[Fresh Start]

If the analyzis of those and other factors indicates that cost of subway construction in Toronto can be lowered towards the Vancouver numbers, then the plans ought to change, and Eglinton subway should return to the agenda.

Without such analyzis, attempts to cost Eglinton subway based on Vancouver's numbers are nothing more than exercises in self-deception. You can cancel LRT and hope to replace it with subway for $5 B. But when the planning and construction start, most likely the cost of subway will swell to $8 or $9 B, or the line gets truncated.

Don't you get it? The numbers can be lowered! The TTC's own construction cost estimates have no basis in reality whatsoever. Ask yourself, if the government was willing to fund the majority cost of you getting a brand new car, whatever the total amounts to, no strings, would you settle for a Suzuki/GM vehicle or trade up and go for a Lamborghini/Maserati? That mentality is what I suspect is happening with TYSSE, which is why I wouldn't cite their numbers on that.

The evidence is all around us to see just how to build a SUBWAY line across Eglinton and not go broke. Is it self-decpetion to contrast the numbers against Montreal's Laval extension? The 5.5 kilometre Orange Line extension that had had to cross the St Lawrence (a feat which makes crossing riverbeds like the Don or Humber a cakewalk by comparison) amounted to only $804 million or 154.5 million/km in 2007 dollars. And that was overbudget! Attempting the same in today's inflated dollar equates $825.6 million, or $868.5 by 2015. That works out to only $167 million/km.

How about something closer to home to convince you further. The Sheppard subway line was built for $934 million total for 6 kilometres or $155.6 million/km in 1997 dollars. In today's currency that would be $1.182 billion or $197 million/km. By 2015 that is projected to be $1.243 billion or $207.2 million/km. If the basic methodology, practices and wage rates to build subways have not changed drastically over this whole time period; how then can Transit City lines, let alone subways, be budgeted in the multibillions? Something doesn't add up here and again it points directly at fiscal mismanagement on the part of the TTC bureaucracy.

It's a pity that railfans take so much stock in some quoted hypothetical figures (both the TTC's cost and ridership forecasts) done during a hasty re-election bid, that they are refusing to see the woods for the trees. A subway built to almost the same parameters as the LRT line would be (big diff full-length grade separation in private ROW) will in no uncertain terms never max out at $8 billion or even $6 billion. In fact even by taking the 2015 currency inflation statistics to heart, anyone willing to think for themselves may quickly realize that 23 kilometres of subway (PIA to Wynford Hts) of whatever track configuration (be it underground, above ground, trenched) can be built for only $4.765 billion.

The Golden Mile along Eglinton through Scarborough is car-oriented country and building road-median LRT corridors through here isn't very pedestrian friendly. That area would be better off with mixed local/express trips of the by-then truncated 34 Eglinton East bus service and customers in-between would never be more than an average of 10 minutes away from a subway stop (Wynford, Kennedy or Warden Stns).

 

[Darwinkgo]

Thank you, well said. I think that the problem lies solely in the bureaucracy's lap and nowhere else. There is something fundamentally wrong with this administration that is not being experienced in other cities comparable to Toronto's size.

I stand firmly by my assertions to Rainforest. TYSSE is a lesson in grandiosity and excessiveness. The only place along the corridor that truly needs to be tunneled is through the university grounds. Everywhere can be done at-grade or above-grade. We've got $14 million contracts being doled out to artisans to give stations through suburbia 'character'. And why can't we bridge over the 407? I mean sheer lunacy. But afterall, its not like we, the City, are paying for it so lets go all out in our wacky demands to the Feds.

At any rate I believe I have demonstrated in my previous posts either one of two things:

- that Transit City cost estimates are completely bogus and hence calls into question the credibility of entire proposal and our rationality in blindly taking the TTC's word for it as canon while affordable options in subway technology, BRT lanes along major arteries, local 416 commuter-rail services (S-Bahn), etc. still exist;

- OR, that Eglinton can actually be built as a subway for the same amount of money as the Crosstown LRT line proposed and ergo should take precedence as a higher mode with ROW exclusivity; tighter headways; fewer intermediate stops prolonging commutes; and the ability to interline service straight into the downtown (thus nullifying the need for Pearson-Union AirLink) will attract more riders and alleviate several other transit corridors in the process.

No amount of subway connection to the airport removes the need for the downtown air link. If I want to spend no money to the airport right now, I have an option - the Airport Rocket. The LRT or subway to the airport is the exactly the same thing, I still have to get my luggage to the subway, and ride with everyone else, stopping at every stop. I know when I ride the Bloor line out to Islington to visit family it feels like it has too many stops, would an average traveler subject themselves to that? Not really. The LRT or subway link is about improving service for the existing captive rider.

The Airport Rail Link is about converting cab fares, family pick up/drop offs, or airport parking into transit users. It picks up an entirely different demographic, someone working in airport security is unlikely to pay for the rail link every day, while a business person soloing in a cab may feel it is worth it to avoid most of the traffic and save a few bucks.

 

[nfitz]

The Sheppard subway line was built for $934 million total for 6 kilometres or $155.6 million/km in 1997 dollars. In today's currency that would be $1.182 billion or $197 million/km.

Your inflation rate isn't appropriate. You seem to be using the Consumer Price Index instead of a rate that is appropriate to the construction industry. Steel, concrete, and fuel costs have both increased much, much, faster than Consumer Price Index.

In your example, you have an inflation rate of just under 2%. This is much, much lower than the actual rate. If you use the MTO Tender Price Index you will see that from Q4 1996/1997 to Q4 2008/09 that the index has increased from 106.94 to 213.22 - that's an inflation rate of over 5.9%.

Using an appropriate index, Sheppard increases from $155.6 million/km in 1997 to $310 million/km today.

 

[kettal]

Metrolinx numbers have Eglinton in line with Skytrain Expo line (plus/minus 200k passengers per day/30 KM length)... although Expo Line average speed is 45 km/hr, so it doesn't take 1 hr 18 minutes to go "Crosstown," it takes 39 minutes from end to end (if Eglinton is 33KM, that's the equivelant of 44 minutes from Kennedy to Pearson)

Do you realize that the expo skytrain has a unidirectional peak travel pattern, while Eglinton's pattern makes it more like two short lines rather than one long one.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

Do you realize that the expo skytrain has a unidirectional peak travel pattern, while Eglinton's pattern makes it more like two short lines rather than one long one.

The "crosstown" title seems to indicate that it would/should be used for crosstown travel across the Yonge dividing line i.e. kennedy-islington or trips to the airport. Otherwise it's just the eglinton line, just as the B-D line is called the "Bloor-Danforth line" and not the "Bloor-Danforth crosstown line" or simply "the crosstown line"

 

[kettal]

The "crosstown" title seems to indicate that it would/should be used for crosstown travel across the Yonge dividing line i.e. kennedy-islington or trips to the airport. Otherwise it's just the eglinton line, just as the B-D line is called the "Bloor-Danforth line" and not the "Bloor-Danforth crosstown line" or simply "the crosstown line"

Who cares? The current name of it is not final, it's just a preliminary description of the line. It really doesn't matter what it's called, very few people will actually use it to cross the town on a daily basis, even if it was a subway.

 

[gweed123]

Who cares? It really doesn't matter what it's called, very few people will actually use it to cross the town on a daily basis, even if it was a subway.

Then why the big fuss about it needing to be one single continuous line? I, and others on here, have proposed a subway from Jane to Don Mills, and then temporary BRT making up the rest of it. But the LRT fans on here poo pooed it because it lacked continuity and had "too many transfers" for those going cross town. Yet now these same LRT people are saying that not many people will use it to go cross town anyways! Which one is it???

Ridership will drop off substantially outside of the 'core' of Eglinton (ie past Jane and Don Mills), that's why they chose to have the tunnel stop there. If the name of the game is making it easier for people to get to Eglinton-Yonge and Eglinton West, then a subway would get them there faster, and would not need to be expanded if ridership ever increased (you could even start with 4 car trainsets, like Sheppard).

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

Who cares? It really doesn't matter what it's called, very few people will actually use it to cross the town on a daily basis, even if it was a subway.

We all know what the actual travel patterns are. I suppose this brings up the question... Why is the city/TTC marketing this as a crosstown route? Subway or LRT.

Further to your initial comment on WaterlooWarriers post. The length of the line doesn't change the speed that it operates at, Eglinton will be ~25km/hr no? While Vancouver's line is closer to 45km/hr; it doesn't matter where you put the start and end points 99.99% of the time 45km/hr will get there faster than 25km/hr.

Also the western portion of the Eglinton line could very well have bi-directional travel with PIA/Airport Corporate Centre and the YUS line drawing passengers in from each end.

Otherwise I don't see how your post significantly alters what WaterlooWarrier said. Maybe I missed something.

+1 To Gweeds post above

 

[Eug]

Huh? It's called the crosstown because it goes across town. Seems pretty simple to me.

It's really irrelevant whether or not most people will use it to get across town.

 

[gweed123]

Huh? It's called the crosstown because it goes across town. Seems pretty simple to me.

It's really irrelevant whether or not most people will use it to get across town.

My point was that the LRT fans were using this name as justification for having one complete transferless line across the city, and then they go and say that the majority of people will not use it to get across town anyways. It has very little to do with the name, it's just one of their main points for building it as an LRT vs a subway is the continuity of the LRT, when they then admit that continuity isn't a very important issue, as the line won't be used in that way.

 

[Eug]

My point was that the LRT fans were using this name as justification for having one complete transferless line across the city, and then they go and say that the majority of people will not use it to get across town anyways. It has very little to do with the name, it's just one of their main points for building it as an LRT vs a subway is the continuity of the LRT, when they then admit that continuity isn't a very important issue, as the line won't be used in that way.

Fair point, but it also depends on where that transfer point might be. If that transfer point was anywhere near the centre of the line for example, that would be highly annoying... which begs the question: How much of a pain would it be to build a transfer station at say Leslie for example?

 

[gweed123]

Fair point, but it also depends on where that transfer point might be. If that transfer point was anywhere near the centre of the line for example, that would be highly annoying... which begs the question: How much of a pain would it be to build a transfer station at say Leslie for example?

Which is exactly why I'm proposing (temporary) terminuses at Jane and Don Mills, that way the section between the 2 proposed LRT lines (hopefully the Don Mills LRT gets morphed into the northeast extension of the DRL instead, but that's beside the point) is subway. Higher capacity, reliable, expandable (like I said earlier, start with 4 car trainsets like on Sheppard. If ridership demand increases, add on more cars). Have the rest of the line made up of BRT, which is much cheaper to build than LRT, and that can be easily replaced if the line is extended in either direction.

The TTC sees running an express bus (technically not even BRT) between Sheppard-Yonge and Downsview as being an acceptable solution, so why not a BRT between Eglinton-Don Mills and Kennedy? I would imagine that passenger demand on that portion of the Eglinton line would be roughly the same as the Sheppard West express bus.

 

[Ansem]

Which is exactly why I'm proposing (temporary) terminuses at Jane and Don Mills, that way the section between the 2 proposed LRT lines (hopefully the Don Mills LRT gets morphed into the northeast extension of the DRL instead, but that's beside the point) is subway. Higher capacity, reliable, expandable (like I said earlier, start with 4 car trainsets like on Sheppard. If ridership demand increases, add on more cars). Have the rest of the line made up of BRT, which is much cheaper to build than LRT, and that can be easily replaced if the line is extended in either direction.

The TTC sees running an express bus (technically not even BRT) between Sheppard-Yonge and Downsview as being an acceptable solution, so why not a BRT between Eglinton-Don Mills and Kennedy? I would imagine that passenger demand on that portion of the Eglinton line would be roughly the same as the Sheppard West express bus.

I'll take note of this.
These contradictions really hurts transit city credibility...

 

[kettal]

Then why the big fuss about it needing to be one single continuous line? I, and others on here, have proposed a subway from Jane to Don Mills, and then temporary BRT making up the rest of it. But the LRT fans on here poo pooed it because it lacked continuity and had "too many transfers" for those going cross town. Yet now these same LRT people are saying that not many people will use it to go cross town anyways! Which one is it???

Ridership will drop off substantially outside of the 'core' of Eglinton (ie past Jane and Don Mills), that's why they chose to have the tunnel stop there. If the name of the game is making it easier for people to get to Eglinton-Yonge and Eglinton West, then a subway would get them there faster, and would not need to be expanded if ridership ever increased (you could even start with 4 car trainsets, like Sheppard).

You show a failure to understand the prevailing travel patterns...

Will the average commuter use Eglinton only to go to Jane street? no. Will he use it to go to Don Mills? no (at least not until there is a new DRL subway). For this reason, a transfer at either of these points is an arbitrary inconvenience.

Very few riders coming from Scarborough, for example, will be going any further west than Dufferin. Yes, some will, but not enough to make the transfer point (for eastbound trains originating in scarborough) become a bottleneck of the journey. The real cross-town travellers, who will use it from Scarborough all the way to Etobicoke, is insignificant in terms of capacity.

And as I said earlier, the subway + brt combo doesn't bring any advantage to a partially tunnelled LRT, except adds a transfer.

Just sit back, relax and watch, it will be built and it will work great. The sky is not falling.

 

[kettal]

The TTC sees running an express bus (technically not even BRT) between Sheppard-Yonge and Downsview as being an acceptable solution, so why not a BRT between Eglinton-Don Mills and Kennedy? I would imagine that passenger demand on that portion of the Eglinton line would be roughly the same as the Sheppard West express bus.

There's a difference between acceptable and ideal.

Everybody knows Sheppard has become a dog's breakfast of transfers. Due to cut-backs, overbuilding stations, and "we'll finish it later" mentality (which you seem to exhibit with your Eglinton stub proposal). Nobody wanted it to come out the way it did. Do we really need Eglinton to become another mess like Sheppard?