General Road and Highway Discussion

[Square]

That's what I thought. Thanks.

[bravado]

I know a lot of people were pretty cranky with my use of the word corruption in public infrastructure costs, but this is the sort of shit that pops up and blows my mind:

Under the funding agreement announced by Councillor Alejandra Bravo (Davenport) and Julie Dzerowicz, Member of Parliament for Davenport, the Government of Canada will provide $23 million from its Active Transportation Fund (opens in new window), while the City will contribute $125.7 million.

The project will see the existing 2.1-kilometre trail doubled in length, with an additional two kilometres of trail[...]

https://www.toronto.ca/news/city-of-toro...extension/

How is it possible that 2.1km of new pedestrian trail comes out to $150M? $~70k per metre? How does this get approved? Are they replacing all sewer lines within 20km of this path and including it in the budget?

[tomh009]

I know a lot of people were pretty cranky with my use of the word corruption in public infrastructure costs, but this is the sort of shit that pops up and blows my mind:

Under the funding agreement announced by Councillor Alejandra Bravo (Davenport) and Julie Dzerowicz, Member of Parliament for Davenport, the Government of Canada will provide $23 million from its Active Transportation Fund (opens in new window), while the City will contribute $125.7 million.

The project will see the existing 2.1-kilometre trail doubled in length, with an additional two kilometres of trail[...]

https://www.toronto.ca/news/city-of-toro...extension/

How is it possible that 2.1km of new pedestrian trail comes out to $150M? $~70k per metre? How does this get approved? Are they replacing all sewer lines within 20km of this path and including it in the budget?

Four pedestrian/cycling bridges are included. Those are surely far more expensive than 2.1 km of MUT.

[danbrotherston]

I know a lot of people were pretty cranky with my use of the word corruption in public infrastructure costs, but this is the sort of shit that pops up and blows my mind:


How is it possible that 2.1km of new pedestrian trail comes out to $150M? $~70k per metre? How does this get approved? Are they replacing all sewer lines within 20km of this path and including it in the budget?

Four pedestrian/cycling bridges are included. Those are surely far more expensive than 2.1 km of MUT.

Yes but 70m per km is expensive for LRT. Even with bridges this is way too much for cycle infra. Also, why 4 bridges in 2 km?

[dtkvictim]

Four pedestrian/cycling bridges are included. Those are surely far more expensive than 2.1 km of MUT.

Yes but 70m per km is expensive for LRT. Even with bridges this is way too much for cycle infra. Also, why 4 bridges in 2 km?

If I understand correctly, this is parallel/within the Kitchener Line rail right of way. So it effectively needs all of the same grade separations that the tracks have (Lansdowne, Brock, and Queen), plus I think a bridge over the spur for the Barrie line. It still seems like an absurd price, but Metrolinx is building it...

[ijmorlan]

If I understand correctly, this is parallel/within the Kitchener Line rail right of way. So it effectively needs all of the same grade separations that the tracks have (Lansdowne, Brock, and Queen), plus I think a bridge over the spur for the Barrie line. It still seems like an absurd price, but Metrolinx is building it...

Maybe they’re billing a complete replacement of the rail grade to the active transportation project. Not conceptually different from leaving space beside a rail right-of-way for a multi-use trail.

[Acitta]

Four pedestrian/cycling bridges are included. Those are surely far more expensive than 2.1 km of MUT.

Yes but 70m per km is expensive for LRT. Even with bridges this is way too much for cycle infra. Also, why 4 bridges in 2 km?

The Railpath runs beside the tracks, which pass over the crossing streets on bridges.

[dtkvictim]

Ontario eyes barring new bike lanes where car lanes would be cut

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/o...-1.7328878

[cherrypark]

Ford is pure distilled Etobicoke commuter. Just run for Toronto mayor instead man, save us the trouble.

[danbrotherston]

Ford is pure distilled Etobicoke commuter. Just run for Toronto mayor instead man, save us the trouble.

He did, and Toronto rightly decided they didn't want him. Ontario, on the other hand, made a different decision.

[bravado]

Just last week Doug was all about "not telling cities what do to" around housing, and yet here he is waving his Emperor of Ontario crown around about bike lanes?

[KevinL]

"Go ahead, do what you want!"

...

"Not like that!"

[ac3r]

Here's an even better idea: public transit!

[ijmorlan]

Fortunately, there is an easy solution: just close the car lanes. Don’t re-stripe them as bike lanes or anything. Of course, if some bicyclists still use the space once the cars are out of them, nobody can really blame them.

[dtkvictim]

I wonder if this means any improvements to Benton/Frederick, Victoria & King, and I'm sure some other projects are dead? Are the Lancaster changes removing lanes? Does this meaning turning lanes can't be removed?

Nonsense. Worse when you consider that many road diets or turning lane reconfigurations should happen regardless of bike lanes, but now you can't toss them in to save money on constructing them together (if at all).

Fortunately, there is an easy solution: just close the car lanes. Don’t re-stripe them as bike lanes or anything. Of course, if some bicyclists still use the space once the cars are out of them, nobody can really blame them.

They'd sure be blamed for getting run over by a right hook, or any other situation where they should have had right of way.