[salsa]

A reminder that there's a public meeting tonight.

 

[steveintoronto]

Either the whole region gets subway expansion or none of us do. Infighting among ourselves over which area is more deserving is what's holding us back.

Absolutely agree on that, and that means no more subways. RER through the core in tunnel is the way to do this.

Not to flog a dead horse, but I can't help but keep hearkening back to Jane Whitfield's circa 2006 mayoral campaign plan to expand the subway network incrementally by 2 kilometres per year. A never-ending construction scheme would of had us closer to finishing SSE, DRL and even Sheppard by now.

Highly disagree. There must be a project with a detailed business case made, and funding, which has become problematic in Toronto's case, finely detailed from the onset and delivered by a *project limited company* that includes the private sector in many cases, and public money. Crossrail provides a stunning model of this that is now being marketed (no charge) as a case study for other cities and governments to emulate. It's coming in slightly under-budget, and looking to be ahead of schedule. It does have the full force of the UK Parliament behind it, a detail difficult, but not impossible, to do in Canada's case. Metrolinx is federally chartered, at least for the rail division.

Meantime:

To RER A, or to RER C? How Paris typifies the two models for cross-city commuter train lines

• January 11, 2017

Since World War Two, some cities have sought to extend rapid transit into their suburbs by leveraging legacy commuter rail lines. Building on prewar examples from Berlin and Tokyo, they initiated a variety of treatments to modernise their commuter rail: electrification, integrated fares, high all-day frequency, and cross-city connections.

All this turns commuter rail into an express metro line. The city that has done the most in this direction is Paris, which since the 1970s has built a network called the RER, with five lines labeled A through E.

It is the cross-city connections that are the costliest to provide, since they almost always involve new tunnels under city center. Cities can build cross-city tunnels in two ways. One approach involves high investment: the tunnels are longer and involve several stations, often in difficult-to-construct locations. The main example is the RER A, whose construction involved about 17 km of new tunnel and seven underground stations, running on an east-west axis through central Paris. [...]

http://www.citymetric.com/transport...o-models-cross-city-commuter-train-lines-2704

Toronto is mentioned a number of times as a "fortunate case" due to the loop across being intact via Union Station. Not realized by the author is that Union is saturated, or more aptly, the approaches to Union are, and a very real case can be made to loop many RER services under King or Queen streets in tunnel, and along a similar alignment to the latest proposed DRL connecting to extant GO lines at either end as Crossrail does brilliantly. Crossrail service, btw, will be a train every 2.5 minutes.

What the RER A vs. C Contrast Means for New York Regional Rail

• About
• Comment Policy
• Construction Costs
• Post Queue
• 2017/02/07

A few weeks ago, I published a piece in City Metric contrasting two ways of through-running regional rail, which I identify with the RER A and C in Paris. The RER C (or Thameslink) way is to minimally connect two stub-end terminals pointing in opposite directions. The RER A (or Crossrail) way is to build long city-center tunnels based on urban service demand but then connect to legacy commuter lines to go into the suburbs. Crossrail and the RER A are the two most expensive rail tunnels ever built outside New York, but the result is coherent east-west regional lines, whereas the RER C is considerably more awkward. In this post I’d like to explain what this means for New York. [...]

https://pedestrianobservations.word...-c-contrast-means-for-new-york-regional-rail/

This fully applies to Toronto. When does Toronto ever get past the "Subways, Subways, Subways" fixation? It's so incredibly past tense in any other progressive world-class city. For what it costs to bore a subway (and the DRL must go deep due to geological conditions) for slightly more, you can have multiples more yield per investment, and have the province pay, but also have it as part of Metrolinx.

And fund the project by the nascent Investment/Infrastructure Bank, for arm's length distance from meddling politicians, and for the benefit of cold-hearted and beady eyed investors (and the taxpayers will share in this by having seats on the board), and a team who know how to get maximum return per cost of investment.

What a concept. Too bad it's going to fly over the heads of most Torontonians while the advanced world remains a generation or two ahead of us...

 

[jaybe]

Either the whole region gets subway expansion or none of us do. Infighting among ourselves over which area is more deserving is what's holding us back.

This is the Ford mantra of "subways, subways, subways." The reality is we are faced with limited resources. All of us, Governments included, regularly make decisions on how to allocate scarce resources. The problem is we have politicians driving the funding bus rather than an arms length Agency. Decisions are being made based on criteria other than what is the most effective transit solution.

Scarborough would be much better served with 3 LRT lines (Eglinton extension to UofT, the SRT replacement and a Sheppard line) rather than a single subway stop at the STC.

 

[OneCity]

This is the Ford mantra of "subways, subways, subways." The reality is we are faced with limited resources. All of us, Governments included, regularly make decisions on how to allocate scarce resources. The problem is we have politicians driving the funding bus rather than an arms length Agency. Decisions are being made based on criteria other than what is the most effective transit solution.

Scarborough would be much better served with 3 LRT lines (Eglinton extension to UofT, the SRT replacement and a Sheppard line) rather than a single subway stop at the STC.

This is the Miller mantra "LRT LRT LRT". Scarborough would be better served by 2 subways and and LRT loop, Scarborough would be better server with 2 LRT's and a subway to SCC. Scarborough would be much better served with an SLRT connected to Eglinton LRT and a Sheppard Subway and the other LRT. So many better plans to serve Scarborough which take into account the existing infrastructure.

Tory's subway are pretty ridiculous. But the SLRT is not what would serve Scarborough better long term

 

[steveintoronto]

This is the Miller mantra "LRT LRT LRT".

You know, you absolutely exemplify what's so freakin' small about Toronto.

This isn't even about Toronto really. It's about *best practice*. Try learning from other cities. Ones generations ahead of us.
As you were...

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Funny thing about "LRT LRT LRT" Miller was that more subways were initiated under his leadership than any other mayor.

 

[Hopkins123]

This is the Ford mantra of "subways, subways, subways." The reality is we are faced with limited resources. All of us, Governments included, regularly make decisions on how to allocate scarce resources. The problem is we have politicians driving the funding bus rather than an arms length Agency. Decisions are being made based on criteria other than what is the most effective transit solution.

Scarborough would be much better served with 3 LRT lines (Eglinton extension to UofT, the SRT replacement and a Sheppard line) rather than a single subway stop at the STC.

No, this isn't as simplistic as "subways, subways, subways" for subways' sake; it more about the line already exists as a subway so let's just extend it out to a 'natural' terminus or end-point instead of pigeonholing it at Kennedy (or in Sheppard's case Don Mills) in perpetuity then commence building a new line with different technology to carry commuters heading in the same direction of travel, for no valid reason other than marginal cost savings at the end of the day.

Crosstown is being built as LRT from conception. Ergo any extension ought to also be as LRT. It isn't about technology, it's about preserving what's already in place.

To Steveintotonto's point, the DRL is a brand new line so the technology used doesn't have to necessarily be wed to subways as we know them, though it must be underground through downtown.

Grade-separated transit in general ain't cheap. And we're only diluding ourselves to think otherwise. Kicking the can down the road is unfair to the next generations whom will find it even more difficult than today's governments to fund these things.

 

[salsa]

This is the Miller mantra "LRT LRT LRT". Scarborough would be better served by 2 subways and and LRT loop, Scarborough would be better server with 2 LRT's and a subway to SCC. Scarborough would be much better served with an SLRT connected to Eglinton LRT and a Sheppard Subway and the other LRT. So many better plans to serve Scarborough which take into account the existing infrastructure.

Look, I understand that the Scarborough thread has been shut down and it's very difficult for you to take even a day off from re-debating it and talk about something else, but let's just give it a rest. Same for others.

 

[steveintoronto]

To Steveintotonto's point, the DRL is a brand new line so the technology used doesn't have to necessarily be wed to subways as we know them, though it must be underground through downtown.

My apologies if I'd mis-characterized your vector. We have much to discuss.

Look, I understand that the Scarborough thread has been shut down

I just checked, and indeed it is for a "few days".

I can't substantiate this:

Miller was that more subways were initiated under his leadership than any other mayor.

But did find this, which still holds true: (more than ever)

Miller says Toronto can't afford subway expansion
ctvtoronto.ca
Published Thursday, October 28, 2010 11:14PM EDT

Outgoing Mayor David Miller said Thursday that the cupboard is bare for anyone hoping to build new subways in Toronto.

"There's been a divergence of views about transit," he said in a speech to the Toronto Rotary Club.

"But the truth is, we have no money for subways, so subways won't get built. Ultimately, it's up to the people we've elected." [...]

http://toronto.ctvnews.ca/miller-says-toronto-can-t-afford-subway-expansion-1.568447

No use in belabouring the point. it's beyond politics almost, the money (as it has been provided before) just isn't there. And yet there's a *massive sum* waiting for a long-term, stable investment, *especially if the risk is underwritten by the taxpayer for what the taxpayer would have been on the hook for anyway!*

And the answer is with the Feds. And we've got to look beyond patchwork fixes and yesterday's transient tweaks. They're not giving anywhere near good value in many cases, and certainly wouldn't if repeated.

We've got to think *trans-jurisdictionally* and big to see a solution that endures. And it's RER. The real question is "Is Metrolinx up to the task?"

Bruce McCuaig just might have some actual answers in weeks to months. (his present platitudes came with the pre-requisite tie and pressed pants)

 

[Young Stats]

We've got to think *trans-jurisdictionally* and big to see a solution that endures. And it's RER. The real question is "Is Metrolinx up to the task?"
Bruce McCuaig just might have some actual answers in weeks to months. (his present platitudes came with the pre-requisite tie and pressed pants)

I don't think Metrolinx is up to the task. The reason is that in the eyes of Torontonians, 15 mins for RER is considered infrequent. In other words, in order for RER (as an alternative to DRL) to work RER needs TTC subway level frequencies and also to implement TTC fares within Toronto. The issue is that there's going to be capacity constraints even if the line is electrified or otherwise it would be waste of money.

 

[Young Stats]

Question: Would the cost of the DRL 'long' will drastically reduce if the labour force and the construction itself were fully automated?

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

Question: Would the cost of the DRL 'long' will drastically reduce if the labour force and the construction itself were fully automated?

Would we be factoring the R&D costs of developing such construction methods?

As costly as it is, I would say one of the benefits of a major infrastructure project like building a subway is the construction jobs that it produces, and the mulitplier effect on the economy that comes from those jobs and material consumption. Governments typically like saying "we created xx,xxx amount of jobs this month".

That's the quick answer. I don't know much about actual construction to comment whether automizing certain steps is feasible or profitable. I'd imagine some construction unions would have a problem with the idea too.

 

[steveintoronto]

in the eyes of Torontonians, 15 mins for RER is considered infrequent.

Crossrail runs every 2.5 mins, that should do it...In the event, this RER full bore tunnel could also host tram-trains, as detailed in an earlier post, same catenary, same platforms, same signalling system, as done in a number of cities in Europe, all of them generations ahead of us for transit.

in order for RER (as an alternative to DRL) to work RER needs TTC subway level frequencies and also to implement TTC fares within Toronto.

And? This is going to be in play long before the DRL is, *even if it is built as projected*! Which I find highly improbable.

The issue is that there's going to be capacity constraints even if the line is electrified or otherwise it would be waste of money.

The waste of money is a half-baked solution to 'make-do' with what is fine to be left as is, albeit with improved signalling, but *by-passed*!

When are we going to stop throwing money into yesterday's subways? How many times can you rebuild the old Chevy before it's just time to get something better for the long haul and heavy lifting? Keep the old Chevy for day-to-day tasks, like going downtown a few blocks to the job.

Question: Would the cost of the DRL 'long' will drastically reduce if the labour force and the construction itself were fully automated?

TBMs are already highly automated. That's why the incremental cost to doing this RER/LRT in tunnel track and loading gauge is almost insignificant to doing it standard subway bore as per labour and tunnelling equipment costs.

It's like building a full sized sedan v. compact car. You still have to stamp out steering wheels, doorhandles and road-wheels and tires ...

Different sections of the DRL loop could have turn-backs to reduce headway time. Some would go to the edge of town. Some as far as the electrification could take them.

 

[innsertnamehere]

Funny thing about "LRT LRT LRT" Miller was that more subways were initiated under his leadership than any other mayor.

1?

 

[steveintoronto]

A picture speaks a thousand words: (without uttering a sound)