Transit City Plan

[DSC]

Only in Canada will a transit line be built 90% like a subway, but not as one outright, for fear of annoying politicians at City Hall.

I think the cost might also annoy taxpayers rather than politicians - a subway is 'a little' more costly than an LRT and there is no need for a subway on this route at present - it will need FAR more passengers to be economic.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

It makes vastly more sense for the Eglinton line to continue along Eglinton east of Kennedy and for the Danforth line to run up to STC.

 

[Kitsune]

The TRANSIT CITY LIGHT RAIL PLAN: STATUS UPDATE FOR FEBRUARY 2009 is now available in PDF format.

It includes comments like:

Click on the above link to download the PDF.

Looks like they still havnt made up there mind about running Sheppard an extra stop.

 

[doady]

No, a number of LRT installations in the United States are built just like this. Just ask Buffalo or Pittsburgh.

And Edmonton, and soon Calgary as well.

Sad how Toronto follows the route of lower tier cities like Buffalo, Pittsburgh, Edmonton and Calgary, instead of real cities like Berlin, Paris, London, New York, etc.

 

[rbt]

Sad how Toronto follows the route of lower tier cities like Buffalo, Pittsburgh, Edmonton and Calgary, instead of real cities like Berlin, Paris, London, New York, etc.

Looks to me like we're doing EXACTLY what Paris does.

14th line opened (kinda -- lots of history) in 1998. They've done a couple of minor extensions since that time (13th and 14th line).

Sheppard line opened about the same time and our Yonge and Spadina extensions are quite a bit longer.


Paris proposed and built 3 at grade LRT lines with minimum frequencies of about 90 seconds due to vehicle traffic at intersections. Others are on the way, essentially forming a ring around the city. This line replaced a very over capacity bus route.

Toronto proposed and will build 7 at grade LRT lines in a grid which will replace bus routes which are all at capacity in 2011.


Tramlink, in London, started in 1999. These are at grade trams that cross with vehicular traffic at intersections. They've built 3 routes in the last decade. Docklands Light Rail, the other major expansion, is similar to the SRT or Vancouver Skytrain.


By all appearances, we're doing exactly what Paris and London are doing.

 

[RedRocket191]

By all appearances, we're doing exactly what Paris and London are doing.

From Wikipedia Commons, Paris Tram line 3:

Right-of-way down the centre of the road, traffic crossing at intersections. Sound familiar?

 

[doady]

I never said that the Paris and London don't have trams. You LRT fanatics are all the same.

 

[RedRocket191]

I never said that the Paris and London don't have trams. You LRT fanatics are all the same.

The please clarify your above comments. What is the lower-tier route of Buffalo and Calgary and what is the upper-tier route of London and New York? And I don't appreciate the second sentence, for the record.

 

[urbanfan89]

If we're going to build Eglinton as completely grade separated, why cheapen out the last 10% and use 2 car LRVs? It makes much more sense to overbuild in the short run (you can always run 4-car subway trains and add cars on if ridership increases) to assure the line does not get packed like sardines in 30 years.

This is the exact problem in the Vancouver Canada Line: it's completely built as a metro system, except where the stations are 40 m long and trains can only be 2 cars until billions are spent expanding the line.

 

[urbanboom]

I never said that the Paris and London don't have trams. You LRT fanatics are all the same.

HAHAHA!!

Some people stereotype by race, religion or orientation. Only on UT would you find people stereotyping by their transit preference! "All you LRT people are the same". I don't know. I just find that really funny.

 

[afransen]

In terms of the raw financial case for overbuilding now to avoid expansion in 15, 20, 30 years essentially depends on the discount rate used by government. That is, what kind of `return` are we looking to get on infrastructure spending. Many businesses use discount rates in the 12 - 15% range, which makes overbuilding for the future much worse than building to demand now, and upgrading in 15 years even if it might cost 5x more at that time.

It`s arguable that government can use much lower discounting, since it can borrow for so little. You still need to factor in something more to account for the risk the investment may not be needed for 50 years, or ever. I don`t know what rate, if any, is used by government in their CBAs. My guess is that something in the 7-8% range would be appropriate. At that rate, it still doesn`t make sense to overbuild now, even if it costs one tenth of what it would cost thirty years from present.

 

[Voltz]

If we're going to build Eglinton as completely grade separated, why cheapen out the last 10% and use 2 car LRVs? It makes much more sense to overbuild in the short run (you can always run 4-car subway trains and add cars on if ridership increases) to assure the line does not get packed like sardines in 30 years.

This is the exact problem in the Vancouver Canada Line: it's completely built as a metro system, except where the stations are 40 m long and trains can only be 2 cars until billions are spent expanding the line.

I recall reading that they are planning to build the eglinton line with 3 car length platforms, underground stations may be longer, but of course the designs are not yet finalized.

 

[northstar]

It makes much more sense to overbuild in the short run...

Like Mirabel Airport! ;-)

 

[nfitz]

Looks to me like we're doing EXACTLY what Paris does.

14th line opened ...

Where's our other 11 subway lines? Or our RER lines! I wish we'd do exactly what Paris does!

 

[urbanfan89]

Like Mirabel Airport! ;-)