[ViveleCanada]

TTC Meeting No. 2035
Tuesday, September 24, 2019
1:00 PM

From link.

Presentations/Reports/Other Business
Subway Platform Gap Retrofit Program (For Action)

It might just be me, but I don't remember the T1 cars having any serious vertical gap between the cars and platform when they ran on Line 1 or even on Line 2. It seems as though the "vertical gap" problem started being a problem when the TR's came in. I find it strange that they would modify the platforms rather than retrofit the trains to be level with the platform.

 

[Steve X]

Over 20 years ago, the TTC calculated that there is a flat cost of $3mil a year simply in overheads and staffing to operate a garage - regardless of its size - for one year. (All being equal, that's the equivalent of $4.3mil today.) This is what informed the decision to close two smaller garages and consolidate them in one (Eglinton), and why the minimum garage size is now considered to be 250 buses.

If you operate many smaller garages instead of a couple of big ones, that is an additional cost that the TTC will have to bear and with absolutely no net benefit to the amount of service put on the street. Is that really a wise decision?

For the record, heavy maintenance is already only done at 2 sites, both of which are in the Hillcrest Complex. What is done at each garage is by no means considered "heavy".

Dan

I was thinking if they can save on the property cost by selling the air rights while reduce deadheading distance with garages much closer to the area they intend to serve (e.g. downtown), the extra operating cost would be minimized while making garages a bit more affordable to build. Of course this isn't Europe so working a deal with developers might not work out.

 

[Richard White]

It might just be me, but I don't remember the T1 cars having any serious vertical gap between the cars and platform when they ran on Line 1 or even on Line 2. It seems as though the "vertical gap" problem started being a problem when the TR's came in. I find it strange that they would modify the platforms rather than retrofit the trains to be level with the platform.

I always thought it was an issue with the shocks on the train not with the platforms themselves.

That said I have noticed a gap that wasn't existing with the H series trains.

 

[smallspy]

I was thinking if they can save on the property cost by selling the air rights while reduce deadheading distance with garages much closer to the area they intend to serve (e.g. downtown), the extra operating cost would be minimized while making garages a bit more affordable to build. Of course this isn't Europe so working a deal with developers might not work out.

It doesn't change the fact that it costs $4+mil just to keep the lights and heat on, regardless of the size of the garage.

Dan

 

[Jonny5]

I was thinking if they can save on the property cost by selling the air rights while reduce deadheading distance with garages much closer to the area they intend to serve (e.g. downtown), the extra operating cost would be minimized while making garages a bit more affordable to build. Of course this isn't Europe so working a deal with developers might not work out.

Building above a garage downtown might be difficult and unsightly. I assume you are talking about the garage being below ground here, if not, let me know what you mean. You're probably going to need minimum two independant access points into and out of the place, and you probably want a third that is perhaps a dedicated employee/TTC non-service vehicle access point. It's going to kill the streets around the area with a flood of driveways and traffic.

If you are collecting air rights income then the building above it will also face the challenge of paying the TTC in perpetuity simply to be there, and then also not having any ground level retail to earn income from. That's not going to be much of a desirable building to own and rent commercially, or to own as a residence.

I suppose if there was one place you might be able to pull it off it would be Moss Park. You would essentially have to shut it down for a whole 18 months, and then build the park back on top of the garage, with perhaps one corner redeveloped into a residential tower to pay for it all. This could service the Sherbourne, Bay, Parliament, Wellesley and Cherry/Esplanade/Fort York buses, with all heavy maintenance done elsewhere. Though as of now you could easily throw this out in the Portlands for several years until the DRL/OL is finished and the whole bus service downtown is reconfigured.

 

[Streety McCarface]

Why are we considering building a garage downtown where the property is insanely valuable, and the bulk of the surface network is served by the Streetcar system? Downtown needs more streetcar storage long term (beyond 10 years from now, and I don't believe an upgraded Hillcrest will be enough space by 2030), and the streetcars don't have the flexibility of deadheading 5-10 km to start their route. East York, Dufferin Grove, and The Annex (west old town in general) are in greater need of bus storage than Downtown, and good luck trying to sell air rights in any of those streetcar suburbs, let alone build a facility there. .

 

[littlewill1166]

I don't get why there needs to be a full-sized garage. The TTC already had properties downtown to store busses overnight to reduce the storage/deadheading problem (Dufferin Gate Loop, Exhibition Loop, Wellsley Station).

 

[DSC]

I don't get why there needs to be a full-sized garage. The TTC already had properties downtown to store busses overnight to reduce the storage/deadheading problem (Dufferin Gate Loop, Exhibition Loop, Wellsley Station).

Buses need attention every day even if only cleaning and filling with gas. This is mostly done at night so it is not like your car that just sits around when you are in bed. Also, having to dispatch drivers to a variety of small (not secure) overnight 'parking places' every morning makes no sense. Of course, some garages do not need to do 'heavy maintenance" but I think that is already the situation.

 

[Northern Light]

If a garage is built after McNicoll it should be in close proximity to the core; if only to provide a source of shuttle buses (ideally artics) for unexpected to subway shutdowns.

That doesn't mean it needs to be directly in the core; but something considerably closer than Eglinton, Birchmount or Queensway, for sure.

I think the logical assembly would the site currently used by Greyhound in the Portlands, combined with an adjacent self-storage facility.

I measured the block and as a one-storey garage site it would be close to the size of Birchmount (47,000m2, vs 52,000); If you add one deck, you could easily consolidate the Lakeshore Garage of Wheel Trans to the site; and still have a fairly normative sized standard bus garage.

The only obvious site I saw in the west of downtown area was Exhbition Place, which I think only works if you want to go underground below the current surface parking, located on the Lakeshore side.

 

[drum118]

How about more of these cars see service like this until they die???
TTC marks the end of a streetcar era with a splash of colour

 

[littlewill1166]

Buses need attention every day even if only cleaning and filling with gas. This is mostly done at night so it is not like your car that just sits around when you are in bed. Also, having to dispatch drivers to a variety of small (not secure) overnight 'parking places' every morning makes no sense. Of course, some garages do not need to do 'heavy maintenance" but I think that is already the situation.

It's not like they're not parking certain vehicles overnight anyways https://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/canad...een-rolling-through-toronto-station-1.2263273

 

[smallspy]

I don't get why there needs to be a full-sized garage. The TTC already had properties downtown to store busses overnight to reduce the storage/deadheading problem (Dufferin Gate Loop, Exhibition Loop, Wellsley Station).

Because those facilities aren't designed to store buses for any substantial length of time. They aren't secure, they don't have facilities to allow for washing and servicing of vehicles, they have no facilities to store and empty fareboxes, nor sufficient parking for employee's vehicles while they're out driving the buses.

If a garage is built after McNicoll it should be in close proximity to the core; if only to provide a source of shuttle buses (ideally artics) for unexpected to subway shutdowns.

The next garage - it's already in the planning stages - will be in the western part of the city. It will also be the first garage to allow for storage and servicing of both regular and Wheel-Trans fleets.

Dan

 

[Jonny5]

If a garage is built after McNicoll it should be in close proximity to the core; if only to provide a source of shuttle buses (ideally artics) for unexpected to subway shutdowns.

Unexpected subway shutdowns aren't being covered by a new or changed garage location. The buses would either all be in service already where they are now, or they would be at the garage with no operators there to drive them anywhere. Given how our system is and has been for a decade now, even the most elaborate plans requiring a successful activation and deployment of millions of dollars worth of city property and staff is going to boost relief capacity in the event of a subway shutdown from like 1% to 1.5% of needed capacity. And all that it will still probably take at least 1 hour and probably 3 to get anything really going.

 

[Northern Light]

Unexpected subway shutdowns aren't being covered by a new or changed garage location. The buses would either all be in service already where they are now, or they would be at the garage with no operators there to drive them anywhere. Given how our system is and has been for a decade now, even the most elaborate plans requiring a successful activation and deployment of millions of dollars worth of city property and staff is going to boost relief capacity in the event of a subway shutdown from like 1% to 1.5% of needed capacity. And all that it will still probably take at least 1 hour and probably 3 to get anything really going.

2 thoughts, first, my understanding (perhaps to be corrected) is that each division operates with a 'spare board' to ensure sick drivers can be replaced; as well as some number of vehicles during rush hours and other busy periods which are 'run as directed'.

I would assume said operators and buses are among those that would be dispatched for shuttle service, along with redirecting buses off of busier routes.

Second.....why do you have near unreadable light-grey font in your post?

 

[smallspy]

2 thoughts, first, my understanding (perhaps to be corrected) is that each division operates with a 'spare board' to ensure sick drivers can be replaced; as well as some number of vehicles during rush hours and other busy periods which are 'run as directed'.

This is correct. RAD buses vary in number, and are usually no more than about 6 per division during each rush hour.

I would assume said operators and buses are among those that would be dispatched for shuttle service, along with redirecting buses off of busier routes.

That is the current plan at Operations, and there are no plans to change that anytime soon. They will also try and call drivers who are ending their shift and offer them overtime to operate the shuttles as well.

Dan