OK - as usual the TTC is giving us a project that will deliver less than promised and cost more. I've updated this post based on the fact that the proposed line has now been shortened. I didn't realize this until I went through the material a bit more carefully:
The original proposal calls for the Sheppard East line to be 13.6 km long. The maps now provided (at the EA consultation and online) have the line going from the Don Mills terminus to Morningside. This is only 12 km long.
I've adjusted the stop spacing listed in the text below - all three posts. Obviously, this will reduce the speed on this s-LRT (slow LRT) even further.
As we wait to find out if there will be a TTC strike tomorrow, I'd thought I'd wrap up some last thoughts on the Sheppard LRT.
Here are my conclusions:
COST
This line will end up with a cost of about $1.1 billion for the 12 km - from the Eastern end of teh Sheppard subway to Morningside. I expect the option to be recommended for the Don Mills interchange will be LRT under the 404. Additional cost items include:
- a service/storage depot for the streetcars - say $100 million
- grade crossing elimination at the GO line - say $150 million
- the 404 tunnel (as above) - say $150 million
- street-scaping (which is or isn't included in the $550 million - $40 million
- 10% for underestimation on the general line construction costs - $50 million
(I'd note that if there are indeed multiple rapid transit projects ongoing, particular engineering and skilled trades will be in short supply. This is going to add to the price.)
Add this up, we get: $1.045 billion
BENEFITS
- negigibly faster transit service (most of the benefit is washed by the longer stop spacing and service). [Note - if the Don Mills interchange forces people to trudge down to subway level - most people will actually have longer trips overall.]
- new street-scaping - which could be done without the streetcar line
DISRUPTIONS
- four year construction period (2009 - 2013).
UNKNOWN
- potential traffic impacts. If the TTC sticks with the 5-minute headway, there should be minimal disruption to the N-S arteries that cross the route
- any option for the Don Mills interchange will help with the 404/Sheppard congestion.
- trucks might have a problem with the U-turns
DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL
A chunk of the route is a city designated 'avenue'. In the 'avenue' concept, the city provides 'high order transit' - and this will turn the streets into a lush, tree-lined, walkable avenues.
I don't really buy this for Sheppard - and in general. The staff at last Tuesday's consultation were unable to tell me where this concept had worked. There are many cities with trams - but the trams go in and out of already built-up areas.
No doubt there are some lots on Sheppard E. that can be redeveloped. However, it's not true that there are vast sections.
My take is that the growth projections were picked to justify the LRT - i.e. "buses can't handle it and it's not enough to do a subway or RT". My A++!
WHAT COULD BE DONE
Sheppard could easily handle 3000 peak passengers (current is 1900) with a few adjustments:
1. Add 'scoot' transit priority - in Montreal, buses get a 10% speed improvement (and hence capacity) - $8 million
2. Add articulated buses for 50% of the schedule - gives a 25% capacity increase - $18 million
This pushes capacity to 2740 per hour - without any dedicated bus lanes. With a dedicated bus lane over the 404 (which would cost $$) , we'd be at 3000/hr peak direction easily - and speed would improve without taking away local services.
Showing posts with label Transit. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Transit. Show all posts
Friday, April 18, 2008
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
Sheppard LRT (Transit City) Consultation - Part II
Yesterday I penned some notes and observations on the TTC's initial public consultation on the Sheppard East LRT proposal. Here is more:
4. Connection to subway at Don Mills
The proposed LRT will connect to the Sheppard Subway. The TTC gives three options:
1. Surface connection at Don Mills - This would require expansion of the bridge over Hwy 404.
This is likely the least expensive option - but it stinks as a connection strategy because of the configuration of the Don Mills terminus.
2. Underground connection at Don Mills - This requires a tunnel under Hwy 404.
3. Extend Sheppard subway to Consumers Rd and build LRT connection there.
As the printed material provides suggests, this is likely the most expensive option - but the best for riders.
Note - in the original proposal, the connection at Don Mills would be underground:
Light rail service would operate from the underground transfer terminal at Don Mills Station, rising to the surface to operate the rest of the way in a dedicated right-of-way.
In option #1 above, the connection is not underground - but via stairs/elevators. This means that the TTC determined that it was not feasible to cross the 404 at surface AND have the streetcar line connect level with the subway.
As the TTC's printed material admits, going under Hwy 404 - with the subway or streetcars - is going to add even more to the project cost. (Transit City is already at $8.4 billion - on its way to $11 billion I'm going to guess.)
4. Connection to subway at Don Mills
The proposed LRT will connect to the Sheppard Subway. The TTC gives three options:
1. Surface connection at Don Mills - This would require expansion of the bridge over Hwy 404.
This is likely the least expensive option - but it stinks as a connection strategy because of the configuration of the Don Mills terminus.
2. Underground connection at Don Mills - This requires a tunnel under Hwy 404.
3. Extend Sheppard subway to Consumers Rd and build LRT connection there.
As the printed material provides suggests, this is likely the most expensive option - but the best for riders.
Note - in the original proposal, the connection at Don Mills would be underground:
Light rail service would operate from the underground transfer terminal at Don Mills Station, rising to the surface to operate the rest of the way in a dedicated right-of-way.
In option #1 above, the connection is not underground - but via stairs/elevators. This means that the TTC determined that it was not feasible to cross the 404 at surface AND have the streetcar line connect level with the subway.
As the TTC's printed material admits, going under Hwy 404 - with the subway or streetcars - is going to add even more to the project cost. (Transit City is already at $8.4 billion - on its way to $11 billion I'm going to guess.)
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
Sheppard LRT public consultation - updated
I've updated this for the corrected stop spacing.
Yours truly attended the TTC's initial public consultation on the proposed Sheppard East LRT.
Here's a rundown of the details - good, the bad and the we're not sure yet - with my two cents worth:
(Information is from the display boards, Gary Carr of the TTC and Praveeen John from URS consulting.)
The details:
1. Stops and spacing
The TTC presented a board showing:
Red - existing stops
Green - agreed upon stops
Yellow - To be determined
Counting the Green + Yellow, it seems to work out 550 metres between stops. The TTC guy explained that the stops are closer together (i.e. proposed) in the retail intensive stretch between Victoria Park and McGowan - and thus spaced wider along the residential stretches.
The stop spacing issue is the Achilles' heel of this streetcar plan. The stop spacing the TTC is floating here is slightly longer than I've read in other spaces. This is comparable to the Strasbourg tram - which has average speeds of about 21 km/hr. This is negligibly faster than the Sheppard buses today.
The drawback is longer (roughly double) walking distance to and from stops - especially in the residential sections. With the walk to Sheppard plus walking along, many people will be looking at walks to and from getting up to 1 km each way.
If you live on Sheppard, and are at a stop you'd be in luck. If not - the extra walking means that you lose the time you've gained due to vehicle speed. The improvement in speed (20 km / hr ==> 21 km / hr) gains the average rider (based on 7 km) 0.9 minutes each direction each day. However, the rider loses 1.8 of those minutes by having to walk another 150 meters at 5 km / hr.
My two cents - the 21 km / hr is an insufficient improvement to attract riders. The increased spacing actually make using the service less attractive for quick trips - because of the added time walking (and distance carrying groceries.)
My guess is that public pressure will result in more stops and lower speed. I'd guess that speed will end up about only 1 km/hr faster than today's bus service.
2. Street layout
The streetcars would run in a semi-private right-of-way - similar to those on Spadina and under (interminable) construction on St. Clair W.
The cross section diagrams presented showed three of the typical proposed cross sections:
1. Mid block - no station
Here there is no sidewalk cut. There are two traffic lanes. The traffic lanes are reduced by 20 cm from the current standard (now 3.5 m - proposed 3.3 m). There is space for bike lanes (1.5 m) on each side - and some street-scaping (shown as little trees on the schematic.)
2. Mid block - with streetcar station
The station locations will require 2.5 m of sidewalk cut on each side.
The stations themselves will have platforms 3 meters wide and 60 meters in length.
3. Intersections
The signalized intersections will provide for a U-turn phase for vehicles to access locations on the far side. There will be two traffic lanes in each direction (widths as described above) and a left-turning lane of 3.0 meters in width.
The length of the turning lane is not specified.
There was no information on the turning radii support for commercial vehicles - the issue that the TTC and city swept under the rug on St. Clair.
My two cents - I didn't have a chance to explore the section of Sheppard under study. It's hard to tell how much the sidewalk cuts will reduce the attractiveness of the street for pedestrians. The intersections on Sheppard have a bit more space than on St. Clair W - so perhaps the stuck trucks problem wont be as bad at is in St. Clair.
3. Trains
The TTC is proposing to run two car trains at 5 minute or so intervals.
My 2 cents - I actually agree with this approach. The non-train-based Spadina service is impossible to keep 'on track'. A 5 minute service interval allows signal systems to give the LRVs priority without completely stopping traffic in the other directions.
I would note that extrapolates out to about 32o LRVs for the overall proposed Transit City Network with 20 % spare factor. Add some cars for the Eglinton line - which might be three LRVs per train - and we're close to the 386 I calculated back last year. (See: http://hogtown.blogspot.com/2007_03_01_archive.html)
Of course, riders will lose about 1 minute for each wait - since the headway on Sheppard E is currently about 3 minutes. (Average wait will increase from 1.5 minutes to 2.5 minutes.)
MORE TOMORROW
Yours truly attended the TTC's initial public consultation on the proposed Sheppard East LRT.
Here's a rundown of the details - good, the bad and the we're not sure yet - with my two cents worth:
(Information is from the display boards, Gary Carr of the TTC and Praveeen John from URS consulting.)
The details:
1. Stops and spacing
The TTC presented a board showing:
Red - existing stops
Green - agreed upon stops
Yellow - To be determined
Counting the Green + Yellow, it seems to work out 550 metres between stops. The TTC guy explained that the stops are closer together (i.e. proposed) in the retail intensive stretch between Victoria Park and McGowan - and thus spaced wider along the residential stretches.
The stop spacing issue is the Achilles' heel of this streetcar plan. The stop spacing the TTC is floating here is slightly longer than I've read in other spaces. This is comparable to the Strasbourg tram - which has average speeds of about 21 km/hr. This is negligibly faster than the Sheppard buses today.
The drawback is longer (roughly double) walking distance to and from stops - especially in the residential sections. With the walk to Sheppard plus walking along, many people will be looking at walks to and from getting up to 1 km each way.
If you live on Sheppard, and are at a stop you'd be in luck. If not - the extra walking means that you lose the time you've gained due to vehicle speed. The improvement in speed (20 km / hr ==> 21 km / hr) gains the average rider (based on 7 km) 0.9 minutes each direction each day. However, the rider loses 1.8 of those minutes by having to walk another 150 meters at 5 km / hr.
My two cents - the 21 km / hr is an insufficient improvement to attract riders. The increased spacing actually make using the service less attractive for quick trips - because of the added time walking (and distance carrying groceries.)
My guess is that public pressure will result in more stops and lower speed. I'd guess that speed will end up about only 1 km/hr faster than today's bus service.
2. Street layout
The streetcars would run in a semi-private right-of-way - similar to those on Spadina and under (interminable) construction on St. Clair W.
The cross section diagrams presented showed three of the typical proposed cross sections:
1. Mid block - no station
Here there is no sidewalk cut. There are two traffic lanes. The traffic lanes are reduced by 20 cm from the current standard (now 3.5 m - proposed 3.3 m). There is space for bike lanes (1.5 m) on each side - and some street-scaping (shown as little trees on the schematic.)
2. Mid block - with streetcar station
The station locations will require 2.5 m of sidewalk cut on each side.
The stations themselves will have platforms 3 meters wide and 60 meters in length.
3. Intersections
The signalized intersections will provide for a U-turn phase for vehicles to access locations on the far side. There will be two traffic lanes in each direction (widths as described above) and a left-turning lane of 3.0 meters in width.
The length of the turning lane is not specified.
There was no information on the turning radii support for commercial vehicles - the issue that the TTC and city swept under the rug on St. Clair.
My two cents - I didn't have a chance to explore the section of Sheppard under study. It's hard to tell how much the sidewalk cuts will reduce the attractiveness of the street for pedestrians. The intersections on Sheppard have a bit more space than on St. Clair W - so perhaps the stuck trucks problem wont be as bad at is in St. Clair.
3. Trains
The TTC is proposing to run two car trains at 5 minute or so intervals.
My 2 cents - I actually agree with this approach. The non-train-based Spadina service is impossible to keep 'on track'. A 5 minute service interval allows signal systems to give the LRVs priority without completely stopping traffic in the other directions.
I would note that extrapolates out to about 32o LRVs for the overall proposed Transit City Network with 20 % spare factor. Add some cars for the Eglinton line - which might be three LRVs per train - and we're close to the 386 I calculated back last year. (See: http://hogtown.blogspot.com/2007_03_01_archive.html)
Of course, riders will lose about 1 minute for each wait - since the headway on Sheppard E is currently about 3 minutes. (Average wait will increase from 1.5 minutes to 2.5 minutes.)
MORE TOMORROW
Friday, February 29, 2008
Has Jane left Transity City?
hmm - the TTC may have chopped some routes from its Transit City plan. Reports the National Post's Peter Kuitenbrower:
From In a rush? Get off and walk - Feb 28 2008
Longer term, the TTC has its Transit City light-rail plan - outlined in some detail at yesterday's meeting. It plans longer streetcars in dedicated lanes on Eglinton, Sheppard East, Finch West, Don Mills and the Waterfront West.
Mr. Stambler went through a slideshow of sexy streetcars in Barcelona, Paris and San Francisco, "to remind us of what Toronto will look like at some point in the future."
But not only is that future at least five years and $7-billion away, it does nothing to solve the problems of streetcars that fight mixed traffic on east-west routes downtown.
There is now no mention of the Jane or Malvern lines - and the price has been 'chopped' from $8.3 billion to $7 billion. Maybe the TTC will get smart and use the money to build heavier lines with the needed cuts under intersections to make the scheme slightly more viable.
From In a rush? Get off and walk - Feb 28 2008
Longer term, the TTC has its Transit City light-rail plan - outlined in some detail at yesterday's meeting. It plans longer streetcars in dedicated lanes on Eglinton, Sheppard East, Finch West, Don Mills and the Waterfront West.
Mr. Stambler went through a slideshow of sexy streetcars in Barcelona, Paris and San Francisco, "to remind us of what Toronto will look like at some point in the future."
But not only is that future at least five years and $7-billion away, it does nothing to solve the problems of streetcars that fight mixed traffic on east-west routes downtown.
There is now no mention of the Jane or Malvern lines - and the price has been 'chopped' from $8.3 billion to $7 billion. Maybe the TTC will get smart and use the money to build heavier lines with the needed cuts under intersections to make the scheme slightly more viable.
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
As predicted here - Transit City cost nears $10 billion
The TTC's capital budget is now available:
2008-2012 CAPITAL PROGRAM AND 10-YEAR CAPITAL FORECAST
As predicted in this space (i.e. by yours truly) back in March of this year, the 'expected' $6.1 billion cost was severely lowballed. (See Sunday, March 18, 2007
More on the Transit City - Cost approaching $10 billion.)
Per my earlier analysis:
Despite the staggering cost estimate, it appears that the scheme is being low-balled. The TTC does this consistently - so no surprise here. One obvious delusion is the plan to use only 240 vehicles. Although the vehicles would be larger than todays CLRVs, and even so than the ALRV versions, the 240 vehicle fleet size works out to an unrealistic load factor in terms of riders per service hour.
Applying the benchmark from Calgary C-train (122 riders per service hour) , using 240 vehicles for 175 million passengers a year would require vehicles to be in service an average of 16 hours/day. This doesn't seem realistic.
You can read the details, but basically, the vehicle requirements I see for the Transit City lines is for 386 LRVs - rather than the 240 in the proposal.
Now, in the TTC capital budget, I am proven right (I can't read the figures in the details because of the way the TTC publishes therir reports in tbe web. I will be requesting a hard copy tomorrow.)
It should be noted that the $6.1 billion figure included early estimates of vehicle requirements, however it did not include costs for the necessary maintenance and storage facility requirements to support this expanded LRT network.
Vehicle requirements have also been reassessed to determine more realistic assumptions for LRV loading standard capacity, average operating speeds and maintenance spares ratios. Total costs for Transit City are currently estimated to be in the order of $8.3 billion.
Estimate costs for the new LRVs to be (mis)used on the downtown streetcar network are now about $7 million/car. For 200 cars, we're at about $1.4 billion.
Are we at $10 billion yet? -No - but $9.7 billion is pretty close. Give this a few months and more costs will come out of the trackwork.
Bemoans one local LRT advocate (Steve Munro) who earlier asserted "I believe that the TTC’s estimate is in the ballpark." in response to my analysis.
Meanwhile, both the new streetcar procurement and Transit City are getting more expensive as cost estimates are refined. This is not making friends among Councillors who want so badly to be pro-transit, but who are sideswiped by the TTC’s inability to price their projects.
Well - I'll gladly help review the cost estimates!!!!
2008-2012 CAPITAL PROGRAM AND 10-YEAR CAPITAL FORECAST
As predicted in this space (i.e. by yours truly) back in March of this year, the 'expected' $6.1 billion cost was severely lowballed. (See Sunday, March 18, 2007
More on the Transit City - Cost approaching $10 billion.)
Per my earlier analysis:
Despite the staggering cost estimate, it appears that the scheme is being low-balled. The TTC does this consistently - so no surprise here. One obvious delusion is the plan to use only 240 vehicles. Although the vehicles would be larger than todays CLRVs, and even so than the ALRV versions, the 240 vehicle fleet size works out to an unrealistic load factor in terms of riders per service hour.
Applying the benchmark from Calgary C-train (122 riders per service hour) , using 240 vehicles for 175 million passengers a year would require vehicles to be in service an average of 16 hours/day. This doesn't seem realistic.
You can read the details, but basically, the vehicle requirements I see for the Transit City lines is for 386 LRVs - rather than the 240 in the proposal.
Now, in the TTC capital budget, I am proven right (I can't read the figures in the details because of the way the TTC publishes therir reports in tbe web. I will be requesting a hard copy tomorrow.)
It should be noted that the $6.1 billion figure included early estimates of vehicle requirements, however it did not include costs for the necessary maintenance and storage facility requirements to support this expanded LRT network.
Vehicle requirements have also been reassessed to determine more realistic assumptions for LRV loading standard capacity, average operating speeds and maintenance spares ratios. Total costs for Transit City are currently estimated to be in the order of $8.3 billion.
Estimate costs for the new LRVs to be (mis)used on the downtown streetcar network are now about $7 million/car. For 200 cars, we're at about $1.4 billion.
Are we at $10 billion yet? -No - but $9.7 billion is pretty close. Give this a few months and more costs will come out of the trackwork.
Bemoans one local LRT advocate (Steve Munro) who earlier asserted "I believe that the TTC’s estimate is in the ballpark." in response to my analysis.
Meanwhile, both the new streetcar procurement and Transit City are getting more expensive as cost estimates are refined. This is not making friends among Councillors who want so badly to be pro-transit, but who are sideswiped by the TTC’s inability to price their projects.
Well - I'll gladly help review the cost estimates!!!!
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
Back to transit - the TTC cost spiral
It's been a few months since I wrote much about transit. What is there really to write - nothing much changes at the TTC. However, since we're about to get socked with a mammoth property tax increase in one form or another - you all might be interested in a big reason behind the increase.
(The proposed Land Transfer Tax is a property tax - you just pay it all at once when you are selling/buying.)
A while back I analysed the comparative performance of the Montreal transit system (MTC or STM depending on the language) and the TTC. I've put together some updated figures:
Montreal - MTC/STM
Operating cost per rider
1994 actual: $1.63
2007 budget: $1.88
That's a 15.4% increase overall - but a decline of 2.9% when inflation is taken into account. This means that the Montreal system lowered its unit operating costs - even when the increased cost of fuel and electricty are taken into account.
Toronto - TTC
Operating cost per rider
1994 actual: $1.73
2007 budget: $2.35
This is an overall increase of 35.8%!!!!! OR 20.4 percentage points higher than Montreal.
What does this mean in real $$$. Well, if the TTC had matched the STM's performance, it's 2007 operating cost per rider would be:
1.154 *$ 1.73 = $1.995 / rider
or $2.35 - $1.995 = $0.355 lower than the actual budget.
@ the 2007 projected ridership of 461 million
461 million * $0 .355 = $163.7 million
In other words, the TTC has missed and is missing opportunities to become more efficient while the STM hasn't and isn't.
The Montreal system's performance shows that you can have a succesful transit system without an ever upward spiral in costs.
The worst for the TTC is yet to come.
The 2008 TTC pro forma budget that is referenced here shows that the TTC costs will explode next year. Operating expenses are set to grow by $128 million ($1,083 million ==> $1,211 million) while ridership revenue will grow by only $24 million. (This was before the recent fare increase was voted in.) This would vault operating cost / rider to about $2.59 - a whopping 10% increase.
Well -the $163 million in lost opportunity into 1994 and the $104 million in growth in required subsidy this year would give us back $267 million - which would make the Land Transfer Tax largely unnecessary.
(The proposed Land Transfer Tax is a property tax - you just pay it all at once when you are selling/buying.)
A while back I analysed the comparative performance of the Montreal transit system (MTC or STM depending on the language) and the TTC. I've put together some updated figures:
Montreal - MTC/STM
Operating cost per rider
1994 actual: $1.63
2007 budget: $1.88
That's a 15.4% increase overall - but a decline of 2.9% when inflation is taken into account. This means that the Montreal system lowered its unit operating costs - even when the increased cost of fuel and electricty are taken into account.
Toronto - TTC
Operating cost per rider
1994 actual: $1.73
2007 budget: $2.35
This is an overall increase of 35.8%!!!!! OR 20.4 percentage points higher than Montreal.
What does this mean in real $$$. Well, if the TTC had matched the STM's performance, it's 2007 operating cost per rider would be:
1.154 *$ 1.73 = $1.995 / rider
or $2.35 - $1.995 = $0.355 lower than the actual budget.
@ the 2007 projected ridership of 461 million
461 million * $0 .355 = $163.7 million
In other words, the TTC has missed and is missing opportunities to become more efficient while the STM hasn't and isn't.
The Montreal system's performance shows that you can have a succesful transit system without an ever upward spiral in costs.
The worst for the TTC is yet to come.
The 2008 TTC pro forma budget that is referenced here shows that the TTC costs will explode next year. Operating expenses are set to grow by $128 million ($1,083 million ==> $1,211 million) while ridership revenue will grow by only $24 million. (This was before the recent fare increase was voted in.) This would vault operating cost / rider to about $2.59 - a whopping 10% increase.
Well -the $163 million in lost opportunity into 1994 and the $104 million in growth in required subsidy this year would give us back $267 million - which would make the Land Transfer Tax largely unnecessary.
Wednesday, June 27, 2007
Transit stuff - "new" GM for the TTC
I've been read the riot act - specifically that I should spend more time on my own writing and less posting on other people's web sites.
In recent transit news, the TTC have hired 'interim' Chief General Manager Gary Webster as 'permanent' CGM. What's it been - a year since Ric DuCharme had enough of being Howard Moscoe's lapdog. My alma mater was able to find a new president in roughly half that time.
My guess is that no-one with any talent from outside applied for the job. We can thank Moscoe for this state of affairs - i.e. overpoliticization scaring away top professionals. This is a Toronto problem in general. The TDSB had to promote the handiest warm body from within to replace Dave Reid as education director.
I'm not sure of Mr. Webster's qualifications. He's been at the TTC for a long time. I'd hate to think that he's agreed to the job as a nice quiet place (well paid of course) to wait until retirement. We don't need a another lap dog at the TTC.
Mind you Adam Giambrone is a noticeable improvement over Moscoe - then again Attila the Hun would have been an improvement.
In recent transit news, the TTC have hired 'interim' Chief General Manager Gary Webster as 'permanent' CGM. What's it been - a year since Ric DuCharme had enough of being Howard Moscoe's lapdog. My alma mater was able to find a new president in roughly half that time.
My guess is that no-one with any talent from outside applied for the job. We can thank Moscoe for this state of affairs - i.e. overpoliticization scaring away top professionals. This is a Toronto problem in general. The TDSB had to promote the handiest warm body from within to replace Dave Reid as education director.
I'm not sure of Mr. Webster's qualifications. He's been at the TTC for a long time. I'd hate to think that he's agreed to the job as a nice quiet place (well paid of course) to wait until retirement. We don't need a another lap dog at the TTC.
Mind you Adam Giambrone is a noticeable improvement over Moscoe - then again Attila the Hun would have been an improvement.
Thursday, June 21, 2007
On the transit front
The Ontario liberals made a big splash with the election promise for $12 billion or so of transit capital spending over the next 12 years. This is smart packaging politically. The Conservative platform that calls for all gas tax $$$ to be used for transportation (instead of other pet causes) would deliver as much - but Mr. Tory didn't list the projects in as much detail.
It's also smart because although the legislature won't sit before the election, this accouncement is not within the official campaign limits. The election laws should be changed to prevent a party from using the front of being 'in power' and using as election PR.
It's also smart because although the legislature won't sit before the election, this accouncement is not within the official campaign limits. The election laws should be changed to prevent a party from using the front of being 'in power' and using as election PR.
Tuesday, June 05, 2007
TTC - Downtime in downtown
Well - the vaunted Spadina LRT is out of service again.
TTC Notice re: 509 510 service
This is barely a news event anymore. Riders will be taking buses from Union Station and then transferring for trips north. 'Transit City'? - no - 'Transfer City' more likely.
TTC Notice re: 509 510 service
This is barely a news event anymore. Riders will be taking buses from Union Station and then transferring for trips north. 'Transit City'? - no - 'Transfer City' more likely.
Sunday, April 01, 2007
LRT - Eglinton and the 6 dwarves
A reader has brought it to my attention that the LRT popularity poll on the Transit City propaganda site shows that over 80% of those replying would prefer the proposed Eglinton line:
Here are the results as of this afternoon:
Eglinton - 11049 votes - 83.6 %
Sheppard East - 670 - 5.1%
Scarborough Malvern - 377 - 2.9%
Waterfront West - 363 - 2.7%
Don Mills - 329 - 2.5%
Etobicoke Finch West - 245 - 1.9%
Jane - 186 - 1.4%
Transit pundit Steve Munro prognosticates that the underground part of the Eglinton line would be the last to be built. The line would be built starting at the extremities - hmm perhaps this proposal should be called Transfer City instead of Transit City. It seems that potential riders have other ideas.
Here are the results as of this afternoon:
Eglinton - 11049 votes - 83.6 %
Sheppard East - 670 - 5.1%
Scarborough Malvern - 377 - 2.9%
Waterfront West - 363 - 2.7%
Don Mills - 329 - 2.5%
Etobicoke Finch West - 245 - 1.9%
Jane - 186 - 1.4%
Transit pundit Steve Munro prognosticates that the underground part of the Eglinton line would be the last to be built. The line would be built starting at the extremities - hmm perhaps this proposal should be called Transfer City instead of Transit City. It seems that potential riders have other ideas.
Sunday, March 18, 2007
More on the Transit City - Cost approaching $10 billion
The TTC has a habit of low-balling the estimated costs of capital projects. Given that this an engineer-run organization rather than a customer-oriented one, this is not surprising. LRT projects could keep TTC engineering and planning staff busy for a while. If working of EAs (Environmental Assessments) is part of your job description at the TTC, this is the ultimate gravy train. It doesn't matter if the scheme is good for riders or the city in general.
Despite the staggering cost estimate, it appears that the scheme is being low-balled. The TTC does this consistently - so no surprise here. One obvious delusion is the plan to use only 240 vehicles. Although the vehicles would be larger than todays CLRVs, and even so than the ALRV versions, the 240 vehicle fleet size works out to an unrealistic load factor in terms of riders per service hour.
Applying the benchmark from Calgary C-train (122 riders per service hour) , using 240 vehicles for 175 million passengers a year would require vehicles to be in service an average of 16 hours/day. This doesn't seem realistic.
I would expect LRT ridership/service hours on the proposed routes to be lower than the Calgary benchmark. Why ?
a. Other than the Eglinton line's central segment, one of the lines will be serving a dense employment district.
b. The speed of service will not match that in Calgary. The C-train lines are cut under most intersections of any size. There are at grade crossing - but most are in industrial/warhouse areas. (Check out Google Earth as a good way of investigating this.)
c. I'd expect station spacing (if there are actually stations) to end up being about 400 metres. (Longer than this and residents will demanding local bus service.) This will slow the service - reducing passengers/service hour.
d. Calgary's LRT runs in large part on completely segregated ROW (i.e. no vehicles and no pedestrians. This allows trains to run at high speed between stations. This won't be possible with the proposed lines here - other than sections in tunnels - due to pedestrian safety requirements.
More realistic would be 100 boardings / hour or necessitating about 386 vehciles (I'm using the Calgary benchmark of about 12.3 hours in service/day).
With extra yard/maintenance space, the difference adds about $1 billion to the price tag.
Information is now trickling out about some of the other truth-stretching. TTC Commissioner Milcyn Peter Milczyn has been quoted indicating that the price tag for the critical tunnel section of the proposed Eglinton line is twice the estimate put forward. The proposed line on Jane will need 1-2 km of tunnel at the South end - minimum. This is not included in the estimates - which assume at grade construction only.
In addition, the so-called 'Transit City' plan does not include other wish list lines. We're already under the gun for $1 b note for the streetcar replacements for existing streetcar routes.
Is the price tag close to $10 billion yet - yes it is.
Despite the staggering cost estimate, it appears that the scheme is being low-balled. The TTC does this consistently - so no surprise here. One obvious delusion is the plan to use only 240 vehicles. Although the vehicles would be larger than todays CLRVs, and even so than the ALRV versions, the 240 vehicle fleet size works out to an unrealistic load factor in terms of riders per service hour.
Applying the benchmark from Calgary C-train (122 riders per service hour) , using 240 vehicles for 175 million passengers a year would require vehicles to be in service an average of 16 hours/day. This doesn't seem realistic.
I would expect LRT ridership/service hours on the proposed routes to be lower than the Calgary benchmark. Why ?
a. Other than the Eglinton line's central segment, one of the lines will be serving a dense employment district.
b. The speed of service will not match that in Calgary. The C-train lines are cut under most intersections of any size. There are at grade crossing - but most are in industrial/warhouse areas. (Check out Google Earth as a good way of investigating this.)
c. I'd expect station spacing (if there are actually stations) to end up being about 400 metres. (Longer than this and residents will demanding local bus service.) This will slow the service - reducing passengers/service hour.
d. Calgary's LRT runs in large part on completely segregated ROW (i.e. no vehicles and no pedestrians. This allows trains to run at high speed between stations. This won't be possible with the proposed lines here - other than sections in tunnels - due to pedestrian safety requirements.
More realistic would be 100 boardings / hour or necessitating about 386 vehciles (I'm using the Calgary benchmark of about 12.3 hours in service/day).
With extra yard/maintenance space, the difference adds about $1 billion to the price tag.
Information is now trickling out about some of the other truth-stretching. TTC Commissioner Milcyn Peter Milczyn has been quoted indicating that the price tag for the critical tunnel section of the proposed Eglinton line is twice the estimate put forward. The proposed line on Jane will need 1-2 km of tunnel at the South end - minimum. This is not included in the estimates - which assume at grade construction only.
In addition, the so-called 'Transit City' plan does not include other wish list lines. We're already under the gun for $1 b note for the streetcar replacements for existing streetcar routes.
Is the price tag close to $10 billion yet - yes it is.
Tuesday, February 06, 2007
Fixing the TTC
The Sun has published a summary of remarks by local transit "luminaries" on How can the TTC be Fixed?
I thought I'd rate the remarks:
1. Bob Kinnear
In no way surprising, union president Bob Kinnear wants 'funding, funding, funding...'. Well, seeing that the ATU has swallowed whole just about all of the funding increases over the last few years, this is hardly surprising. The trough of pay and perks for union members can never be full enough. Kinnear sheds some crocodile tears about riders - yeah right!
During the most recent contract negotations, Kinnear actually objected to the TTC using a small amount of money on a service study on linking some routes in the north center of the city down to Castle Frank Station! The message is clear from Mr. Kinnear - the money belongs to the unions. (And why not, they've paid lock, stock and barrel for the Mayor.)
Surprisingly, Kinnear comes up with an idea that the TTC brass are loathe to consider - express bus service to key stations on the subway. The TTC hate express buses: the reason, they can work. Montreal has about 20 specialized bus routes - compared to a measly 7 or 8 in the larger Toronto.
Funny how TTC studies always seem to say these are too expensive to run.
2. Richard Soberman
U of T professor Soberman always shows up somewhere. Soberman has discussed the Spadina 'LRT' - and his comments are bang on - the service is 'not effective transit'. It's no surprise that Soberman wasn't part of the St. Clair study. This was purposeful - to make it easier for the scheme to be slammed up the derrieres of residents and businesses.
I believe Soberman is right, the TTC/City should use enforcement and other measures to keep transit lanes clear - without resorting to neighbourhood death sentences like the St. Clair W debacle. They do it in Montreal!
3. Adam Giambrone
Giambrone is an inprovement of his predescessor as TTC Chair. Well, anyone would be. hmm - he wants the TTC to expand its network of LRTs.
ADAM - the TTC has no LRT - it only has streetcars. If you want to see LRT, go to Calgary or St. Louis. Look's like he's bought into TTC self-delusion/rabid LRT lobbying already. (The snakeoil salesman at Bombardier are good aren't they.)
4. Rob McIsaac:
The GTTA chief sees the St. Clair debacle as the better way.
HEY Rob, would your Oakville/Burlington friends be so excited about something that saved 1-minute on their average trip to work? Why do you think it's such a good deal for us?
5. David Gunn
I have a lot of respect for David Gunn. I believe things would be remarkly different has he stayed and Moscoe had been pushed out instead. After Gunn departed, TTC operating costs per rider exploded AND service relaiability has suffered. TTC professional management turned into Moscoe's lapdogs. Eventually, Gunn's successor Rick Ducharme got tired of the BS too.
6. Donna Cansfieild
Cansfield's candour is to be commended if the article is reflecting her thoughts"
The provincial transport head honcho knows the TTC isn't perfect, but she feels the commission took a big step in the right direction late last year when Giambrone took the chairman's post.
Well - remarkable lucidity from a transporation rookie.
7. Steve Munro
Munro a long time TTC advocate and critic. I agree with many of his criticisms of the TTC - however, in his blog he often misses the mark.
At least in his comments here, he's not suggesting streetcars as a solution to all the world's ills.
I thought I'd rate the remarks:
1. Bob Kinnear
In no way surprising, union president Bob Kinnear wants 'funding, funding, funding...'. Well, seeing that the ATU has swallowed whole just about all of the funding increases over the last few years, this is hardly surprising. The trough of pay and perks for union members can never be full enough. Kinnear sheds some crocodile tears about riders - yeah right!
During the most recent contract negotations, Kinnear actually objected to the TTC using a small amount of money on a service study on linking some routes in the north center of the city down to Castle Frank Station! The message is clear from Mr. Kinnear - the money belongs to the unions. (And why not, they've paid lock, stock and barrel for the Mayor.)
Surprisingly, Kinnear comes up with an idea that the TTC brass are loathe to consider - express bus service to key stations on the subway. The TTC hate express buses: the reason, they can work. Montreal has about 20 specialized bus routes - compared to a measly 7 or 8 in the larger Toronto.
Funny how TTC studies always seem to say these are too expensive to run.
2. Richard Soberman
U of T professor Soberman always shows up somewhere. Soberman has discussed the Spadina 'LRT' - and his comments are bang on - the service is 'not effective transit'. It's no surprise that Soberman wasn't part of the St. Clair study. This was purposeful - to make it easier for the scheme to be slammed up the derrieres of residents and businesses.
I believe Soberman is right, the TTC/City should use enforcement and other measures to keep transit lanes clear - without resorting to neighbourhood death sentences like the St. Clair W debacle. They do it in Montreal!
3. Adam Giambrone
Giambrone is an inprovement of his predescessor as TTC Chair. Well, anyone would be. hmm - he wants the TTC to expand its network of LRTs.
ADAM - the TTC has no LRT - it only has streetcars. If you want to see LRT, go to Calgary or St. Louis. Look's like he's bought into TTC self-delusion/rabid LRT lobbying already. (The snakeoil salesman at Bombardier are good aren't they.)
4. Rob McIsaac:
The GTTA chief sees the St. Clair debacle as the better way.
HEY Rob, would your Oakville/Burlington friends be so excited about something that saved 1-minute on their average trip to work? Why do you think it's such a good deal for us?
5. David Gunn
I have a lot of respect for David Gunn. I believe things would be remarkly different has he stayed and Moscoe had been pushed out instead. After Gunn departed, TTC operating costs per rider exploded AND service relaiability has suffered. TTC professional management turned into Moscoe's lapdogs. Eventually, Gunn's successor Rick Ducharme got tired of the BS too.
6. Donna Cansfieild
Cansfield's candour is to be commended if the article is reflecting her thoughts"
The provincial transport head honcho knows the TTC isn't perfect, but she feels the commission took a big step in the right direction late last year when Giambrone took the chairman's post.
Well - remarkable lucidity from a transporation rookie.
7. Steve Munro
Munro a long time TTC advocate and critic. I agree with many of his criticisms of the TTC - however, in his blog he often misses the mark.
At least in his comments here, he's not suggesting streetcars as a solution to all the world's ills.
Tuesday, December 05, 2006
A last ride on the Moscoe train
As I write, we're hours away from seeing Howard Moscoe depart from the Toronto Transit Commission. If there's is one good thing to come from the recent municipal election, it's a chance to see some improvement in the governance of the TTC. This can't come too soon.
Consider my experiences this past Sunday night. I took the TTC over to the St. Clair West area for dinner. On the return journey - while waiting for the bus back to St. Clair West station - a man with a bag full of Christmas presents scampers over to the waiting area.
"Is it $2.75" he asks politely. Yes I say. We converse while waiting for the bus. He's from Thunder Bay - down to visit his daughter, and just returning to the Delta Chelsea.
He's confused as to the duration of the construction on St. Clair. "Wasn't this going on in July?"
The bus arrives and we board. After about one stop, I realize that I might need a transfer. With the interminable construction, I wasn't sure if the buses were stopping in the station - or on the street on the South side. I inquire of the driver. She is initially confused - but finally understands the question. I acquire a transfer and also one for the chap from Thunder Bay. (One of my better boy-scout deeds.)
We get to the station and descend. Lo-and-behold, the entrance is automated - for tokens and passes swipes only. There is no way we're getting in with our flimsy paper transfers. After a minute or too, I locate the help button. I inquire as to how to enter the station. The voice on the other end insists that it should be clear - but it indeed was not.
"Do I go to the left?" I inquire. When I don't get an equivocal "Yes" or "No" answer, I decide to try it. It does lead to an attended entrance.
The chap from Thunder Bay asks how the many Torontonians who don't speak English in ever manage. Now that was a excellent question - one I couldn't really answer. The truth of the matter is that they manage by suffering. With Howard Moscoe's TTC, they (and everyone else) has suffered through:
Rapidly escalating operating costs - causing the ever increasing fares.
A surly and snug workforce - one that went out on strike despite taking us to the cleaners in the most recent contract.
Needless and endless streetcar construction - The debacle on St. Clair West is a textbook example on how to bring neighbourhoods to the point of despair.
Embarrassment - Moscoe makes Attila the Hun look like a diplomat.
Yes - I have it in for Moscoe - but with good reason. The man flat out lied to me during the St. Clair debate. He refused to consider looking at transit options that are working well in other cities. Worst of all, he's alienated those who might have helped with capital funding. This is in part due to his incredible mouth - saying dumb and plain rude things at the most inopportune moments - and in part because he and the TTC have planned poorly.
Moscoe and his TTC have lost the credibility they need to make the case for capital projects. Moscoe and a small cadre of light-rail lobbyists have been trying to push the city in that direction. However, they haven't presented a coherent plan. The TTC is years late even putting together a specification of new light-rail equipment.
The latest price-tag floating about for LRT equipment is $800 million - or about $6 million a car. There's no plan in place as to how these expensive vehicles would provide substantively better service than regular buses. Moscoe's TTC is undertaking studies for a light rail line somewhere in the West end. The objectives of these studies is without any measure of coherence - appearing to be no more that projects to keep TTC engineers and analysts looking busy. Like running a streetcar line through the Ex grounds is going to solve Toronto's transportation problems! Then there's the plan to run the subway at night.
Oh and the plan to hire station masters. Would they be equally as surly and indifferent as 50% of the current staff? I'll take a pass thanks.
Well - we can only hope that the new TTC chair will do better. That's not asking much!
Consider my experiences this past Sunday night. I took the TTC over to the St. Clair West area for dinner. On the return journey - while waiting for the bus back to St. Clair West station - a man with a bag full of Christmas presents scampers over to the waiting area.
"Is it $2.75" he asks politely. Yes I say. We converse while waiting for the bus. He's from Thunder Bay - down to visit his daughter, and just returning to the Delta Chelsea.
He's confused as to the duration of the construction on St. Clair. "Wasn't this going on in July?"
The bus arrives and we board. After about one stop, I realize that I might need a transfer. With the interminable construction, I wasn't sure if the buses were stopping in the station - or on the street on the South side. I inquire of the driver. She is initially confused - but finally understands the question. I acquire a transfer and also one for the chap from Thunder Bay. (One of my better boy-scout deeds.)
We get to the station and descend. Lo-and-behold, the entrance is automated - for tokens and passes swipes only. There is no way we're getting in with our flimsy paper transfers. After a minute or too, I locate the help button. I inquire as to how to enter the station. The voice on the other end insists that it should be clear - but it indeed was not.
"Do I go to the left?" I inquire. When I don't get an equivocal "Yes" or "No" answer, I decide to try it. It does lead to an attended entrance.
The chap from Thunder Bay asks how the many Torontonians who don't speak English in ever manage. Now that was a excellent question - one I couldn't really answer. The truth of the matter is that they manage by suffering. With Howard Moscoe's TTC, they (and everyone else) has suffered through:
Rapidly escalating operating costs - causing the ever increasing fares.
A surly and snug workforce - one that went out on strike despite taking us to the cleaners in the most recent contract.
Needless and endless streetcar construction - The debacle on St. Clair West is a textbook example on how to bring neighbourhoods to the point of despair.
Embarrassment - Moscoe makes Attila the Hun look like a diplomat.
Yes - I have it in for Moscoe - but with good reason. The man flat out lied to me during the St. Clair debate. He refused to consider looking at transit options that are working well in other cities. Worst of all, he's alienated those who might have helped with capital funding. This is in part due to his incredible mouth - saying dumb and plain rude things at the most inopportune moments - and in part because he and the TTC have planned poorly.
Moscoe and his TTC have lost the credibility they need to make the case for capital projects. Moscoe and a small cadre of light-rail lobbyists have been trying to push the city in that direction. However, they haven't presented a coherent plan. The TTC is years late even putting together a specification of new light-rail equipment.
The latest price-tag floating about for LRT equipment is $800 million - or about $6 million a car. There's no plan in place as to how these expensive vehicles would provide substantively better service than regular buses. Moscoe's TTC is undertaking studies for a light rail line somewhere in the West end. The objectives of these studies is without any measure of coherence - appearing to be no more that projects to keep TTC engineers and analysts looking busy. Like running a streetcar line through the Ex grounds is going to solve Toronto's transportation problems! Then there's the plan to run the subway at night.
Oh and the plan to hire station masters. Would they be equally as surly and indifferent as 50% of the current staff? I'll take a pass thanks.
Well - we can only hope that the new TTC chair will do better. That's not asking much!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)