Jump to content

McNicoll Bus Garage - Updates and Discussion


Recommended Posts

So I'm assuming that the 8000s that are wrapped (if they survive the chopping block) will move to McNicoll if 900 was transferred?

(Foamer thoughts) Now I'm starting to think that an airport bus on the 57 might actually happen... it's no Queensway but still...

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 163
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Taken a couple of days ago by a co worker that wishes to remain anonymous:

Complete nonsense.  The powertrain of the artics is identical to any of the 40 foot LFSes. The only change is the upsizing of the transmission, and that certainly doesn’t change any of the diagno

Obviously things can change, its a proposal.

Posted Images

2 hours ago, Kelvin3157 said:

So I'm assuming that the 8000s that are wrapped (if they survive the chopping block) will move to McNicoll if 900 was transferred?

(Foamer thoughts) Now I'm starting to think that an airport bus on the 57 might actually happen... it's no Queensway but still...

I think they should consider running a 932 between the AIrport and Mt Dennis Stn when the crosstown opens. Of course they should run directly from the airport via the 427 to Eglinton bypassing Renforth Stn. It'll give riders another option to the subway other than the more expensive UPX.

Then they could have more airport wrapped buses for the foamers too!

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Xtrazsteve said:

I think they should consider running a 932 between the AIrport and Mt Dennis Stn when the crosstown opens. Of course they should run directly from the airport via the 427 to Eglinton bypassing Renforth Stn. It'll give riders another option to the subway other than the more expensive UPX.

Then they could have more airport wrapped buses for the foamers too!

I don’t think the routing via the 427 to Eglinton would work because of the drastic lane transfer from entering the highway to the Eglinton exit (if the route ever comes into fruition)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...

Arrow and MtD will be left with a few core routes. 

I'm surprised they'll send Wilson the 60. I guess it's not that bad considering most of the service is between PV and Finch. Definitely a shorter deadhead than the 52.

Birchmount is losing the 17. Another division without its name route.

It really looks like the are going to run artics on the 927 with MtD taking it. Otherwise it makes absolutely no sense. I sense they'll have to send a bunch of diesel buses to MtD. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FlyerD901 said:

Screenshot_2019-07-21-15-41-43-829_com.google.android.apps.docs.png

Screenshot_2019-07-21-15-41-11-171_com.google.android.apps.docs.png

Screenshot_2019-07-21-15-40-40-313_com.google.android.apps.docs.png

Screenshot_2019-07-21-15-40-12-908_com.google.android.apps.docs.png

Screenshot_2019-07-21-15-39-39-574_com.google.android.apps.docs.png

Screenshot_2019-07-21-15-39-05-375_com.google.android.apps.docs.png

Screenshot_2019-07-21-15-38-17-527_com.google.android.apps.docs.png

Screenshot_2019-07-21-15-37-39-266_com.google.android.apps.docs.png

Obviously things can change, its a proposal.

41 minutes ago, Xtrazsteve said:

Arrow and MtD will be left with a few core routes. 

I'm surprised they'll send Wilson the 60. I guess it's not that bad considering most of the service is between PV and Finch. Definitely a shorter deadhead than the 52.

Birchmount is losing the 17. Another division without its name route.

It really looks like the are going to run artics on the 927 with MtD taking it. Otherwise it makes absolutely no sense. I sense they'll have to send a bunch of diesel buses to MtD. 

Can't the TTC re-institute a second division to do other division's route before 2008 since there are a limited number of buses? Like rush hour runs on Birchmount's 24 VICTORIA PARK by McNicoll, MtD's 32 EGLINTON WEST by Queensway, 54 LAWRENCE EAST by Malvern and 60 STEELES WEST by Arrow Road?

Come to think of it, I may expect the 175 BLUFFER'S PARK to be retained by Birchmount and the proposed 189 STOCKYARDS to be operated by Mount Dennis.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of the moves dont make sense, so I feel like there's going to be changes between now and 2020. Unless the clown who came up with the idea of screwing the windows shut on buses is the same as the one coming up with garage allocations.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, lip said:

A lot of the moves dont make sense, so I feel like there's going to be changes between now and 2020. Unless the clown who came up with the idea of screwing the windows shut on buses is the same as the one coming up with garage allocations.

They are moving routes for artic allocation in consideration oppose to deadheading distance. MtD and McNicoll would be able to handle maintaining more artics than Arrow, Malvern and Wilson. Moving the 29 to MtD messed everything up. The 52/952 is better at MtD, now they seem to try to stuff it somewhere. It has 51 runs in PM peak and does account for almost 25% of any garage that takes it. It might just end up back at MtD when the Crosstown opens. That will result in another shuffle.

With McNicoll taking all the routes in that area, they wind up having to assign enough routes to the nearby garages to keep the balance. I wouldn't say the moves don't make sense. It's just not as ideal. Wilson having all the east end routes isn't ideal either. When MtD opened and they end up with routes in the east end.

Comstock was always built in the wrong place thanks to the city. TTC wanted the garage in Leaside and that's still the better location.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Express Network said:

Can't the TTC re-institute a second division to do other division's route before 2008 since there are a limited number of buses? Like rush hour runs on Birchmount's 24 VICTORIA PARK by McNicoll, MtD's 32 EGLINTON WEST by Queensway, 54 LAWRENCE EAST by Malvern and 60 STEELES WEST by Arrow Road?

They try to avoid doing that, as it greatly complicates scheduling and crewing, and supervision of the route.

 

12 hours ago, Xtrazsteve said:

Comstock was always built in the wrong place thanks to the city. TTC wanted the garage in Leaside and that's still the better location.

And with what land would they have built the division on? If they didn't build Eglinton, they'd still be waiting for a chunk of land in Leaside to open up.


Dan

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, smallspy said:

And with what land would they have built the division on? If they didn't build Eglinton, they'd still be waiting for a chunk of land in Leaside to open up.


Dan

They could have expropriate a piece of land. I'm not too sure about this but I would have thought ,ost of the big box stores weren't as developed in the late 90s in that area.

Now, ML has proposed to place the Ontario Line MSF in that area. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TTC T6H-5307N 2252 said:

Where was the land TTC was considering in Leaside 

No, there wasn't. It was never made available.

 

40 minutes ago, Xtrazsteve said:

They could have expropriate a piece of land. I'm not too sure about this but I would have thought ,ost of the big box stores weren't as developed in the late 90s in that area.

They could have expropriated, sure....but the TTC has never had to expropriate land for a garage before. None of the pieces of land that were (or have been) available in Leaside were big enough for a bus garage.

 

40 minutes ago, Xtrazsteve said:

Now, ML has proposed to place the Ontario Line MSF in that area. 

No, they haven't. The proposed facility is off of Overlea, north of Thorncliffe Park. Not quite Leaside.

 

Dan

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/22/2019 at 6:48 PM, smallspy said:

No, they haven't. The proposed facility is off of Overlea, north of Thorncliffe Park. Not quite Leaside.

Based on the map I saw in the Metrolinx plan, it looks like the MSF will be around Beth Nealson and Wicksteed - which I think has been discussed as a possibility before either here or on UT.

image.thumb.png.4670ebeb758200aa09c66c57c17482ec.png

On 7/21/2019 at 8:39 PM, Xtrazsteve said:

Comstock was always built in the wrong place thanks to the city. TTC wanted the garage in Leaside and that's still the better location.

Given that TTC is now deploying electric buses, a garage somewhere in the Portlands to serve downtown/east routes might fit somewhere that a yard with diesel refuelling needs would not - near the Portlands Energy Centre maybe? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, dowlingm said:

Given that TTC is now deploying electric buses, a garage somewhere in the Portlands to serve downtown/east routes might fit somewhere that a yard with diesel refuelling needs would not - near the Portlands Energy Centre maybe? 

Not till the TTC absolutely commits itself to e-buses. For those who don't already know, the 60 buses on order is only a pilot. If it fails, we could be seeing hybrids being ordered for another decade.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Transit geek said:

Not till the TTC absolutely commits itself to e-buses. For those who don't already know, the 60 buses on order is only a pilot. If it fails, we could be seeing hybrids being ordered for another decade.

The last fleet planning only includes hybrid buses till 2025 the switch own. They really need a few years to determine if eBuses are worth it or not. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Transit geek said:

Not till the TTC absolutely commits itself to e-buses. For those who don't already know, the 60 buses on order is only a pilot. If it fails, we could be seeing hybrids being ordered for another decade.

Just like we have artics and standards co-existing, I don't think it's unreasonable to have TTC operate on the basis that e-buses will work better in some contexts in the short term and not others.

At present it may be their charging cycle lends itself particularly to reinforcing routes, in a charge-AM peak-charge-PM peak fashion, and in operating peak only services such as 503 or 143. Yes, that makes life a little more taxing for dispatching, but if it reduces deadheading buses from the suburbs, the resulting savings in time and energy cost might end up paying for a little more headcount to make it work.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Express Network said:

Since nobody mentioned what allocations what McNicoll will get next year, these are the projections on what buses and routes will operate are as follows (This is only preliminary):

...

No mention it because they don't know or is confidential. You sir are no expert. 

This allocation is not realistic at all and is totally based on what a fanboy wants to see. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/30/2019 at 3:24 AM, Xtrazsteve said:

No mention it because they don't know or is confidential. You sir are no expert. 

This allocation is not realistic at all and is totally based on what a fanboy wants to see. 

Disregard the above post.

On 7/22/2019 at 8:54 AM, smallspy said:
On 7/21/2019 at 8:39 PM, Xtrazsteve said:

They are moving routes for artic allocation in consideration oppose to deadheading distance. MtD and McNicoll would be able to handle maintaining more artics than Arrow, Malvern and Wilson. Moving the 29 to MtD messed everything up. The 52/952 is better at MtD, now they seem to try to stuff it somewhere. It has 51 runs in PM peak and does account for almost 25% of any garage that takes it. It might just end up back at MtD when the Crosstown opens. That will result in another shuffle.

With McNicoll taking all the routes in that area, they wind up having to assign enough routes to the nearby garages to keep the balance. I wouldn't say the moves don't make sense. It's just not as ideal. Wilson having all the east end routes isn't ideal either. When MtD opened and they end up with routes in the east end.

Comstock was always built in the wrong place thanks to the city. TTC wanted the garage in Leaside and that's still the better location.

They try to avoid doing that, as it greatly complicates scheduling and crewing, and supervision of the route.

 

And with what land would they have built the division on? If they didn't build Eglinton, they'd still be waiting for a chunk of land in Leaside to open up.


Dan

Wasn't New Eglinton (Comstock) built to replace Danforth and Old Eglinton (Duplex) garage back in 2002? Looking over the list of routes, they have seven former Danforth routes and 10-11 former Old Eglinton routes, barring the 925 and 954, as shown, but again, this is what the division would've look like.

Did Birchmount picked up most of Danforth's non-accessible routes when it closed that same year?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Express Network said:

Disregard the above post.

Wasn't New Eglinton (Comstock) built to replace Danforth and Old Eglinton (Duplex) garage back in 2002? Looking over the list of routes, they have seven former Danforth routes and 10-11 former Old Eglinton routes, barring the 925 and 954, as shown, but again, this is what the division would've look like.

Did Birchmount picked up most of Danforth's non-accessible routes when it closed that same year?

Comstock was built to replace both Danforth and Eglinton divisions, yes. But it isn't ideally sited - the TTC had been looking for a long time for property around the east end of Leaside but to no avail.

 

Dan

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...