News   Jul 19, 2024
Menkes' Maison 77 Clarendon Topped Off in South Hill
 849     0 
News   Jul 19, 2024
TTC's Next Big Step: Replacing Rick Leary
 3.7K     7 
News   Jul 19, 2024
Third Phase of Quad Residences Advances at York University
 1.2K     3 

Danforth Line 2 Scarborough Subway Extension

Voltz said:
They mentioned they are having trouble getting bids for the carhouse because of the uncertainty.
Click to expand...

I thought the constuction of these lines was going P3. If so, why is this maintenance facility not put into the main contract. That way it gives some flexibility to the P3 Contractor to eliminate the maintenance facility and use McCowan instead, and perhaps switch to Skytrain if there are bonuses for reducing the closure time on the SRT.
 
BurlOak said:
I thought the constuction of these lines was going P3. If so, why is this maintenance facility not put into the main contract. That way it gives some flexibility to the P3 Contractor to eliminate the maintenance facility and use McCowan instead, and perhaps switch to Skytrain if there are bonuses for reducing the closure time on the SRT.
Click to expand...

They need the maintenance facility for Sheppard anyway and the McCowan yard is not big enough, I don't think that time or money could be saved if the line was switched back to Skytrain.
 
Surprised about the negative reaction. My understanding is that it is early enough that changes can be made, and this is a far better corridor to build in compared to where the RT is now (which never managed to spawn development, though zoning may have played a part in that).

If it is beyond the point of no return and it would add another decade to any completion, then I agree it is better to stick to the current plan.
 
i support BD subway, but I doubt this changes anything since TO doesn't have an appetite to pay for the additional cost of a subway

Though it seems feasible that it could be paid by cutting from the budget...$1B over 15 years is $67M...the vehicle tax was that much and the budget still balanced...and while a large amount, as a percentage of each year operating budget it is not that much...

seems like it could be done if we wanted to...
 
Electrify said:
Surprised about the negative reaction. My understanding is that it is early enough that changes can be made, and this is a far better corridor to build in compared to where the RT is now (which never managed to spawn development, though zoning may have played a part in that).

If it is beyond the point of no return and it would add another decade to any completion, then I agree it is better to stick to the current plan.
Click to expand...

Because Toronto never seems to stick to anything, that's why. You want the BD extension you should have bargained with Ford and the province 4 years ago, not the last six months. I'm tired of this crap. Pick a plan and stick to it.
 
Voltz said:
They need the maintenance facility for Sheppard anyway and the McCowan yard is not big enough, I don't think that time or money could be saved if the line was switched back to Skytrain.
Click to expand...

The TTC report from 2006 (http://www.toronto.ca/srtstudy/pdf/srt-strategic-plan-report.pdf) stated that the LRT would be 36% more expensive ($490M versus $360M for Skytrain) and the closure would be 350% longer (36 months versus 8 months for Skytrain).
 
BurlOak said:
The TTC report from 2006 (http://www.toronto.ca/srtstudy/pdf/srt-strategic-plan-report.pdf) stated that the LRT would be 36% more expensive ($490M versus $360M for Skytrain) and the closure would be 350% longer (36 months versus 8 months for Skytrain).
Click to expand...

Do you not realize how old that report is?

It predates Transit City, does not include the extension in the cost estimate and has numerous other faults.

If it was accurate and realistic then the TTC would not have decided to switch to LRT.
 
Voltz said:
Do you not realize how old that report is?

It predates Transit City, does not include the extension in the cost estimate and has numerous other faults.

If it was accurate and realistic then the TTC would not have decided to switch to LRT.
Click to expand...

It was a more impartial report written before Transit City was derived and the conclusion of all reports had to favour LRT. David Miller, and the left of City Council, and the provincial Liberals, invested heavily (political capital) in Transit City and the result of all studies after this date seemed to magically favour LRT. Those same people still have significant power and they do not want their previous decisions revisited.

The absolute dollars can not be used due to inflation and the lack of costing of the extension, but the relative savings do exist for this conversion.

The public acceptance of this Skytrain model would also go up significantly if it were connected to an elevated Eglinton line.

BTW, this report also shows that the B-D subway extension is by far more expensive, but we still have significant numbers of people who support the B-D extension who also say that we must listen to the experts.
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
BurlOak:

I bring you to a summary by Steve Munro on said report:

http://stevemunro.ca/?p=217

I found the "gaming of the facts" interesting, from the perspective back in 2006 vis-a-vis Soberman's own preferences and the "greater network".

AoD
Click to expand...

I don’t buy this network stuff very much at all.

Finch West and the Scarborough Malvern lines are the best examples of what an LRT should be – at grade for most of the length and then underground for a transfer to a major node. However, these two, and most of the rest of Transit City are actually well within the ridership numbers of BRT. The other advantage of LRT would be branching or interlining, where two lines come together for a grade-separated portion nearing the busier core – but none are planned for the entire “networkâ€. Even Sheppard only warrants BRT for most of its length – maybe in conjunction with a short subway extension (east and west).

They planned all sorts of transit lines, mostly LRT, got funding for only 4, and now none of the others are even being considered for future funding or future phases. Even those 4 are continually being delayed because everyone knows how unpopular and unworkable they are.

If you look at the SRT, the extension to Malvern is fully grade separated, so there is no benefit to LRT. Also, the line stops at Kennedy and doesn’t go farther – meaning it is a stand alone line and not part of a continuous network.

Eglinton has well over 50% of the length being underground at high cost and the portion through Scarborough can easily and cheaply be elevated to allow for faster and more reliable service using automated running. The only reason in-median LRT is being considered is because most of Scarborough is being forced to transfer instead of taking the natural route that would minimize their inconvenience.

The idea that Miller, Munro, et al had about LRT did not come true when the lines progressed through design and I think it is now quit debatable whether we would have been better off with SkyTrain being used for ECLRT, SRT and DRL – and then BRT for the rest. (Of course along with some improvement to GO fares, frequencies, and connectivities).
 
You don't have to "buy it" - the author of the report you've quoted made that point, and you chose to cherry pick the bits that happens to fit your view and justify your thesis - and need I remind you, said report predated Transit City by a year. At this point, just build the damn thing as LRT - if necessary, it can be reconnected to Eglinton, elevated, whatever later on.

AoD
 
Last edited:
I think the most recent report of LRT vs Skytrain (or whatever name Bombardier is marketing it as these days) is the Metrolinx Benefits Case report from 2009.
Base Case is defined as the replacement of the aging MKI vehicles along with any
infrastructure improvements to the existing line between Kennedy and McCowan stations
that are required to accommodate the new vehicles. The anticipated improvements will
increase capacity to 7,000 passengers per hour per direction by 2031 from today’s 4,500
passengers per hour per direction.

Option 1 includes all the upgrades in the Base Case with a 5.4 km extension to the Malvern
Town Centre utilizing the existing technology.

Option 2 includes all the upgrades assumed in the Base Case plus an extension of the SRT
technology to a new terminus station at Markham/Sheppard. At Markham/Sheppard, the
SRT will connect to the in-street Sheppard East LRT service running eastbound along
Sheppard. The extension to Malvern Town Centre along Neilson Road from Sheppard
Avenue has been included within this option.

Option 3 has similar alignment to Option 1 (extension to Malvern Town Centre) but with
light rail technology (LRT). The line would run in the existing right-of-way and, where
possible, utilize the existing guideway between Kennedy and McCowan Stations, and then
extend from McCowan to Malvern Town Centre along an exclusive right-of-way.

Option 4 has the same alignment and LRT technology as Option 3, but between McCowan
and Malvern Town Center the LRT will operate in an at-grade, partially exclusive right-ofway.
Click to expand...

Costs are then: Base: $452m O1: $1612m O2: $1233m O3: $1404m O4: $1225m
Interestingly though is that all Skytrain options have a closure of at least 8 months versus 36 months for LRT.
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
You don't have to "buy it" - the author of the report you've quoted made that point, and you chose to cherry pick the bits that happens to fit your view and justify your thesis - and need I remind you, said report predated Transit City by a year. At this point, just build the damn thing as LRT - if necessary, it can be reconnected to Eglinton, elevated, whatever later on.

AoD
Click to expand...

Alvin it should be connected to Eglinton NOW! I'm tired of this half ass approach, no offense. A one seat ride for those in Scarborough is not asking much at all.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top