Quote:
Originally Posted by Kitchissippi
Scrapping the existing tunnel under the Queensway and building another one with a 90 degree bend would likely cost way more than what can be saved.
|
The 90 degree bend I'm not thrilled with, but it is of 45-50 metre radius and right beside a station so the train will be going slowly any way. Since most new LRVs can handle 15-20m radius curves there should be little problem getting around the curve.
As for the cost, there is the construction of a single rail line, most of which can be at grade, although it might be better to put the east part into a trench to remove the up/down of the 417 underpass then the VIA underpass. I would suggest that the Belfast Overpass could be lengthened to accomodate a surface line under it.
My route has roughly 2600m of rail line, while the Staff plan has 3200m, including the 700m spur to the Yard.
I expect that the total cost of putting a new tunnel under the 417 is not going to eat up a huge amount of money: The estimate for adding a rail tunnel under the Queensway for the Lincoln Fields to Baseline stretch was $20M. I expect that this tunnel would not be more than $50M.
So, $150M saved from not building the BRT lanes, a shorter length of rail, but an extra $50M spent for the new underpass. Still sounds as if my plan comes out ahead.
Threaded Mode