Danforth Line 2 Scarborough Subway Extension

[BurlOak]

I agree 100%. Anything can be built. And yes it costs more than the "pre package" equipment. But it's common sense. Toronto look for the easy way out and in the end wither buys a lemon or buys the Cadillac where its not required.

Which is also why the Sheppard subway should be changed into the same technology as whatever is used on Sheppard ave throughout Scarborough. How any reasonable person would even debate this type of City building is absurd.

I wonder what would be less expensive, our current plans or a grade-separated plan.

CURRENT PLAN

1. In-median LRT from Brentcliffe to Kennedy (underground Don Mills), ($600M) and
2. B-D subway extension from Kennedy to McCowan/Sheppard ($4.0B), and
3. Sheppard in-median LRT from Don Mills to Morningside ($1.0B)
4. Buy and run LRT trains on all lines.

OR MICHAEL SCHABAS STYLE PLAN

1. Grade-separated RT from Brentcliffe to Kennedy (underground Don Mills, plus tearing up +/-400m of track west from the Scenic portal and moving the tracks to the south side), ($1.0B + $200M portal adjustment) and
2. SRT refurbishment to suit new trains and extend to Malvern ($2.0B), and
3. Sheppard elevated RT from Don Mills to Kennedy GO and then STC and conversion of technology ($1.5B + $500M)), and
4. Buy and run Mark III or similar trains on all lines.

I would suspect that the current plan is more expensive and serves less people in a slower manner. In rough terms, of the top of my head, I would put the costs at $5.6B for our current plans and $5.2B for the grade-separated plan.

If you add in the the current plan has a SmartTrack tunneled under Eglinton West, while the alternative would an elevated Eglinton line and that's another Billion that we are throwing away.

The other thing to note is that the Allen-Eglinton and Yonge-Eglinton Stations are on the critical path so this portal adjustment would not even add to any delays in opening the line.

 

[nfitz]

Vancouver also just refurbished a good chunk of its original MK I trains. Did anyone from the TTC ring up TransLink and say "hey, mind giving us a few pointers?"

It's been widely reported that Translink and TTC are working together on obtaining parts, with TTC also refurbing our MK1 trains. Why do you doubt there's been communication?

 

[TOareaFan]

It's been widely reported that Translink and TTC are working together on obtaining parts, with TTC also refurbing our MK1 trains. Why do you doubt there's been communication?

Yeah, I thought that one of the costs incurred by the delay over the whole LRT/Subway debate/change/debate was that they had to refurb the cars currently in use.

 

[gweed123]

Actually, the tunnel turn means ICTS cannot pass through (anything off-the-shelf from Bombardier such as MKII or MKIII vehicles). They don't make what Toronto has any more.

I believe it's the tunnel height makes it unsuitable for LRT using pantograph, though it can handle the turn radius perfectly fine (AFAIK).

Does anybody else find it humorous that there are some people that are using the required rebuild of ~200m of existing tunnel as justification for building ~4000m of new tunnel?

 

[coffey1]

Does anybody else find it humorous that there are some people that are using the required rebuild of ~200m of existing tunnel as justification for building ~4000m of new tunnel?

I agree but there's certainly alot of humorous on all side of these absurd plans in Scarborough.

-The current tunnel & subway stub for Sheppard North York which Scarborough is expected to transfer to on a separate technology. (No reason not to integrate this properly)
-The Subway to Richmond Hill & Vaughan are much more absurd the SSE (Only SSE make the Star's headline for local Political reasons)
-The route of the current Scarborough RT is quite humorous (the industrial express route leave much to be desired)
-What about the SMLRT? If we are building a local network we should be short changing the large number of "priority people" in this City


The whole thing is a mess & its hard for Scarborough residents agree & get excited of poorly designed plans

 

[Duck]

Does anybody else find it humorous that there are some people that are using the required rebuild of ~200m of existing tunnel as justification for building ~4000m of new tunnel?

Yep. You said it perfectly. Absolutely stupid.

 

[Amare]

Does anybody else find it humorous that there are some people that are using the required rebuild of ~200m of existing tunnel as justification for building ~4000m of new tunnel?

I honestly dont even think they are using this as an excuse to build an LRT/replacement SRT for the line. I think certain politicians in the city have absolutely no idea what they're talking about and they just continue to make up random statements to justify another unjustified subway. We saw the same thing with Sheppard, and Spadina; and now Scarborough is just the latest saga.

 

[crs1026]

Does anybody else find it humorous that there are some people that are using the required rebuild of ~200m of existing tunnel as justification for building ~4000m of new tunnel?

I went looking for some hard data about what vehicles might fit in a tunnel designed for UTDC ICTS railcars, I found this:

http://greg-vassilakos.com/traindwg/traindwg.htm

It looks like lots of LRT's have a maximum height of 12 feet - 12.5 feet with pantograph lowered. A TTC TR subway car is 12 feet high.

Vancouver Skytrain cars appear to be 10 feet 8 inches in height, so one might well have to enlarge the SRT tunnel to fit an LRT in it.

I can't find any hard data about how high and wide that SRT tunnel is - can anyone help?

I'd like to see some actual facts here....I'm really wondering if the "it won't fit" claim is a matter of willpower rather than factual engineering.

- Paul

 

[CDL.TO]

I'd like to see some actual facts here....I'm really wondering if the "it won't fit" claim is a matter of willpower rather than factual engineering.

I wonder too. Or, in other words, designing the infrastructure to fit the vehicle rather than designing the vehicle to fit the infrastructure.

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

I wonder too. Or, in other words, designing the infrastructure to fit the vehicle rather than designing the vehicle to fit the infrastructure.

This is what annoys me with Sheppard. The interchange is not needed.

I want to know why a massive world city like Toronto is unable to find some vehicle manufacturer willing to design and construct an LRT vehicle that fits our requirements for the Sheppard tunnel. If Bombardier doesn't want to do it then frankly it is their loss. Some French, German, Japanese or even Chinese company would probably jump at the opportunity to get Toronto's contract.

 

[BurlOak]

I can't find any hard data about how high and wide that SRT tunnel is - can anyone help?

I'd like to see some actual facts here....I'm really wondering if the "it won't fit" claim is a matter of willpower rather than factual engineering.
- Paul

I scoured the Internet previously and found nothing.

The Official TTC report from 2006 said that the tunnel "may" have to be rebuilt to suit Mark II vehicles. (I I not sure how they could not detain this conclusively).

IIRC, my conclusion based on anecdotal info was that the height would fit and the the longer trains would have a bit of trouble negotiating the curve and the emergency walk may need to be narrowed. Of course the requirements for existing tunnels is not as severe as new ones so I think it still could fit satisfying old criteria - just as most roads do not meet current shoulder widths and even height restrictions, but we all recognize that Engineering is about balancing cost and safety.

 

[CodeMonkey]

This is what annoys me with Sheppard. The interchange is not needed.

I want to know why a massive world city like Toronto is unable to find some vehicle manufacturer willing to design and construct an LRT vehicle that fits our requirements for the Sheppard tunnel. If Bombardier doesn't want to do it then frankly it is their loss. Some French, German, Japanese or even Chinese company would probably jump at the opportunity to get Toronto's contract.

It's not just the vehicles. Transit City would be using the standard (rail) gauge while the Sheppard subways uses a customized gauge the TTC has been using for years. Add on top re-configuring the power connections, station tracks and we might as well extended the Sheppard subway for the costs and hassle of re-configuring it.

---

But back on topic; I think why this is coming back up again is the fact that the TTC might finally be dumping Bombardier for LRT vehicles over the new streetcar fiasco, and we're being pushed back into buying another rail product from Bombardier. Why else would this be brought up now?

 

[dowlingm]

This is what annoys me with Sheppard. The interchange is not needed.

I want to know why a massive world city like Toronto is unable to find some vehicle manufacturer willing to design and construct an LRT vehicle that fits our requirements for the Sheppard tunnel. If Bombardier doesn't want to do it then frankly it is their loss. Some French, German, Japanese or even Chinese company would probably jump at the opportunity to get Toronto's contract.

hang on. Isn't it only two or three weeks since this sort of nonsense was trotted out. The "it's their loss" and everything?

 

[CDL.TO]

Transit City would be using the standard (rail) gauge while the Sheppard subways uses a customized gauge the TTC has been using for years.

The wheels have to be moved outwards by one inch. That doesn't really suggest that it's going to be easier to spend $2 billion to extend the subway.

 

[CodeMonkey]

The wheels have to be moved outwards by one inch. That doesn't really suggest that it's going to be easier to spend $2 billion to extend the subway.

It's about a 2 inch difference, well more 2 3/8". Still enough to cause problems.