[TheTigerMaster]

All the transit systems should be given over to metrolinx. They don't have any real power. Remember cities can be made and broken in Ontario at the snap of the premiers fingers.

Someone should do something about that.

I really feel that Ontario should seriously consider granting Toronto/GTA some sort of special status within the Province or have the city secede and form some kind of autonomous administrative division independent from the Province of Ontario with greater representation in the House of Commons, where it is grossly underrepresented. The city and the region is simply far to large to be a simple "creature" of the Ontario as it is laid out in the Constitution. The same thing may also be said about Montreal and Vancouver.

Sounds like a crazy idea, but this kind of setup certainly has benefitted several cities around the world.

A political champion. That's pretty much the only way at this point, because Metrolinx, although they clearly want grade-separation, don't want to reopen the political can of worms.

Isn't Metrolinx legally allowed to change the design of the ECLRT however they please? I haven't read the entire contract between the City of Toronto and Metrolinx, but I believe that they has full control over the design of the line as long as they "listen" to public concerns. They've already eliminated Leslie station and made the portion grade separated. What's to stop them from doing the same thing to the rest of the line (I have a sneaking suspicion that it's not that simple)?

 

[ssiguy2]

I called the Crosstown office and I asked them why they weren't elevating, using Primove or extending it as SRT and using the new 67 meter {expandable to one long 102 metres} Innovia MK111 SkyTrain cars. They had never heard of the new MK111 SkyTrain cars and had not even seen MK11 that Vancouver has had for 17 years, never heard of Primove, and didn't know about elevation.

They couldn't tell me why a little SRT is costing more to transfer over to LRT than Vancouver's entire new 11km Evergreen SkyTrain line which includes all the new Innovia MK111 trains, a one km tunnel, and grade spearation. She was actually quite nice and had no idea why is was so much more than Vancouver. She said she would get back to me. Never did so I talked to another guy 2 weeks ago. He said Torontonians would never go for elevation but I mentioned how Vancouverites love it and he admitted the only elevated systems he had ever seen were the ever so new Chicago and New York lines. He said he would get back to me.

This conversation started a month ago and I have yet to get an email answer although the woman did email me telling me they are still looking into it and hadn't forgotten me which was nice to atleast know that they actually were looking for answers and not the standard form letter.

Have any of you actually gone to Metrolinx or Crosstown to find out why they aren't elevating the line? Now that Miller's TC is dead and this is Metrolinx's baby I bet they would be more receptive than most of you think. Remember before Miller LRT plans Metrolinx wanted to simply extend the SRT down Eglinton and save themselves the conversion and make it grade separated with the new MK11 trains. All that they would be doing is going back to what they originally wanted until Miller decided that Torontonians don't want rapid transit but "great city building" instead.

BTW< I maybe wrong but I believe Vancouver has taken possension of it's new MK11 trains but I think Bombardier is planning to phase them out completely so that all the trains will be the Innovia model which is the basis for both their new SkyTrain and Monorail train systems.

 

[gweed123]

Someone should do something about that.

I really feel that Ontario should seriously consider granting Toronto/GTA some sort of special status within the Province or have the city secede and form some kind of autonomous administrative division independent from the Province of Ontario with greater representation in the House of Commons, where it is grossly underrepresented. The city and the region is simply far to large to be a simple "creature" of the Ontario as it is laid out in the Constitution. The same thing may also be said about Montreal and Vancouver.

Sounds like a crazy idea, but this kind of setup certainly has benefitted several cities around the world.

I've raised in another thread the possibility of basically re-creating Metro, but encompassing the entire GTHA. Toronto and Hamilton would be de-amalgamated (but with York and East York staying with Toronto), and the Upper Tier governments (Peel, Halton, Durham, York) would be abolished. Every municipality would be given seats in council based on population. I did a chart a while ago actually, and I concluded that 75,000/seat was the magic number to get a good balance.

Metro would be responsible for things like transit, master planning, major roadways, utilities, and police/fire/ambulance. The local municipalities would still have control of things like Site Plan approval, ZBLs, garbage collection, etc.

Isn't Metrolinx legally allowed to change the design of the ECLRT however they please? I haven't read the entire contract between the City of Toronto and Metrolinx, but I believe that they has full control over the design of the line as long as they "listen" to public concerns. They've already eliminated Leslie station and made the portion grade separated. What's to stop them from doing the same thing to the rest of the line (I have a sneaking suspicion that it's not that simple)?

Legally yes, but practically no. There was so much political capital spent on both sides of the debate, that re-opening it without having a political champion first could get ugly. Of course, if either side of the debate actually talked about it like grown-ups, it wouldn't be an issue. But alas, it is.

There is no technical reason why Metrolinx can't do it. They have the authority to do it, and they certainly have the planning justification to do it. They just don't have the political capital to do it.

If elevating Eglinton East did have a political champion, particularly on Toronto Council, theoretically it could be 'suggested' by council through a simple motion. Of course, that runs the severe risk of a Fordite taking that opportunity to push all of Transit City back into the debate. Then we could end up right back where we were in 2011 and the start of 2012.

Of course, Wynne could also order Metrolinx to change the plan, in which case she would be twisting Metrolinx' rubber arm on that one. But then again, you run the risk of angering Ford and his minions.

 

[k10ery]

Have any of you actually gone to Metrolinx or Crosstown to find out why they aren't elevating the line? Now that Miller's TC is dead and this is Metrolinx's baby I bet they would be more receptive than most of you think. Remember before Miller LRT plans Metrolinx wanted to simply extend the SRT down Eglinton and save themselves the conversion and make it grade separated with the new MK11 trains. All that they would be doing is going back to what they originally wanted until Miller decided that Torontonians don't want rapid transit but "great city building" instead.

Are you suggesting that the professional planners haven't considered the elevated Skytrain option? It was publicly proposed by McCuaig himself in 2010 after Ford was elected. But it got no support from any faction on council. Since then Metrolinx has signed onto 2 different plans for transit on Eglinton, and neither one included elevation (except for the SRT section). Your plan has no political support in Toronto. Best to forget it, as Metrolinx has.

 

[Catenary]

I called the Crosstown office and I asked them why they weren't elevating, using Primove or extending it as SRT and using the new 67 meter {expandable to one long 102 metres} Innovia MK111 SkyTrain cars. They had never heard of the new MK111 SkyTrain cars and had not even seen MK11 that Vancouver has had for 17 years, never heard of Primove, and didn't know about elevation.

I asked a very similar question of the staff in Ottawa, since their LRT is similar in design to Eglinton. A high floor, automated system like Vancouver's seems to fit best at first look but what it comes to is future expansion and in Toronto's case compatibility with the other lines. Low floor tram trains seems to be the going preference in the province right now, and will probably lead to increased buying power in the future, and will help maintenance in the future by having a common vehicle design in Toronto.

I don't see the point of Primove in this application. It's great where you don't want or can't have wires but it seems needlessly complex when you have room for them. Catenary lines are proven technology, as are third rails.

I've raised in another thread the possibility of basically re-creating Metro, but encompassing the entire GTHA. Toronto and Hamilton would be de-amalgamated (but with York and East York staying with Toronto), and the Upper Tier governments (Peel, Halton, Durham, York) would be abolished. Every municipality would be given seats in council based on population. I did a chart a while ago actually, and I concluded that 75,000/seat was the magic number to get a good balance.

Metro would be responsible for things like transit, master planning, major roadways, utilities, and police/fire/ambulance. The local municipalities would still have control of things like Site Plan approval, ZBLs, garbage collection, etc.

This sounds a lot like London England. I like their system, but it leads to some issues. Try figuring out the different rules for parking in each borough without getting a ticket.

 

[gweed123]

This sounds a lot like London England. I like their system, but it leads to some issues. Try figuring out the different rules for parking in each borough without getting a ticket.

I'll have to read up on their system. And as for parking, it's confusing enough now with the rules in each municipality, so that wouldn't really change much, haha.

But yes, it seems that big cities need this kind of over-arching regional government, because most of the big problems are regional problems. Without some sort of collaborative entity in place to direct, you're going to get piecemeal solutions, at best.

 

[snowystar]

I asked a very similar question of the staff in Ottawa, since their LRT is similar in design to Eglinton. A high floor, automated system like Vancouver's seems to fit best at first look but what it comes to is future expansion and in Toronto's case compatibility with the other lines. Low floor tram trains seems to be the going preference in the province right now, and will probably lead to increased buying power in the future, and will help maintenance in the future by having a common vehicle design in Toronto.

This would make sense if they are building a brand new system. However, for Toronto's case, it is replacing an existing one involving writing down hundreds of million dollar worth of usable asset (ie. guideway and station). I think I've asked this before - how much extra are they paying for this conversion, and how much can they save on future vehicle maintenance and purchase? Lets assume the conversion cost 500M extra and could save 3M/year on operating cost and 2M per vehicle purchase, and the vehicle life cycle is 30 years - it would take more than 90 years just to break even. As structures typically built to last 75-100 years, no matter what's being built, it would most likely have to undergone extensive retrofit before that time. So, would it really make sense to spend so much more to get the little saving from standardizing the fleet, when there are plenty of other alternatives available?

 

[Rainforest]

I think I've asked this before - how much extra are they paying for this conversion

Nothing. Conversion / upgrade is needed either way (to LRT, or to larger MK-II ICTS vehicles).

They estimated the costs of both options (conversion / upgrade, plus extension to Malvern Centre), and they came very close (actually, ICTS a tiny bit more expensive).

Taking into account the fleet commonality argument, and the flexibility of buying new vehicles in future, LRT wins clearly.

 

[Sir Novelty Fashion]

I called the Crosstown office and I asked them why they weren't elevating, using Primove or extending it as SRT and using the new 67 meter {expandable to one long 102 metres} Innovia MK111 SkyTrain cars. They had never heard of the new MK111 SkyTrain cars and had not even seen MK11 that Vancouver has had for 17 years, never heard of Primove, and didn't know about elevation.

This conversation started a month ago and I have yet to get an email answer...

The Crosstown public outreach office's job isn't to have arguments about technology decisions that were approved years ago at the political level (and then, excruciatingly, un-made, then re-made), and ratified all the way up the chain to the premier's office, such that any attempt to alter them, even by the elected representatives of the people of Toronto, has received a curt response to bugger off.

(I'm not sure how you imagined this going down. Someone in the Crosstown constituency office getting your e-mail, slapping her head, and saying "The Mark THREE! How could we have forgotten the Mark THREE!" and pressing a large red panic button labelled "STOP EVERYTHING.")

I think that office is going to be much more receptive to public feedback on the issues that are currently before it: alignment, station design, what colour to paint the trains.

 

[BurlOak]

Are you suggesting that the professional planners haven't considered the elevated Skytrain option? It was publicly proposed by McCuaig himself in 2010 after Ford was elected. But it got no support from any faction on council. Since then Metrolinx has signed onto 2 different plans for transit on Eglinton, and neither one included elevation (except for the SRT section). Your plan has no political support in Toronto. Best to forget it, as Metrolinx has.

I recall one article about elevating the ECLRT back in 2011, after Ford was elected. I do not recall any open feedback from any politician. Neither the Left or Right came out in favour of it, or opposed to it. There were not even vague details on where it would run, how many stations, and how much it would save over a fully burried option. The impression left was that Metrolinx was considering elevated and would have a bit more detail to the musings of McCuaig so that the public and political level could make an informed decision. Even up until Stintz and the other Councillors killed the Ford plan I was expecting the elevated option to be released as a compromise.

My conclusion is that gweed123 is correct and the majority of working level planners and engineers strongly favour the elevated option. However, the senior management of Metrolinx, who are stongly influended by the government of the day, were told to essentially to revert back to the Transit City plan. The government was highly worried that the conservative movement was entering Toronto and they would not have a chance in the next election if the Conservatives start winning seats in Toronto. Thus, the goal became about making Ford look bad and not to make transit work well.

I do agree that until the political climate changes there will be no consideration of an elevated line. In the short timelines remaining, this could only occur with a Provincial election.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

BurlOak:

My conclusion is that gweed123 is correct and the majority of working level planners and engineers strongly favour the elevated option. However, the senior management of Metrolinx, who are stongly influended by the government of the day, were told to essentially to revert back to the Transit City plan. The government was highly worried that the conservative movement was entering Toronto and they would not have a chance in the next election if the Conservatives start winning seats in Toronto. Thus, the goal became about making Ford look bad and not to make transit work well.

I think it is less about making Ford look bad (when you think about it, as much as Metrolinx tried to stay away from the mudslinging, they didn't get away entirely unscathed in this affair) but the unwillingness to delay movement on the file any further. In any case, should the situation warrant, there is nothing to preclude elevating the line in the future.

do agree that until the political climate changes there will be no consideration of an elevated line. In the short timelines remaining, this could only occur with a Provincial election.

Given the political/fiscal climate, any changes would probably be unfavourable - in the form of delays if not cancellation.

AoD

 

[leopetr]

This would make sense if they are building a brand new system. However, for Toronto's case, it is replacing an existing one involving writing down hundreds of million dollar worth of usable asset (ie. guideway and station).

1. The station at Kennedy is hated. The plan to move it underground to the concourse level to make the transfer easier was introduced before Transit City, back when the plan was to upgrade to ICTS Mark II.

2. The most expensive part of the guideway is the tunnel past Ellesmere. That tunnel is too small for ICTS Mark II or Mark III and has to be rebuilt regardless of whether you're rebuilding it as LRT or ICTS.

3. Bombardier has no interest in making more crappy Mark I vehicles after the current ones die.

 

[voxpopulicosmicum]

The Crosstown public outreach office's job isn't to have arguments about technology decisions that were approved years ago at the political level (and then, excruciatingly, un-made, then re-made), and ratified all the way up the chain to the premier's office, such that any attempt to alter them, even by the elected representatives of the people of Toronto, has received a curt response to bugger off.

(I'm not sure how you imagined this going down. Someone in the Crosstown constituency office getting your e-mail, slapping her head, and saying "The Mark THREE! How could we have forgotten the Mark THREE!" and pressing a large red panic button labelled "STOP EVERYTHING.")

I think that office is going to be much more receptive to public feedback on the issues that are currently before it: alignment, station design, what colour to paint the trains.

Thank you.

 

[k10ery]

I recall one article about elevating the ECLRT back in 2011, after Ford was elected. I do not recall any open feedback from any politician. Neither the Left or Right came out in favour of it, or opposed to it. There were not even vague details on where it would run, how many stations, and how much it would save over a fully burried option. The impression left was that Metrolinx was considering elevated and would have a bit more detail to the musings of McCuaig so that the public and political level could make an informed decision. Even up until Stintz and the other Councillors killed the Ford plan I was expecting the elevated option to be released as a compromise.

My conclusion is that gweed123 is correct and the majority of working level planners and engineers strongly favour the elevated option. However, the senior management of Metrolinx, who are stongly influended by the government of the day, were told to essentially to revert back to the Transit City plan. The government was highly worried that the conservative movement was entering Toronto and they would not have a chance in the next election if the Conservatives start winning seats in Toronto. Thus, the goal became about making Ford look bad and not to make transit work well.

I do agree that until the political climate changes there will be no consideration of an elevated line. In the short timelines remaining, this could only occur with a Provincial election.

A decision about elevation has got to be made by elected politicians not planners/bureaucrats. This was true even before Ford politicized this debate with the "subways" mantra - because you know local residents would scream about elevation.

So Metrolinx put the idea out there. If Ford was serious about saying no to surface rail - and a bit smarter than I guess he is - then he could have picked this up and become the advocate for elevation. But he didn't, no one did, and now there is really no appetite for reopening the file.

So it's not ignorance that prevents elevation, and it's not some anti-Ford conspiracy. But if there's no political constituency for it then it's not going to happen. Time for us all to move on.

 

[snowystar]

Nothing. Conversion / upgrade is needed either way (to LRT, or to larger MK-II ICTS vehicles).

They estimated the costs of both options (conversion / upgrade, plus extension to Malvern Centre), and they came very close (actually, ICTS a tiny bit more expensive).

Taking into account the fleet commonality argument, and the flexibility of buying new vehicles in future, LRT wins clearly.

The keyword is "other alternatives" - other technologies (third rail rotary motor?), other operating conditions (shorter train, higher headway?), different requirements, combination of technologies, etc. The report seems almost black and white as its either long LRT or ICTS trains, and it is set up in a way that either options would be very expensive. For instance, they got the cost estimate of the ICTS yard from Vancouver, but due to TTC's different "maintenance practice", the yard would cost 200M more here. AFAIK, Vancouver's yard doesn't even cost 200M. So what's with this special "maintenance practice" that would more than double the cost? And how come a MkII train in Toronto would only hold 70 people while the same train in Vancouver can hold 134? Is it not allowed to have more than 30 standees per vehicle in Toronto? The same applies to LRVs, but to a less degree.

I'm not sure about the LRT options, but comparing the ICTS option, Vancouver's Expo Line have 65% higher capacity and 2.5x longer, but served with only 60% more trains. And yet the maintenance center in Toronto is going to cost 200M more? Why is it so expensive to build anything in Toronto...