News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 11K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 43K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 6.9K     0 
pulls not surprised face

Anyone who's been paying attention to the Crossrail project could have told you this project was going to be late!
They haven't even started on the hard bit - all the testing, commissioning and final paperwork (making sure the fire alarms all work, all the various systems communicate with each other, the signalling system is fully tested etc etc).

Maybe it would have been better to have built a yard on the western side so the "easier" surface section can open earlier!
 
turini2 said:
pulls not surprised face

Anyone who's been paying attention to the Crossrail project could have told you this project was going to be late!
They haven't even started on the hard bit - all the testing, commissioning and final paperwork (making sure the fire alarms all work, all the various systems communicate with each other, the signalling system is fully tested etc etc).

Maybe it would have been better to have built a yard on the western side so the "easier" surface section can open earlier!
Click to expand...

You mean building a yard in the east? Even if they did, the utility of opening a section not connected to much (much less Yonge) wouldn't be that high. Anyways, I wonder if they would have made the latest deadline even without COVID - and it's just being trotted out as a convenient excuse now.

AoD
 
Late and over budget, who would have thought?

Wasn't one of the reasons for LRT was that it was more affordable and easier to build? I guess that theory has been blown out of the water. Elevation is far easier and faster to build and far less disruptive on local roadways because, unlike median running LRT, elevated rail usually goes along the side of a roadway.

After all this time and money Toronto will be getting a rather slow, unreliable, and lower capacity system than if they had built the damn thing grade separated in the first place.
 
ssiguy2 said:
Late and over budget, who would have thought?

Wasn't one of the reasons for LRT was that it was more affordable and easier to build? I guess that theory has been blown out of the water. Elevation is far easier and faster to build and far less disruptive on local roadways because, unlike median running LRT, elevated rail usually goes along the side of a roadway.

After all this time and money Toronto will be getting a rather slow, unreliable, and lower capacity system than if they had built the damn thing grade separated in the first place.
Click to expand...
The crosstown would not be elevated through the central part. The grade level portion is straight forward and started way later as it's much faster to build (see Finch LRT).

An elevated Crosstown would still be below grade through the centre of the route and hit the same problems.
 
Steve X said:
The 102D from Major Mac to Warden Station is pretty close to the 54A length too. Way over an hour.
Click to expand...
according to the TTC's 2020 service report the 54 just a bit over a kilometre longer! They're really damn close! The Steeles, Eglinton east, and Bloor-Danforth night busses still beat both of them though with the 354 just being little behind 😮
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
The real orthodoxy buster here is the notion that P3 is by default better and cheaper, and transfers risks from the government to the private sector. Pretty much none of that had happened in this case.

AoD
Click to expand...

Don’t forget Ml’s equally embarrassing outcome when it took Bombardier to court alleging failure to deliver on its LRV contract.

More recently, Ml’s approach to P3 for GO RER expansion went back to the drawing board when bidders balked at ML’s proposed way of doing things.

This is an organization that just doesn’t want to be accountable for anything, and especially not for project management.

- Paul
 
crs1026 said:
Don’t forget Ml’s equally embarrassing outcome when it took Bombardier to court alleging failure to deliver on its LRV contract.

More recently, Ml’s approach to P3 for GO RER expansion went back to the drawing board when bidders balked at ML’s proposed way of doing things.

This is an organization that just doesn’t want to be accountable for anything, and especially not for project management.

- Paul
Click to expand...

Oh I am acutely aware of the move towards "alliance" model - with risk sharing back to the government - that pretty much puts an end to the whole "transfer risk to the private sector" P3 argument in the transit context in the GTA.

AoD
 
felix123 said:
When will a new completion date actually be set? Or is it just "idk, whenever" at this point?
Click to expand...

I imagine there will be a negotiation.

Considering that the date won't be prior to June 2, 2022.... it may not matter as much to QP.

- Paul
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
Oh I am acutely aware of the move towards "alliance" model - with risk sharing back to the government - that pretty much puts an end to the whole "transfer risk to the private sector" P3 argument in the transit context in the GTA.

AoD
Click to expand...
I think at this point it might be wise to abandon P3s altogether, or to rethink strategies. Right now Metrolinx can easily hit a wall where P3s become to unviable to pursue since they troubled contractors so much that costs will be even more expensive (since the private sector knows how much risk they're putting on themselves, and how strict ML is with suing companies that underdeliver), and it might be cheaper to just go back to the old way of government run construction.
 
TorPronto said:
The crosstown would not be elevated through the central part. The grade level portion is straight forward and started way later as it's much faster to build (see Finch LRT).

An elevated Crosstown would still be below grade through the centre of the route and hit the same problems.
Click to expand...

Yes I know the central part will be underground as it should be but the rest should have been elevated. The CT has too many stations both at grade and underground adding to the costs for little return. Also the underground stations themselves had to be made significantly larger than needed than if the system was grade separated because the system will suffer from much lower frequency capacity.

Miller proclaimed that LRT would offer the best of both worlds.......... high capacity, high frequency but lower costs and faster construction than subway but as Torontonians are quickly realizing instead it offers the worst pf both world.............high costs, lower capacity, less frequent service, less reliable but coming in a subway costs and timetables.
 
ssiguy2 said:
Yes I know the central part will be underground as it should be but the rest should have been elevated. The CT has too many stations both at grade and underground adding to the costs for little return. Also the underground stations themselves had to be made significantly larger than needed than if the system was grade separated because the system will suffer from much lower frequency capacity.

Miller proclaimed that LRT would offer the best of both worlds.......... high capacity, high frequency but lower costs and faster construction than subway but as Torontonians are quickly realizing instead it offers the worst pf both world.............high costs, lower capacity, less frequent service, less reliable but coming in a subway costs and timetables.
Click to expand...
The train station spacing (underground) for Line 5 are about the same spacing as with Line 2. For an underground LRT, it seems appropriate. The surface LRT stops are equivalent to what the "express" bus stops would be at.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top