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

[gweed123]

This decision makes sense for the grade-separated Eglinton and Scarborough rapid transit lines. They should have left the on-street LRTs (local transit) to the TTC though.

Should also be interesting to see if the private sector pushes for Eglinton East to be grade-separated (elevated or side of road) as ridership was projected to double if the line was completely separated.

That's a very interesting point. It could be especially interesting if they bring in the same group responsible for the Canada Line. Certainly they're no strangers to an elevated LRT down the middle (or directly alongside) of a suburban avenue.

I always thought that if the B-D extension to Sheppard & McCowan didn't go ahead, that running the Eglinton and Scarborough LRTs as a single thru-line was the next best option.

Would also be interesting to see what this group brings forward in terms of money for a future westward extension. They can't really expect to get any ownership % of the line if they don't chip in money to help build it. If it's still being built 100% with public money, I'd certainly hope that the contract would only be to build, operate, and maintain, without any ownership stake.

 

[BMO]

Guys, the fact that a private sector company will run the line means NOTHING other than the fact that it will be private sector employees running the line instead of the TTC. Apart from that the system will look like a seamless integrationg with the TTC from the customer's perspective.

The only thing that the private sector will be in charge of after construciton is complete, is running and maintaining the line. The fare and other issues would be set by the province in a contract, where the company would presumably make a bonus if they exceed cost-recovery targets (hence the incentive to run the system more efficiently, without reducing the given service levels set forth in the agreement.)

This is a common practice throughout Asia, and even right here in Canada (VIVA York, Canada Line).

So for all of you wondering if the private sector will push for grade separation, that will not happen. The money is already allocated to what is planned and the agreement will be based off of that.

This is often referred to as a Design Build Finance Operate Maintain contract. Where the money is eventually paid to the private sector for the total cost, but in the interim it is designed, built and financed by the private industry to reduce the upfront capital costs to the government. Another advantage with this is expertise, since the private sector will be building the line, it makes sense to have the same company design it for their own optimal operating preocedures. This allows the private sector to tailor and build the line at a better quality and more efficient design that will ultimately help them make better returns when they run it.

I for one truly think this is a very good way of building rapid transit, and would hope that future expansion is done in the same way. As for existing lines, I doubt much savings would be had at this point by putting private sector employees to run it.

 

[valkoholic]

This strikes me as Metrolinx trying to give itself another reason to exist. Ideally they would've financed, planned, and built the region's transit upgrades but they've lost the financing and planning jobs so they're trying to get into local operations.

 

[M II A II R II K]

They should push for full traffic light priority.

 

[Electrify]

Guys, the fact that a private sector company will run the line means NOTHING other than the fact that it will be private sector employees running the line instead of the TTC. Apart from that the system will look like a seamless integrationg with the TTC from the customer's perspective.

The only thing that the private sector will be in charge of after construciton is complete, is running and maintaining the line. The fare and other issues would be set by the province in a contract, where the company would presumably make a bonus if they exceed cost-recovery targets (hence the incentive to run the system more efficiently, without reducing the given service levels set forth in the agreement.)

This is a common practice throughout Asia, and even right here in Canada (VIVA York, Canada Line).

So for all of you wondering if the private sector will push for grade separation, that will not happen. The money is already allocated to what is planned and the agreement will be based off of that.

This is often referred to as a Design Build Finance Operate Maintain contract. Where the money is eventually paid to the private sector for the total cost, but in the interim it is designed, built and financed by the private industry to reduce the upfront capital costs to the government. Another advantage with this is expertise, since the private sector will be building the line, it makes sense to have the same company design it for their own optimal operating preocedures. This allows the private sector to tailor and build the line at a better quality and more efficient design that will ultimately help them make better returns when they run it.

I for one truly think this is a very good way of building rapid transit, and would hope that future expansion is done in the same way. As for existing lines, I doubt much savings would be had at this point by putting private sector employees to run it.

Perhaps they may push for the Eglinton and Scarborough lines to be combined, since the infrastructure will already be in place for a single through route?

Unlikely, but I would have also liked to see them remove some of the smaller stops on the lines to save money, with provisions to add them in if surrounding stops become too busy. Meanwhile the city could pick up the slack by running local bus service alongside if deemed necessary.

Also, it would have been nice for them to look at an elevated option for Eglinton East, as well as Finch and Sheppard (for the latter, possibly even creating a portal to allow through routing with the subway) to help boost ridership, but I'm guessing we are beyond the point of no return and to implement such changes would cost too much time and money.

 

[BurlOak]

This is often referred to as a Design Build Finance Operate Maintain contract. Where the money is eventually paid to the private sector for the total cost, but in the interim it is designed, built and financed by the private industry to reduce the upfront capital costs to the government. Another advantage with this is expertise, since the private sector will be building the line, it makes sense to have the same company design it for their own optimal operating preocedures. This allows the private sector to tailor and build the line at a better quality and more efficient design that will ultimately help them make better returns when they run it.

Perhaps they may push for the Eglinton and Scarborough lines to be combined, since the infrastructure will already be in place for a single through route?

Also, it would have been nice for them to look at an elevated option for Eglinton East, as well as Finch and Sheppard (for the latter, possibly even creating a portal to allow through routing with the subway) to help boost ridership, but I'm guessing we are beyond the point of no return and to implement such changes would cost too much time and money.

It seems the design portion only includes detailed design. I understand that the Canada Line in Vancouver was a true Design Build Finance Operate Maintain Contract thatspecified certain service levels and left to the contractor to do the entire design so they could optimize things based on their strengths and previous experiences.

For Eglinton, the option to save money on tunnelling by using Skytrain technology, or using single tunnel instead of twin has been removed from the Contractor. I doubt an elevated through Scarborough would not lower the operating expenses enough to justify the extra construction costs to elevate the line. The entire conceptual design appears to be complete before it is handed over so I do not think we will see anything too innovative. The connected SRT/Eglinton may be possible depending on if they are paid based on boardings or trip distance.

 

[sixrings]

my biggest question is will this now mean the elimination of oakwood station?

 

[innsertnamehere]

They should push for full traffic light priority.

they already have that..

 

[ssiguy2]

If the city would allow total grade separation they could get a private company to pony up some funds for the line to help cover the cost. This is what they did for the Canada Line and why they got private sector money.........it allows the line to be automated saving the private company a small fortune on operating costs. This wouldn't work in Toronto because the morons at Metrolinx would probably still want someone on board at $40/hr to make sure the doors close.

The stupid people who demand a person to make sure the doors close must never take elevators.

 

[officedweller]

Guys, the fact that a private sector company will run the line means NOTHING other than the fact that it will be private sector employees running the line instead of the TTC. Apart from that the system will look like a seamless integrationg with the TTC from the customer's perspective.

The only thing that the private sector will be in charge of after construciton is complete, is running and maintaining the line. The fare and other issues would be set by the province in a contract, where the company would presumably make a bonus if they exceed cost-recovery targets (hence the incentive to run the system more efficiently, without reducing the given service levels set forth in the agreement.)

This is a common practice throughout Asia, and even right here in Canada (VIVA York, Canada Line).

So for all of you wondering if the private sector will push for grade separation, that will not happen. The money is already allocated to what is planned and the agreement will be based off of that.

This is often referred to as a Design Build Finance Operate Maintain contract. Where the money is eventually paid to the private sector for the total cost, but in the interim it is designed, built and financed by the private industry to reduce the upfront capital costs to the government. Another advantage with this is expertise, since the private sector will be building the line, it makes sense to have the same company design it for their own optimal operating preocedures. This allows the private sector to tailor and build the line at a better quality and more efficient design that will ultimately help them make better returns when they run it.

I for one truly think this is a very good way of building rapid transit, and would hope that future expansion is done in the same way. As for existing lines, I doubt much savings would be had at this point by putting private sector employees to run it.

Agreed with what you've said - but it'll be the push-pull between the existing design and the private partner's profits. i.e. how much will the operator-driven manual design impact the profitability (ie. amount of Provincial subsidy) and will that force a redesign (to full grade separation)?

 

[Wrenkin]

If the city would allow total grade separation they could get a private company to pony up some funds for the line to help cover the cost. This is what they did for the Canada Line and why they got private sector money.........it allows the line to be automated saving the private company a small fortune on operating costs. This wouldn't work in Toronto because the morons at Metrolinx would probably still want someone on board at $40/hr to make sure the doors close.

The stupid people who demand a person to make sure the doors close must never take elevators.

So you would save staffing costs buy burying the line for the full length? Or building underpasses at every cross street? Or what? Elevated guideway? I don't see how you would save money in the medium term.

 

[rbt]

So you would save staffing costs buy burying the line for the full length? Or building underpasses at every cross street? Or what? Elevated guideway? I don't see how you would save money in the medium term.

You can pay a ton of people for $100M/year (10% return on $1B capital); not to mention the additional maintenance budget required to maintain a burried corridor which is around $5M/km for the TTC.

In short, grade separation to enable automation is not a money savings idea.

 

[sixrings]

You can pay a ton of people for $100M/year (10% return on $1B capital); not to mention the additional maintenance budget required to maintain a burried corridor which is around $5M/km for the TTC.

In short, grade separation to enable automation is not a money savings idea.

Maybe this way they will be able to get through an elevated line which connects with the srt and uses srt type trains then they would not need to redo the srt stations and if they doubled the amount of people using the line that's obviously double the revenue. I'm just thinking outloud and maybe from a personal perspective am bias towards that idea as I see the west needing to be grade seperated as well. Then metrolinx could use the lrt trains from this line on something like hurontario and rebidding for srt type trains. Its asking a lot I understand but one can hope for some positives with this new announcement. I always wanted the eglinton and srt line to interline. I didn't think it needed to be barried like rob ford and some nimbys thought but it would still be nice to be grade seperated.

 

[innsertnamehere]

You can pay a ton of people for $100M/year (10% return on $1B capital); not to mention the additional maintenance budget required to maintain a burried corridor which is around $5M/km for the TTC.

In short, grade separation to enable automation is not a money savings idea.

you don't seem to realize that it would be elevated rather than underground. that would probably be about a $300,000,000 upgrade, so about $30 million a year. plus it would provide greater ridership, meaning less subsidy.

 

[rbt]

you don't seem to realize that it would be elevated rather than underground.

Somehow I don't think Council will be too interested in an above-ground option in order to help with private partner profit. They stand a much better chance of being re-elected if they vote against such a proposal.

I would argue that you don't see to realize the political realities tied to that option.