News   Jul 12, 2024
199 Church Showcases Heritage Facade and Artwork at Street Level
 729     0 
News   Jul 12, 2024
Six Points Plaza Redevelopment Advances With 36-Storey First Phase
 669     0 
News   Jul 12, 2024
Trading Spaces: Can Real Estate Conversion Help Boost Housing Supply?
 297     0 

Toronto Crosstown LRT | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx | Arcadis

BMO said:
I think the updated ridership from the recent powerpoint released is at 12, 000 ppdp if I'm not mistaken.
Click to expand...

You're right, I just looked those up. 12,000 is much closer to subway numbers, and wouldn't have to increase that much to be at a capacity that requires a full subway.

Of course, most of that increase comes from merging the RT with the Eglinton line, and the case for that merger is that an LRT can reuse some of the RT infrastructure and alignment. If we're upgrading things to subway, then it makes more sense to go back to the original plan of merging the RT with the Bloor line. If we do that, then all of a sudden the Eglinton Line is back at clear LRT ridership levels. It's a bit of a Catch-22
 
Last edited:
SimonP said:
You're right, I just looked those up. 12,000 is much closer to subway numbers, and wouldn't have to increase that much to be at a capacity that requires a full subway.

Of course, most of that increase comes from merging the RT with the Eglinton line, and the case for that merger is that an LRT can reuse some of the RT infrastructure and alignment. If we're upgrading things to subway, then it makes more sense to go back to the original plan of merging the RT with the Bloor line. If we do that, then all of a sudden the Eglinton Line is back at clear LRT ridership levels. It's a bit of a Catch-22
Click to expand...

It is a tricky situation, I'll agree with that. Personally I think they should have gone with Mark II ICTS. It would have reduced the amount of upgrade needed to the SRT, and would have been a good compromise on capacity between LRT and HRT. Not to mention the fact that ICTS is Bombardier, which would have meant only a modification of the contract, not a cancellation.
 
Filip said:
Haha! David Gunn totally hit the nail on the head with what I think of the Eglinton streetcar-subway.

"EGLINTON: “Low-floor streetcars in a tunnel will cost you more than a subway while delivering less. I can’t for the life of me figure out how this decision was made.â€

Cost is a big selling point for light rail, but Mr. Gunn said to put it underground requires tunnels bigger than for subways, while low-floor light-rail vehicles cost twice as much as subway cars and have less capacity. “It’s just crazy, it’s insane.â€

Metrolinx says that the smaller underground stations and reusing the Scarborough RT’s right of way make light rail the more cost-effective option. Mr. Gunn responds, “That’s such nonsense, but I guess if you can defend mixing the track gauges, you can defend anything."

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...cision-ever-former-head-warns/article2086415/
Click to expand...

This is really the result of Ford's hatchet job on the Eglinton LRT and the effects of the upcoming election.
 
The other important thing with all of this is that capacity on the Yonge line is going to run out long before it will on Eglinton. The only real solution is a DRL that connects with the Eglinton Line at Don Mills. Such a connection would at the same time reduce the load on the busy Don Mills to Yonge section of the ECLRT.
 
Filip said:
Instead of building our subway network, we're introducing a new orphan technology into the TTC's mix. Say hello to your $8.6 billion SRT boondoggle for the 2010s, Toronto.
Click to expand...

To be fair, it is eliminating one orphan for another...but the difference is that LRTs are used across the world and are proven to work in our cold climate (eg. Calgary/Edmonton) and once this project is complete, extending it east to Malvern and west to the Airport will be cheaper with LRTs than subway's

If you've ever seen Calgary's LRT in action, you would have a different opinion of light-rail...Toronto is such a poor example, it is no wonder everyone is so anti-LRT
 
The vast majority of the increase in ridership for the Eglinton that result from its full grade seperation are riders who are currently riding the Bloor Danforth line. They don't need a different route and the shift of riders in no way justifies the extra cost or validates the need for a underground scheme.
 
SimonP said:
No, 5,400 was the Eglinton number from the original Transit City estimates. Here's the data from Steve Munro: http://stevemunro.ca/?p=945
Click to expand...
Oh ... that number ... that number was always very odd ... Metrolinx also modelled it as part of the Big Move - including all the other infrastructure planned by 2031 and they had 7,800. I'm assuming the new numbers come out of the still active model that Metrolinx has - rather than whatever the lowest-cost bidder for the long-completed Eglinton EA cooked up.
 
I think they made the best of the situation for what they wanted to accomplish. It's a compromise, but I'm fine with it. I would have been fine with at-grade portions of the Eglinton LRT on the west and east portions but what's done is done. If and when they extend the Eglinton line to the airport, I'm not even that concerned if it runs at-grade, below grade or above grade, as long as it doesn't have too many stops.
 
This sounds promising - a design-build-operate-maintain contract would be attractive to a private bidder and have the project one more step removed fom the beaucracy of the TTC. The Canada Line was built under a design-build-partially finance-operate-maintain contract.
I can foresee bidders proposing changes to the allignment and elevation of the line (in the "design" phase) to optimize costs.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...ver-operation-of-eglinton-lrt/article2105748/

Metrolinx, TTC in talks over operation of Eglinton LRT JOHN LORINC
From Friday's Globe and Mail
Published Friday, Jul. 22, 2011 3:00AM EDT
Last updated Friday, Jul. 22, 2011 3:02AM EDT

The TTC is now talking to Metrolinx about a possible long-term deal to maintain and operate the Eglinton Crosstown LRT, a $6-billion project being financed and built entirely by the provincially owned agency, Toronto Transit Commission sources have told The Globe and Mail.

TTC sources said Metrolinx has floated the possibility of issuing a request for proposals that asks for bids for a design-build-maintain-and-operate contract. Under the original Transit City agreement, Metrolinx was to develop and own the Eglinton line. At present, the TTC owns all its rail lines and rolling stock.

Metrolinx spokesperson Vanessa Thomas said in an e-mail statement that “the maintenance and operations of the Eglinton-Scarborough Crosstown will be determined in a future agreement. No such decision has been made at this time.”

Such a deal would mark another first, as the agency has traditionally operated all its routes. The KPMG core service review of the TTC, released this week, also raised the possibility of out-sourcing TTC routes.

Special to the Globe and Mail
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Not sure this is a good idea for the long-term. It might work out ok in the short-term when the line is new and maintenance costs are low, but what about longer-term, system-wide issues? The worst thing you can do is start to fracture a transit system that is one of the most-integrated systems in the world, and is regarded as quite impressive within the global transit industry for that very reason (regardless of what people in Toronto think about it).

And as for changing the design and alignment to lower costs, costs are already being optimized. I suppose that there may be cheaper ways of doing things if you don't have worry about impacts on surrounding areas or environments. I don't know enough about the details of the line itself, but cheaper isn't always better.
 
Once again it makes no sense. The services that have the highest passenger to vehicle ratios and which are the newest are the most efficient to run. They might be able to contract out the operation of bus routes and actually find savings. Contract out in 5 route packages with 10 year contract terms each contract starting 2 years apart. This way if one provider has a strike then 80% or your routes still operate and the ability to add a route to the network is there every two years without getting robbed for a contract change.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top