News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 11K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 43K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 6.9K     0 
Well, I am quite ok with the idea of putting Eglinton entirely underground if they interline it with SRT - again on the basis of eliminating that additional transfer (and it will probably eliminate the rationale for BD extension). I think the current focus should be on ending the inappropriate use of transit resources that is the Sheppard line, which simply can't be justified by ridership numbers.

What impact will extending Eglinton all the way to YYZ has on ridership (can't seem to find the BCA for it, is there even one)? If those figures are good, we should be expediting that extension over Sheppard and Finch.

AoD
 
Last edited:
The interlining with the SRT is the reason i was more in favour of EGLINTON being grade seperated then Sheppard. Now maybe they are simply going to extend the danforth line to STC which eliminates the need for interlining but we dont know that yet.
 
sixrings said:
The interlining with the SRT is the reason i was more in favour of EGLINTON being grade seperated then Sheppard. Now maybe they are simply going to extend the danforth line to STC which eliminates the need for interlining but we dont know that yet.
Click to expand...

Danforth to STC would be both cheaper than undergrounding Eglinton and higher capacity.

You could terminate Eglinton at Kennedy, build Danforth to STC, and have enough left over for Finch LRT.
 
rbt said:
Danforth to STC would be both cheaper than undergrounding Eglinton and higher capacity.

You could terminate Eglinton at Kennedy, build Danforth to STC, and have enough left over for Finch LRT.
Click to expand...

Extending the Bloor-Danforth to STC will also be important if the first phase of the DRL is only running to Pape.
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
rbt:

Is it cheaper? I am under the distinct impression that undergrounding BD from Kennedy to STC will cost more than 1.9B.
Click to expand...

I remember going to the initial "what do we do with the SRT" meeting where the initial findings were presented.

IIRC, I was on the order of $1.1B for 2 stations (Lawrence and SCC). $1.9B may be right as it has been 5 or 6 years since that estimate was made. This was when the target date for the rebuild was to be completed by 2013.

I recall Scarborough councillors at the time having issues with eliminating the Ellesmere and McCowan stops. The city was expecting to pay for the upgrade without provincial funding so price was also a big factor and they were expecting the SRT to be EOLd essentially this year.

Mark II, the chosen option at the time, was going to be a 6 month service outage and something like a $400M conversion at that time; we've learned that both those numbers were overly optomistic. We also have some funding from the province to work with so we will be increasing the city's capital debt load.

Anyway, you can take $700M off the SRT rebuild if it becomes a straight demolition instead of a rebuild. There may be a 5 year gap in rail based service at the SCC.

So, $1.9B transferred from undergrounding Eglinton West to the Danforth extension instead and $700M remains which is relatively close to Finch's pricetag.
 
Last edited:
AlvinofDiaspar said:
Well, I am quite ok with the idea of putting Eglinton entirely underground if they interline it with SRT - again on the basis of eliminating that additional transfer (and it will probably eliminate the rationale for BD extension). I think the current focus should be on ending the inappropriate use of transit resources that is the Sheppard line, which simply can't be justified by ridership numbers.

What impact will extending Eglinton all the way to YYZ has on ridership (can't seem to find the BCA for it, is there even one)? If those figures are good, we should be expediting that extension over Sheppard and Finch.

AoD
Click to expand...

So you'd like to what? Mothball Sheppard? Convert it to LRT? (which was costed at $600 million by Metrolinx)

It really doesn't sound like you have a solution for Sheppard at all.
 
It's better to ALRT the line, and have a direct route to Union, and those that need to use the BD line can transfer at Kennedy Junction.
 
ssiguy2 said:
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.
Click to expand...

TTC seemed to realize this in a 2006 report that showed lower costs and much less disruption.

http://www.toronto.ca/srtstudy/pdf/srt-strategic-plan-report.pdf

but when they decided on the one solution fits all transit model (everything LRT), they change the recommendation from Skytrain (Mark II) to LRT. Another factor was the refusal to consider anything but at-grade median for the East part of Eglinton. If all of Eglinton was interlined with the SRT - the order for vehicles would have been large enough that it would have achieve enough economies of scale.
 
CC:

Sorry, sinking good money into a project of dubious benefit when there are other more worthy priorities is a solution in search of a problem.

AoD
 
BurlOak said:
TTC seemed to realize this in a 2006 report that showed lower costs and much less disruption.

http://www.toronto.ca/srtstudy/pdf/srt-strategic-plan-report.pdf

but when they decided on the one solution fits all transit model (everything LRT), they change the recommendation from Skytrain (Mark II) to LRT. Another factor was the refusal to consider anything but at-grade median for the East part of Eglinton. If all of Eglinton was interlined with the SRT - the order for vehicles would have been large enough that it would have achieve enough economies of scale.
Click to expand...

Yeah. The TTC internally hates ICTS, and seems to be willing to do anything to end its use. Metrolinx for a long time was trying to convince the TTC to do a continuous ICTS Eglinton - SRT, but the TTC was having nothing of it.

Add to that the TTC's refusal to do contracting through Infrastructure Ontario, or a single contract instead of its piece by piece approach, and a picture emerges of a power hungry organization desperately trying to defend its fiefdom.
 
Darwinkgo said:
Yeah. The TTC internally hates ICTS, and seems to be willing to do anything to end its use. Metrolinx for a long time was trying to convince the TTC to do a continuous ICTS Eglinton - SRT, but the TTC was having nothing of it.

Add to that the TTC's refusal to do contracting through Infrastructure Ontario, or a single contract instead of its piece by piece approach, and a picture emerges of a power hungry organization desperately trying to defend its fiefdom.
Click to expand...

Exactly.
It's funny that one of the people that does not have a negative view of ALRT is Steve Munroe.
He openly states that the SRT is a complete failure but at the same time commends Vancouver on making it;'s SkyTrain a success. He sees the huge improvement in the vehicles themselves, superior reliability and most importantly how Translink was determined to make SkyTrain a success and it is.
The TTC CHOOSE to make the SRT a failure by not putting in the heating mechanisms, not updating the fleet, making the transfer at Kennedy the most inconvient as possible, allowing the tracks to rot, and having ugly stations.
Vancouver has proven that ALRT is a affordable, efficient, fast, quiet comfortable, reliable, extremely high frequency automated system with a stellar safety record.
Translink wanted to create an excellent ALRT rapid transit system and the TTC wanted the thing just to die a slow death......both transit agencies got exactly what they asked for.
 
ssiguy2 said:
The TTC CHOOSE to make the SRT a failure by not putting in the heating mechanisms, not updating the fleet, making the transfer at Kennedy the most inconvient as possible, allowing the tracks to rot, and having ugly stations.
Click to expand...

I'm not really sure where to start with this, so I'll try it out point-by-point.

Kennedy Station - I don't think that it's particularly poorly thought out, to be honest. They didn't have a whole lot of space to work with as all of the land around the station was already built upon, and they wanted to maximize the parking there. Yeah, the slog up the stairs is a bit of a pain, but no better or worse than the walk necessary at many of the stations on the Sheppard Line, or Wilson Station. Which is all designed like that for a reason.

Updating the fleet - in what way, exactly? The TTC upgraded the wayside computers a number of times, and in fact tried to upgrade to the latest version of SelTrac (which is what finally killed the ATO). Frankly, a lot of the problems on the line have more to do with the software, or the onboard computers - which are obsolete, but are hardly worth upgrading at this point - than anything else.

Ugly stations - funny. You've complained about the grandiose designs of the Spadina extension, and now you're complaining about how "ugly" the SRT stations are.

Rotting tracks - what exactly are you getting at here? The TTC has a specific level of maintenance that they have to meet. Are you suggesting that they are putting peoples lives in jeopardy when they ride on the TTC?

Heating mechanisms - where, exactly?

Dan
Toronto, Ont.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top