unimaginative2
Senior Member
The TTC is awfully lucky they have Steve Munro. He probably does the job of about 100 people at TTC headquarters. Of course, on the other hand, his biases certainly come through.
|
|
|
Transit City Plan
- Thread starter 299 bloor call control.
- Start date
Dan416
Senior Member
On the other hand, if we didn't have Morono then we'd probably be getting a network of subways rather than LRTs and we'd be arguing the various merits of a subway to the airport versus a subway to Not!Malvern.
scarberiankhatru
Senior Member
The same local councillors strongly supported replacing the RT with a subway extension for just long enough to get people excited about the possibility of positive, tangible change in Scarborough...any chance they're pulling Steve Munro's leg and will end up choosing the obvious better option and complete a half-finished subway line? Hmm, I didn't think so, either. I'm sure they were told that LRT is "cheaper" and/or "better" than the subway extension that's been planned for decades and they changed their minds in seconds flat before rushing out of the room to go comment on whatever silly thing Rob Ford just said.
The Sheppard streetcar will also certainly snuff out the 190, a wildly successful, useful, quick, cheap improvement over existing bus service. We probably won't see any more Rocket routes started up...the benefits of not needing an EA, a billion dollars of capital, and many years of construction are totally cancelled out by the fact that a few people that don't even live in the suburbs think buses are icky.
The Sheppard streetcar will also certainly snuff out the 190, a wildly successful, useful, quick, cheap improvement over existing bus service. We probably won't see any more Rocket routes started up...the benefits of not needing an EA, a billion dollars of capital, and many years of construction are totally cancelled out by the fact that a few people that don't even live in the suburbs think buses are icky.
Voltz
Senior Member
On the other hand, they tried getting a network of subway lines several years ago and all we got was 4 stops on sheppard. arguing about who does and does not gets a line and who gets the best technology got us nowhere
scarberiankhatru
Senior Member
^ The same thing would happen today with the Transfer City lines if the boroughs weren't amalgamated. The Transfer City plan wiped the slate clean and started over, preventing turf wars by denying anyone the chance to comment or input ideas, which is one reason why they're in such a hurry to get it built.
ShonTron
Moderator
Member Bio
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 12,524
- Reaction score
- 9,492
- Location
- Ward 13 - Toronto Centre
Here's the first "progress" post in this thread, called "Progress on Transit City".
The first Sheppard East EA meeting is scheduled for April 7, 2008. Mark your calendars - I will try to attend.
I suggest reading Steve Munro's latest post on Transit City, it comes with the presentation made at the last commission meeting.
Also, read the comments in the post about the possbility of extending the Sheppard Subway to Vic Park to address the difficulty of the transfer between subway and streetcar and serve Consumers Road and a major north-south route at a more logical terminus.
The first Sheppard East EA meeting is scheduled for April 7, 2008. Mark your calendars - I will try to attend.
I suggest reading Steve Munro's latest post on Transit City, it comes with the presentation made at the last commission meeting.
Also, read the comments in the post about the possbility of extending the Sheppard Subway to Vic Park to address the difficulty of the transfer between subway and streetcar and serve Consumers Road and a major north-south route at a more logical terminus.
Dan416
Senior Member
The fact that this ill-hatched Transfer City plan has to consider EXTENDING the subway by one stop to build an LRT the rest of the way is ridiculous and Morono's objection to even that shows his inherent bias.
Once you get a TBM (or a dozen or more, like Madrid), you should be using them constantly, on multiple lines. The more subway you build, the cheaper it gets per km. Yet apparently we've learned nothing from Metrolinx's visit to Spain. Instead we'll likely be stuck with Spadina LRTs all over the city in inappropriate corridors.
nfitz
Superstar
Oh come on ... how much are you going to save per km. Your primary expenses are stations, track, signalling, trains, and the tunnel itself. None of this is saved because you are digging more track. Some management costs perhaps. So you drop the cost per km from say $200 million to $198 million - it really doesn't change much
I beg to differ. The one thing they concluded was that part of the reason it was built faster there, is they weren't stuck with such a cumbersome EA process. And that certainly has been fixed quickly!
ShonTron
Moderator
Member Bio
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 12,524
- Reaction score
- 9,492
- Location
- Ward 13 - Toronto Centre
Could you at least call Steve Munro by his real name? It really hurts your arguments stooping so low. I don't agree with his stance when it comes to the Sheppard East corridor, but he's no moron.
CDL.TO
Moderator
Sorry that I don't have the numbers here right in front of me, but savings are more substantial than that. If you're building more tunnel you're logically building more stations and signals and the such as well. What has been discovered in Madrid and Moscow, is if you have constant subway construction you end up with construction workers and engineers who are highly skilled at building subways... you end up with tradesmen who specialize in the tasks required to build subways. When you only build a line every decade or two, the wheel needs to be reinvented each time and workers need to be trained each time and retrained while on the job because they must preform multiple tasks. In Madrid, because all work is always ongoing, you're able to have the same people working on the same task constantly, whether it is building tunnels, laying track, installing subway lighting, tiling stations, etc etc etc. MASSIVE economies of scale!
Think of it as being like house construction. A suburban subdivision home builder can throw up houses quickly and efficiently because he has constantly moving teams of carpenters, electricians, drywallers, plumbers, painters, etc. All constantly working on their specialty and moving from job site to job site. But here in Toronto we have no choice but to hire 10 non-specialised construction workers and tell them to "build a house".
So yeah, the savings in Madrid are considerably more than 1%, but I don't have the exact figures in front of me. They also do some other things that save money, like single tunnels with two tracks as opposed to double tunnels here in Toronto.
As for the EAs, that just slows down the amount of time until construction can start. It doesn't effect the amount of time it takes to actually build a line.
allabootmatt
Senior Member
I always wondered about tunnel profile. It seems like most European metro trains are considerably narrower than Toronto's; London (in the deep-level tubes) and indeed Madrid's in particular. If that is a sufficient saving in width to bring down construction costs substantially in Madrid's case it's definitely something worth examining.
In London, on the other hand, tube construction is definitely not cheap, although that might have something to do with the seemingly boundless English capacity for mismanagement of public works and the ludicrously overbuilt stations.
In London, on the other hand, tube construction is definitely not cheap, although that might have something to do with the seemingly boundless English capacity for mismanagement of public works and the ludicrously overbuilt stations.
Panzerfaust
Active Member
Oh hahaha I see what you did there. Morono instead of Munro because he's a moron, am I right?
I suppose if you're willing to dip to schoolyard insults, I can call you a big fat poop head, then? Whether you agree with him or not, he's done a hell of a lot more for transit in this city than you or I ever have, and that's worthy of a lot more respect than calling him "Morono" like it's some sort of epic insult.
RedRocket191
Senior Member
The reason is more from the limitations of the technology of the time. London's Northern Line uses narrow trains because the tunnels were hand dug in the 1880s. It's really a marvel of technology for the time, and I couldn't even imagine the kinds of conditions workers experienced.
Here here
allabootmatt
Senior Member
Yes, but even the newer deep-level tunnels are equally narrow (and short!)--like the Victoria.
Dan416
Senior Member
Mr. Munro is credited with saving our streetcars in the past. I'm sure Toronto will be ever grateful for that, especially since we're lucky enough to have the (slow) streetcar network we have. But his current blind devotion to LRTs is not worthy of respect from a rational person. A rational person would say, use the right tool for the right job, not just one technology that has yet to be proven to be as fast as subway in Toronto.
Furthermore, Mr. Munro is more than happy to blindside the entire city with this LRT plan that has had no consultation whatsoever and get the LRT process started before councillors have a chance to say, "you know what, this corridor should really be a subway, especially since it has an EA already DONE to be a subway, and has always been planned as such, and forcing a transfer where one shouldn't exist is silly". But no, he'd rather shove LRT down Toronto's throats. If the TTC could prove that LRT was worthwhile, then maybe I wouldn't mind so much. But if taking the Eglinton Crosstown LRT is as fast as taking the Queen streetcar, transit in Toronto will be a disaster. I suppose it all comes down to how the TTC designs these LRTs, but I don't have much faith in the TTC right now. We have TWO subways going to York Region, and nowhere else.