Very logical and I agree with you completely. That said, part of me sometimes wishes that we had the ambition/political will/imagination of a city like Barcelona, where they're building the La Sagrera Linear Park, a 4 kilometre long park built entirely above the newly buried high-speed railway lines and a new La Sagrera station, all cutting through the middle of the city

https://www.west8.com/projects/la-sagrera-linear-park/

Interesting suggestion. To remove the Union station rail corridor to below grade is to remove an 8 to 12 track corridor generally speaking.

Which, if we don't replace/demolish the train station (shed and under-shed areas) is still an enormous project. On the east side of Union, you have to start the burial east of the river to achieve much. Probably 6B , plus the park itself, so maybe 7B

The west side of Union....is below grade by Peter/Blue Jays Way.....leave it as and go over............2.5B gets you to Bathurst with a finished park.

I can appreciate the ambition, seriously. But that's stiff.

It would get you 21ha of parkland, give or take, assuming you're including GO' storage yards.

That's ~450M per hectare.

That's a tough sell to me.
 
Last edited:
Interesting suggestion. To remove the Union station rail corridor to below grade is to remove an 8 to 12 track corridor generally speaking.

Which, if we don't replace/demolish the train station (shed and under-shed areas) is still an enormous project. On the east side of Union, you have to start the burial east of the river to achieve much. Probably 6B , plus the park itself, so maybe 7B

The west side of Union....is below grade by Peter/Blue Jays Way.....leave it as and go over............2.5B gets you to Bathurst with a finished park.

I can appreciate the ambition, seriously. But that's stiff.

It would get you 21ha of parkland, give or take, assuming you including GO' storage yards.

That's ~450M per hectare.

That's a tough sell to me.
Also a massive economic cost of that disruption for construction.
 
Interesting suggestion. To remove the Union station rail corridor to below grade is to remove an 8 to 12 track corridor generally speaking.

Which, if we don't replace/demolish the train station (shed and under-shed areas) is still an enormous project. On the east side of Union, you have to start the burial east of the river to achieve much. Probably 6B , plus the park itself, so maybe 7B

The west side of Union....is below grade by Peter/Blue Jays Way.....leave it as and go over............2.5B gets you to Bathurst with a finished park.

I can appreciate the ambition, seriously. But that's stiff.

It would get you 21ha of parkland, give or take, assuming you're including GO' storage yards.

That's ~450M per hectare.

That's a tough sell to me.
Fair. You've convinced me that I can adjust my ambitious imagination by settling for an elevated park being built above the existing line (I am nothing if not practical in my daydreams). Where does that land us in terms of cost per hectare?
 
Fair. You've convinced me that I can adjust my ambitious imagination by settling for an elevated park being built above the existing line (I am nothing if not practical in my daydreams). Where does that land us in terms of cost per hectare?

Straight elevated, where the rail corridor is trenched, so you're building a deck/bridge I would estimate just over 125M per ha.

* keeping in mind this is a very ballpark estimate, I'm also not adding structure to support the weight of any substantial buildings.

The east side is more problematic, you have no lateral anchors (tiebacks) and more height, to get free and clear over an already elevated corridor. I think the baseline is closer to 250M per ha, but then you have to add accessibility. The park is 4 storeys or more in the air. So you need to add elevators and escalators. we can debate how many but if you add them at each major road on two sides, that's at least 10 sets. (plus stairs) that will add a fair bit.

Its a lot less expensive than tunnels, but far from cheap.

****

To think differently about this , La Sageara, the full thing, cost 2.24B Euros which is ~3.5B CAD. Subway construction costs in Toronto are close to 10x Madrid.

The math is a bit daunting .

I'm using the most extreme differential, but its real just the same. Obviously we can and should get our cost down...... but still.
 
Last edited:
Straight elevated, where the rail corridor is trenched, so you're building a deck/bridge I would estimate just over 125M per ha.

* keeping in mind this is a very ballpark estimate, I'm also not adding structure to support the weight of any substantial buildings.

The east side is more problematic, you have no lateral anchors (tiebacks) and more height, to get free and clear over an already elevated corridor. I think the baseline is closer to 250M per ha, but then you have to add accessibility. The park is 4 storeys or more in the air. So you need to add elevators and escalators. we can debate how many but if you add them at each major road on two sides, that's at least 10 sets. (plus stairs) that will add a fair bit.

Its a lot less expensive than tunnels, but far from cheap.

****

To think differently about this , La Sageara, the full thing, cost 2.24B Euros which is ~3.5B CAD. Subway construction costs in Toronto are close to 10x Madrid.

The math is a bit daunting .

I'm using the most extreme differential, but its real just the same. Obviously we can and should get our cost down...... but still.
Thanks for your info/thoughts on it. I'm getting a bit off topic here, and I may need to be pointed to another discussion thread, but why are the infrastructure costs here so much higher here (maybe in North America than Europe in general)? Is it labor costs, tougher to build-to engineering/building/safety/environmental standards, higher expropriation costs (even for subsurface)? I find it hard to believe that there would be so much more political grift here than in Europe. Are we just lazy/incompetent when it comes to procurement?
 
Thanks for your info/thoughts on it. I'm getting a bit off topic here, and I may need to be pointed to another discussion thread, but why are the infrastructure costs here so much higher here (maybe in North America than Europe in general)? Is it labor costs, tougher to build-to engineering/building/safety/environmental standards, higher expropriation costs (even for subsurface)? I find it hard to believe that there would be so much more political grift here than in Europe. Are we just lazy/incompetent when it comes to procurement?

The easy part of that equation is soft costs. Consultants, Business Cases, lots of things that either don't exist or are employed more sparingly elsewhere.

There are other factors. In general, P3s as we structure them cost more than old-school procurement. There are two discrete and clear factors. The first is that large, high-risk contracts have a limited number of bidders, which means low competition. In Ontario, Ellis Don or Aecon are on almost every large bid, that makes for typically 2 bids max and if one takes a pass, just 1 bid.

But add to that, we have a bad habit of tendering at 60% design, which leaves lots of room for change orders and estimates that are far from Class 1 (tight).

On top of that, we do have a very strange construction culture here that is wide-spread, of having far too few workers on site, and delivering projects with 5-day weeks and 1 shift per day.

This is just profoundly inefficient. Its not universal here, but it is much more common than would be accepted in much of the world.

There are other issues, and there are countless reports on these, most documented on UT in one thread or another.......but these really are at the heart of the matter.

It is fair to point out though, that Spain which has been discussed in this thread is a relatively lower wage, lower land cost country compared with urban Canada, which doesn't excuse our shortcomings, but does play a role in the pricing difference.
 
This photo that Paclo linked of this "project" is quite frankly the perfect illustration of what Toronto has become in the 21st century.

If there was one photo that encapulates the urban development landscape in this city, this would be it.

View attachment 743666
In most places you’d always assume this is a massing model but in Toronto this could easily be the final rendering. That’s the scary part. This could easily be it… oh well. Time will tell is we get a massing model or a real well designed project.
 

Back
Top