|
|
|
- Thread starter Dan416
- Start date
BMO
Senior Member
yes I have the exact same opinion about the Transit city network, but in all honesty the transit city lines will not be very intertwined with the legacy system with the exception of Jane/st. clair and the Don Mills line, and the Waterfront line (which last time I heard would use legacy streetcars). Most of the other lines are pretty much isolated form the legacy system. Whereas the Eglinton subway portion directly connects with the Y-U-S twice and would be a heavily used link between the two sides of the Y-U-S. Most people on transit city wouldn't be using transit city lines to connect to legacy streetcar lines, whereas most people on the eglinton subway portion would be using it to connect to the subway.
Darwinkgo
Active Member
The cost to install diamond interchanges or even a single wye are pretty high, keeping the systems separate can save money sometimes. Plus, the stations will not be built to 500 feet lengths so no real point anyways.
JasonParis
Moderator
I don't think this has been mentioned yet, but Chris Sellors (outgoing Councillor Michael Walker's endorsed candidate for Ward 22) is running on a pro-Eglinton subway platform...
Retirement sparks fight for key ward
Retirement sparks fight for key ward
unimaginative2
Senior Member
Quoting Chris Sellors from the above article:
I couldn't agree more! All I'd like to see is at least a serious, credible cost-benefit examination of different modes. Right now all we have is very carefully-designed studies to ensure that no alternative to LRT is considered. They're so absurd that they assume that ridership would be exactly the same regardless of the speed, frequency, or quality of service offered. That is patently flawed.
I couldn't agree more! All I'd like to see is at least a serious, credible cost-benefit examination of different modes. Right now all we have is very carefully-designed studies to ensure that no alternative to LRT is considered. They're so absurd that they assume that ridership would be exactly the same regardless of the speed, frequency, or quality of service offered. That is patently flawed.
scarberiankhatru
Senior Member
They'll just model an LRT line moving at subway speeds [but still in the middle of the road]. We're already going to spend at least 4 or 5 billion on Eglinton...the least we can do is a quick study to see the marginal cost of more grade-separation so we don't throw reliability and speed and so on down the drain.
Dan416
Senior Member
I agree 100%. When you see in the EA that the subway wasn't even "carried forward" as an alternative, how credible is that study? All of Transit City suffers from this because they didn't adequately study the needs of each corridor (esp. finishing the Sheppard Subway).
unimaginative2
Senior Member
Exactly. Sheppard was the same. They refused to study the subway line that has been planned for decades: Yonge/Sheppard to STC. Instead they insisted on running all the way out to farmers' fields and parkland at Meadowvale. Obviously that's ridiculous with a subway--it's ridiculous with LRT or even BRT. It can barely support a decent urban bus service.
CodeMonkey
Active Member
I think the subway option was dead to begin with, the whole EA was just so they keep things legal.
jtaylor247
New Member
Fresh Start
Banned
Thank Darwin! See people, some politicians can see the light. Toronto needs more subways. It's a simple concept. She supports the Eglinton crosstown as full metro, awesome. Thomson recognizes that ECLRT which has yet to break ground, is reaching into subway levels of cost pricing, so we may as well pursue that. I like that she recognizes that the 29th busiest airport in the world needs to be served with true local mass transit; it's not just a commuter line. Richview's gradually resembling Sheppard East's condo growth spurt, Don Mills-Eglinton is of regional significance, and central Eglinton is as densified and urbane as Queen Street so we don't stick any of that with a underground or worse road-median mized traffic streetcar line.
Speaking of Queen, 2 for 2 Thomson recognizes that the DRL has no business running alongside a rail corridor through the downtown. I don't care what could be 30 years from now closer to the central waterfront. Right now Queen Street is the heart of the city and where people go to work, school and play. It also is the best vantage point for short feeder commutes north or south to the also densified corridors of Dundas and King Streets. Prop up the resources that we have now and industry will reflect favorable response.
Finally, yes Sheppard East as a subway. No-brainer. She even acknowledges the mistake of skipping Sheppard/Willowdale. The billion being squandered on SELRT could build track out to Agincourt. We'd just need to cover the difference to add in the stops. This is how we ought to go about slicing up a $15 billion dollar pie, equitably and fiscally sound.
Rainforest
Senior Member
Thanks jtaylor247.
I like her idea of road tools dedicated to transit construction.
However, is her math right? Collecting $400 million with $5 tolls on Gardiner and DVP requires 80 million car trips per year.
Her estimate for the Eglinton subway is definitely low-balled, by at least 1 billion. I think it would be better to recognize the real cost, and plan for construction in stages.
Last edited:
Bureaucromancer
Active Member
It actually was explicitly dead the day Transit City was announced, the press releases, speeches and documents all said specifically that LRT was the only technology considered, from the beginning of the initiative no less (the claim being that Transit City was and is a light rail initiative, the individual lines would be go or no go for LRT).
As far as keeping the EAs legal though, the new transit class process doesn't actually require the alternate technology work to be done at all (having been written pretty specifically to speed up Transit City).
Fresh Start
Banned
You say that like Miller and Giambrone didn't exorbitantly lowball the cost of Transit City during the Miller campaign. Remember the days of $6 billion for 120+ kilometres of LRT and how quickly that dissolved after the reelection victory? Using private-public partnership, OUR cost (i.e. municipal taxes) to build new subway lines will be minimal. Budget overruns are the problem of private firms and they'll do everything necessary to keep costs low.
Rainforest
Senior Member
Surely they did. But that does not make it a legitimate strategy.
That depends on the wording of the contract. TTC contracts out most of its construction work already, but that does not necessarily prevent cost overruns.
And in any case, no private firm will take full fiscal responsibility for a project, if it costed below the bottom line. They will demand a realistic cost from the beginning, plus some reserve for unforeseen events.