Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Or will they just put out a cattle call, train them for a week and then you have your new operators?

being a for profit corporation (whomever it may be) of course it will be that way... At first. Maintenance personel, and track maintenance could very well be sub-sub contracted to pnr railworks and the like.

I'm reasonably sure the subcontractor operators on this board will concur.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Since there is a collision on the rails the artist should have drawn a shuttle bus in there too. :lol:

If its a Metrolink run line ... will they be using GO buses for the shuttles? seeing as the TTC wants nothing to do with P3 :P

Link to post
Share on other sites

If its a Metrolink run line ... will they be using GO buses for the shuttles? seeing as the TTC wants nothing to do with P3 :P

Someone contact the artist. Have them redo the image and have two shuttles, one TTC and one GO(or Metrolinx). The operators of the shuttles could be standing beside each other near the buses and scratching their heads like "which one of us is providing service here?"
Link to post
Share on other sites

Depending on how the AFP is structured, in theory TTC could bid on operating the line as a subcontractor to the successful DBFOM consortium, no?

Depending on how the consortium was structured, and should the TTC actually develop the ability to tender such a document, sure.

Dan

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

I guess that should put an end to any rumours that Metrolinx wants to take control of TTC - at least the subways. The mere suggestion of Toronto suggesting they are quite happy to let Ontario pay and operate rapid transit in Toronto appears to have shaken up the Minister enough that he's gone and knocked some sense into his minions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

All is right in the world,...again. ^_^

No it isn't. There's more to the TTC than just purple jackets. This isn't the first time I've had to point that out to you, either. You habitually gloss over us grease monkeys.

I want to see the details of what qualifies as 'maintenance'.

We don't count?!

Link to post
Share on other sites

No it isn't. There's more to the TTC than just purple jackets. This isn't the first time I've had to point that out to you, either. You habitually gloss over us grease monkeys.

I want to see the details of what qualifies as 'maintenance'.

We don't count?!

Exactly. Maintain sounds like contracting out to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Control of maintenance is contracting out!! This means station maintenance (cleaning, etc.), all vehicle maintenance, all track and structure maintenance, etc. I'll ask one simple question: if the stations are dirty, if the vehicles are dirty, if the vehicles break down; who will the public blame? Simple answer: the TTC!!! Even though these functions will be outside of TTC control; the TTC will get the blame!!!

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

I checked the Crosstown web site today, and discovered that Metrolinx has issued three new consultations for changes to the EA.

One puts the line underground all the way east to Don Mills Road, instead of only to Brentcliffe, with the price being eliminating two stops........kinda subway like, eh Rob?

The second advances the idea of a "Mount Dennis Transit Hub" which moves the location of the Weston station to right under the GO line and references a potential Eglinton GO station.

The latter restored my faith in the planning process .....it's a very clever way of quietly backing away from the Weston Pearson Rail stop - which was an unwise appeasement to the Weston Nimby's...in favour of tying the GO/Pearson lines into the Crosstown LRT. This omission in my humble and inexpert opinion was a criminal flaw in the plan. I'm glad to see this rectified. The Weston Nimby's need to suck it up, says me :-)

The presentations are on the web site at

http://thecrosstown.ca/sites/default/files/December%202012%20Open%20House%20-%20East%20Section%20-%20website.pdf

http://thecrosstown.ca/sites/default/files/Keele-Jane-Black-Creek-EPR-web_0.pdf

http://thecrosstown.ca/sites/default/files/Mt%20Dennis%20Mobility%20Hub%20Study%20web.pdf

- Paul

Link to post
Share on other sites

One puts the line underground all the way east to Don Mills Road, instead of only to Brentcliffe, with the price being eliminating two stops........kinda subway like, eh Rob?

Yes, however one of those two stops was eliminated because it was always a bit of an iffy proposition as a surface stop (of course, that whole section of line at the surface was a bit iffy). Putting the line underground provides the justification to eliminate it.

The other is an unfortunate victim of the vertical alignment of the line, and likely would have been eliminated in any situation.

Dan

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Mount Dennis transit hub looks nice - thanks for sharing. I've done some work around there; personally I can say the neighbourhood has potential for revitalisation. (The Black Creek Business Area does indeed feel like a wasteland and is not a dense/efficient use of inner city land, for example.) Having a Union-Pearson Express stop here instead of at the current Weston GO makes a lot more sense, too.

Let's just hope this plan goes ahead. I'm just wondering how the line will continue westbound in the future. Expropriate properties on the north side of Eglinton and continue as an elevated track? Or widen the road and run down the median.. IIRC, Eglinton isn't very wide in the immediate area (much better closer to Jane and beyond.) But it's been a while since I've been out there..

Link to post
Share on other sites
Let's just hope this plan goes ahead. I'm just wondering how the line will continue westbound in the future. Expropriate properties on the north side of Eglinton and continue as an elevated track? Or widen the road and run down the median.. IIRC, Eglinton isn't very wide in the immediate area (much better closer to Jane and beyond.) But it's been a while since I've been out there..
The plan is to have it emerge from the Mt. Dennis tunnel into the median of Eglinton and run all the way to Martin Grove and beyond as such.

I still think that the best option would be an at-grade line on the north side with fly-unders at major cross streets. That, or widen Eglinton to the point that you can have a decent buffer of trees on either side of the median ROW. Having no buffer between the roadways and the tracks is not appealing in the least, and there's ample space west of Jane for it too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The plan is to have it emerge from the Mt. Dennis tunnel into the median of Eglinton and run all the way to Martin Grove and beyond as such.

Yea, according to the plan, it emerges above ground, but is an elevated track on the north side of Eglinton by the time it reaches Weston. So I guess from that point westbound, it'll just "fly over" to the median of Eglinton and continue down the median. But, I'm just wondering if the properties north of Eglinton just west of Weston would need to be expropriated to do that.

I still think that the best option would be an at-grade line on the north side with fly-unders at major cross streets. That, or widen Eglinton to the point that you can have a decent buffer of trees on either side of the median ROW. Having no buffer between the roadways and the tracks is not appealing in the least, and there's ample space west of Jane for it too.

I definitely like the idea of fly-unders (or over, for that matter) for major cross-streets, be it north of, or down the median of a widened Eglinton (kinda like how St-Clair's streetcar flies under at St-Clair West station.) A line that would be as major as Eglinton needs good separation from the other traffic on the road. Greenery would also look more pleasant for sure.

Has the city ever considered the rest of this LRT line being an elevated track entirely, west of Weston/Jane? Less expensive than an underground, and appeases the people who don't like dealing with other modes of transport on their road levels. (-cough- Ford Nation..)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea, according to the plan, it emerges above ground, but is an elevated track on the north side of Eglinton by the time it reaches Weston. So I guess from that point westbound, it'll just "fly over" to the median of Eglinton and continue down the median. But, I'm just wondering if the properties north of Eglinton just west of Weston would need to be expropriated to do that.

The revised plans that shift the Mt. Dennis station eastward means that no expropriation is required west of Weston Rd. The portal is/was supposed to be midway between Jane and Weston. Given that Eglinton Flats completely surrounds the intesection of Jane and Eglinton, I think they would prefer the tracks run in the median at least as far as Scarlett.

I definitely like the idea of fly-unders (or over, for that matter) for major cross-streets, be it north of, or down the median of a widened Eglinton (kinda like how St-Clair's streetcar flies under at St-Clair West station.) A line that would be as major as Eglinton needs good separation from the other traffic on the road. Greenery would also look more pleasant for sure.

Has the city ever considered the rest of this LRT line being an elevated track entirely, west of Weston/Jane? Less expensive than an underground, and appeases the people who don't like dealing with other modes of transport on their road levels. (-cough- Ford Nation..)

Once they pass the garden centre west of Scarlett, they do have clear access to the Richview Expressway ROW. Running within a trench would mean no having to mess around with Eglinton through most of Etobicoke. They may need to get back onto the street to get past the 427. The costliest aspects of running in a trench would be prepping it, creating the flyovers and making them accessible to the flyover transfer routes. Mississauga is doing just that with the BRT corridor along Eglinton. I guess since it's Phase 2, they haven't really given much thought to transfers between the LRT and BRT if the LRT is indeed trenched that far. The very preliminary concept plans had the surface running LRT stopping at one of the BRT stations and then continuing across the 401 on a purpose-built bridge west of Renforth connecting with the GTAA offices at Convair.

I think with what's being faced with the Gardiner, the City may be leary about creating another long elevated structure. They do have criteria when considering it (see the whole Malvern process). Some of the neighbourhoods slope downward from Eglinton, so the added height from an elevated structure would mean there would be more to see in terms of a visual obstruction. Hence, the trench option as being more palatable if they don't want to run along the median. Plus, not every street would necessarily need a flyover. The smaller streets like Widdicombe Hill or Wincott could simply operate with a traffic light or railway gate. If/when volumes dictate or when funds become available they can separate the grades. The tracks could also go over the street instead, depending on whichever structure is cheaper to build.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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...