nfitz
Superstar
I haven't seen such drawings called as-builts though. But that could explain the Waterfront Toronto update that otherwise seems rather unusual.
|
|
|
TTC: Other Items (catch all)
- Thread starter drum118
- Start date
wopchop
Building Toronto
I've seen them referred to as as-built drawings before. Generally, we don't encounter them as such in industry, as as-built drawings in contractual language typically refer to drawings that contractors or subcontractors would provide to clients of work just performed for them. I have though, been provided or been asked to provide, as-built drawings of structures (created by others) for a new project.
To me, it sounds like someone made an as-built drawing and made a wrong assumption regarding the footings. It would make sense with the way the article is written.
Unless the original as-built drawings do exist and are in fact wrong. But the footing thing seems like a weird mistake for the original builders to make.
Last edited:
drum118
Superstar
I can assure you that as built, original drawings and etc can say one thing until you open things up and find it totally different than what the plan call for.
Ask TTC about the electrical prpblems they had for St Clair W station when the contractor was digging up live wire that weren't supposed to be there in the first place as they weren't on any plans TTC had. Seams some work took place in the past on moving lines and wires, but no one updated the master plan.
Contractor have in the past have cheap out on projects when no one is looking to save a few buck that what they were building didn't comply with the bid contract drawings.
I have come upon both new construction drawing as well as built one where my work required major rework so it met the site condition, costing $1,000 or $10,000 to make it work.
I have seen footings and wall bearings totally screw up that they had to be dug out and reconstructed correctly at huge cost to the sub or contractor. Remember seeing footings for a 3 story steel build that 80% of it was wrong. The steel fabricator had to re-detail the shop drawing showing how to cut up the steel for the project to match the footing layout. This set the project back 3 months.
Saying the footing for the bridge were built wrong compared to the drawings can be true since we weren't around at the time to see what when wrong back then.
One hopes when doing reno or adding to a building that the correct info are on the plans. I also add extra funds to try to cover the surprise surprise that may surface and where I can back charge or ask for more money though change orders.
wopchop
Building Toronto
Yes, I agree. Nothing that I said in any way should indicate otherwise. I've been around long enough to know that there are always surprises on site.
doug
Active Member
You set the tone for my response.
nfitz
Superstar
What in my initial post - http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/showthread.php/20264-TTC-Other-Items-(catch-all)?p=944635#post944635 set the tone for your response:
?
Nobina
New Member
Free public transit
I found this a very interesting read: Free public transit in Tallinn is a hit with riders but yields unexpected results
In Tallinn, Estonia, since January 2013, residents of the capital city are entitled to unlimited free rides on trams, commuter trains, and buses or trolley buses within the city limits. The costs are recovered through taxes. Riders still have to buy a smart card and tap on and off each vehicle, and carry proof of residence. The main motive for this is to encourage residents who aren't registered as residents of Tallinn to register and start paying taxes to the city. There are about 40,000 of these unregistered residents.
This could never work in Toronto - the only reason it works in Tallinn is because transit is heavily subsidized to begin with. But it does raise some good points, such as what Singapore is experimenting with to alleviate congestion: Transit authorities offer commuters in Singapore free off-peak fares in effort to alleviate morning rush, by offering free subway service to riders exiting at 16 central stations before 7:45am.
Once Presto is implemented in Toronto, we can introduce variable pricing, so fares vary by time of day. This gives people an incentive to change their travel patterns. Fares can be set to penalize those who travel on certain routes when rush hour is at its worst. We can also tie fares in with income like Helsinki, Finland does, so if you earn more, you pay more.
What I would like to see done is expanding the network of 140-series routes, having all-day two-way, regular fare service. Some of the routes need to be adjusted to terminate at more logical places, e.g. it would make sense for the 144 to terminate at Don Mills Station instead of VP/Ellesmere.
I would just like to add, it's good to see Tallinn moving away from the old Soviet-era trams and commuter trains, with the recent orders of 16 CAF-built trams, and 38 Stadler Flirt commuter trains (18 EMUs and 20 DMUs). Tallinn is also planning to extend their tram network to the airport and ferry terminals in 2017.
I found this a very interesting read: Free public transit in Tallinn is a hit with riders but yields unexpected results
In Tallinn, Estonia, since January 2013, residents of the capital city are entitled to unlimited free rides on trams, commuter trains, and buses or trolley buses within the city limits. The costs are recovered through taxes. Riders still have to buy a smart card and tap on and off each vehicle, and carry proof of residence. The main motive for this is to encourage residents who aren't registered as residents of Tallinn to register and start paying taxes to the city. There are about 40,000 of these unregistered residents.
This could never work in Toronto - the only reason it works in Tallinn is because transit is heavily subsidized to begin with. But it does raise some good points, such as what Singapore is experimenting with to alleviate congestion: Transit authorities offer commuters in Singapore free off-peak fares in effort to alleviate morning rush, by offering free subway service to riders exiting at 16 central stations before 7:45am.
Once Presto is implemented in Toronto, we can introduce variable pricing, so fares vary by time of day. This gives people an incentive to change their travel patterns. Fares can be set to penalize those who travel on certain routes when rush hour is at its worst. We can also tie fares in with income like Helsinki, Finland does, so if you earn more, you pay more.
What I would like to see done is expanding the network of 140-series routes, having all-day two-way, regular fare service. Some of the routes need to be adjusted to terminate at more logical places, e.g. it would make sense for the 144 to terminate at Don Mills Station instead of VP/Ellesmere.
I would just like to add, it's good to see Tallinn moving away from the old Soviet-era trams and commuter trains, with the recent orders of 16 CAF-built trams, and 38 Stadler Flirt commuter trains (18 EMUs and 20 DMUs). Tallinn is also planning to extend their tram network to the airport and ferry terminals in 2017.
muller877
Senior Member
Finland didn't think that through very well....the more you make the more you can afford to drive downtown and pay for parking. So its already hard to convince the wealthy to move to public transit. If your goal is to get cars off the road, you actually have to give the rich a larger incentive (i.e. better/quicker service transit then driving). Without this incentive you actually have to create a wider gap in pricing (lowering the cost of transit perhaps to be even cheaper than the less-well off). I know, counterintuative to the "progressives" out there but that's what an economic model will show you.
The UK encourages the "creative" class to have flexible shifts. That is, they have to be in the office from 10-3 but can come in early or stay late. This in conjunction with very large changes in the cost of transit (50-100% higher in rush hour) has smoothed out rush hour. But the 2 policies have to go hand-in-hand.
aquateam
Active Member
There are three classes of commuters:
1) Commuters who don't own cars/can't afford a car and are beholden to public transit
2) Commuters who don't have access to effective public transit and need to drive
3) Commuters to whom both driving and public transit are options
Trying to get people to take public transit instead of driving means that group 3 needs to be targeted.
Of people who have the choice, their decision is influenced by:
A) Cost
B) Travel time
C) Comfort/Convenience
Making transit free eliminates A) for transit users, but given that transit is already (usually) the cheapest option, this is unlikely to improve ridership significantly. If more people from group 1 (captive transit users) take transit (because it's now free) instead of walking/not making trips, you might actually see more cars on the road because people would rather drive than take overcrowded buses. In the case of wealthier people, reducing the cost of transit to below that of poorer people is a bad idea because cost is already not the main factor in their decision.
Reducing the cost of transit (such as by constraining the rises in fares) might actually cause transit ridership to drop if it deprives the transit agency of revenue for service improvements.
If you want to improve transit's mode share by changing the cost part of the decision process, it's more effective to add a marginal cost to drivers (who don't directly see a cost for each trip, unlike transit users). Congestion charges and parking fees mean that they would see a cost for each trip (instead of them seeing lump costs for irregular fill-ups and for insurance/maintenance fees.)
W. K. Lis
Superstar
DSC
Superstar
Member Bio
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2008
- Messages
- 18,998
- Reaction score
- 26,416
- Location
- St Lawrence Market Area
This was certainly the proposal from TTC Management - has it actually been approved yet? Has the budget for it been found? (I think not, yet)
aquateam
Active Member
They put out the proposal, but I think it's a question for the next city council to decide whether or not to fund it. Tory seemed put off by it.
Time-based transfers would be nice. Normally I get around the TTC rules whenever there is a Proof of Payment transfer from bus to subway but it would be good to be able to actually get off where there isn't a transfer and get back on.
the lemur
Senior Member
I haven't been able to find any information on this income-based fare system. I know Finland has income-based fines for traffic violations, though.
Nobina
New Member
Right you are, and a few years back the CEO of Nokia got a speeding ticket for over 100,000 euros. This is a fair system.
But in regards to income-based fares. I probably should've elaborated more. The average rider will pay the regular advertised fare, while those on welfare, disablility, etc. are eligible for income-based fares. These are applied automatically to your card when you get it registered, like concession fares are.
PL1
Active Member
Tallinn is in Estonia, not Finland