News   Aug 09, 2024
Cladding Rises on Topped Off Reina Condos in South Etobicoke
 1K     2 
News   Aug 09, 2024
UrbanToronto Industry Updates: New Partnerships, Cooling Markets, Advances in Affordable Housing
 778     0 
News   Aug 09, 2024
High-Rise Community Proposed at 401 and Brock in Pickering
 3.5K     2 

Danforth Line 2 Scarborough Subway Extension

robmausser said:
a LOT of biased misinformation in here from an angry old man who didnt get his way (as are opinion pieces often)

"No other transit authority bought the system" - Not true, it is the backbone of the Vancouver Skytrain, the Detroit People Mover, the JFK airport connection in New York, and now many other systems as the technology was taken over by Bombardier as their Innovia Metro technology used in South Korea, Malaysia, China, etc etc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombardier_Innovia_Metro

" It was supposed to be driverless. But drivers had to be added." At the insistence of the TTC. The driverless technology was excellent and has provided safe and reliable transit for decades in Vancouver. Meanwhile, 4 people lost their lives in Toronto from driver error on a TTC subway train in 1995.

The rest I agree with though, sort of. The subway is an epic waste of money, but so is the LRT.

The best bang for buck is and always was to upgrade and refurbish the existing SRT and extend it to Malvern Town Centre.

Unfortunately this opinion piece paints the SRT as some sort of failed and flawed system, so that idea gets thrown under the bus.

Its only failings and flaws are a direct result of the TTC's mismanagement of it. It works fine everywhere else. (ok maybe not Detroit but that is also because the system is woefully underbuilt)
Click to expand...

My takeaway from the piece was not that the RT is some sort of failure, but that it's the result of ignoring professional transit advice in favour of politics.

Do I agree the current RT is a white elephant? No. But a grade separated streetcar line would've made more sense.
 
At the time it was not.

In any case, I hope Maltow continues to push for accountability and a release of the updated cost. The public should know before they vote, and the candidates should be forced to voice their support (or lack thereof) based on the current cost, not rhetoric.
 
syn said:
At the time it was not.

In any case, I hope Maltow continues to push for accountability and a release of the updated cost. The public should know before they vote, and the candidates should be forced to voice their support (or lack thereof) based on the current cost, not rhetoric.
Click to expand...
Have a referendum before the election.
 
hw621 said:
Even if we put shovels in the ground today, we are looking at completion in 10 years...
Click to expand...
I thought Metrolinx used 2028 as the potential opening date in their last round of station consultations - which is why the new Lawrence East GO station is designed to function with the existing Lawrence East subway station in place.
 
nfitz said:
I thought Metrolinx used 2028 as the potential opening date in their last round of station consultations - which is why the new Lawrence East GO station is designed to function with the existing Lawrence East subway station in place.
Click to expand...
That is 10 years from now. They can easily add in 1 or 2 years in delays, at a minimum.
 
44 North said:
With the operators and operations point, was SLRT supposed to use the current yard facility? Or was there to be a new one. Also wasn't the line to be fully automated and run by the Prov - i.e no drivers.

The traction point I think is interesting. And one reason I think a simple Line 3 vehicle upgrade is better than LFLRVs. Flexity Outlook/Freedom is a tank built for street operation. Subway/metro vehicles like the Innovia or TR is way lighter.



The author definitely plays-down current ridership/demand for Line 3, which is odd and unfortunate - esp considering that he's advocating for SLRT. And with your post I agree, mostly. But I think the supposed TTC mismanagement is more attributable to the City and Prov. If anything the TTC is what's held the line together in spite of higher level decisions and fund re-allocation. The upgrades to newer rolling stock, Kennedy improvement, and Malvern extension were all ready to go well over a decade ago. Maybe two decades. But instead any new major capital funding went to extending U/S to Vaughan. Then Transit City came along, and though "fully funded", the spending wouldn't be seen for Line 3 until a decade later. And even then it was predicated on a ground-up rebuild for LFLRVs. A strange vehicle choice considering the line's fully grade-separate and what's in place now is high-level trains.

TTC will play along with all this, but they obviously don't make the key choices. Same thing with Network 2011. TTC wanted RL first, but Metro wanted Sheppard first (and built as a full-scale subway). So that's what ended up taking priority. Also from what I gather TTC was historically all about lower-cost solutions. It's usually politicians that force the higher-cost alternatives.
Click to expand...
With the LRT or even an upgrade to the SRT, they would have to completely redo the yard in order for it to accommodate the different vehicles. That would cost a lot of capital and in maintenance because they're completely different.

It's not an argument for bad management, but an argument for increased management because they have to focus on a separate line entirely.

It makes no sense that they'd go with LFLRVs...The lines are already high platforms.

Funny thing, I read somewhere that even Lastman wanted a DRL built before Sheppard, but for some reason, everyone in the city said no.
syn said:
At the time it was not.

In any case, I hope Maltow continues to push for accountability and a release of the updated cost. The public should know before they vote, and the candidates should be forced to voice their support (or lack thereof) based on the current cost, not rhetoric.
Click to expand...
I'm surprised he's playing this game, considering untrustworthy it makes him seem to be.
 
hw621 said:
2023 - 2027
Click to expand...
2023 hasn't been for a long time. The latest TTC update put opening at Q2 2026. But that assumes they issue the RFQ on-time by end of Q1 2018 - and did I miss that?

And then the 30% design complete by end of Q2 2018 ... about 70 days time. Followed by an RFP by end of Q3.

I'm a bit mystified on how they have those targets, but aren't having a cost update to council until Q1 2019.
 
amnesiajune said:
It doesn't help that Toronto gets four times more snow than Vancouver. It also doesn't help that Vancouver build a whole network of them, and we didn't. It's a lot easier to maintain 286 train cars than 28 of them.
Click to expand...
Is that any excuse, as if Vancouver does lnt rain a lot more then Toronto year round?
 
denfromoakvillemilton said:
Is that any excuse, as if Vancouver does lnt rain a lot more then Toronto year round?
Click to expand...

Rain isn't really an issue for the SRT. The problem is ice, which Vancouver isn't really prone to (they never get more than a few days a month with a high temperature below zero). It's been a problem since the SRT first opened, and newer ICTS systems in places with cold winters (namely, the JFK AirTrain) have heated rails to avoid this problem.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top