asphalt) design checks would have to be completed to ensure the surrounding systems can handle the extra water. As smallspy said, in Toronto or any other urban city, you have to treat this as a new road and stormwater management is a big part of the cost.
This goes the same for adding a right lane for a BRT-lite setup. The storm drains will have to be moved, the entire pavement re-graded, and other site work. Sounds real simple, pave a roadway in an open field and it will be cheap, but these other issues must be accounted for and will increase the costs to some degree.