[taylortbb]

Thank goodness Smart track is getting shot down. Adding more stations to existing GO lines within Toronto would have gone against this notion..

I don't understand what you want. You asked if any of our politicians have ridden the Elizabeth line, have you ridden the Elizabeth line? It has stop spacing much closer than GO trains currently do. Adding stops to the GO train (and electrifying it) would be how you build something like the Elizabeth line.

 

[Voltz]

Eglinton was the place for an entirely grade separated metro or subway.

Based on what facts?

Sufficient ridership? What projections have shown this?

Speed? What is the speed difference over the surface section? Never mind that a subway would never have made it that far. And never mind that the speed you seem to want is for the GO expansion project, and we already have a subway to Kennedy.

 

[nfitz]

I genuinely have to wonder how many folks at Metrolinx or politicians in Ontario have been to a city like London and ridden the Elizabeth line? Do they know what true "crosstown" transit is like?

Elizabeth Line is heavy rail on the national rail network. There's nothing stopping an Elizabeth Line train running all the way to Wales; well, something may have to pull it once the electrification stops. At the same time, there's nothing physical stopping a steam engine (that does still run occasionally) from further west, right under Lonon (well, other than common sense and safety).

Think of the Elizabeth Line as more like GO trains, but with some more frequent stations closer to downtown, and a tunnel through the core.

Thank goodness Smart track is getting shot down. Adding more stations to existing GO lines within Toronto would have gone against this notion. *widely spaced stations*

Hang on .... first you favour the Elizabeth Line concept - and now you are dissing it? In the central London core section, the station spacing on the Elizabeth line is about 2 km. But Union to Bloor/Dundas West is 6 km - and you want no stations in between? Even Bloor to Mount Dennis is 4.6 km. If you want something like the Elizabeth Line, then you add a station at St. Clair. And at Lansdowne. And at King/Shaw. Even Exhibition to Union is 3 km!

Heck, Union to East Harbour is 3 km. East Harbour to Danforth is 5.5 km! Elizabeth-line spacing on Smart Track would give you stations at West Harbour, Gerrard (Carlaw), Coxwell and Danforth.

I don't see the consistency here.

If anything SmartTrack, for all it's flaws, was an attempt to create something closer to the Elizabeth Line than anything else ... well before they added that bizarre tunnel under Eglinton ...

 

[urbanclient]

Based on what facts?

Sufficient ridership? What projections have shown this?

Speed? What is the speed difference over the surface section? Never mind that a subway would never have made it that far. And never mind that the speed you seem to want is for the GO expansion project, and we already have a subway to Kennedy.

At the risk of rehashing old topics... All 3 of your rhetorical questions have been answered.

Nevermind that Neptis (think tank) pointed out that they never properly considered metros in the first place, LRT/tram was a foregone conclusion. Or that the 2009 benefits case favoured full grade separation for Eglinton, which made the decision makers look bad, so they cooked up a new analysis in 2012 that concluded full grade separation would actually be the worst option: a complete reversal.

On cost:
It's fairly clear had a subway/metro been built starting in 2011, that the costs would not be significantly higher than the $10+ billion in capital costs for Line 5 (I'm not including the 30 year maintenance, to make it fair). We have the Line 1 TYSSE to compare, which cost just over half as much per km, and was 78% TBM tunnelled while being 100% tunnelled (the whole thing is underground). Whereas Line 5 was ~51% TBM tunnelled, total ~54% tunnelled including sequential excavation.

This is a false dichotomy, that the only choice was a hybrid metro/tram or nothing at all. Building a slightly shorter subway, and extending it later would arguably be better in hindsight (by subway I mean elevated/underground/surface level metro, the key is full grade separation, I don't care what you call it).
---------------------------------

On speed:
30 km/h for a rapid transit line is more or less the bare minimum for a city as sprawled as Toronto (i.e. similar to any major Chinese city), and that's more or less what was planned originally. 38 minutes for 18 km.

The current average on the surface is below 20 km/h, although I'm confident that TSP improvements can improve it to the low 20s.

Source for 38 minutes (Eg. @ Keele to Kennedy stn.): https://news.ontario.ca/en/backgrounder/29212/eglinton-crosstown-light-rail-transit-line
-------------------------------

One of my most reacted to posts went over the projected demand/capacity issue. See below:

[...] Also, I don't think anyone is 100% guaranteeing that Line 5 will run into capacity issues in the short term, but it doesn't take some leap of logic to think that Line 5 will capture lots of latent demand for a city so starved of rapid transit. The demand projections for Line 5 were done off numbers from two decades ago when population growth rates were projected to be much lower [2]. To make matters worse, the advertised max 15,000 pphpd with 3 cars is unrealistic since it implies a >6 people m^2 crush load with 250 pax per 30 metre car and 0 flip up and multi-use seats used. A more realistic figure is 12,000 pphpd with 200 pax each for 3 cars, at 20 trains per hour.
View attachment 705154

https://urbantoronto.ca/forum/attachments/bombardier-flexity-freedom-brochure-2011-pdf.95184/

For Line 5 Eglinton, we must distinguish between low absolute cost and high long-term value. Selecting a cheaper technology that provides disproportionately lower utility is a false economy, as it represents a poor value proposition if the marginal benefit fails to scale with the city's growth. In contrast, a subway (even a light metro) yields a significantly higher benefit to cost ratio because its superior potential throughput will far outweigh the incremental increase in construction costs. In hindsight, it's unclear Line 5 would've even cost more as a subway of any kind since the per km costs of Line 5 as mixed-grade tram are around 2 times that of the Vaughan Line 1 extension.

1. "The expansion of transit in the GTHA is the largest in North America today, but our job is far from over. By 2041, over 10 million people will live in our region— comparable to Paris or London."
Metrolinx 2041 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN For the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area Draft Final

https://assets.metrolinx.com/image/upload/v1663237694/Documents/Metrolinx/20180308_BoardMtg_Draft_Final_2041_RTP_EN.pdf

2. In 2012 an updated case from Steer Davies Gleave was released. They predicted Eglinton would only need 9,000 pphpd by 2031 based on outdated population projections. (pg. 20/49)
https://assets.metrolinx.com/image/...etrolinx/Benefits_Case-Eglinton_Crosstown.pdf
In 2.4 (pg. 11/49) it says "The assumed employment and population forecasts used for the assessment are identified in ‘Places to Grow’ the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe area and is consistent with those used in the Regional Transportation Plan, The Big Move."
Places to Grow is from 2006. The Big Move is from 2008.
View attachment 705173
Big Move 2008 pdf:https://assets.metrolinx.com/image/upload/v1663240133/Documents/Metrolinx/TheBigMove_020109.pdf

The Big Move says, "The GTHA, located in southern Ontario, is Canada’s largest urban region. It is also one of Canada’s fastest growing urban regions. With a current population of over six million people, it is forecast to be home to 8.6 million people by the year 2031."

Without fully accounting for undercounted visas and overstays, the GTHA population is already estimated to be 8.3 million as of July 1, 2024 (StatsCan). The true population of the GTHA could very well be 8.6 million already when factoring in NPR undercount as predicted by Benjamin Tal from CIBC (https://economics.cibccm.com/cds?id=858756bd-a8fc-4920-8ea4-e1dcd1c104d4&flag=E).

Compare that with the original TTC/Toronto Crosstown Environmental Project Report (EA) from 2010: https://assets.metrolinx.com/image/upload/v1689691727/Images/Metrolinx/EA_complete.pdf

"2.1.2 Identification of Alternative Transit Technologies
The City of Toronto’s Official Plan forecasts a 270,000(10%) increase in the population of the City by 2031"
The City of Toronto's official plan numbers they are citing for this forecast dates back to 2002 at least [2000, actually], before the official 2001 census numbers were released, as part of Flashforward: Projecting Population And Employment To 2031 In A Mature Urban Area - Looking Ahead Part 1. edit, added source: https://www.toronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/9529-Flashforward-Looking-Ahead-Part-1.pdf
View attachment 705174
The city of Toronto has seen much more than a 270,000 increase in just the last 5 years, let alone since 2006.

StatsCan Population estimates:
https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1710015201

IMO the problem is the P3 projects that proceed from ~50% design and rip off the taxpayers. Traditional procurement would probably get more built for the same budget. P3s blow through the budget, which leads to less projects being built, which leads to discontinuous construction etc... Not to mention Metrolinx is still grasping at straws about P3s apparently offering value for money when it clearly does not in Ontario. IMO the lack of retained institutional knowledge at the government level is less of a problem because even in traditional procurement, the design stage is outsourced to an engineering firm.

In a nutshell, the projections for population and therefore demand for Line 5 was based on numbers from 2000.

We know Toronto had much higher population growth than projected. We're at 3.3+ million when they predicted 3 million by 2031. So roughly 10 to 20% higher population in the catchment area.

Closer to the low-end, 10% higher for transit demand in 2026, when you consider more people work remotely now. The other factor to consider is lower car ownership/usage in 2026 than 2000.

There are too many confounding variables for me to give an exact figure for how much more ridership there is in 2026. Or how much more ridership there would be, had a subway been built (induced demand applies to transit as well). But it's obvious the ridership (demand) projections were wrong, given that they're already running higher service levels than originally planned. Whether you think 10% is significant or not, is to each their own.

From 2022:

"According to a TTC staff report that went to the agency’s board on April 14, the TTC has been preparing to open the LRT at what the P3 agreement calls Service Level 1, which would see trains run as often as every 5 minutes at the busiest times. But the TTC is now in discussion with Metrolinx about starting at Level 6, under which trains would run as often as every 3 minutes and 10 seconds. Metrolinx proposed the higher service levels, which would be a major change — the LRT wasn’t expected to reach Level 6 for another 15 years. [2037]"

How often should the Eglinton LRT run? TTC, Metrolinx disagree

Difference over LRT service levels proves an early test of province and city’s ability to get along.

web.archive.org

Peak headways for Line 5 are 4'04" as of March 15, and will decrease after full opening.
-------------------------

To be fair, I just spoke with a friend that lives on Eglinton regarding weekday rush hour crowding and they said Line 5 was slightly less crowded than Line 1. My anecdotal experience over the weekends is the opposite.

 

[Bojaxs]

Smart track wasn't going to work because there is no realistic path towards electrifying the GO lines. Show me Metrolinx's step by step plan to electrify the network. Will it be EMU's or electric locomotives?

There appears to be very little effort being made by MX to build electrical infrastructure at Union Station. Plus the issues surrounding the roof. Lakeshore is the most likely line, but that's still over 10 years away... at best.

With Smart Track we would have been stuck with slow moving, frequently stopping, diesel trains in Toronto with electrification still decades away. Smart Track would make more sense if the GO lines were already electrified.