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

[Rainforest]

1. I would guess that a number of people did vote against Transit City. We will never know for sure unless we bring in a referendum - a different thread I believe.

2. TTC and Metrolinx should not be assuming Ford will not be elected. Perhaps Metrolinx was adamant about LRT vehicles as part of the Memo of Understanding. Otherwise, I would assume these public organizations should be following direction from the political leaders - which is a fully grade separated line.

2a) I am not so sure that Ford will not win again. The last 2 Mayors have won re-election. Most time in the GTA the incumbent wins re-election. McGuinty won re-election twice even though logically he probably deserved to lose both times. Also, presumably the economy will be better in 3 years time and that would also improve Fords chances.

2b) I am not sure if the desire is for the LRT to be extended (to the airport and to Malvern) or is it to branch out at the ends. For example, the UofT Scarborough-Kingston-Eglinton line could interline with the currently planned ECLRT. Also, in the West, one branch could go up to the Airport, while another goes along Eglinton to Mississauga. From some DRL discussions, and long ago TTC experience, it appears that interlining a subway is very difficult - even though a subway is a closed system and it should be relatively easy. So how could interlining LRT, that runs (partially) in traffic (i.e. still has strong potential for traffic delay, bunching, etc.) be any easier. This brings us back to the reason for LRT being extension of the line. But as I know it, separated ROW already exists (almost) from Jane (Black Creek) to the airport and for extension from STC to Malvern.

1) I don't have statistical data, but my unscientific poll indicates that the majority of both TTC riders and car users simply don't follow TTC's system expansion plans. Therefore, I would be surprised if many people voted primarily for or against such plans in the mayoral elections.

2 and 2a) In 2014, Ford will be more vulnerable than an average incumbent. Ideologies aside, he is not a very good manager, and some of his promises (not to raise taxes and not to cut services at the same time) are mutually incompatible. A reasonably likeable centrist candidate who can gather votes both from the left (fed up with Ford and hoping to get rid of him) and right (those who just want better management), will have a very good chance to beat him.

More importantly: even though Ford's departure in 2014 is not guaranteed, Metrolinx would run a higher risk by following his directions too closely. If they bet on Ford's departure and proven wrong, they will have a nonoptimal but functional line. If they bet on Ford staying longer and proven wrong, they will go through two redundant redesign cycles and get heavily critisized for not following the original plan and waisting money.

Yes, public organizations should follow direction from the political leaders; but what can you do if leaders change faster than you can complete a project? Smart executives try to find a middle ground between the requirements of the present and possible future masters.

2b) Interlining/branching is another interesting topic to discuss; but even with no branches, keeping LRT leaves more flexibility for the extensions west of Jane and east of McCowan. There is no continuous ROW on either side. The Richview Corridor strip in the west can be used to reduce the cost of a fully grade-separate line, but that strip does not run all the way to the airport.

 

[ssiguy2]

What you are saying makes sense except you are forgetting one thing.............Metrolinx and the TTC want the line to be automated. You cannot have any automated system without total grade separation and this is why LRT is the worse possible option. It has the lowest capacity and will cost more than any of the alternatives whether they be standard subway, SKyTrain or monorail due to none of those 3 technologies will require "raising the roof" on the current SRT stations which is a waste of both time and money.
If they elevate the current Eglinton DM to Kennedy section, LRT is also the most expensive of those technologies due to having to add catenary over elevated rail.
The Eglinton line is the most expensive LRT line ever built on this entire planet and yet will have the lowest capacity and cost the most making it sheer lunacy.

 

[W. K. Lis]

What you are saying makes sense except you are forgetting one thing.............Metrolinx and the TTC want the line to be automated. You cannot have any automated system without total grade separation and this is why LRT is the worse possible option. It has the lowest capacity and will cost more than any of the alternatives whether they be standard subway, SKyTrain or monorail due to none of those 3 technologies will require "raising the roof" on the current SRT stations which is a waste of both time and money.
If they elevate the current Eglinton DM to Kennedy section, LRT is also the most expensive of those technologies due to having to add catenary over elevated rail.
The Eglinton line is the most expensive LRT line ever built on this entire planet and yet will have the lowest capacity and cost the most making it sheer lunacy.

They'll still want a human aboard the train to handle problems, including direction giving, health problems, tourist issues, mechanical issues, etc..

It's the most expensive because it is ALL underground west of Kennedy, according to Rob's plans. As for "raising the roof", that be solved using Bombardier PRIMOVE system (which they are not going to use it seems).

 

[nfitz]

What you are saying makes sense except you are forgetting one thing.............Metrolinx and the TTC want the line to be automated.

Your are forgetting one thing. Metrolinx and TTC had planned on the automation BEFORE it was going all underground, and there was grade separation. ATC would only have been from around Leslie to Weston. At that point the driver takes over. Pretty simple ... same way on ATC systems in Montreal, the driver is there to take over when the ATC system goes down. Montreal has been able to switch from one to the other for almost 40 years ... not complicated.

You cannot have any automated system without total grade separation and this is why LRT is the worse possible option.

Except as noted above, you CAN have an automated system without total grade separation. Obviously you don't run ATC through the non-grade separated section.

Another example is autopilot on a plane. They run it for part of the flight, but never for all the flight!

 

[ShonTron]

They'll still want a human aboard the train to handle problems, including direction giving, health problems, tourist issues, mechanical issues, etc..

It's the most expensive because it is ALL underground west of Kennedy, according to Rob's plans. As for "raising the roof", that be solved using Bombardier PRIMOVE system (which they are not going to use it seems).

As I understand, much of the SRT was built planned for LRT stock rather than the ICTS that was ultimately used, hence the loop at Kennedy Station. Would there actually be a need to raise the roofs for overhead wiring?

 

[Rainforest]

... LRT is the worse possible option. It has the lowest capacity and will cost more than any of the alternatives whether they be standard subway, SKyTrain or monorail due to none of those 3 technologies will require "raising the roof" on the current SRT stations which is a waste of both time and money.

I doubt that "raising the roof" is a major cost. Around 2009, Metrolinx completed an SRT extension study, with cost estimate for both the ICTS option and LRT option. The total costs came up very close (ICTS actually being a little bit higher). If raising the roof was a major cost, then ICTS should have come up cheaper.

It is probably true that ICTS / SkyTrain, or another kind of high-floor light metro, would have somewhat higher capacity limit than LRT, for the given station geometry. Trains ordered for Eglinton would have too many cabs (2 per car, hence 6 per train) when really only 2 outermost cabs are needed.

This, however, can be fixed in future, by ordering tightly coupled new trains with 2 cabs per train when the first bunch is close to retirement.

 

[CharmAlarm]

Meanwhile, in the real world...

http://spacingtoronto.ca/2012/01/09/lorinc-don-drummond-will-mess-up-rob-fords-plans/

 

[Justin10000]

What you are saying makes sense except you are forgetting one thing.............Metrolinx and the TTC want the line to be automated. You cannot have any automated system without total grade separation

San Franscisco's LRV's are completely automated in the tunnels,and when they emerge from the tunnels, operators take over. Total grade separation is not required for automatic operation.

 

[Voltz]

Meanwhile, in the real world...

http://spacingtoronto.ca/2012/01/09/lorinc-don-drummond-will-mess-up-rob-fords-plans/

Since the province is obviously looking for cuts to be made and the Eglinton plan is a prime target due to its enormous cost, I think what is going to happen is if city council does not revert back to the original plan in time then the province is going to unbury the eastern part of Eglinton and leave the other lines cut, since cutting funding under the original plan will mean cancelling lines.

 

[nfitz]

Since the province is obviously looking for cuts to be made and the Eglinton plan is a prime target due to its enormous cost...

Is it though? Metrolinx's plans were divided into two parts. 2011 to 2015 and 2016 to 2020. I thought the second part was funded from Metrolinx's future revenue generation tool (whatever they decide it will be), and only the 2011 to 2015 was counted as a capital expense for the province. I thought the timing of Eglinton was such, that there wasn't that much of the surface LRT (and now underground bit) that was going to be in the 2011 to 2015 timeframe. At the same time, Finch was entirely post-2015.

If the province needs to reduce capital expenditure to save our credit rating, then I don't think, on paper, that cutting the eastern underground portion of Eglinton (which remains pretty much post 2015) would actually gain them anything.

But I haven't actually seen the budget documents - maybe I'm assuming too much.

 

[Dan416]

If this forces them to be creative about how to deal with the eastern portion, that's good. If it means going back to the old plan (which is like 100% not going to happen with Ford in power, by the way) it'd be stupid.

What I foresee happening, if cuts are to be made, is it'll either be at-grade but not having to stop for traffic lights or getting in the way of traffic, or elevated, or trenched. It will definitely not run in the middle of the road, that'd be anathema to the Fords (and me).

If they can't figure out how to do that, though, then they will just build the originally tunnelled portion and leave out the eastern portion. Which will leave the SRT orphaned yet again.

I do not know why the LRTistas are so gleeful about this supposed impending cut though. If Miller were still in power, these cuts would be either the SELRT or FWLRT or ECLRT. It's basically a no-win for anyone.

 

[junctionist]

What silver lining is there to this? We're not going to get the transit plan blanketing the city with on-street ROW LRT, and now we might not even get the subway LRT alternative? It's on Eglinton where the speed and reliability of grade-separated transit is logical. Rallying against the Crosstown at this point is just pushing transit expansion in Toronto to the barest minimum. Any savings by on-street LRT are merely going to go towards cutting the provincial deficit. The Crosstown in its current form will be an excellent transit project that link urban centres and suburbs in the important central part of the city. One might as well support it.

 

[44 North]

If they can't figure out how to do that, though, then they will just build the originally tunnelled portion and leave out the eastern portion. Which will leave the SRT orphaned yet again.

I actually foresee this, too. But with the SRT being replaced. Maybe someone else had this thought, too. But as history shows us, Toronto will get a left with a disjointed, unfinished mess once again. So my bet is the original underground LRT between Keele and Laird, and a completed S(L)RT. I'd prefer ROW than nothing connecting the two projects, but that fate is up to the transit gods.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

Toronto will get nothing again.

Toronto and Detroit = two cities with no plans for the future.

 

[M II A II R II K]

The SRT wouldn't get orphaned if that ended up being the case with Eglinton. They would extend the subway or make a GO ALRT on that GO Line. I hardly think there would be a pointless transfer created once again.