Toronto Eglinton Line 5 | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx | Arcadis

[SimonP]

The other important thing with all of this is that capacity on the Yonge line is going to run out long before it will on Eglinton. The only real solution is a DRL that connects with the Eglinton Line at Don Mills. Such a connection would at the same time reduce the load on the busy Don Mills to Yonge section of the ECLRT.

 

[accura407]

Instead of building our subway network, we're introducing a new orphan technology into the TTC's mix. Say hello to your $8.6 billion SRT boondoggle for the 2010s, Toronto.

To be fair, it is eliminating one orphan for another...but the difference is that LRTs are used across the world and are proven to work in our cold climate (eg. Calgary/Edmonton) and once this project is complete, extending it east to Malvern and west to the Airport will be cheaper with LRTs than subway's

If you've ever seen Calgary's LRT in action, you would have a different opinion of light-rail...Toronto is such a poor example, it is no wonder everyone is so anti-LRT

 

[Voltz]

The vast majority of the increase in ridership for the Eglinton that result from its full grade seperation are riders who are currently riding the Bloor Danforth line. They don't need a different route and the shift of riders in no way justifies the extra cost or validates the need for a underground scheme.

 

[nfitz]

No, 5,400 was the Eglinton number from the original Transit City estimates. Here's the data from Steve Munro: http://stevemunro.ca/?p=945

Oh ... that number ... that number was always very odd ... Metrolinx also modelled it as part of the Big Move - including all the other infrastructure planned by 2031 and they had 7,800. I'm assuming the new numbers come out of the still active model that Metrolinx has - rather than whatever the lowest-cost bidder for the long-completed Eglinton EA cooked up.

 

[Dan416]

I think they made the best of the situation for what they wanted to accomplish. It's a compromise, but I'm fine with it. I would have been fine with at-grade portions of the Eglinton LRT on the west and east portions but what's done is done. If and when they extend the Eglinton line to the airport, I'm not even that concerned if it runs at-grade, below grade or above grade, as long as it doesn't have too many stops.

 

[officedweller]

This sounds promising - a design-build-operate-maintain contract would be attractive to a private bidder and have the project one more step removed fom the beaucracy of the TTC. The Canada Line was built under a design-build-partially finance-operate-maintain contract.
I can foresee bidders proposing changes to the allignment and elevation of the line (in the "design" phase) to optimize costs.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...ver-operation-of-eglinton-lrt/article2105748/

Metrolinx, TTC in talks over operation of Eglinton LRT JOHN LORINC
From Friday's Globe and Mail
Published Friday, Jul. 22, 2011 3:00AM EDT
Last updated Friday, Jul. 22, 2011 3:02AM EDT

The TTC is now talking to Metrolinx about a possible long-term deal to maintain and operate the Eglinton Crosstown LRT, a $6-billion project being financed and built entirely by the provincially owned agency, Toronto Transit Commission sources have told The Globe and Mail.

TTC sources said Metrolinx has floated the possibility of issuing a request for proposals that asks for bids for a design-build-maintain-and-operate contract. Under the original Transit City agreement, Metrolinx was to develop and own the Eglinton line. At present, the TTC owns all its rail lines and rolling stock.

Metrolinx spokesperson Vanessa Thomas said in an e-mail statement that “the maintenance and operations of the Eglinton-Scarborough Crosstown will be determined in a future agreement. No such decision has been made at this time.”

Such a deal would mark another first, as the agency has traditionally operated all its routes. The KPMG core service review of the TTC, released this week, also raised the possibility of out-sourcing TTC routes.

Special to the Globe and Mail

 

[Still Waters]

Not sure this is a good idea for the long-term. It might work out ok in the short-term when the line is new and maintenance costs are low, but what about longer-term, system-wide issues? The worst thing you can do is start to fracture a transit system that is one of the most-integrated systems in the world, and is regarded as quite impressive within the global transit industry for that very reason (regardless of what people in Toronto think about it).

And as for changing the design and alignment to lower costs, costs are already being optimized. I suppose that there may be cheaper ways of doing things if you don't have worry about impacts on surrounding areas or environments. I don't know enough about the details of the line itself, but cheaper isn't always better.

 

[drum118]

Well the fun just begin and say hello to the private sector.

 

[gweed123]

Unfortunately I think they started this process too late. Having a contract signed before the election would have made the project nearly untouchable.

 

[EnviroTO]

Once again it makes no sense. The services that have the highest passenger to vehicle ratios and which are the newest are the most efficient to run. They might be able to contract out the operation of bus routes and actually find savings. Contract out in 5 route packages with 10 year contract terms each contract starting 2 years apart. This way if one provider has a strike then 80% or your routes still operate and the ability to add a route to the network is there every two years without getting robbed for a contract change.

 

[Palma]

Making the Eglinton Crosstown private is crazy. If its part of the TTC it should be run by the TTC. Perhaps Metrolinx should be privatized so those employees loose their high salary jobs - perhaps then metrolinx could be run more efficently - say more like a privately run business.

 

[Mapleson]

Making the Eglinton Crosstown private is crazy. If its part of the TTC it should be run by the TTC. Perhaps Metrolinx should be privatized so those employees loose their high salary jobs - perhaps then metrolinx could be run more efficently - say more like a privately run business.

Are you suggesting that consultants are cheap? If you think you'd save money by paying them each $250/hour to sit around a table and talk about it, then go right ahead.

Privatizing Eglinton is maybe the best way forward for Ford. No one wants to touch a privatized Sheppard, but Eglinton will actually have some ridership. It could still be integrated into the TTC, just as a premium service or with City revenue redirected to private partners. If someone is willing to pay to build a subway, they should be entitled to part revenue for it's lifespan (~50 years). If it's the provience, it's a tax burden. If it's a private entity, it's only a revenue drain. The second is the easier political sell.

 

[k10ery]

Are you suggesting that consultants are cheap? If you think you'd save money by paying them each $250/hour to sit around a table and talk about it, then go right ahead.

Privatizing Eglinton is maybe the best way forward for Ford. No one wants to touch a privatized Sheppard, but Eglinton will actually have some ridership. It could still be integrated into the TTC, just as a premium service or with City revenue redirected to private partners. If someone is willing to pay to build a subway, they should be entitled to part revenue for it's lifespan (~50 years). If it's the provience, it's a tax burden. If it's a private entity, it's only a revenue drain. The second is the easier political sell.

When oh when will people get it that public-private partnership does not mean privatization, and it does NOT mean there will be no government subsidy. Far from it. The main reason to choose a P3 is to try to limit construction cost overruns and of course union busting. If Bob Kinnear had kept his mouth shut in the last two weeks, I wonder if we would even have had this "leak" now.

 

[gweed123]

Are you suggesting that consultants are cheap? If you think you'd save money by paying them each $250/hour to sit around a table and talk about it, then go right ahead.

Privatizing Eglinton is maybe the best way forward for Ford. No one wants to touch a privatized Sheppard, but Eglinton will actually have some ridership. It could still be integrated into the TTC, just as a premium service or with City revenue redirected to private partners. If someone is willing to pay to build a subway, they should be entitled to part revenue for it's lifespan (~50 years). If it's the provience, it's a tax burden. If it's a private entity, it's only a revenue drain. The second is the easier political sell.

Ottawa is doing a DBFM with the OLRT. The contract will stipulate that the PPP consortium will be required to conduct any maintenance done in the first 15 years. It will be owned by the City of Ottawa, but part of OC Transpo revenue will go towards paying the consortium. Given that it will reduce OC Transpo's operating expenses by about $100 million/year, those funds can go towards paying down the OLRT. I would imagine a similar arrangement would be suitable for Eglinton, given that the projected ridership is only a few thousand pphpd lower than what the OLRT is.

 

[Mapleson]

When oh when will people get it that public-private partnership does not mean privatization, and it does NOT mean there will be no government subsidy. Far from it. The main reason to choose a P3 is to try to limit construction cost overruns and of course union busting. If Bob Kinnear had kept his mouth shut in the last two weeks, I wonder if we would even have had this "leak" now.

I realise the difference between P3 and privatization. However, I was responding to Palma's comment "Perhaps Metrolinx should be privatized", which is privatization.

Ottawa is doing a DBFM with the OLRT. The contract will stipulate that the PPP consortium will be required to conduct any maintenance done in the first 15 years. It will be owned by the City of Ottawa, but part of OC Transpo revenue will go towards paying the consortium. Given that it will reduce OC Transpo's operating expenses by about $100 million/year, those funds can go towards paying down the OLRT. I would imagine a similar arrangement would be suitable for Eglinton, given that the projected ridership is only a few thousand pphpd lower than what the OLRT is.

This is a model that I support. Full lifecycle cost approaches mean less burden in the long run.