[drum118]

The ALRVs are already falling apart now with a very low reliability rate. An average of 2500 km between failures means they spend a week on the road and they are back in the shop. I doubt the rebuilts would last very long. If the TTC can retire them and run slightly less service, they rather do that than spending a fortune on them. They can just run buses substitutes again when the Eglinton line opens in 2021. They are only rebuilding 60 cars cause they will get BBD to pay for them. No way will they spent a large amount to keep them running if it's coming directly from the TTC budgets.

TTC would need another yard in the 2020s. Hopefully they can pick up a small parcel of land to store 25 or so cars around St Clair. It doesn't need to be a full fledged carhouse, just something that can do daily inspections and rotate it with Leslie Barns when necessary. Although the Port lands have more space, they should not build another carhouse there. A major blockage or power outage would leave the streets dry. Probably better to have a new large carhouse in the west end.

By the mid 2020s, maybe we'll see more development along Lake Shore in Mimico and New Toronto's industrial sites. If development booms there, a network of new lines could be built along Queensway, Kipling South and etc. It would make more sense to have a new carhouse there. Plus there's the Waterfront LRT.

There is no land in the St Clair area for another yard.

Hillcrest could be use to store 511 & 512 and cut the deadhead 90%.

There a lot of empty industrial land south of the rail corridor in Mimico to support a large yard. Would require a long service track from the Lake Shore to the yard.

Until you put a line on the Queensway or Kipling, can't get to a lot of empty industrial land there. It may require a long service track as well, depending on location.

Having yards on both sides of the city will help in reducing the deadhead time to get cars to/from routes than today.

Was very surprised when TTC announced they were rebuilding 30 ALRVs for an extra 10 years of service considering they been nothing but problems and were first to go when the new fleet arrived. Since they carry more riders than a CLRV, can see why the need to rebuild them.

 

[dowlingm]

It would be feasible to operate uptown Flexities on 512 but

• every loop would have to go due to curve radius restrictions
• the rest of the track ripped and regauged
• the existing St Clair West transfer and St Clair terminal would have to be rethought as straight-through/crossover
• the 600V power infrastructure changed out for 750V, possibly requiring new facilities if any vaults shared with the subway (probably a good idea either way given the recent outage)

It might work as part of Jane LRT since the new track could sever Gunn's loop and work its way east, but boy would it be disruptive, not least since the track centres would have to change, and stops adjusted, to account for the extra 11m width of uptown cars.

 

[Steve X]

There is no land in the St Clair area for another yard.

Hillcrest could be use to store 511 & 512 and cut the deadhead 90%.

There a lot of empty industrial land south of the rail corridor in Mimico to support a large yard. Would require a long service track from the Lake Shore to the yard.

Until you put a line on the Queensway or Kipling, can't get to a lot of empty industrial land there. It may require a long service track as well, depending on location.

Having yards on both sides of the city will help in reducing the deadhead time to get cars to/from routes than today.

Was very surprised when TTC announced they were rebuilding 30 ALRVs for an extra 10 years of service considering they been nothing but problems and were first to go when the new fleet arrived. Since they carry more riders than a CLRV, can see why the need to rebuild them.

I'm wondering if the Ken Shaw Lexus Toyota site is large enough to keep 25 or so cars. Probably building a storage there would probably cause a major uproar from the residents.

 

[Amare]

By the mid 2020s, maybe we'll see more development along Lake Shore in Mimico and New Toronto's industrial sites. If development booms there, a network of new lines could be built along Queensway, Kipling South and etc. It would make more sense to have a new carhouse there. Plus there's the Waterfront LRT.

Well there is a large plot of empty lands on Birmingham (west of Islington and north of Lake Shore) which would be excellent for a carhouse. It doesnt require a lot of trackage (literally only about 200 metres of track maximum) and it is owned by the city (through Build Toronto).

If the city was smart they would keep it, as there would be very litle opposition against a development like that since Willowbrook is right next door.

But of course this is the City of Toronto we're talking about so they'll sell it off as soon as soil remediation isnt a large concern.

 

[drum118]

I'm wondering if the Ken Shaw Lexus Toyota site is large enough to keep 25 or so cars. Probably building a storage there would probably cause a major uproar from the residents.

First of all, major uproar by the locals as noted.

Too close to residential and don't think there is enough room to do it. Too long since I last look at this area. One area that could be use is the land in the rail corridor west of Jane St that was used by the Road Railer, but not enough room for a loop.

Need to proceed with the long over due EA to take 512 west as plan and requires funding both on the EA side as well building the line.

Big issues, has the city bought all the land yet to widen St Clair in the first place and if not what is it going to cost then to do it??

 

[muller877]

There is no land in the St Clair area for another yard.

Hillcrest could be use to store 511 & 512 and cut the deadhead 90%.

There a lot of empty industrial land south of the rail corridor in Mimico to support a large yard. Would require a long service track from the Lake Shore to the yard.
.

How about creating some density? Multi-level storage facilities? I don't know the financial cost but we only have finite land in Toronto.

 

[drum118]

It would be feasible to operate uptown Flexities on 512 but

• every loop would have to go due to curve radius restrictions
• the rest of the track ripped and regauged
• the existing St Clair West transfer and St Clair terminal would have to be rethought as straight-through/crossover
• the 600V power infrastructure changed out for 750V, possibly requiring new facilities if any vaults shared with the subway (probably a good idea either way given the recent outage)

It might work as part of Jane LRT since the new track could sever Gunn's loop and work its way east, but boy would it be disruptive, not least since the track centres would have to change, and stops adjusted, to account for the extra 11m width of uptown cars.

Getting rid of loops and going duel end would solve a lot of issues today.

During the rebuilding the 512 ROW, you remove the centre poles to increase the centre to centre of tracks that should happen day one, but for the car width. Restring the wires from the poles. Would make EMS very happy as well TTC bus drivers.

You build the various crossovers along the route and no big deal in regauged the tracks. Platforms may come an issue.

Changing power is a must. Yonge loop would remain, but St Clair West could become a straight through with walkover to the station. The south wall has to be move south to allow a platform for the eastbound and this would require rebuilding the roof and the road.

You would get rid of both Oakwood and Gunns Loop since you only need a crossover to go east.

It would allow the CP land at Jane St to be use as a yard if the line can't be connected to the Jane Line to get to the Eglinton Yard.

 

[nfitz]

We're a long way from needing another yard. The current yards can hold 264. And there's always some in service - a minimum of 14 currently - that's 278. That brings us to 2030 ... and presumably there'll be an opportunity to use Hillcrest sooner or later.

 

[drum118]

How about creating some density? Multi-level storage facilities? I don't know the financial cost but we only have finite land in Toronto.

Don't see why not considering its done in Europe. I saw a bus garage with 2 levels over a carhouse.

 

[crs1026]

I hope we are a long way from reguaging St. Clair. That's almost new track, it''s set in concrete, and (unlike the rest of the city trackage) it's all of the same age. The sensible strategy would be to regauge when it wears out, in 20 years.

If space is an issue, Hillcrest is the first place to consider.

With the current Flexity order being brand new, there is no rush to regauge the rest of the network. When the DRL is built, there may be opportunity to trim the TTC gauge lines a little - for instance, do just the west end of 501. That would free up enough cars for any added needs on the existing routes.

If the TTC seriously proposes regauging, they are going to need a really good lifecycle plan that matches the wearout of rail to the Flexity fleet's life cycle. By the time the new cars wear out, there may be models on the market that take the TTC spec in stride, which would make the whole thing moot.

- Paul

 

[drum118]

I hope we are a long way from reguaging St. Clair. That's almost new track, it''s set in concrete, and (unlike the rest of the city trackage) it's all of the same age. The sensible strategy would be to regauge when it wears out, in 20 years.

If space is an issue, Hillcrest is the first place to consider.

With the current Flexity order being brand new, there is no rush to regauge the rest of the network. When the DRL is built, there may be opportunity to trim the TTC gauge lines a little - for instance, do just the west end of 501. That would free up enough cars for any added needs on the existing routes.

If the TTC seriously proposes regauging, they are going to need a really good lifecycle plan that matches the wearout of rail to the Flexity fleet's life cycle. By the time the new cars wear out, there may be models on the market that take the TTC spec in stride, which would make the whole thing moot.

- Paul

I would be very surprised to see St Clair regauge by 2040 just in time for the next fleet

 

[Amare]

We're a long way from needing another yard. The current yards can hold 264. And there's always some in service - a minimum of 14 currently - that's 278. That brings us to 2030 ... and presumably there'll be an opportunity to use Hillcrest sooner or later.

True enough, but that shouldnt stop the city from protecting land for future streetcar/bus garage use. The city has a very poor history of doing so, and NIMBYism is only going to get worse from here on out. The McNicoll NIMBY's will look like a joke compared to what we're going to see in the future.

And to be honest, I really don't think the TTC will use Hillcrest as yard storage unless they were really desperate (ie: last resort, no other possible options).

 

[W. K. Lis]

There were protests by vegans against the animal slaughterhouses in the Keele & St. Clair area last weekend. We could always replace the slaughterhourses with carbarns? Be careful what you wish for.

 

[drum118]

Second hand, but 4418 is supposed to be in route to Toronto, which mean TTC will/could have it Monday/Tuesday next week just in time for TTC meeting.

Its not the end of the month of all things, which means we could see another car been ship next week

 

[EnviroTO]

I don't think it will ever make sense to change the guage. None of the issues Bombardier had with delivery were guage related. I don't even think gauge had much impact on price with curve radius and power requirements having a much larger impact. As long as the world hasn't adopted a standard gauge in all countries and a standard vehicle width, as long as the TTC urban fleet is significantly large, and as long as there is no call for route integration, there is no big benefit to reguaging track.