jeffreym
Active Member
I wouldn't read much into that. I think in their world subway = below ground and streetcar = above ground.
|
|
|
nfitz
Superstar
Given the current plan is to put the Eglinton LRT in a subway tunnel under Eglinton, I'm not sure what the point here is.
jeffreym
Active Member
ssiguy just said he thought Doug Ford was implying that the Eglinton line would use subway cars. I'm saying that I just think he doesn't know what he's talking about.
nfitz
Superstar
If the entire tunnel is underground, and it's a subway ... then the cars built to run with them are subway cars. Not like the current subway cars ... and design-overkill ... but that's essentially what they are.
Dan416
Senior Member
Maybe they've realized it makes no sense to use LRVs if the entire line is underground. Just get Bombardier to switch out the LRVs with TRs.
Solid Snake
Active Member
That's exactly what I was thinking, why on earth would Bombardier mind a change of trainset but the problem lies with the SRT elevated section.
adeel
Active Member
strictly hypothetically, what would be the cost addition to the 8.2B to get the SRT also done underground? If I recall correctly, on certain alignments is that section not the only part that has the usage that supports heavy rail?
Hipster Duck
Senior Member
I no longer live in Toronto, and this fiasco has tempted me to "wash my hands" of following transit planning in this city. If I were McGuinty I would seriously ask for my $8 billion back and delay transit expansion by another generation...until Toronto has the maturity to vote in competent politicians and hand over its transit planning to actual experts who know and care about actual outcomes. Of course, Toronto is my hometown, so I still give a shit about what happens there, but, on the transit front, I watch it increasingly distantly and shake my head like some Iranian exile, or former Detroiter watching their city/country spiral down the drain.
Whatever outcome we get: LRT at grade, fully underground, etc. is all a wasted opportunity - it's just how great a wasted opportunity it represents. My personal opinion is that the Transit City proposal was a mediocre option and Rob Ford's tunneled LRT is a horrendous option. Transit City was mediocre enough because it had too many stops, and uses low floor vehicles and platforms. An at-grade LRT using high floor vehicles and less frequent station spacing would have been my preferred choice, but that wasn't even on the table. Rob Ford's "plan", which he hatched out of a 5 second sound bite, takes the worst aspects of Transit City: the low floor LRVs and frequent stop spacing...and puts them underground at immense cost! Why don't we just build a solid gold colossus of Rub and Tug? It'll probably cost less and have the same use as a $250M cut and cover station at "Bermondsey"!
Finally, unimaginative makes a very good point that has largely gone ignored. Other cities, including Munich - a first world city with high labour costs and social democratic safety concerns - can build a subway for a comparable cost to surface LRT in Toronto. What gives?
/rant over.
Whatever outcome we get: LRT at grade, fully underground, etc. is all a wasted opportunity - it's just how great a wasted opportunity it represents. My personal opinion is that the Transit City proposal was a mediocre option and Rob Ford's tunneled LRT is a horrendous option. Transit City was mediocre enough because it had too many stops, and uses low floor vehicles and platforms. An at-grade LRT using high floor vehicles and less frequent station spacing would have been my preferred choice, but that wasn't even on the table. Rob Ford's "plan", which he hatched out of a 5 second sound bite, takes the worst aspects of Transit City: the low floor LRVs and frequent stop spacing...and puts them underground at immense cost! Why don't we just build a solid gold colossus of Rub and Tug? It'll probably cost less and have the same use as a $250M cut and cover station at "Bermondsey"!
Finally, unimaginative makes a very good point that has largely gone ignored. Other cities, including Munich - a first world city with high labour costs and social democratic safety concerns - can build a subway for a comparable cost to surface LRT in Toronto. What gives?
/rant over.
Last edited:
denfromoakvillemilton
Senior Member
Member Bio
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2008
- Messages
- 7,495
- Reaction score
- 1,557
- Location
- Downtown Toronto, Ontario
This is why people run off to New York City and Los angeles when they graduate!
I would think the biggest slap in the face would be taking that $8.2 billion and giving it to 905 transit projects. Build the Yonge extension to RHC, build the Hurontario LRT, build the Dundas BRT, build the LRTs in Hamilton, or electrify GO (I know all those can't be done with $8.2 billion, but pick and choose). Basically say "fine, if you can't get your ducks in a row, we'll give the money to municipalities who do". You can bet that Toronto would be even more pissed off at Ford than they already are, and it would be a great political move for the Liberals to pump so much transit money into those 905 swing ridings.
Or take some of that money and build the WWLRT out to Roncesvalles, and spend the rest in the 905. No reason to punish downtown for the mistake of the suburbs. The inner 416 went blue in the last municipal election (and also somewhat in the Provincial election). They voted for stupidity, they should get what they deserve: nothing.
Last edited:
nfitz
Superstar
Toronto is the only reason McGuinty got elected. He took almost 80% of the seats in Toronto - that's over 1/3 of his caucus. Another 1/4 of his caucus are from ridings just around Toronto.
Surely McGuinty isn't going to say Toronto doesn't vote for competent politicians, given that they elected him.
Palma
Senior Member
But as it would cost more (so everyone says) to switch to "actual" subways although they are going below ground anyways, why would Doug Ford even mention subway? I would imagine they would want as much savings as possible for his sheppard subway that Rob Ford thinks that by catering to Scarborough and North York (north 401) will get him re-elected. He probably is confusing subway, LRT. streetcar because otherwise since the Fords keep saying Toronto wants subways why does no one mention to them that Eglinton is not getting "subways" and see what he says. If LRT is good enough for Eglinton then LRT is good enough for Sheppard. There is no way Sheppard should get a subway ahead of Eglinton.
ssiguy2
Senior Member
People constantly state that if the system is completely grade separated then technology doesn't matter but on the contrary is matters a great deal. The cost of an underground system for all the 4 possible technologies are about the same but LRT stations have to be larger to accomodate the same number of passengers as Metro, monorail, or SkyTrain.
Also, and this is a biggie, the SRT conversion to lightrail {and I actually called the Crosstown office to verify it} will be far and away the most expensive. Why?.............because unlike the other 3 technologies LRT requires a higher clearance due to the overhead catenary lines. This is one of the reasons why the SRT to LRT conversion is going to be both expensive and time consuming. The LRT will require the "raising of the roof" of all the stations which Metro, m0onorail would not wjile just continuing as
SkyTrain would be the most cost effective.
This is why I strongly against any total grade separation using LRT..........it is going to cost much more than the other options due to the massive station renovations that will be needed. That is why the conversation about technology matters a great deal.
Also, and this is a biggie, the SRT conversion to lightrail {and I actually called the Crosstown office to verify it} will be far and away the most expensive. Why?.............because unlike the other 3 technologies LRT requires a higher clearance due to the overhead catenary lines. This is one of the reasons why the SRT to LRT conversion is going to be both expensive and time consuming. The LRT will require the "raising of the roof" of all the stations which Metro, m0onorail would not wjile just continuing as
SkyTrain would be the most cost effective.
This is why I strongly against any total grade separation using LRT..........it is going to cost much more than the other options due to the massive station renovations that will be needed. That is why the conversation about technology matters a great deal.
Palma
Senior Member
Thats the problem when these transit constructions are going on and there is no consideration for the future. Like why build the LRT if in the future it will turn into a subway. I say will and not may (Eglinton here) because no one can predict the future. There are tons of residential streets intersecting Eginton and never-mind condos that for sure will be going up along the street. For they built the scarborough RT instead of a subway again is no thought for the future.
GenerationW
Senior Member
It already did.