News   Jul 17, 2024
Side-by-Side The Davisville and Uovo Top Off on Yonge in Midtown
 527     0 
News   Jul 17, 2024
Midtown Resubmission Adds Height, Density, Matches Adjacent Proposal
 1.5K     2 
News   Jul 17, 2024
News Roundup for July 17, 2024
 631     0 

Monorail for Toronto

Did some checking and according to the Wall Street Journals "Has the age of monorails finally arrived" article of 2011, the just 18km of the Chonquin Monorail built in 2005 is already carrying 350,000 passengers per day with 2 new monorails lines opening by the end of the year. The new Sao Paulo 25km line to be completed by 2014 is projected to have ridership levels of up to 500,000 passengers per day...........in other words, the Yonge Line.
 
ssiguy2 said:
Did some checking and according to the Wall Street Journals "Has the age of monorails finally arrived" article of 2011, the just 18km of the Chonquin Monorail built in 2005 is already carrying 350,000 passengers per day with 2 new monorails lines opening by the end of the year. The new Sao Paulo 25km line to be completed by 2014 is projected to have ridership levels of up to 500,000 passengers per day...........in other words, the Yonge Line.
Click to expand...

hehe... Guess that makes the Yonge line nothing more than a tourist line.
 
nfitz said:
Why would he have said monorail if he meant any type of elevated transit. We have two elevated transit systems in Toronto already, and neither are monorail. Even I don't think that Doug Ford is that stupid. He said it for a reason ... presumably it's what the financiers whispering in his ear are using.

However, I confess I haven't seen the CTV interview. Do you have a URL?
Click to expand...

Here is the link.

I think he used to word monorail just to refer to elevated transit and not a monorail specifically. To quote him "an above ground people mover". Monorail sounds sexier though :p.
 
Even though everyone is entitled to post their opinions and ideas, I am beginning to feel that this thread ran its course a long time ago and it's now basically one forumer's personal plaything.

The idea that any North American city (including, and perhaps particularly, Toronto) will consider a monorail as a serious mode of rapid transit is pretty slim. This isn't because monorails are ineffective, but because transportation planning is, by its nature, a very conservative endeavour. Every rapid transit line ever built in North America is some variation of heavy rail, light rail or bus* - modes which have existed since 1910. The reason they're confined to these three forms is because engineers know how to build them, suppliers know how to supply them and operators know how to operate them. The other reason is that they work: there is no capacity parameter, speed requirement, space or cost constraint that isn't well handled by some variation of the three existing modes, so there isn't some "magic sweet spot" for monorails to enter the market and totally dominate.

Transportation planning has been an evolutionary, and not a revolutionary process. Even events that seemed to usher in a "sea change" in the world of transportation - like the light rail rennaisance in the late 1970s - took place not because places like Edmonton and San Diego discovered some newfangled way to transport people, but because planners and engineers needed a replacement vehicle for century-old interurban lines in non-decaying cities like San Francisco, Boston and, yes, Toronto. The BRT "revolution" is the ultimate in evolutionary transport innovation - transit operators with an aversion to trying out a new technology putting their old workhorses (i.e. buses) to new uses.

If we still use the same fundamental modes of transportation from a hundred years ago to move people around, why would we try anything different now? Another way of asking the same question would be to recognize that monorail technology has been around for about 60 years and has failed to catch on in a substantial way anywhere outside of some Asian cities. Why would that change now?





*There's also "ferry-based rapid transit"; again, a mode which has existed since - well - humans decided to transport themselves over water.
 
superman said:
Here is the link.

I think he used to word monorail just to refer to elevated transit and not a monorail specifically. To quote him "an above ground people mover". Monorail sounds sexier though :p.
Click to expand...
Thanks ...

... doesn't make any sense what he's saying. It's going to start at Union station, head west to ACC, Ontario Place ... then east to the Pan Am Games??? But before it gets to the Pan Am games, it will go through the Portlands on Cherry street? Where on earth does the think the Pan Am Games are? Have people listened to this ... it's absolutely absurd ... the man is completely clueless in terms of geography!

Has Doug Ford ever been east of Etobiocoke before he was elected councillor? Given how clueless his comments are, I suppose Monorail could mean anything ...
 
It has been conformed that "monorail" was simply Doug Ford's shorthand for "elevated people mover" or some other form of higher order transit. Several articles at this point. It was a stupid choice of words considering how predictable the opposition would be, as is the the wording of "mega mall". 1.6 million square feet is similar in size to Yorkdale and Square One and while they're both sizable malls, they wouldn't exactly be classed as "mega malls" like West Edmonton. If it's similar in function to the Eatin Centre, but with better integration on all sides at street level, it could work well as an anchor to their entire area which will be largely residential also.
 
Waahooo! Monorail! (sorry, had to say it. lol)

Springfield_Monorail.png
 
Hipster Duck......
I don't know why you think this thread has run it's course, the simple fact that it is getting a lot of responses states otherwise.
It's probably more relevant now than ever for Toronto as you have a mayor who is considering it for Toronto and there increasing awareness of how the Eglinton LRT will probably be the most expensive LRT system ever built. There is a growing awareness in Toronto , and this site, that Toronto is going to have to pull it's literal head out of the ground and start seriously considering elevated transit like the rest of the planet. It's fixation on expensive suburban subways is what has brought mass/rapid transit to a near screetching halt. Due to this monorails are certainly one option that should be considered especially as many large world cities are embracing it for their mass/rapid transit systems.
Also you state that cities have only built heavy rail, LRT, or commuter rail but now more than ever that is changing not only with monorail but guided buses, monorail, SkyTrain, maglev, and people movers.
Perhaps the problem is that Toronto has failed to embrace new technology is the problem?
 
leopetr said:
It's not a proposal. It's a story to cover-up the actual plan, which is to sell off land in the portlands at firesale prices so they can avoid raising property taxes for another year. It's a plan to squander long term assets in order to buy short-term votes. There's never going to be a monorail.
Click to expand...

What he said.
 
ssiguy2 said:
It's probably more relevant now than ever for Toronto as you have a mayor who is considering it for Toronto and there increasing awareness of how the Eglinton LRT will probably be the most expensive LRT system ever built.
Click to expand...

This is the mayor that turned the Eglinton LRT into the most expensive LRT and is focused on delivering an expensive Sheppard Subway. The fact he is considering the monorail isn't based on some in depth analysis on cost recovery, but is instead a reflection of the fact he sees monorail as a perfect pairing with tourist and amusement type activities.

It is nice that you are a monorail fan, but get real. Monorails aren't getting much consideration in cities which already have a subway or LRT system. Elevated rail isn't getting much consideration in residential areas in the democratic world. All the places LRT has been proposed in Toronto involved crossing traffic at grade... it is cheaper than grade separation and monorails can't do at grade crossings. All the places subways have been proposed are at grade or below grade except when crossing rivers or streets. In all the places LRT and Subway has been proposed there is no cost benefit of using monorail. Only the current SRT and airport people mover make sense as monorail, and with both a subway and LRT reaching Kennedy in the future it doesn't make sense to use monorail on the SRT route in the future because using subway or LRT provides through service. How many underground monorail stations exist in the world? Since the 60s how many new kilometers of elevated subway lines have created? It isn't popular with the electorate and the electorate decides who gets in to power.
 
Eglinton LRT is also not an option as Metrolinx and the TTC have confirmed that the line will be automated which means completely grade separation which leaves only 2 alternatives.........tunnel or elevate.
I fail to understand why you think this thread has run it's course. The fact that you have a mayor who is even considering a monorail for Toronto than what better time for a "Monorail for Toronto" thread?
Why have DRL or Yonge extension threads when, at a Toronto rapid/mass transit expansion rate, won't even be considered for atleast 20 years, if ever?
I would never have started a Monorail for Toronto thread except for the fact that Bombardier is becoming a major player in the field. This is why I have always thought the aversion to proprietary technology is laughable bordering on childish when discussing transit in Toronto.
Tell me..........when was the last time ANY TTC rail contracts weren't given to Bombardier? Toronto {and Montreal} have, and will only have, one supplier. If Bombardier stopped making rail technology and decided to go back to horse n buggy Toronto would be the first city to buy the new stage coaches. The TTC goes thru the standard public relations exercise of putting contracts up fo tender but it's a cruel joke. Siemens could offer a buy-on-get-one-free sale on it's new LRT trains and it wouldn't make a hoot difference. I remember when they were deciding who to "choose" who would get the streetcar legacy contract and how ridiculous it was. Anyone who didn't think Bombardier would get the contract needed their head examined and the board of the TTC knew it.
This is why I have always considered monorail an option for Toronto. The tunneled LRT will cost MORE than a tunneled subway, monorail,or SkyTrain as I phoned and asked the Eglinton LRT office and she acknowledged that. She flat out acknowledged that the tunnel costs for all three are the same but the LRT will cost more due to the extra expense of the overhead power supply.
SkyTrain has worked very well in Vancouver and has proven itself to be efficient, reliable, and safe. The new MK11 cars are also very quiet, roomy, bright, and comfortable. It has had problems in the snow and cold weather but much of that has been over come and would not at all be an issue if it installed the rail heating mechanisms. The trouble with the SkyTrain is that it is a pricey technology which is why it was never the success that Bombardier hoped for.
I think Bombardier has acknowledged this as it no longer seems to be pushing the technology and has shifted it's emphasis to the new Innovia Monorail systems which are probably the best new system out there due to their very light weight, ease of maintenance, and versatility. The fact that Bombardier just announced last month that it is investing $30 million into a new track to test and showcase the system in Kingston bears this out. It is, of course, getting a little "extra funds" courtesy of Queen's Park because, as I stated, Bombardier has a stranglhold on Ontario and Quebec.
Monorail is cost effective, safe, reliable, affordable, flexible but most importantly it is manufactured by Bombardier and we can bitch and complain about that til we are blue in the face but we all know that that is priority #1.
 
ssiguy2 said:
I fail to understand why you think this thread has run it's course. The fact that you have a mayor who is even considering a monorail for Toronto than what better time for a "Monorail for Toronto" thread?
Click to expand...

This thread has run its course when you start using the exact same talking points in the same order from a previous thread. For example:

Hipster Duck......
I don't know why you think this thread has run it's course...
It's probably more relevant now than ever for Toronto as you have a mayor who is considering it for Toronto
Click to expand...

With respect to

Also you state that cities have only built heavy rail, LRT, or commuter rail but now more than ever that is changing not only with monorail but guided buses, monorail, SkyTrain, maglev, and people movers.
Click to expand...

"Skytrain", or ICTS, is just subway/metro technology with linear induction motors - nothing revolutionary there. There are only a handful of guided busways, none in North America and no big push to develop them; only one commercial maglev line exists, and there are no plans to expand it. As for people movers? There are probably fewer rapid transit (eg. non-airport or private facility) people movers in existence in North America now than there was in 1990, now that the Tandy Metro has been decommissioned. The Miami Metromover, Las Colinas APT and JTA Skyway are universally panned as being expensive, white elephant gadgetbahns that have lower ridership than most bus circulators.
 
I agree although I know the Miami Metromover and JTA Skyway are not monorail but I appreciate what you state. I also think they were a horrid waste of money but lacked understanding of urban planning. The Sydney monorail also falls into that category.
Let me make this clear so there are no misunderstandings................I would strongly OPPOSE any tonka-toy circular route that I fear the Portlands Monorail may become. I have never thought circular routes were good for anything but amuzement parks and airports. I would also never endorse any elevated line that go thru already established older neighbourhoods like Queen, King, central Eglinton. Elevated transit is ideal as it is much cheaper than tunneling and faster than at grade but one never wants to undermine the city's social vitality. Any Portland Monorail that is built for true mass/rapid transit would go roughly via a rail ROW in new development. Same for Eglinton.....tunnel from DM to Jane but elevate thru the Golden Mile as to do otherwise is an obscene waste of funds. The entire Spadina Ext should have been elevated to VCC including thru YorkU.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top