How about a bottle mister?
Only costs a penny, guaranteed.
Does Pirelli’s stimulate the growth, sir?
You can have my oath sir,
‘Tis unique.
Rub a minute,
Stimulatin’ i’n’ it?
Soon you’ll have to thin it once a week.From Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street, by Stephen Sondheim
A commonly repeated myth in the LRT vs subway debate is that subways “last 100 years” while LRTs last “barely 30”.
If we were standing in a less-than-reputable circus, in a town that had only a passing familiarity with modern technology, and we still had an innocent, childlike faith that everything we are told is true, then I might put down the frequency with which this line is repeated to a bunch of rubes who can’t be expected to know better.
Toronto is not such a town at such a time and place. It has pretensions to greatness. Soon there will even be a train to the airport, although the Ferris Wheel won’t be ready to meet it for the Pan Am Games. We think we are a “world class city”, a phrase that any con artist will recognize as the sign of a mark ripe for the picking. We even have a flock of daily newspapers and local media to shine the light of truth in dark places.
Alas, no. We’re ready to plunk down our money for the miracle of subways that will cure all our ills. If Rob Ford were were a rather large man with a tail coat, a top hat, tights and a short whip, we would expect a certain amount of hyperbole. It’s part of the greatest show on earth, after all. If we faced a sly man, twirling his moustache, with his shop wares displayed in a back alley well out of sight of the constabulary, we might reasonably expect that our money would vanish into thin air for goods of dubious value. But at City Hall, we trust everyone.
Let me tell you something, gentle readers: subways do not last for 100 years. There is more than ample evidence of this right under our noses. Anyone who says otherwise is not merely misinformed, or “poorly advised” to use parliamentary language, they are outright liars. They care only to convince you that spending an extra billion or so is obviously worthwhile because the alternative is simply not worth the money.
Before the subway foamers start scrolling down to the comment box, let me make one very important point: if you want to pay for a subway rather than an LRT (or a BRT, or a horse-and-wagon, or a Swan Boat), and you accept the tradeoff of higher capital cost for the supposed benefit of that technology, then an argument can be made for a subway in some places.
But don’t try to con me with lies about how long it will last for that huge investment.
If a subway were a 100-year proposition:
- We would still be riding in non-air conditioned red “Gloucester” subway cars on the Yonge line. They were bought for the opening in 1954 and would be just coming into a decent middle age of 60 next year. Not even eligible for senior’s fares yet.
- The track on which those trains run would be the original installation ranging in age from 60 (Yonge line, Eglinton to Union) down to
2535 (Spadina south from Wilson), with the Downsview extension a mere 17. - The signal system would of comparable age to the track over various sections of the line as would be basic systems such as ventillation, pumps, lighting, escalators, station finishes, power supply and last, but not least, tunnels.
In fact:
- The G-cars lasted until 1990 (36 years, long by subway car standards). They were replaced by the H6 subway cars which are just now being phased out by the TR “Toronto Rocket” cars. The H6s were considered something of a lemon by the TTC. They are being replaced at the tender age of 23 to take advantage of the production run of TRs already in place at Bombardier. The Yonge line is now on its third fleet of subway cars.
- The original H1 subway cars purchased for the Bloor-Danforth subway that opened in 1966 were replaced at about age 30 by the T1 cars. Those cars in turn will be due for retirement in the mid 2020s.
- Subway track has many components including the running rails, special work (switches and frogs) and the support structure on which these rest.
- Rail tends to last about 25 years (less at locations of high wear such as stations and curves). Special work might last 25 years, but high wear pieces will have to be selectively changed out. The most high-profile of the track replacements was at St. George crossover on the BD line which required weekend-long shutdowns and diversions via the wye. Weekday-only subway riders may not remember these events and other more recent weekend shutdowns for track replacement.
- Where track is out in the elements, it is laid on ties and ballast like a mainline railway. The ties may last a few decades, but the wooden ones are commonly changed out as they eventually decay. The TTC has moved to concrete ties in some locations, but not everywhere. The oldest sections of open track (Yonge line from Berwick Portal to Muir Portal, and from Rosehill crossover to Ellis Portal) are in some locations in rough shape. Major reconstruction of the track near Davisville Station is needed because the foundation is in poor condition, and slow orders here are common.
- Where track is in tunnels, it is bolted either directly to the tunnel slab, or to a layer of floating slabs that rest on large rubber discs to provide insulation from vibration (a technique first seen on the Spadina subway). Any location where there is water in the tunnels is bad for the rail mounts which rust out and must be replaced.
- In some locations, the tunnel concrete is delaminating (the surface layer is splitting away from the concrete underneath). This makes for very noisy operation, but also requires repairs so that the integrity of the concrete is preserved.
- The signal system from the original Yonge line has severe problems with reliability as any subway rider knows, although this is not the only area where signal failures occur. Again, wet areas can play havoc with signals by providing a false signal that track is occupied when it is not. (The system is designed to fail “safe” by showing trains that are not there, rather than by having real trains disappear, only to be rear-ended by surprised followers.) The relays controlling the system are obviously critical to safe operations, but they are antiques. Modern signalling uses solid state controls. The entire YUS is receiving a new signal system in a project that will last until the Spadina extension opens in 2016. The BD line is scheduled for resignalling in the 2020s concurrently with the acquisition of new trains that will have automatic train control (ATC) capabilities like the TRs on Yonge.
- Tunnels and stations are kept free of water by numerous drainage and pumping systems. They are ventillated, in cases of emergency, by large fans. This equipment is good for 50 years at best, and a lot has been replaced on the older parts of the system. Think of this the next time you ride under the Don River at York Mills Station.
- Station lighting does not last forever. This is not just a case of swapping out light bulbs, but of replacing fixtures both for age and for improved efficiency. Anyone who has fluorescent lamps in their home or office knows the smell when a ballast wears out. Imagine that you own 69 stations chock full of such lamps. It is more productive to replace all of the fixtures every two or three decades than to have them fail in place one by one.
- Escalators last 25-30 years, and are kept operating by dint of constant maintenance. Eventually they wear out as did the original Peele Motostairs of the Yonge line, and machines from other manufacturers. After considering complete replacement by an external contractor, the TTC decided to undertake reconstruction of most of its escalators as an “in house” project at considerably lower cost. Subway riders whose memory stretches back more than a few years will remember the ongoing, and lengthy, shutdowns of escalators in the older parts of the system.
- Elevators are even more cantakerous. They need constant attention, and users of St. George Station will remember that main elevator was out of service for months last winter. It is nowhere near 100 years old. That may be construed as “maintenance”, but as elevators and escalators are an essential part of “accessibility”, they need to be available as close to 100% of the time as possible.
- Station finishes include the walls, ceilings and floors. Only one of the original twelve Yonge stations (Eglinton) retains its original vitrolite tiles, and these remain thanks only to intensive lobbying to preserve the original material. Stations on the Bloor-Danforth line have started to sport new wall finishes (e.g. Pape and Dufferin). Ceilings, well, the less said about those metal slats the better. Floors and stairs wear out in high traffic areas and have to be replaced notably at Pape Station which will close for 12 days to give unobstructed access to the terrazzo. Many ceilings have had major restoration work to repair disintegration thanks to water penetration, and similar work can be seen (by anyone who takes the trouble to look for it) in many tunnel locations.
- Stations and other buildings last for a very long time with proper maintenance. The subway carhouses are showing no signs of needing replacement, but then neither are the two streetcar barns dating from the 1920s, nor the TTC substations scattered around the city powering the streetcar system.
- The power supply system for subways consists of substations, a network of feeder cables, switchgear to control the circuits and the third rail for power pickup by the trains. There is also a “low voltage” (power like we use at home) distribution system for the many non-traction power requirements in stations and tunnels. The switchgear lasts about 50 years, and much of it is in various stages of a replacement program. Feeder cables don’t last forever, and one particularly memorable failure was an explosion in a Hydro vault near Queen and Bay caused by TTC feeders whose insultation had disintegrated. The low voltage systems also need replacement as they age. Do you own a 60-year old house with its original wiring? Have you talked to your insurance broker lately?
- Tunnels last 100 years if they are lucky enough to be in a stable, dry location, but many of ours are not. A few examples:
- The Yonge line from Eglinton to Sheppard has round, deep bore tunnels lined with segmented rings. A design flaw in these segments showed up some years ago, and its effect is that the tunnels are slowly being flattened by the pressure of the earth above. The work to reinforce the tunnels and arrest this change before the tunnels and the subway trains collide is responsible for the multi-year night-time shutdown of this segment of the line.
- A section of the tunnel between Bay and St. George Stations on the BD line required major repairs a few years ago, but the exterior of the structure could not be accessed (it is now under a hotel). This required weekend-long shutdowns of the BD service with a diversion through the wye. Other concrete repairs are still in progress in this area. There is a lot of underground water in the old Yorkville area of Toronto as a look at old maps will reveal.
LRT shares many subsystems with subways up to and including tunnels and signal systems where these are necessary. The technologies are identical. Only the shape of the vehicle and the simplicity (or not) of the stations is different.
Everyone knows about streetcar track replacement because it is so obvious and invasive a procedure. After decades of laying inferior track structures (the premise that we were keeping streetcars took a long time to percolate to track standards), the TTC is now building streetcar track with foundations that will last at least 60 years, probably more. The track itself will wear out — that’s what happens when you run trains on it — but the foundation should endure for two or more generations of new track.
Surface operations do not require the level of infrastructure with its ongoing operating and maintenance cost of subways. All that extra convenience and capacity come at a price. If they are not really needed, they take operating funds away from other service and maintenance budgets.
Yes, I have been going on at some length here. There are times when gentlemanly debate needs to be replaced with a very large club (with or without a spike, to your taste) and a very simple statement to those who would mislead us: you are wrong, and you know you are wrong.
Politicians lie all the time — it’s part of the show. With luck, their ignorance and mendacity will be posted on YouTube for everyone to see. Reputable journalists should be ashamed especially if they work for newspapers of record. Community advocates can be excused, up to a point, for being confused, but they risk credibility with simple slogans rather than well-considered opinions.
Anyone familiar with the musical Sweeney Todd knows why Pirelli’s Miracle Elixir was a rather foul-smelling, yellow liquid. That would be a polite way to describe claims about the relative lifespans of subways and LRTs.
Steve Munro 
Of course we would pay extra… People from Scarborough are tired of being told it’s our fault. When in reality its Municipal, Provincial & Federal politics they are playing us.
Our politicians have played with the transit card too long. Scarborough has pockets which were building in hopes of better transit through the years. Only to be denied again and again.
Only options should be to let the people vote on transit type and TAXES and take this out of politicians’ hands.
LikeLike
Don’t forget about the roads themselves wearing out. Ruts at bus stops, ruts just from trucks and automobiles, potholes, etc. Why do they close the Gardiner Expressway or Don Valley Parkway every year for something other than a bicycle race? Why do we always see the 400 series of highway having construction on them? Why do they do construction on sidestreets even though the traffic volume is very low? And what about those bridge collapses we see on the news? Why don’t they last 100 years?
LikeLike
Another great read, Steve. Thanks.
I share your frustration. The SRT does need to be replaced (and is nearly 30 years old) which is likely where a lot of this fiction comes from.
Of course, Edmonton and Calgary have sections of LRT that are older (1978 and 1981) and are doing just fine (both require periodic state-of-good-repair projects too). And of course the oldest parts of Boston’s light rail system are nearly 120 years old! But how can you argue these points with politicians and their enablers who can’t understand or refuse to acknowledge the difference between light rail and streetcars (witness the Ford/Matlow video from a few weeks back).
One minor nitpick: Wouldn’t the original rails from Wilson to St. George be 35 years old, not 25 years old as per above?
Steve: Yes, my mental arithmetic slipped a digit there. I will correct the article.
LikeLike
Steve, most all your commentaries are excellent, but these last few are fantastically written, calling out the “truths” on all fronts. I gather you support, just leave well enough alone and let the Provincial Government take on all the risk, and all the costs, and let them replace the SRT.
My attitude is the same, and if Toronto wishes to still have even more improved transit in Scarborough, that they start incorporating BRT’s that will feed into Kennedy Station and any of the LRT Stations. What better transit can you get than that. Add to this is finding a way to maximize the number of GO Trains into Kennedy Station, and allow all commuters arriving at Kennedy Station between 7 am and 9 am a “FREE TTC PASS TRANSFER ONTO THE GO TRAIN AT KENNEDY”. Voila, one has found the cost efficiency of a ‘FREE DOWNTOWN RELIEF LINE”, using a smart flow plan. I have already worked out a flow plan such that 13 GO TRAINS could arrive within AM commuter period, instead of just 6 Go Trains. Your thoughts …
LikeLike
Speaking of subways and maintenance, I wonder why the work outside Dufferin Station (i.e., a concrete wall on the west side next to the Bell building) has been suspended for a few months.
LikeLike
It’s a lot easier to blame politicians & journalists when they aren’t backed up by TTC reps provided to inform City Council decision making.
I think it was a TTC engineer that gave the misleading response (opinion). Wouldn’t be surprised if Councillors had spoken to him beforehand and knew the answer they’d get.
Steve: The problem is that wherever this ridiculous idea originated, it has legs. They should be cut off. If it came from someone inside the TTC, I must ask why we are paying this person to be on the public payroll.
In the limited sense that things like tunnels last a long time, the statement is correct, but it’s not specific to subways. It refers to any structure which necessarily is built for longevity because replacing it on the fly would be prohibitively costly and complex.
Alas, I am unlikely to be around in 2054 when the Yonge subway self-destructs at age 100 to see how the TTC reacts.
LikeLike
I just rode the better part of the new St. Clair streetcar up to Caledonia and I can barely wait for the new Flexity LRVs. I’ve been having an unhealthy obsession with the LRVs or what they call trams and tramways in Europe, spending endless hours on YouTube watching videos of light rail trams in Europe (Google Berlin Hauptbahnof aka Berlin Central Station and you will be blown away by how far ahead things have progressed in places like Europe). The St. Clair streetcar is so direct onto the street to access, unlike using a labyrinth of stairwells to access the train. It’s just my hope or dream that future Flexity LRVs can have a longer unit length with the option for MU operation.
I think heavily restricting car access in the downtown with streetcar trains in their place would do some real good, even if the decision was not made for some time to come. Evenings and night time are usually fine, not as much traffic. Then there are some of the urban utopias in Europe like Copenhagen where it’s almost all bicycles and metros and light rail. I think car drivers can get addicted to having a car and have some rage on like Mr Ford when car use is threatened (in Russia there is a lot of crazy driving, where car drivers can get a forged car siren that is called a Miglaki, that is really meant for diplomats and dignitaries, with flashing light to cut through anything including red lights, I think Mr. Ford would be delighted to get his hands on one of those for his Caddy SUV..). Frankly I’m offended by all the noise and hostility I see between drivers on the street especially at rush hour, Friday afternoon rush hour is the worst and, I kid you not, I almost wish every day was like a Monday or Tuesday. Anyways I apologize if I’m straying from the topic.
As far as the setback goes for Transit City, I know for a fact that the then dubbed Spadina LRT was supposed to open back in 1990, same as then dubbed 604 Harbourfront LRT, except that residents and merchants at the time were opposed.
Steve: The line was proposed much earlier than 1990, and it was opposed by the left on Council, including one Jack Layton, because it was seen as being a support for development of the railway lands at the expense of local service on Spadina. The original TTC plan called for express operation south from Bloor with only a few stops so that streetcars could quickly reach the new developments south of King.
Then there’s the delays that happened to the 512 line upgrade to a streetcar right of way with Save our St. Clair managing to delay construction further at the time. Maybe I’m a nut case for caring not one iota that I don’t own a car, I only wish there were more like me out there. If there is one thing I would love to see in my lifetime is the placement of strict restrictions of private automobile access to the inner city during rush hour and partly during mid weekdays and the eventual deployment off in the future of longer unit LRVs run in MU trains. I also bet that if some of the LRVs were double ended you could have some crossover tracks on legacy network tracks and the ROW trackage for more convenient turn arounds, as well as avoiding the serious congestion for Spadina streetcars at Charlotte loop. I also have to beg the question of whether it would work to run a Transit City LRT line up Yonge st as congestion relief for the Yonge Subway like some souped up 97 Yonge Bus service, only as an LRT…
And finally, interestingly enough in Dubai the city is putting in some light rail there and the local transit authority is trying to make the LRVs real nice and as a perk have a section of the LRVs for first class passengers only. As one internet comment I came across recently said, a developed nation is not where the low income can afford to buy a car, but where everyone including even the upper classes choose to take transit..
Tìl next time…
Jordan Kerim : )
LikeLike
Unfortunately most of the subway repairs take place out of view of the majority of people, especially car drivers who would not be caught dead on public transit. Unfortunately street car repairs are in plain sight of anyone who tries to use the road. Even if the delay is caused by some other agency the TTC takes the blame. The surface system is also bound up by the need to replace a lot of badly built track, the need to get it done by 2015 and possibly the infrastructure fund designed to combat a recession.
LikeLike
You could not have put it better, with LRT you have far more options for expansion to cover larger catchment areas to give more people access to high quality transit, something the subway and car huggers like to forget.
Greg
LikeLike
The Gardiner expressway was built around the time I was born, and it only designed to last 25-20 years – look like it will be here long past my retirement age…
With infrastrucutre, it is hard to do lifecycle costing because you can likely make the bricks, mortar conrete and steel last for over a century if it is properly maintained… just as the New York and London subways are still running in the original tunnels.
Vehicles, and many of the mechanical and electrical systems do have a limited lifespan and become obsolete because of technological advancement… true of both subways and LRTs
With an LRT, though, after about 30 years, the road and tracks have to be torn up – much as the St. Clair LRT was, and much as the Harbourfront LRT is essentially being demolished and moved 30 feet to the side…. so everything except the tunnel at Union station is essentially going in the garbage.
This is true of all streetcar lines that run on the mainstreets of Toronto… every 30 years the tracks are torn up – only in a few cases, like along the Queensway where the streetcar runs in a gravel or grass right of way, can the railbed/tracks be “permanent”, like train tracks.
Steve: This is flatly untrue. The tracks may be replaced, but not the foundation they sit on. The rebuilding cycle which is almost at an end (after 20 years of making up for poor track from the 70s and 80s) is building road foundations that will last well beyond the life of one set of rails. The Queensway has been completely rebuilt a few times since it was installed in the 50s. Similarly the power distribution system lasts much longer than 30 years.
As for Harbourfront, it is not moving “30 feet to the side”, but will be rebuilt more or less where it was before. However, this will be done within a completely redesigned streetscape, a trackbed that doesn’t wake the dead from its noise, new utilities that are scaled to the size of development taking place at the waterfront, and a vastly improved pedestrian and cycling area.
There is also the issue of operating costs – in some cases, given the extra capital cost, interest costs, and operating costs, it may well make sense to build an LRT and then, after 30 years, replace it with a subway – this might be true of Sheppard or a line with very low passenger volumes for the first one to two decades.
In 500 years, it might be that Toronto is like Manhattan with transit in tunnels throughout areas of the city now served by streetcars – eventually the higher cost of tunneling will have to be incurred. That assumes continuous population growth – unlikely in a world where population might stabilise in 50 years, and where Canada will no longer be one of the “haves” as the undeveloped world develops and catches up (meaning few potential immigrants as there is no economic gain to come here).
In short, it is all very complicated – and easy to be glib. Even if a 100 year comparison was possible, there is too much to be assumed to make it truly meaningful.
LikeLike
Steve:
I understand your frustration and appreciate your anger. There gets to be a time when blunt statements need to be made and the nonsense needs to be challenged.
There are people in this City who believe that The Star, a billion dollar corporation, a 26 year old reporter and a respected veteran reporter would all lie about an event because of ideology – at the risk of the credibility of the corporation and the careers of the journalists. There are people who believe that the lack of desire to build highest order transit on a suburban street is because of downtown elites. There are people who believe that LRTs are an insult to a neighbourhood – even though they offer vastly improved transit to the existing buses. There are car drivers who believe that underground transit will magically solve their gridlock problems so that they can drive at will. There are people who believe that their selfish desire for expensive transit – not warranted by volume of riders – is OK – even if it means inadequate transit for may of their suburban confreres.
This all, of course, is patent nonsense. We need all kinds of people to get angry – to speak the truth.
This, in all the last several years that I have been reading your wisdom, is the best post ever. “Don’t let the bastards get you down”.
Michael
LikeLike
Will the new streetcar track really turn out to last this long? Replacement of streetcar track that is embedded in concrete requires extended shutdowns often lasting months, or in the case of St. Clair years, and as we all know, many things turn out to be less durable than expected (like new subway cars). Meanwhile, it is pretty unusual to see shutdowns of the subway system other than on weekends/late at night, Pape station excepted. I realize that subway maintenance is costly but the maintenance of the streetcar system seems to be much more disruptive.
Steve: It is self-evident that track laid in concrete is more difficult to replace than open track laid on a right-of-way or bolted to the floor of a tunnel. However, the track construction now underway across the city is done so that the next time around only the top layer of concrete (from the steel ties up) needs to be removed. The foundation layers — 2/3 of the new concrete today — remain in place. We are already seeing this type of work with stop replacements (most recently westbound at Queen and University) where new track was installed directly only the existing foundation. The transition to this type of construction has taken two decades and is now almost completed for the entire system (Kingston Road and Queens Quay were the last major sections of “old” style track).
It’s worth noting that fully concreted track came about not because of a transit requirement, but to handle the increasing weight of trucks on the roads. Until roughly the 70s, demolishing and repaving existing tracks was considerably simpler and faster. The transition to all-concrete roads was not matched with a rail installation technology suited to the road structure, and the roads fell apart quickly. The damage from that generation of road construction took two decades to repair.
LikeLike
If the system does fail it will be a direct result of all the modifications made over the years to the original design. Take the Rosedale Valley Bridge for example. It had vents in its roof for decades until they were sealed.
Steve: The irony here is that they were closed to improve air circulation control in case of a fire nearby.
With that in mind speaking of centenarians… the Prince Edward Viaduct will turn 100 in 5 years. I hope the TTC and the City have a plan B in place when it becomes structurally unsound. I know the centre track was placed between Broadview and Chester incase the bridge is inoperable but even still I cannot see the TTC operating without it. Any idea what the plan is if the bridge becomes unsound ala Dufferin?
Tunnels and signals be damned, nothing lasts forever including massive bridges.
Steve: The bridge deck on the Viaduct was completely replaced within the last few decades, and the effect was immediately evident walking across the bridge — the sidewalk no longer bounces up and down when heavy trucks pass by. The subway level is regularly maintained including replacement of support beams for the track. This work is much more frequent than the recent Sunday morning shutdowns, although there was a period not too long ago when an extended slow order on the bridge was the result of too much patchwork maintenance. Even Andy Byford has noted that Toronto is in for some much more extensive subway shutdowns to deal with the scale of capital maintenance required to its aging infrastructure.
Bridges will last if they were well designed and built in the first place, and well maintained afterwards. It has been amusing to watch how much of the infrastructure of the 50s through 70s built to handle suburban expansion has been falling apart while structures from the 20s and earlier survive.
If only the Romans had been here 2,000 years ago, Rob Ford wouldn’t need a new football stadium.
LikeLike
The T1 trains, with their solid-state electronics and AC traction motors are very reliable compared to the older Hawkers. Maybe there should be an analysis comparing the benefits of retrofitting one third of the T1 fleet with ATC and keeping it in service for some time after the mid-2020s versus junking all of the T1’s in favour of new trains on the entire BD line. After all, only the end cars need ATC, not the intermediate ones, and with the T1’s, swapping of cars would still be possible provided that the end cars are ATC-capable. Judging by the experience with the new Toronto Rockets (which seem to be on the path of becoming the new lemons of the fleet once the H6s are gone), maybe it is not that prudent to engage into another large scale purchase of subway cars of unproven reliability.
LikeLike
This reminds me of the quotation widely (although apparently incorrectly) attributed to Margaret Thatcher that “A man who, beyond the age of 26, finds himself on a bus can count himself as a failure”. Enough people seem to agree with this that it’s worth replying that “A society in which people count themselves failures for riding a bus can count itself a failure”.
Steve: Dare I point out that people in Scarborough will still ride buses to reach the subway as we have been told that “nobody” walks to a subway station and walking access to the LRT line is unimportant. Meanwhile, the land of Thatcher continues to build “tramlines”.
LikeLike
I find that their are many people out there who aren’t interested in facts they just want the politicians to tell them what they want to hear. If they aren’t being told what they want to hear then they get upset.
Rob Ford was telling people what they wanted to hear for some time. We can build subways without paying for them, the private sector will pay for it. Now he’s changed his tune slightly. We can build subways with a minor property tax increase. It doesn’t have the same ring to it but but people are still hearing what they want to hear, we’re getting subways.
Never mind that the funding is not in place for a Scarborough subway and probably never will be. Instead of getting transit improvements in the form of an LRT network, Scarborough will have to continue to rely on buses.
LikeLike
@Isaac Morland: that quote is a car-dependent society’s manifesto against all forms of public transit. “Bus” there is a shorthand for bus, streetcar, LRT, subway, or commuter train; anything that has one driver and many passengers.
LikeLike
The real question is how do you get people to care? Scarborough is big enough to be heard by politicians but small enough to be silenced when compared to the big picture.
What can people really do? We have no real choices other than corrupt parties. Is there really a solution or do we just keep trying to straighten the line on the map or adjusting the fudged numbers and think that two parties will agree.
LikeLike
But the TTC uses concrete even on LRT lines where trucks cannot drive on them – like the 1980s Harbourfront LRT or St. Clair… or Spadina, where they could have reused the old granite block paving.
Steve: There was a desire to have a right-of-way that vehicles could drive on, and so it’s all concrete all the time.
LikeLike
A couple of comments:
1) Are the 7 extra trains going to come from Stouffville/Lincolnville (?), Kennedy Station or some place in between? You either have to buy more trains or double track the line for at least part of the route, up to the turn around point.
2) The existing 6 trains, except at the beginning and end, are not likely to have much room on them. GO removed the stop at Scarborough to keep locals from overloading the trains, especially east bound. This gives a capacity of 14,000 over 2 hours at roughly 20 minute intervals for trains with room. Most people are not going to wait 20 minutes for a GO train. If you run all trains from farther north then you have a train every 10 minutes but still only 14,000 extra seats over 2 hours.
3) Have you integrated these trains with trains from other routes to make better use of equipment? GO does this for a number of trains except from Milton because they uses CP, not Bombardier, crews.
4) Have you worked out track availability at Union Station. It is tight except on the shoulders and have you checked track capacity on Lakeshore East.
What you suggest would be easily done by a transit outfit but GO, despite their name, operates railway trains and must obey AAR and TC regulations. Their signal system is not set up for headways much less than 10 minutes.
LikeLike
Was there a particular event that triggered this article?
Steve: It has been brewing for a while, but the bilge from all three parties in the by-election pushed it over the top. Out of nowhere, the music from Sweeney Todd floated into my head, and that gave me the framework.
LikeLike
Regarding Robert Wigthman’s and Andrew’s comments about the disruptions due to subway closures being much less extensive due to the work happening on weekends only: let’s just wait until October when there will be a closure for one week straight around Union station. The logistics have not been worked out completely, but there will most likely be reduced service on the Yonge line for the whole week – including peak periods – due to the limited dispatching and storing capacity at Davisville yard. Such a closure will certainly irritate a lot more folks than any streetcar shutdown has ever done.
There is also talk of closing the entire section around Davisville for a straight two-to-three week period for complete track reconstruction. Meaning no subway service north of St. Clair for two or three weeks. How does that sound? So much for that 100-year lifespan of the subway.
Steve: It will be interesting to see whether there is pressure to hold off on more subway shutdowns while Karen Stintz ponders a run for the mayor’s office.
As for the logistics, it will be interesting to see whether both platforms are used at turnaround points because there is no way to maintain a decent headway with a single track station. St. George at least has the option of offloading on the south platform, driving through the crossover, and then loading on the north platform.
The problem with the track north of St. Clair has been known for a few years at least as I remember seeing references to this in the Capital Budget papers. Andy Byford has been making comments about running state of the art trains on worn out infrastructure, and with him running the show, there is finally pressure to deal with a long-standing problem.
LikeLike
Bravo, Steve!
It is necessary to tell the truth and call out charlatans like Rob Ford for their outright lies, plans that only work if 2+2=7 and imaginary private sector partners.
Any given “lifespan” for subways or LRT is completely fictitious. The reality is that both LRT and subways are complex systems with many components each of which has a different lifespan after which it needs to be replaced. That is normal maintenance for any complex system.
Both subways and LRTs will last forever if properly maintained. The original part of the London Underground that opened in 1863 is still in use. But the original steam engines, tracks, signals, etc, have all been replaced. Not to mention little upgrades like electric traction and lighting!
The real question for subways, LRT and swan boats is “how much will it cost to maintain as it ages?” For example, condominium corporations are required to maintain a reserve fund. This is based upon engineering estimates along the lines of “the roof will last X years and then cost Y dollars to replace.” Same for HVAC systems and all the other bits and pieces of the condominium. By paying a maintenance fee into this fund every year, the condo owners are not stuck with a big lump sum bill when the roof needs to be replaced.
Steve, has anyone done any similar engineering study for Subways or LRT? Obviously the cost depends upon all kinds of factors like number of stations, tunnel vs. surface running, etc.
It would be very useful if we could move away from fictitious lifespan numbers and towards an engineering estimate that is the equivalent of a condo maintenance fee. Then we can say “The long term maintenance cost of this proposed line is X dollars per km per year if subway technology is used and Y dollars for LRT.”
Steve, has anyone ever done that kind of analysis?
Steve: Typically this would come from experience with similar existing infrastructure. However, as Toronto is learning, “experience” when something is fairly new (i.e. its component subsystems have not aged beyond their replacement dates) may not be a guide for the very long term. We now face the cost of replacing subsystems with lifespans of 50-60 years, and the associated costs have no precedent in our operations. By contrast, streetcar track capital costs have been quite high in the past decade because we are rebuilding both tangent track and intersections to a new improved standard that will have a longer lifespan and, eventually, reduce both capital and operating costs. In the bus fleet, we discovered that hybrid buses didn’t save us as much as hoped on fuel costs, and they brought extra operating costs that had not been anticipated.
What I am saying here is that much depends on what the “engineers” anticipate and provide for. People have known for centuries that roofs need replacing, and an engineer who claimed otherwise would be laughed out of the room. Conversely, technologies that are poorly understood may be subject to assumptions and assertions that are wholly inappropriate — don’t forget the claims by Metrolinx that electrification could encounter problems with snow — exposing the “engineers” to ridicule only if the underlying assumptions are exposed.
LikeLike
Thanks Steve for another wonderful Sunday morning read.
With all the comments about streetcar tracks, I must ask (once again) why there is a lack of attention being paid to streetcar switches? It’s all fine and dandy if the tracks are getting replaced but the switches at intersection do pose to become a great risk as time goes on and this problem keeps getting forgotten. It just seems very narrow minded/stupid that the TTC is rebuilding intersections but are leaving in place the decrepit switches which could have been easily included with the reconstruction.
Steve: “Decrepit” is a rather strong term. Street railways ran for a century on this technology, and if it were “decrepit” it would have been replaced a long time ago. The new LFLRVs are designed to work with this track, and have done so successfully in their testing. The issue with TTC special work is as much one of maintenance as of technology. (I assume here that you refer to single blade switches.)
A good example is the ongoing failure to replace the switch control systems with something that actually works. This has been an issue for decades, but nobody has cared to press the issue. Imagine if the subway were treated the same way.
LikeLike
When the TTC did the King crossover first I thought it might be so they could turn trains at King instead of Bloor for work at Union Station. My guess is that it is to tear out the current south wall in preparation of building the new platform. Does any one know if this is what it is for?
My advice would be to run the current rush hour service on Yonge and increase the off peak service to whatever level is needed to meet restricted storage requirements. It will be interesting to see King as a terminal station. I think that they will have lots off people yelling “Use the Northbound Platform” or use the Southbound platform. Shades of Woodbine and Keele before the extension. I am guessing that they won’t be working on the tunnel liners north of Eglinton for that week.
Steve: This work is for signals testing, as I understand it. Tearing down the wall at Union can be done in stages overnight and certainly does not justify shutting down the subway.
This sort of thing is fairly common for new signal system installations. A point is reached where the “old” system has to be shut down so that the new one can be tested without interference. This does not fit into convenient short periods because of the work involved to cut back and forth between the two systems.
LikeLike
How old were the PCC’s when they were finally retired? How many are still in service today and when was the last one built?
How could a very simply designed vehicle be built, last for decades and yet the NEW ones only last 30 years. Just some thoughts.
Steve: The A-8 class PCCs, of which two remain available for charters and special events, were delivered to the TTC starting in 1951 (an order of 50 cars). These were the last cars produced “new” for the TTC, although it acquired many cars second hand from other cities. After the decision in 1972 to retain streetcar operation, a number of PCCs went through a major rebuilding program. A further rebuild of cars preceded the opening of the Harbourfront line in 1990 as the original idea was to “brand” the line with period equipment. This second rebuild was, for the bodies, essentially starting from scratch. However, the electrical gear, controls and trucks were the originals, a testimony to the simplicity and ruggedness of the original PCC design.
Although it might be possible to recycle the carbodies from old subway cars (some of our retired equipment has been sold overseas) or streetcars, the controls are another matter. Solid state controls, by their 30th birthday, are positively stone age relative to modern fleets. This is a big problem for maintenance, and certainly for continued use. Indeed, a proposal to extend the lifespan of the CLRV streetcars ran into a high pricetag that included complete replacment of 70s-era electronics.
The remaining PCCs dwindled in use with service cuts through the early 1990s, and they were officially retired in 1995 except for the two cars that remain for special occasions. To answer your question, cars manufactured in 1951 (and some from earlier generations) went through a major overhaul in the 1970s, and a subset of these through another overhaul in the 1980s. They did not last to their retirement over 40 years after they were delivered without major assistance from the staff at Hillcrest Shops.
See also articles on Transit Toronto’s site about the all-electric PCC fleet and the “A15” rebuild program.
LikeLike
Decrepit might have been the wrong term to use, it was the only word that was in my mind at the time I wrote my last comment.
What I was trying to get at is that their switches really need to be put in the spotlight. It really seems that they keep kicking the can down the road so that they don’t have to go through the complex job of updating/installing the technology for switch control. Which of course is currently Band-Aid by the “stop-and-go” order implemented system wide. It would be logical if they installed/updated the technology for switches while renewing track work, but of course this is the TTC. On a side note, it’s somewhat frustrating during rush hour when you see streetcars bunched up together and all having to come to a full stop before travelling across switches; which may also mean having to wait for a full traffic light cycle (mainly seen on Spadina at King, Dundas and College).
Steve: I agree. The brains trust at the TTC does not seem to understand that with the stop-and-proceed protocol, streetcars at intersections that actually have some sort of transit priority can trip the end of their green cycle in the process of pausing at switches. There does not appear to be a good understanding within the TTC of how all of the factors and patchwork decisions about streetcar operation over the years have contributed to problems with the system. They would rather blame everything on “congestion”.
LikeLike
This is beginning to sound like the story of the Trojan horse. It has a grain of truth which had been thoroughly embellished in the retelling over the years before Homer could finally write it down. With our hundred year myth, the embellishments seemed to have occurred much more rapidly.
It appears that some councilors are treating the myth as expert TTC opinion and making a $1 billion decision based in part on the myth. Thus, shouldn’t the TTC have a duty to publicly clarify the situation? Could Brad Ross be asked to make such a clarification?
Steve: This is not a Brad Ross clarification, it is one due to Andy Byford with the support of Karen Stintz. However, I suspect Byford wants to keep his job, and Stintz is unlikely to sabotage a subway campaign she helped to start.
Yes, with care, tunnels can last a century and more, but they only represent part of the cost of building a “subway”.
LikeLike
This may be a bit of a sidebar.
One of the British railways produced a table showing the anticipated lifespans of the various components of a steam locomotive. I forget the details, but the various bits might last 2, 3, 5 or 10 years. One of the big bits would last 30, and all the other lifespans were factors of 30. So at 30 years of age the entire locomotive was life-expired at once and needed either total rebuilding or replacement.
On streetcar lifetimes: The Peter Witts were new in 1923 and were still pretty complete when the subway opened 30 years later and the last went out of regular service aged about 40.
The first PCCs in 1936 lasted until the B-D subway opened in 1966.
(I think most of the other classes were defeated by advancing technology and increased demands.)
Steve: The first Toronto PCCs did not arrive until 1938, just for accuracy, but your point is the same.
LikeLike
Kevin’s comment:
Very true. And with any new technology there is always an element of risk.
As a professional Accountant I am used to working with companies that make major capital investments in computer and other advanced technology. But before they lay out a gazillion dollars to buy high-tech stuff they do their best to do cost/benefit analysis. This includes doing their best to do forecasts of future maintenance and replacement costs for the system and its components.
Many times the technology experts say things like “we forecast X maintenance costs, with a margin of error of plus 100% and minus 20%.” At least we’ve done our best to forecast future cash flows in order to do the cost/benefit analysis, and can look at the “worst-case” scenarios.
What really annoys me is the hypocrisy of Rob Ford and his ilk saying that they want to run the city more like a business, and then spending hundreds of millions of dollars without even trying to do the sort of basic cost/benefit analysis that is routine in the private sector. For example, spending $505 million rebuilding the Gardiner Expressway without seriously looking at alternatives.
Ditto for the hypocrisy of those politicians who bill themselves as “business” types and committed to bringing business principles to running the City. Then they say very non-business-like things such as “build a Scarborough subway because it is our turn.” Can you imagine any serious business where a major department makes a presentation asking for a big investment upon the premise “forget about return on investment. Our department hasn’t got any investment for a while so it is our turn.”
Ridiculous!
Steve: The difference is that the board (usually) fires managers who make bad recommendations. Voters re-elect them.
LikeLike
Kevin Love touched on something that really grinds my gears:
I consider myself a ‘fiscal conservative’, but many who classify themselves (or are classified by others) as that tend to be just what Kevin describes of Rob Ford. Basically, it involves making a spectacle out of piddly little savings (“gravy train”) for the public to see, but turning around and all else be damned when it comes to blowing the big bucks on things to their own benefit. With Ford, pushing for subways helps to keep or boost his political support while at the same time supports his “I want to drive myself without transit users in my way” attitude.
Either you support careful spending in all respects or you don’t, IMHO.
On another note, though not exactly on point in this discussion, some comments have involved the “private funding” issue for subways. In the same way that Steve mentions that points about 100-year lifespan of subways had the music from Sweeney Todd in his head, every time I hear of “private funding” for subways, I think of hydrogen as a fuel. Both tend to be touted as a panacea for which they are not. Hydrogen as a fuel is often spoken of as an “energy source”. Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe, but in its pure, fuel-capable, form is relatively rare on this planet. As a fuel, it is no more of an “energy source” than a set of rechargable batteries are: they are only a means of storing energy for later and portable use (and with a degree of loss). Similarly, “private funding” is touted as a way to pay for subways. It cannot do that anymore than my VISA card can (notwithstanding my spending limit). Private sources may be able to provide a new model for financing, but at some point it must be paid back with money that has to come from somewhere.
LikeLike
Don’t be silly Steve, swan boats on land? Nooo. The obvious choice for mass-transit here is those little choo-choo trains they have for kids at amusement parks. They’d be much cheaper than subways or LRT’s and way more fun! 😉
Steve: Swan Boats are the ultimate vehicle. The Ontario Swan Boat Development Corporation is working on one that swims (the basic model), runs on land (a la the Hippo bus), and flies up into the air (a possible replacement for Ornge?). You have no faith in Ontario technology!
LikeLike
I’m surprised there’s been no mention in this discussion of the age of electric streetcar operation in Toronto on a number of routes, like (random example) College (very late 1800s – 1896?). That’s more than a century and the service still operates today.
However, if we want to talk vehicle lifespans, policymakers should be quite interested in how long GO coaches last; the original batch from 1978 are still in service. That’s 35 years and counting, with an expected lifespan of 50 years. Impressive robustness!
Back to infrastructure, some of the railway corridors still operational in Toronto today were first laid in the 1850s. That’s a roughly 160-year lifespan and counting!
Steve: GO coaches have the advantage that they are trailers in the sense they have relatively little equipment on them and what they do have is easily changed out. Mainline rail cars must be built to higher crash resistance standards than LRVs/streetcars/subways, and they must maintain this standard to the day they are retired. Buses on the other hand do well to get past 12 years without a major overhaul thanks to a US funding standard that rewards transit systems for throwing away vehicles rather than maintaining them.
As for rail corridors, I think the CN and its predecessors have swapped out ties and rails a few times since those lines began operation. I don’t see any semaphores at Via stations either!
LikeLike
Hi Steve
Your comments about life of LRT’s and subways has me thinking about the life of the LRT cars and the new low floor streetcars. Do you think that either will last for thirty years like the CLRV’s did?
Thanks,
Ian
Steve: At this point I’m not sure, and we will have to see how the cars behave in service. However, the state of vehicle electronics is now much more mature than when the CLRVs were delivered and this should be much less of a problem as the new cars age. As for the body structure, trucks, etc., time will tell, but at least this is based on a standard car that has been in service for years, not on one invented specifically for the TTC.
LikeLike
Swan boats have the added advantage that the swan part can self-replicate and all that the managers have to do is upgrade the seating and the fare collection technology!
LikeLike
The thing that has amused me the most about the people making a big deal about the “100 year subway lifespan” and how it’s an investment in the future is that they never mention how long roads last for.
LikeLike
Actually Carl the single deckers from 1967 to ’78 are still in service in different re-incarnations. They were basically H1 subway cars with a little added strength in the sills for buff loading requirements. The trucks even had the mounting holes for traction motors. The windows and car sides were such that they could be cut up and re-used in subway cars if GO failed.
LikeLike
Remember how the TTC kept the “New Look” GM buses runing for ages. You can rebuild almost anything – it is just that the cost of doing so increases to a point where it is not economic.
Usually the problem is rust/corrosion. I know that auto makers have made huge strides since the 1970s/80s – it is often a matter of galvanising or coating materials… or proper maintenance. I have a 1996 Ford Escort that is in amazing shape becuase the original owner had it treated each year at Krown (most rustproofing is mineral oil)
LikeLike
I find the argument that subways are “an investment in the future” as a reason in and of itself for subway over something else (usually LRT) simply laughable.
The idea combines the “100 year lifespan” myth with the idea that its higher capacity, especially when it is multiple times the capacity needed for a corridor, makes it a good investment in the future. That makes it more of a gamble than an investment.
Saying that its higher capacity ensures its usefulness well into the future is gambling that level of capacity will be needed, or more likely, funneled into that corridor, and does not take into consideration how the rest of the network can or can not handle such concentrated capacity. It is almost certain that future needs will involve extensions and the high cost of subway solutions doom the future to decades of round-and-round discussions that build next to nothing.
When one gets away from the core of the city, a higher order of transit mode is needed that does not have an excess of capacity with a cost that is a gamble on whether it will be really needed. A real “investment in the future” would be to build a mode that has some extra capacity but with a cost that makes extensions possible with far less of the going around in circles as nothing gets built.
There really is no suburban corridor that can make use of a full subway capacity without funneling riders from a wider catchment area. For the same money, multiple suburban LRT corridors can provide the same capacity AND provide alternatives in case of a line shut-down. The spending of that money can be spread out over a longer time span while still reaching longer distances by building one corridor at a time.
Proper selection of mode for the proper corridor. That is true investment for the future.
LikeLike
THIS! Too many people believe they are two entirely different kinds of technology, when in reality they are simply conceptual terms to define the same constant.
A common myth is that subways always use third rail while light rail always uses overhead wires. This is incorrect as power supply is independent from the definition, as there are subways which use overhead wires and LRTs which use third rail (for example: London, and arguably the SRT). Ottawa’s trains use diesel, but they are viewed as light rail rather than commuter trains.
Another myth is that subways technically cannot operate at grade. This myth has a little more truth to it, as a common pillar of the definition of a subway is that it does not interact with other transit. However, it is technically possible for subway trains to do just that. Chicago and Paris both have sections of track which cross streets at level crossings.
The one defining factor between the two modes is capacity, and even that is not black and white. A four car train on Sheppard has similar capacity to the trains that will be running along major avenues along the LRT lines. Many other cities operate subway trains with even less capacity.
At the end of the day, subways and LRTs are simply concepts, though subways tend to be more built out than their light rail counterparts. A line which one city defines as a subway route may qualify as an LRT in another city, and vice versa.
LikeLike