King-Victoria Transit Hub

[tomh009]

Could it not be five years simply to spread the cost over a longer time period?

Construction costs are likely capitalized over multiple decades anyway.

[danbrotherston]

Could it not be five years simply to spread the cost over a longer time period?

Construction costs are likely capitalized over multiple decades anyway.

And a longer project costs more.

[dtkvictim]

UNDERSTANDING THE DRIVERS OF TRANSIT CONSTRUCTION COSTS IN CANADA: A COMPARATIVE STUDY

https://stateofcitiessummit.ca/files/041...-Study.pdf

ABSTRACT

The expansion of mass transit infrastructure is crucial for accommodating the rapidly growing
population in Canadian metro areas and promoting a shift toward sustainable modes of transportation.
However, these initiatives are becoming increasingly costly, threatening the timely delivery of
necessary infrastructure to bridge the current sustainable mobility gap.

Our investigation delves into Metrolinx's project portfolio in the Toronto area, comparing it with
transit initiatives in global cities. We categorize expenses into soft and hard costs, identifying specific
cost drivers linked to project scope and design choices. Comparisons with peer cases reveal four
primary cost-driving factors: design choices, procurement, risk management practices, and external
constraints.

Drawing upon international cases where rapid transit is constructed more affordably, our study
proposes reforms in project planning, delivery, and cost estimation that can be implemented across
Canada. It particularly emphasizes reforms in project planning and delivery to expedite and reduce
construction costs, and strategies to enhance cost estimation for better project management.

[bravado]

UNDERSTANDING THE DRIVERS OF TRANSIT CONSTRUCTION COSTS IN CANADA: A COMPARATIVE STUDY

https://stateofcitiessummit.ca/files/041...-Study.pdf

ABSTRACT

The expansion of mass transit infrastructure is crucial for accommodating the rapidly growing
population in Canadian metro areas and promoting a shift toward sustainable modes of transportation.
However, these initiatives are becoming increasingly costly, threatening the timely delivery of
necessary infrastructure to bridge the current sustainable mobility gap.

Our investigation delves into Metrolinx's project portfolio in the Toronto area, comparing it with
transit initiatives in global cities. We categorize expenses into soft and hard costs, identifying specific
cost drivers linked to project scope and design choices. Comparisons with peer cases reveal four
primary cost-driving factors: design choices, procurement, risk management practices, and external
constraints.

Drawing upon international cases where rapid transit is constructed more affordably, our study
proposes reforms in project planning, delivery, and cost estimation that can be implemented across
Canada. It particularly emphasizes reforms in project planning and delivery to expedite and reduce
construction costs, and strategies to enhance cost estimation for better project management.

This is a next level document, full of graphs and data that shows we are woefully incompetent at public procurement and regularly get much less for our money.

I expect no angry suburbanite nor local leader to ever come close to reading it!

[taylortbb]

It's entirely conceivable that they do the first phase which encompasses everything required for the station to be operational, so the platforms, bus loop, parking, King St Bridge, Victoria St reconstruction (assuming Ford doesn't get in the way) wait a bit and then do the actual building resulting in the entire project to encompass 5 years. After all we're dealing with Metrolinx and they can be difficult to work with.

There's no building in the 5 year plan. Look at the render, it's 5 years to build the station platforms, some access ramps, some bus platforms, and a passenger pick-up/dropoff. Once that's done they'll then begin the process to find a private partner to build the actual building as a part of a public-private partnership, which probably adds another decade (or more).

[danbrotherston]

It's entirely conceivable that they do the first phase which encompasses everything required for the station to be operational, so the platforms, bus loop, parking, King St Bridge, Victoria St reconstruction (assuming Ford doesn't get in the way) wait a bit and then do the actual building resulting in the entire project to encompass 5 years. After all we're dealing with Metrolinx and they can be difficult to work with.

There's no building in the 5 year plan. Look at the render, it's 5 years to build the station platforms, some access ramps, some bus platforms, and a passenger pick-up/dropoff. Once that's done they'll then begin the process to find a private partner to build the actual building as a part of a public-private partnership, which probably adds another decade (or more).

It's absolutely bonkers that it will take 5 years to build platforms, ramps, bus platform, and an overpass. Aside from the overpass, a single person using nothing more than hand tools could probably build all that in 5 years. This isn't an exaggeration, for the....what 75 million....they plan to spend, I would literally take the job myself.

[ijmorlan]

It's absolutely bonkers that it will take 5 years to build platforms, ramps, bus platform, and an overpass. Aside from the overpass, a single person using nothing more than hand tools could probably build all that in 5 years. This isn't an exaggeration, for the....what 75 million....they plan to spend, I would literally take the job myself.

I remember thinking about the absurdity of having no level-entry platform at the Via station when any contractor could, in a single weekend, build something the size of a backyard deck that would provide a ramp up to at least one door of the train. Obviously not as good as a full platform, but such a significant payoff for such a trivial expenditure.

[ac3r]

Cut out the bullshit bureaucracy and we would already had this completed years ago.

[Acitta]

It's absolutely bonkers that it will take 5 years to build platforms, ramps, bus platform, and an overpass. Aside from the overpass, a single person using nothing more than hand tools could probably build all that in 5 years. This isn't an exaggeration, for the....what 75 million....they plan to spend, I would literally take the job myself.

I remember thinking about the absurdity of having no level-entry platform at the Via station when any contractor could, in a single weekend, build something the size of a backyard deck that would provide a ramp up to at least one door of the train. Obviously not as good as a full platform, but such a significant payoff for such a trivial expenditure.

There is a level entry platform for the GO train's accessibility coach.

[ijmorlan]

I remember thinking about the absurdity of having no level-entry platform at the Via station when any contractor could, in a single weekend, build something the size of a backyard deck that would provide a ramp up to at least one door of the train. Obviously not as good as a full platform, but such a significant payoff for such a trivial expenditure.

There is a level entry platform for the GO train's accessibility coach.

This has been bugging me for a long time, well before GO came to Kitchener. But you are correct, it’s better now than it used to be, although I think Via still requires people to use steps.

[KevinL]

At least the new Via fleet has proper wheelchair lifts; that had been lacking for far too long.

[taylortbb]

I remember thinking about the absurdity of having no level-entry platform at the Via station when any contractor could, in a single weekend, build something the size of a backyard deck that would provide a ramp up to at least one door of the train. Obviously not as good as a full platform, but such a significant payoff for such a trivial expenditure.

It's sadly not the straightforward. Most of our passenger platforms are on tracks that serve freight trains. The freight trains are allowed to be wider, so a platform that provided level boarding of a Via train could have freight trains collide with it. I believe that's part of why Go uses the low platforms, because they're compatible with freight loading gauges.

There's also a lack of standardization of platform height and spacing. Go and Via have different standards here, and UPX might be a third? And that's just southern Ontario, I'm sure there's other norms elsewhere in Canada. This is something that just needs to get standardized on a national level, probably by adopting US norms (which again, isn't entirely standardized, but the northeastern US has some norms). But the logical standardization would be a high platform, and given the massive amount of legacy Go rolling stock... it's just not that easy to switch.

[danbrotherston]

I remember thinking about the absurdity of having no level-entry platform at the Via station when any contractor could, in a single weekend, build something the size of a backyard deck that would provide a ramp up to at least one door of the train. Obviously not as good as a full platform, but such a significant payoff for such a trivial expenditure.

It's sadly not the straightforward. Most of our passenger platforms are on tracks that serve freight trains. The freight trains are allowed to be wider, so a platform that provided level boarding of a Via train could have freight trains collide with it. I believe that's part of why Go uses the low platforms, because they're compatible with freight loading gauges.

There's also a lack of standardization of platform height and spacing. Go and Via have different standards here, and UPX might be a third? And that's just southern Ontario, I'm sure there's other norms elsewhere in Canada. This is something that just needs to get standardized on a national level, probably by adopting US norms (which again, isn't entirely standardized, but the northeastern US has some norms). But the logical standardization would be a high platform, and given the massive amount of legacy Go rolling stock... it's just not that easy to switch.

Of course, we don't really plan ahead, or rather, this kind of feature is never prioritized. If we had, we could have built the current station with sufficient room to separate freight and passenger traffic, (although possibly there is still room for a gauntlet track).

Even in Toronto, where there are no freight trains, and on platforms which only service GO trains they aren't building for level boarding anyway.

But the "no standardisation" isn't actually as big an issue as people make it out to be. Yeah, it's better if the platform exactly matches the height of the train car, but every inch closer to it is an improvement. The GO accessibility platforms are lower than Via Rail, but using them across the entire platform would certainly eliminate the need for a stool placed in front of the stairs up to the train, which would make boarding easier--if we were willing to restrict or move freight away from the platform edge.

[nms]

I seem to recall that some time the recent past, a French railway operator ordered a fleet of passenger equipment that didn't fit the platforms. In very short order, all of the platforms were upgraded to fit the new stock.

[panamaniac]

I seem to recall that some time the recent past, a French railway operator ordered a fleet of passenger equipment that didn't fit the platforms.  In very short order, all of the platforms were upgraded to fit the new stock.

Perhaps France is not the best place to look for examples of prudent public expenditure.