daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Subways and Urban Transport

Subways and Urban Transport Metros, subways, light rail, trams, buses and other local transport systems



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old May 18th, 2008, 02:14 PM   #181
eddyb
Registered User
 
eddyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 764
Likes (Received): 35

TRZ

Humble apologies for the confusing site (I am 63 and only learning computers) all the seats are three person bench seats with an entry door (like a family car) one side and exit the other. You get in just as you would a car and sit down there would be 10 seats per carriage and up to 25 carriages per train making a total capacity of each train 750 people.

I have gone off the thread here a bit so I started a new thread about Parrahub if you are interested.
eddyb no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old May 21st, 2008, 02:08 PM   #182
Shado
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 348
Likes (Received): 0

The main reason people build any underground transit is that due to the price of land, the cost of disruption, legal disputes etc, it can work out cheaper. This is why you see it done in larger cities, and for smaller sections in other cities. It also means there's no interference from weather (a major issue in some cold/hot climates) and also less maintenance required (less track expansion / contraction etc).

Many people also consider overshadowing from elevated systems to be an ugly blight. Places like Las Vegas were perfect for a monorail as it's a primarily tourist destination, seeing the sights is what most of the passengers will be doing, not getting from a to b the fastest way they can. If you've been on Singapore's MRT system, you'll certainly get the feeling that is what it is doing, the acceleration and deceleration is something else.

A cut and cover solution only happens when the disruption on the surface will be minimal, as it's much cheaper, but obviously only when the disruption is not worth alot of money. It actually works out probably no more expensive than an elevated solution if the disruption was excluded. Deep subways are built because there is no disruption, you put in a TBM, you pay the premium in time and money, but the result is that it's done, no traffic disruption or land resumptions required for most of the length.

Systems in most larger cities will have some underground and some at grade or above ground sections, depending on the density of the area.
Shado no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 21st, 2008, 03:28 PM   #183
Zabonz
Master Planner
 
Zabonz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: zabreg
Posts: 1,618
Likes (Received): 1356

Can anyone tell me what is app. cost of 1mile/km of subway and elevated rail?
__________________
ona je ljubav koja ne može proć
Zabonz no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 22nd, 2008, 03:44 AM   #184
Shado
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 348
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zabonz View Post
Can anyone tell me what is app. cost of 1mile/km of subway and elevated rail?
It will hugely vary depending on the country, labour costs method of construction (cut and cover vs TBM vs other tunneling) and the cost of any above ground land that needs to be purchased etc.
Shado no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 22nd, 2008, 06:30 AM   #185
Electrify
Registered User
 
Electrify's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Markham (Thornhill), Ontario
Posts: 1,684
Likes (Received): 5

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zabonz View Post
Can anyone tell me what is app. cost of 1mile/km of subway and elevated rail?
I'd estimate about $100,000,000-$200,000,000/km for subways, and $75,000,000-$100,000,000 for elevated.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by OEincorparated View Post
You are genius too Electrify, never would have thought of this if not for your thread.
Electrify no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 22nd, 2008, 06:43 AM   #186
Msradell
Always looking up
 
Msradell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Louisville, Kentucky
Posts: 1,773
Likes (Received): 209

Quote:
Originally Posted by Electrify View Post
I'd estimate about $100,000,000-$200,000,000/km for subways, and $75,000,000-$100,000,000 for elevated.
The new subway line being built in NYC is costing about 5 million dollars per mile to build! Of course part of that cost can be attributed to the unions and politics in New York.
__________________
"Written using Dragon Naturally Speaking"
I've learned that depression is merely anger without enthusiasm.
Msradell no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 22nd, 2008, 08:17 AM   #187
deasine
=)
 
deasine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,452
Likes (Received): 57

Yup. Depends on the country, then the region. Depends of what platform length. And train technology is an important factor too.
deasine no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 22nd, 2008, 04:16 PM   #188
Electrify
Registered User
 
Electrify's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Markham (Thornhill), Ontario
Posts: 1,684
Likes (Received): 5

Quote:
Originally Posted by Msradell View Post
The new subway line being built in NYC is costing about 5 million dollars per mile to build! Of course part of that cost can be attributed to the unions and politics in New York.
You mean $2 BILLION per mile ($17 blillion for an 8.5 mile long line, source: http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/features/n_10109/). NYC is the exception to the average, because of its incredibly high density and value. Because of this, I believe an above grade solution such as a monorail or metro with a well designed guideway would be a better investment. Especially since the sky is already blocked out by literally a sea of skyscrapers. Most cities though would be looking at $100 to $250 million per km ($150 to $300 million per mile) depending on the density and politics of the area.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by OEincorparated View Post
You are genius too Electrify, never would have thought of this if not for your thread.

Last edited by Electrify; May 22nd, 2008 at 04:23 PM.
Electrify no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 22nd, 2008, 06:13 PM   #189
TRZ
Welcome to the Rail World
 
TRZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,671
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Electrify View Post
You mean $2 BILLION per mile ($17 blillion for an 8.5 mile long line, source: http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/features/n_10109/). NYC is the exception to the average, because of its incredibly high density and value. Because of this, I believe an above grade solution such as a monorail or metro with a well designed guideway would be a better investment. Especially since the sky is already blocked out by literally a sea of skyscrapers. Most cities though would be looking at $100 to $250 million per km ($150 to $300 million per mile) depending on the density and politics of the area.
Let's put things in perspective. One of the big factors in the cost is the relocation of existing services and/or going beneath existing infrastructure. These same services or existing infrastructure would certainly be an obstacle for the deep foundations required for the elevated guideway. It would be a difficult design, and possibly higher risk construction work since it's such a mess down there. It would also be extremely difficult to fit it supporting structure for an elevated station as well... in fact, underground stations are more than likely EASIER in this case because then you don't have to worry so much about foundation supports going past said services since the station would stay underneath them altogether. So it is worth keeping in mind that elevated in this part of town may be more complicated; even if it is cheaper, it is higher risk, and if any damage is caused by even a small mistake, the costs can be disastrous.
__________________
Pssst... your balls are showing...

EXTREEEEEEEEEEEME transit geek
TRZ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 24th, 2008, 04:32 AM   #190
ssiguy2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: White Rock BC
Posts: 5,404
Likes (Received): 858

I beleive that most systems should be elevated in the burbs or LRT.
Toronto's Spadina line extention is a classic example.
The corridor it serves could easily be elevated and save themselves a cool billion.
People bitch short term but then laugh themselves all the way to bank when they resell.

In Vancouver, there are condos going up right along the route itself. You get use to it and they are still relativly low desite what people say. Also people say the noise will be too much, that is not the case with today's quiter trains and they are still quieter than having an old diesel bus go by every minute.
ssiguy2 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 24th, 2008, 06:27 AM   #191
Msradell
Always looking up
 
Msradell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Louisville, Kentucky
Posts: 1,773
Likes (Received): 209

Quote:
Originally Posted by TRZ View Post
Let's put things in perspective. One of the big factors in the cost is the relocation of existing services and/or going beneath existing infrastructure. These same services or existing infrastructure would certainly be an obstacle for the deep foundations required for the elevated guideway. It would be a difficult design, and possibly higher risk construction work since it's such a mess down there. It would also be extremely difficult to fit it supporting structure for an elevated station as well... in fact, underground stations are more than likely EASIER in this case because then you don't have to worry so much about foundation supports going past said services since the station would stay underneath them altogether. So it is worth keeping in mind that elevated in this part of town may be more complicated; even if it is cheaper, it is higher risk, and if any damage is caused by even a small mistake, the costs can be disastrous.
In many cases deep foundations are not require. Spread footings can be used for most soil conditions since the actual weight being supported isn't very high. Spread floating are very inexpensive and quick to build.
__________________
"Written using Dragon Naturally Speaking"
I've learned that depression is merely anger without enthusiasm.
Msradell no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 24th, 2008, 07:39 AM   #192
TRZ
Welcome to the Rail World
 
TRZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,671
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Msradell View Post
In many cases deep foundations are not require. Spread footings can be used for most soil conditions since the actual weight being supported isn't very high. Spread floating are very inexpensive and quick to build.
Even if it is spread footings, they will still have to be deeper than the services below the road and conflict, since they have to deep enough to resist frost heaving.

I'm assuming HRT vehicles here though, so the foundations for that kind of vehicle would have to be deeper, like a conventional railway (but modified since it is still a fair bit lighter than freight).
__________________
Pssst... your balls are showing...

EXTREEEEEEEEEEEME transit geek
TRZ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 24th, 2008, 07:44 AM   #193
TRZ
Welcome to the Rail World
 
TRZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,671
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by ssiguy2 View Post
I beleive that most systems should be elevated in the burbs or LRT.
Toronto's Spadina line extention is a classic example.
The corridor it serves could easily be elevated and save themselves a cool billion.
Actually, the funny part is, the per-km cost of the Spadina line extention between the 416 portion and the 905 portion, is that the 905 portion is way more expensive than the 416 portion, even though the 905 is elevated and the 416 portion is entirely underground.

If you want to build massive bus terminals and huge parking lots as part of the stations of your elevated transit terminals, you can easily negate any savings from less tunnelling. The stations ALONE must be making up half of the cost of the 905 portion of the Spadina line, it is insane.
__________________
Pssst... your balls are showing...

EXTREEEEEEEEEEEME transit geek
TRZ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 24th, 2008, 10:03 AM   #194
DENTROBATE54
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Brampton, ON
Posts: 687
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by TRZ View Post
Actually, the funny part is, the per-km cost of the Spadina line extention between the 416 portion and the 905 portion, is that the 905 portion is way more expensive than the 416 portion, even though the 905 is elevated and the 416 portion is entirely underground.

If you want to build massive bus terminals and huge parking lots as part of the stations of your elevated transit terminals, you can easily negate any savings from less tunnelling. The stations ALONE must be making up half of the cost of the 905 portion of the Spadina line, it is insane.
The high price tag on the 905 portion is attributive of having to cross a major highway system (the 407, possibly the 400). The majority of the Spadina North extension could be done via a mixture of underground/elevated/at grade ROW.

Downsview to 200m south Finch Ave W- at grade via government owned land in Downsview Park and adjacent the Barrie GO line thereafter.

Finch W-Pond Road- open trench. This area is presently vacant land largely set aside for the Finch Hydro corridor. Any future development would be minimal, reducing the need to bury the line completely.

York University campus grounds- completely underground to Steeles Ave W.

North of Toronto city limits. The section of Jane from Steeles to Interchange Way is mixed woodlands, cemetry and a few industrial lots. There is zero need to waste millions more burying the line through here. The most expensive feat is building a new bridge adjacent Jane to cross the 407 where the line would enter one final tunnel to Highway 7.

The cost for modern-day subway stations in Toronto is roughly $100 million. In spite of this I still think it vital Toronto expand it system (getting back to the question posed in the thread title). And not just in the outlying suburbs but right in the urban nucleus. The cost of building new subways is only of short-term concern. What about the long-term implications of not expanding the transit network?

As buses and streetcars continue to overcrowd with no new subways to alleviate the demand, businesses and residents could (and are) get fed up and setting up shop elsewhere in suburban areas where the commute between home and work is less taxing on the individual. To stem the tide of urban exile and increasing car-oriented downtowns, there needs to be greater motivation for citizens, politicians and the private sector to unite and strategize ways to create a fiscally managable system that boosts the urban economy at all levels (new jobs, closer proximities, new residents, etc.)
DENTROBATE54 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 24th, 2008, 02:31 PM   #195
Msradell
Always looking up
 
Msradell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Louisville, Kentucky
Posts: 1,773
Likes (Received): 209

Quote:
Originally Posted by TRZ View Post
Even if it is spread footings, they will still have to be deeper than the services below the road and conflict, since they have to deep enough to resist frost heaving.

I'm assuming HRT vehicles here though, so the foundations for that kind of vehicle would have to be deeper, like a conventional railway (but modified since it is still a fair bit lighter than freight).
I don't believe the frost line in any major American City is more than 36" and I'm sure the majority of utilities are buried much deeper than that. Also with large spread footings you can "cheat" a little on the frost line due to the massive weight. And don't forget global warming also helps!
__________________
"Written using Dragon Naturally Speaking"
I've learned that depression is merely anger without enthusiasm.
Msradell no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 24th, 2008, 10:03 PM   #196
TRZ
Welcome to the Rail World
 
TRZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,671
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by DENTROBATE54 View Post
The high price tag on the 905 portion is attributive of having to cross a major highway system (the 407, possibly the 400). The majority of the Spadina North extension could be done via a mixture of underground/elevated/at grade ROW.
It's not the crossing of the highway that's the big ticket, it is the integration with it for parking and busses that is jacking it up. Frankly, the subway should not stop there at all (of course, the extension shouldn't be happening north of Steeles either), even VCC is better than a 407 station (whoever had this bright idea should not be in the field, this is terrible planning and sets a very poor example of how expansion should be handled in suburban areas).

Quote:
Originally Posted by DENTROBATE54 View Post
Downsview to 200m south Finch Ave W- at grade via government owned land in Downsview Park and adjacent the Barrie GO line thereafter.
No, this is incorrect. The people involved with redevelopment of the Downsview lands specifically requested that the subway be buried in this area, and it is being buried in this area.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DENTROBATE54 View Post
Finch W-Pond Road- open trench. This area is presently vacant land largely set aside for the Finch Hydro corridor. Any future development would be minimal, reducing the need to bury the line completely.
It will not be open trench. The subway will be travelling directly under Keele between Sheppard and the Finch Hydro corridor. Where is this "Pond Road" you speak of?

Quote:
Originally Posted by DENTROBATE54 View Post
York University campus grounds- completely underground to Steeles Ave W.
Correct (but probably just a lucky guess).

Quote:
Originally Posted by DENTROBATE54 View Post
North of Toronto city limits. The section of Jane from Steeles to Interchange Way is mixed woodlands, cemetry and a few industrial lots. There is zero need to waste millions more burying the line through here. The most expensive feat is building a new bridge adjacent Jane to cross the 407 where the line would enter one final tunnel to Highway 7.
If you think you can just plow a subway through a cemetary, you've got another thing coming. The subway will be on the west side of Jane, not the east.
Have you even looked at the map of the alignment on the TTC's website?
I haven't seen the EA for the 905 portion yet, but I wonder if the VCC station will be only semi-underground? I think they may try to avoid a tunnel here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DENTROBATE54 View Post
The cost for modern-day subway stations in Toronto is roughly $100 million. In spite of this I still think it vital Toronto expand it system (getting back to the question posed in the thread title). And not just in the outlying suburbs but right in the urban nucleus. The cost of building new subways is only of short-term concern. What about the long-term implications of not expanding the transit network?
True that the nucleus is in dire need of an additional subway line. However, the VCC extension is a textbook case of how not to handle subway expansion. Subways are not to be designed in a manner that caters to commuter markets, yet that is exactly what is happening with the Spadina extension.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DENTROBATE54 View Post
As buses and streetcars continue to overcrowd with no new subways to alleviate the demand, businesses and residents could (and are) get fed up and setting up shop elsewhere in suburban areas where the commute between home and work is less taxing on the individual. To stem the tide of urban exile and increasing car-oriented downtowns, there needs to be greater motivation for citizens, politicians and the private sector to unite and strategize ways to create a fiscally managable system that boosts the urban economy at all levels (new jobs, closer proximities, new residents, etc.)
If you are proposing P3, don't.
__________________
Pssst... your balls are showing...

EXTREEEEEEEEEEEME transit geek
TRZ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 24th, 2008, 10:08 PM   #197
TRZ
Welcome to the Rail World
 
TRZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,671
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Msradell View Post
I don't believe the frost line in any major American City is more than 36" and I'm sure the majority of utilities are buried much deeper than that. Also with large spread footings you can "cheat" a little on the frost line due to the massive weight. And don't forget global warming also helps!
The building code states that 1200mm is the minimum depth for foundations to protect themselves against frost heaving. This is by the Canadian code, not the American one.
Utilities vary in depth. Some utilities are deeper, some aren't. Global warming hasn't eliminated frost yet, so let's not bank on that yet, k?
__________________
Pssst... your balls are showing...

EXTREEEEEEEEEEEME transit geek
TRZ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 25th, 2008, 07:43 AM   #198
DENTROBATE54
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Brampton, ON
Posts: 687
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by TRZ View Post
It's not the crossing of the highway that's the big ticket, it is the integration with it for parking and busses that is jacking it up. Frankly, the subway should not stop there at all (of course, the extension shouldn't be happening north of Steeles either), even VCC is better than a 407 station (whoever had this bright idea should not be in the field, this is terrible planning and sets a very poor example of how expansion should be handled in suburban areas).
About the 407 Interchange Stn, the idea is to tie-in some GO BRT services. I question the logic of this for several reasons. The time it takes to exit/re-enter the highway and layover at the station, it'd probably be of more benefit to a majority of commuters to board the subway at Yonge (Richmond Hill Centre extension). Furthermore the GO terminal at Yorkdale is already highly viable, closer to downtown, etc. It's redundant to have multiple GO terminals on the same section of subway.

Quote:
No, this is incorrect. The people involved with redevelopment of the Downsview lands specifically requested that the subway be buried in this area, and it is being buried in this area.
The developers of Downsview Park can't sacrifice a sliver of land out of endless hectares of land? Allowing the subway to run at grade through would be ideal for a TTC/GO tie-in. The planned GO station could be built side by side the subway stop, allotting seamless interchange between both. For crossing Sheppard Ave, just fortify and expand the decking of the existing train bridge, such that bi-directional subway cars can route across as well. The TTC's official plan for this area involves a more invasive routing through the Chesswood industrial park, whereby millions will have to paid out to landowners. The lands immediately adjacent to the traintracks are backlots and other non-usable properties that can easily be utilized for a ROW.

Quote:
It will not be open trench. The subway will be travelling directly under Keele between Sheppard and the Finch Hydro corridor. Where is this "Pond Road" you speak of?
Pond Road lies at the southern periphery of the campus, forming part of the ring road with Ian MacDonald Blvd.

Quote:
If you think you can just plow a subway through a cemetary, you've got another thing coming. The subway will be on the west side of Jane, not the east.
Have you even looked at the map of the alignment on the TTC's website?
No, no you misunderstood me. I didn't say those coordinates were apart of the official plan. It's just my suggestions of how the line could be built at a lesser cost. Every less dollar spent on this can go towards better projects.

Quote:
If you are proposing P3, don't.
I'm glad I not the only person opposed to building this line past the university. The present-day VIVA Orange BRT line runs very frequent such that VCC-York U would be approximately 5 mins away. With frequency like that is it really worth it to spend another billion to Highway 7? Can I ask though, what's wrong with P3s? If the Sheppard 'stubway's any indication it gonna take alot of outside funds to get adequate transit expansion programs underway in Toronto.
DENTROBATE54 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 25th, 2008, 06:09 PM   #199
Ni3lS
Moderator
 
Ni3lS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Stuttgart
Posts: 16,482
Likes (Received): 3452

Underground subways are really worth it! It's going fast, it doesn't take space above ground, so you can build skyscrapers there
__________________
MY SHOWCASE
FLICKR / MY TRAVELS:
[2016] > Norway, Valencia, Arvidsjaur, Innsbruck, Moselvalley, Geneva, Lisbon, Basel, Vosges, Munich, Trieste, Barcelona, Nürburgring, Frankfurt, Spa, Berlin, Wuppertal, Dortmund, Como, Monaco, Saint-Tropez, Tegernsee, Hamburg, Lübeck, Madrid, Stuttgart, Faro, Hochgurgl
[2017] > Düsseldorf, Mallorca, Geneva, Annecy, Montafon, Vorarlberg, Barcelona, Zürich, Crete, Lisbon, Cascais, Málaga, Ronda, Dolomiti, Sistiana, Kitzbühel
Ni3lS no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 25th, 2008, 08:31 PM   #200
TRZ
Welcome to the Rail World
 
TRZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,671
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nielsiej13 View Post
Underground subways are really worth it! It's going fast, it doesn't take space above ground, so you can build skyscrapers there
As someone that has been involved in projects where a skyscraper is built on top of an existing and in-service subway... let me tell you something; not easy. Underground does not mean "out of the way".
__________________
Pssst... your balls are showing...

EXTREEEEEEEEEEEME transit geek
TRZ no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 01:07 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium