[BurlOak]

Somehow I don't think Council will be too interested in an above-ground option in order to help with private partner profit. They stand a much better chance of being re-elected if they vote against such a proposal.

I would argue that you don't see to realize the political realities tied to that option.

The political concern I see here is that the private partner would provide a better elevated service at a lower cost. It would really make the TTC and the Transit City supporters look like they are completely out of touch with the needs of the citizenery.

 

[dowlingm]

In theory TTC could bid to operate on behalf of the successful DBFOM contractor, no?

 

[gweed123]

The private contractors in York have no say over ticket prices. Their cost is set up front in whatever contract they reach with YRT, and it's up to YRT to set fares wherever they like to offset whatever portion of the operating costs they feel is appropriate.

The private contractor operating GO trains has no say over ticket prices. The private contractors that run school buses have no say over education taxes. The private contractor for garbage pickup in Toronto has no say over user fees. Why would people assume this will be any different?

This is the type of arrangement that I want to see. There are some people out there who are suggesting that this is going to be a repeat of the 407 sale. It could be, but I would definitely hope not.

Private operators, but with fares and schedules set by Metrolinx, and the line itself owned by the public.

In theory TTC could bid to operate on behalf of the successful DBFOM contractor, no?

They could, but they would get creamed.

 

[BurlOak]

No.

What I have ALWAYS stated would be the best option for the Eglinton Crosstown is to combine it with the existing SRT using the existing SkyTrain technology. The TTC is going to be spending nearly $1 billion on changing the SRT to LRT. Changing it to LRT is actually the most expensive option and has the lowest capacity of subway/metro, SkyTrain, monorail, or LRT. This is because LRT is the only one of those technologies that requires a complete revamp of the existing RT stations due to the overhead power catenarys which requires "raising the roof" of the stations.......expensive and time consuming.

No other city on the planet would tear down a rapid transit system and replace with one which will have lower capacity and yet more expensive to run. The only logical cost effective option for the Eglinton/Scar is to extend the SRT northeast to Malvern and west along Eglinton. They could elevate the northeast section and elevate along Eglinton until roughly Don Mills. This would result in twice the capacity, a far more reliable system, better service levels, and cost much less to operate. Much of the needed funds for the whole line would come from the savings of not having to revamp all the stations and not having to build a totally new LRT garage/maintenance centre. Simply improve the short turns to accomodate the MK111 cars and add the heating mechanism on the rails and Bob's your uncle.

Vancouver's SkyTrain has proven itself to be very cost effective, reliable, frequent, fast, safe, and with the new MK111 trains very comfortable, smoothe, quiet, and pleasant.

Would I use the SkyTrain if starting from scratch?....No but because much of the line is built then it only makes sense to extend the line. The reality of the situation is that Eglinton requires a completly grade separated line. Due to the savings of not having to spend a fortune {and a lot of time} by not changing the SRT to LRT, Metrolinx could very easily to get a company to chip in a hefty amount to create a seemless, grade separated Eg/Scar/Mal line to help build and run it as they would see real returns due to being automated.

It's funny, people continually denegrate the Canada Line due to it's small stations and those are very valid concerns. At the same time, Toronto will be spending 3 times as much on a line that will have lower capacity, speed, reliability, and be more expensive to run. This is why Vancouver has expanded it's rapid transit by 70 km in the last 25 years and Toronto has by only 7km.

Presumably there will be bonusses and penalties for early or late completion. How much bonus would be given out if they completed the SRT with a shutdown of less than a year.

If the operator is paid based on passenger kilometres, it would be in their interest to interline the SRT and Eglinton to keep people as long as possible.

I imagine that the operator will have very little leeway in what they can do (in terms of design) just to avoid an unwanted result.

 

[rbt]

Presumably there will be bonusses and penalties for early or late completion. How much bonus would be given out if they completed the SRT with a shutdown of less than a year.

If the operator is paid based on passenger kilometres, it would be in their interest to interline the SRT and Eglinton to keep people as long as possible.

I imagine that the operator will have very little leeway in what they can do (in terms of design) just to avoid an unwanted result.

Unless the operator is Bombardier, they will not choose to lock themselves into a single vendor (Bombardier).

 

[M II A II R II K]

We won't know what form the route will end up taking since they're making this up as they go along.

 

[sixrings]

Presumably there will be bonusses and penalties for early or late completion. How much bonus would be given out if they completed the SRT with a shutdown of less than a year.

If the operator is paid based on passenger kilometres, it would be in their interest to interline the SRT and Eglinton to keep people as long as possible.

I imagine that the operator will have very little leeway in what they can do (in terms of design) just to avoid an unwanted result.

would they not just use the trains already ordered for hurontario or something... that way they really arent out any money..

 

[snowystar]

I'm guessing the best comparison will be to Vancouver, since the TTC will now have a mix of private and public routes. Ssiguy2 or anyone else familiar with their transit operations, how would you rate the service on the Canada Line? Are trains more crowded and run less frequently than they should? Is integration with the rest of the network poor? Etc.

• The trains are crowded, but all SkyTrain lines are crowded during peak hours so there's not much difference
• The frequency are not that good at night - every 6 min after 7pm and every 10min after 11:30pm. Train alternate between each of the two branches so frequency is halved there (12min, 20min)
• They seems to be focused more on customer service and reliability than providing lots of service. For instance, the stations are clean, attendants and cleaners are everywhere, and they have high train spare ratio (20%, compared to the other lines at 3-6%)
• With regarding to integration - most people wouldn't know if the line is run by a private company unless they're following the news

 

[k10ery]

• They seems to be focused more on customer service and reliability than providing lots of service. For instance, the stations are clean, attendants and cleaners are everywhere, and they have high train spare ratio (20%, compared to the other lines at 3-6%)

Service frequency on the Canada Line is determined by the government and specified in the operations contract. It is hard to imagine it working any other way on Eglinton. At the end of the day, private operation makes little difference. It just affects:

- the influence of politicians and unions on operational decisions and costs
- the cost risks to which taxpayers are exposed

Seem totally reasonable to give it a try.

 

[officedweller]

I imagine that the operator will have very little leeway in what they can do (in terms of design) just to avoid an unwanted result.

... and therein lies the potential problem - a P3 operator may not want to assume the risk of taking over a inefficiently designed project (i.e. the risk of financial penalties during the operations phase for poor on-time performance or poor service availability)

 

[BurlOak]

No.

What I have ALWAYS stated would be the best option for the Eglinton Crosstown is to combine it with the existing SRT using the existing SkyTrain technology. The TTC is going to be spending nearly $1 billion on changing the SRT to LRT. Changing it to LRT is actually the most expensive option and has the lowest capacity of subway/metro, SkyTrain, monorail, or LRT. This is because LRT is the only one of those technologies that requires a complete revamp of the existing RT stations due to the overhead power catenarys which requires "raising the roof" of the stations.......expensive and time consuming.

In 2006, the proposal was Mark II.

Engineering comes up with Design A, estimated at $20M.
Planning says it does not meet the requirements of the stakeholders so they propose Plan B.
Plan B awarded at $30M.
Contractor proposes to modify design and do "A" for $20M and split the $10M saving evenly.
Planning and Senior Management are happy that they saved $5M.

This is a common theme that seems to repeat quite regularly.

 

[ssiguy2]

The trains come about every 3 minutes & 30 seconds all days and the frequency is determined by Translink. Due to Translink always wanting to not run all trains to ensure back-ups if needed the train frequency cannot be increased due to a limited number of trains. As I understand Translink is considering running more trains in rush hour and have them "short-turn" at Bridgeport Station which is where all suburban buses begin/end their routes including the busy White Rock/South Surrey and Ladner/Twassen Ferry Terminal routes.

Transfers are seamless and the stations and trains are always clean and well maintained. Unless you actually knew that the Canada Line is run by a private partner you would never guess it.

 

[dowlingm]

SRT needs almost total replacement - not just vehicles but other stuff which hasn't been replaced because the system is due to be axed. There is limited saving to be made by bringing in Mark 2s and it involves changes to the station designs on the rest of the alignment which is what, 3 times the length of the SRT as it now exists between the west and east extensions?

If Mark 2 actually gets proposed, which requires changes to the SRT guideway anyway because of the larger size and a fully grade separated line with high level platforms, elevators and so on, it makes more sense to simply make the Eglinton-RT line a subway using 4 car sets from the T1 fleet, like Sheppard but with refitted Automatic Train Operation to reflect the higher frequencies required, with 6 car TRs cascading to the BD line to stay ahead of that line's growth. Having two sorts of grade separate transit made little sense before - it makes none now.

That said, I would stick with the current plan.

 

[snowystar]

If Mark 2 actually gets proposed, which requires changes to the SRT guideway anyway because of the larger size and a fully grade separated line with high level platforms, elevators and so on, it makes more sense to simply make the Eglinton-RT line a subway using 4 car sets from the T1 fleet, like Sheppard but with refitted Automatic Train Operation to reflect the higher frequencies required, with 6 car TRs cascading to the BD line to stay ahead of that line's growth. Having two sorts of grade separate transit made little sense before - it makes none now.

I'm not sure what do you mean by larger size. The TBM diameter used for Eglinton is 6.7m, and the one going to be used for Vancouver's Evergreen Line is only 5.7m. Even Canada Line with 3m train only used a 6.1m wide TBM. Regarding to platform length, since the automated line can run at least twice as often as the at-grade LRT line, theoretically the train would only need to be half as long to carry the same amount of people.

 

[ssiguy2]

We won't know what form the route will end up taking since they're making this up as they go along.

Unfortunatly I think you are right.

Transit planning has become and embarrassing farce. I would say if funny but the long suffering commuters of Toronto aren't laughing.