[TheTigerMaster]

The stop spacing makes sense once people understand that wider spacing does not cause faster travel times.

This was modelled years ago. Increasing the LRT stop spacing caused usage of individual stations to increase (relative to the closer spacing), consequently increasing dwell times at each station. The result was overall travel times more or less identical to the closer spaced options. Thus our current stop spacing has been optimized to maximize ridership, understanding that the LRT will move at the same speed regardless of number of stops.

That said, speed really isn't an issue with the Crosstown. The western extension is projected to move as fast, or slightly faster than Line 2. The eastern section will be moving moderately slower than Line 2. The Crosstown as a whole will travel at speeds comparable to Line 2.

 

[Adjei]

TTC Board wants Crosstown East + West done by 2021. Metrolinx apparently can't get it done until something ridiculous like 2026. TTC Board consequently wants TTC to take over the project to expedite its progress. TTC CEO is actually quite reluctant to take over this project, but he admits that the TTC does have a ton of in house experience managing similar projects, and will ask his staff to put together a schedule for the extensions.

It also should be noted that Metrolinx doesnt have the greatest track record managing the Crosstown project. Metrolinx is already two years behind schedule, which is something that the TTC warned would happen back in 2012.

Whoever can get it done faster should be selected.

You mean the same TTC who have messed up the Spadina extension and caused it to be years behind, hundreds of millions over budget, and caused an outside company to come and manage the project because they couldn't? That same TTC...

 

[drum118]

Regardless if TTC or Metrolinx is looking after building these extensions, they need to be P3 projects.

I don't trust TTC or Metrolinx these days of not screwing up projects based on current track records.

There is a need to review the west extension since various changes have taken place along the route. Prefer to see the ROW off to one side with flyover at major cross roads with the north side being the best option for elevated the ROW.

The east requires a complete EA and that is cutting it fine to have the line in operation by 2021. You would be lucky to see an EA late fall this year, but more like early 2017. Tender would have to go out in 2017 to have construction start in 2018. Unless work work takes 7/24 for building this extension, late 2021, more like mid 2022 would be opening date for it. You could open it in phases to speed things up for a 2021 date.

The big issue is how to get Metrolinx and the province to bring forth these extension sooner than later as it will effect the cash flow for other projects.

Then, Metrolinx is supposed to bring forth their 5 year Master Transit Plan (Big Move) review plan this year to show what projects should move up the list or down it as well adding to it. This review still has to go to the public for input and don't expect to see it until the fall. Base on the final approval, it will go into the 2017 budget for funding.

The other issues for a 2021 opening date for both extension, will Metrolinx be able to obtain more cars from Bombardier to cover the these extensions needs or will they have to cut the quality of service for the centre section to service the extension until the all the cars are here?? You will have an order of about 200-250 cars to service this line and given Bombardier current track record for TTC 204, let alone the extra 60 cars TTC wants, plus the Edmonton order, how many cars will be here come 2020 or 6 months before the line opens??

 

[cplchanb]

The other issues for a 2021 opening date for both extension, will Metrolinx be able to obtain more cars from Bombardier to cover the these extensions needs or will they have to cut the quality of service for the centre section to service the extension until the all the cars are here?? You will have an order of about 200-250 cars to service this line and given Bombardier current track record for TTC 204, let alone the extra 60 cars TTC wants, plus the Edmonton order, how many cars will be here come 2020 or 6 months before the line opens??

I dont think its set in stone that the next order of cars will go to Bdr. Since their royal cockup there has been much animosity between them and TTC and I think Metrolinx would be concerned as well, especially if their initial batch for Ion doesnt come in time. I wouldnt be surprised if this add on comes from Alstom or Seimens since they are most eager to step in

 

[crs1026]

The stop spacing makes sense once people understand that wider spacing does not cause faster travel times.

This was modelled years ago. Increasing the LRT stop spacing caused usage of individual stations to increase (relative to the closer spacing), consequently increasing dwell times at each station. The result was overall travel times more or less identical to the closer spaced options.

We are assuming that ECLRT will follow a subway-like operating paradigm where trams start promptly, accelerate quickly to full track speed, decelerate smartly, make quick platform stops, and carry on. Each stop adds a small amount of decelerate/dwell/accelerate delay. But the difference between 1 km spacing and 800m spacing doesn't cause much cumulative delay. In theory.

I can buy this, sort of, until I look at 501 on the Queensway and ask myself, what could go wrong.

One can't debate stop spacing without factoring in intersections, traffic control, schedule, track profile and condition, and headways.

To be on the safe side, I would argue for restricting stops. One can always add later.

- Paul

 

[drum118]

I dont think its set in stone that the next order of cars will go to Bdr. Since their royal cockup there has been much animosity between them and TTC and I think Metrolinx would be concerned as well, especially if their initial batch for Ion doesnt come in time. I wouldnt be surprised if this add on comes from Alstom or Seimens since they are most eager to step in

Until the power to be at both levels of Government is willing to fund someone else than Bombardier, Metrolinx and TTC are stuck with them.

More telling what will happen in 2017 with TTC current order is the 60th car. Unless all current and future cars up to 60th comply with failure requirement of 35,000 km, not the current 12-15,000, time to look elsewhere. If the failure rate is still to high and late delivery, then you may see a request to re-tender all orders and accept a delay of 2 years or so. We may know this by September before the 60th car due in Feb 2017 based on current delivery schedule.

You will have at least 5 new bidders for TTC and Metrolinx order.

In fact, TTC and City of Toronto are already paying 2/3 of the cost and therefore have the rights to look elsewhere for a car that will met all the current requirements since Bombardier has breach the contract in the first place. If this was taking place in the private sector, tenders would be already issues and most likely a contract awarded to someone else.

 

[Tuck]

The Spadina-York subway was funded in 2006 and will open 2017. The Eglinton Crosstown was funded in 2009 and will open in 2021. So the Spadina-York extension which was a 6 station extension to an existing line with no major interchange stations or obstacles is only 1 year less that a completely brand new line with 13 underground stations including 2 subway interchange stations, 2 GO interchange stations, and one outside the underground section which is a combined subway and GO station. So the TTC and Metrolinx aren't significantly different at this point, except that Metrolinx seems to have a plan with buffer already built in, while the TTC is actually late to plan.

The stations on the Spading extension are far, far more complicated than anything on the Eglinton line. Council had no business approving stations like that, but it became a vanity project, and so here we are. Plus someone died on site, causing construction to stop for 6 months, I think. Which is more the contractor's fault than the TTCs.

The stop spacing makes sense once people understand that wider spacing does not cause faster travel times.

This was modelled years ago. Increasing the LRT stop spacing caused usage of individual stations to increase (relative to the closer spacing), consequently increasing dwell times at each station. The result was overall travel times more or less identical to the closer spaced options. Thus our current stop spacing has been optimized to maximize ridership, understanding that the LRT will move at the same speed regardless of number of stops.

That said, speed really isn't an issue with the Crosstown. The western extension is projected to move as fast, or slightly faster than Line 2. The eastern section will be moving moderately slower than Line 2. The Crosstown as a whole will travel at speeds comparable to Line 2.

Thats really interesting actually - I didn't know this. Though this guy below makes a good point:

We are assuming that ECLRT will follow a subway-like operating paradigm where trams start promptly, accelerate quickly to full track speed, decelerate smartly, make quick platform stops, and carry on. Each stop adds a small amount of decelerate/dwell/accelerate delay. But the difference between 1 km spacing and 800m spacing doesn't cause much cumulative delay. In theory.

I can buy this, sort of, until I look at 501 on the Queensway and ask myself, what could go wrong.

One can't debate stop spacing without factoring in intersections, traffic control, schedule, track profile and condition, and headways.

To be on the safe side, I would argue for restricting stops. One can always add later.

- Paul

 

[TheTigerMaster]

The stations on the Spading extension are far, far more complicated than anything on the Eglinton line. Council had no business approving stations like that, but it became a vanity project, and so here we are. Plus someone died on site, causing construction to stop for 6 months, I think. Which is more the contractor's fault than the TTCs.

I'm no engineer, but something tells me that a subway station built in a dense urban area is much more complicated than one built in the middle of empty fields.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Regardless if TTC or Metrolinx is looking after building these extensions, they need to be P3 projects.

Why? Has't the auditor general already come out and said that Ontario's P3 model has cost taxpayers billions additional.

The east requires a complete EA and that is cutting it fine to have the line in operation by 2021. You would be lucky to see an EA late fall this year, but more like early 2017. Tender would have to go out in 2017 to have construction start in 2018. Unless work work takes 7/24 for building this extension, late 2021, more like mid 2022 would be opening date for it. You could open it in phases to speed things up for a 2021 date.

It shouldn't take 3 to 4 years to build it. With the Crosstown, surface construction was projected to take only 23 months. Based on that, Crosstown West and East should be able to start mid to late 2019 and still make the September 2021 deadline.

 

[facepalming_brooklynite]

the Spadina-York extension which was a 6 station extension to an existing line with no major interchange stations or obstacles is only 1 year less that a completely brand new line with 13 underground stations including 2 subway interchange stations, 2 GO interchange stations, and one outside the underground section which is a combined subway and GO station.

One of the new stations on the Spadina-York extension, Downsview Park, is an interchange station between subway and GO:
https://www.ttc.ca/Spadina/Stations/Sheppard_West_Station/index.jsp

 

[drum118]

Why? Has't the auditor general already come out and said that Ontario's P3 model has cost taxpayers billions additional.
It shouldn't take 3 to 4 years to build it. With the Crosstown, surface construction was projected to take only 23 months. Based on that, Crosstown West and East should be able to start mid to late 2019 and still make the September 2021 deadline.

You plan for the worse based on current track records of both outfits and being ready for what every surprise that may show up along the way.

One only has to look at Seattle and Phoenix to see lines that open as much as 6 months early and being under budget.

P3 can be a good thing or bad thing depending how the contract is written, since they are assuming the greater risk. It also depend on what taking place in the market for work. It also allow for things to get built sooner than later.

Then one only has to look at various projects for TTC & Metrolinx to see projects over budget and years late as standard bidding process.

 

[Tuck]

I'm no engineer, but something tells me that a subway station built in a dense urban area is much more complicated than one built in the middle of empty fields.

Eh, I'm not so sure about that. Staging wise, maybe? You need to manage traffic, try not to interrupt the lives of people living nearby. But once you've cleared the utilities and set up a work zone, you should be fine, as the actual structure is relatively simple. Granted, the tunnels may be more complicated since its a denser area, I'm not sure - more work might need to go into making sure the digging doesn't disturb the foundations of buildings nearby.

The structures on the Spadina extension are not simple structures. Architecturally, theres a lot to them, and that makes them much harder to build. They're also not small structures, and sit on a larger plot of land than anything on Eglinton, so theres more work to do.

 

[rbt]

Why? Has't the auditor general already come out and said that Ontario's P3 model has cost taxpayers billions additional.

That's very well known. We're paying a premium to somebody else to take some of the risk. De-risking always costs upfront money; and they're gambling there wont be problems and they'll bank the premium. The 1-year delay while putting together the tender is also pretty expensive (thanks inflation).

The huge benefit for current government leaders (not necessarily the tax payers) is it's painfully difficult to stop a project once the contract is signed. In short, P3 is great if you expect persons hostile to the project to take power at any point while it is under construction.

I don't think an anti-LRT mayor will take over Toronto again any time soon. I certainly don't trust Brown not to tinker though.

 

[Rainforest]

The stop spacing makes sense once people understand that wider spacing does not cause faster travel times.

This was modelled years ago. Increasing the LRT stop spacing caused usage of individual stations to increase (relative to the closer spacing), consequently increasing dwell times at each station. The result was overall travel times more or less identical to the closer spaced options. Thus our current stop spacing has been optimized to maximize ridership, understanding that the LRT will move at the same speed regardless of number of stops.

Technically, that's not what they found. They modelled Sheppard LRT with 400 m average stop spacing vs 800 m average spacing, and projected the speed to be 23 kph in the former case, and 27 kph in the latter case.

Then they said that the speed improvement for the wider spacing is "not is large as they expected"; for the reason you mentioned (longer dwell times). But that's not the same as "does not cause faster travel times".

That said, speed really isn't an issue with the Crosstown. The western extension is projected to move as fast, or slightly faster than Line 2. The eastern section will be moving moderately slower than Line 2. The Crosstown as a whole will travel at speeds comparable to Line 2.

For Crosstown specifically, I have to agree with you. The overall speed will be defined by the long underground section, and significant sections where the stop spacing is wide due to the lack of destinations (Leslie to Don Mills, or around Black Creek).

Therefore, the speed will be pretty good overall, and cutting a few more stops such as Oakwood or Ferrand would not noticeably improve the travel times.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Technically, that's not what they found. They modelled Sheppard LRT with 400 m average stop spacing vs 800 m average spacing, and projected the speed to be 23 kph in the former case, and 27 kph in the latter case.

Then they said that the speed improvement for the wider spacing is "not is large as they expected"; for the reason you mentioned (longer dwell times). But that's not the same as "does not cause faster travel times".

Yeah I meant that the speed savings were sufficiently minimal. A 5 km trip 24 kph takes 12.5 min. At 27 kph, 11.1 min. It's a very very small difference. And because people need to walk to the stations, the minimal time saving would be offset by longer walk times