Many service changes come into effect for September 2010. These will include both the reversal of the normal summer cuts as well as improvements to deal with growth in demand.
Please refer to my article on the June 2010 schedule changes for a list of the summer service cuts that will end in September.
The Toronto Transit Commission held a long Board meeting on July 14, 2010, that, as reported elsewhere, spent much of its time on the Greenwood/Donlands second exit proposals. This article is a compendium report on other agenda items of interest.
The full agenda is available on the TTC website.
Continue readingUpdated July 15, 2010 at 11:00 am:
With luck, this will be the last update in this thread.
At the TTC meeting on July 14, there was a long presentation and discussion of the issues at Donlands and Greenwood Stations. The presentation materials are not yet online as the project pages are being updated by the TTC to reflect recent changes.
Greenwood Station
TTC staff recommended and the Commission approved that the community’s alternative proposed second exit route be used. This route passes through the back yards of numbers 11 and 15 Linsmore rather than through a site now occupied by any house.
The first version of this scheme included the expropriation of the house now under renovation at 9 Linsmore. A newspaper report of the affected landowner gives some idea of the background and suggests that his 7-year renovation project is a long-standing annoyance to at least some in the neighbourhood.
In any event, it appears that other owners on Linsmore may be willing to sell, and one way or another, that’s where the exit will go. The only remaining issue for the TTC is to determine the location of a sewer that may interfere with the proposed route to the exit, and the feasibility of diverting this sewer to suit the new construction.
Donlands Station
The situation at Donlands is more complex than at Greenwood. TTC staff did a much more thorough job at the Commission meeting, compared with the public meeting a few days earlier, of explaining the standards and calculations used in evaluating the alternatives. Their target for the path length from the point where an exit stair meets the platform to the surface is two minutes. This keeps the total exit time, including getting to the exit on the platform, within the overall code targets.
The original group of exit proposals by the community fails to meet the exit time criterion. However, a new alternative came to light at the Commission meeting. This would link into the east, rather than the west, end of Donlands Station. The exit passages would all lie under roads rather than houses, and the exit building would be on the north-east corner of Donlands & Strathmore where there is now a school parking lot and a vent shaft to the subway. TTC staff will report back on this option once they have a chance to review it.
The most contentious part of the discussion turned on whether the TTC would give approval to any plans on July 14, or would wait until their August 23 meeting to finalize their choice. The community, understandably, does not trust the TTC, and a deferral would have been a sign of good faith from the Commission. Such an action would not have slowed work because the Council meeting at which expropriation will be considered is not until August 25. A TTC recommendation could be taken to Council as supplementary information, a routine process.
On a split vote of 6-3, the Commission decided not to delay approval, and decided to give staff the authority to proceed with the three proposals now on the table: (a) Donlands & Strathmore, (b) the new TTC alternative with a building in the Dewhurst road allowance and (c) the original scheme using property now occupied by 1 & 3 Strathmore.
Staff assured the Commission that they will report back in August with the outcome of their review. More generally, there is a recognition at TTC that a public consultation process is needed for “small” projects that don’t trigger formal Environmental or Transit Project Assessments.
Last September, I reported on the travesty of new “area maps” for the streets around subway stations. They were so hopelessly inaccurate that an excellent Toronto trivia contest could have been held to spot all of the errors. In very short order, they vanished. (It’s amazing how quickly the TTC can move when it’s embarrassed.)
Joe Clark reports that a new area map has just appeared at Christie Station and has posted photos on Flickr.
Have a look. What is missing? The TTC routes serving the area! There’s a nice green line showing the subway, and the stations are marked, but no surface routes. Yes, riders can look at the big map right next-door to see the local routes, but it wouldn’t hurt to have them on the area maps too.
Also missing-in-action is the alternate entrance at Bathurst/Markham.
The next question for trivia seekers is this: will the TTC replace the even older generation of local maps which can be found in selected locations around the system? These missed the first wave of really inaccurate updates, and were not removed in the great purge. Does the TTC even know they exist, and will they update them with brand new maps?
The second exit from Broadview Station opened briefly last summer ending the long period of reconstruction at that station. By fall, it was closed again due to ongoing problems with water. The announced opening date kept changing, and most recently signs declared that June 30, 2010 was the new target.
Here is the explanation from the TTC’s Brad Ross:
We’ve encountered a very difficult problem with water ingress at Broadview Station. TTC Engineering and our consultants are continuing geotechnical investigations to determine the source and extent of the water presence.
The next step is to remove the below grade water on a temporary basis to allow the extensive repairs needed to stairwell finishes and the stairs to re-open. In the interim a permanent solution will be developed and implemented to prevent water from entering the structure in the future. There’s a tank on-site is to facilitate remedial and testing measures and removal of the below grade water.
The saga continues.
Updated on June 15 at 11:30 am: Thanks to “nfitz” for pointing out that the base prices for both the TTC and Metrolinx cars are available in Bombardier press releases.
Updated at 11:50 am: A link to Transit Ottawa’s website has been added.
We gathered at an odd, odd-of-the-way spot — the GO platform at Kennedy Station — a small band of media, government aides and friends of MPPs. In the background, SRT trains came and went from the upper level of the subway station.
The occasion? Metrolinx and the Government of Ontario announced Cabinet approval of the extended “Big 5 in 10” project funding and the purchase of 182 new Light Rail Vehicles for the Transit City network. The “Big 5” announcement was no surprise — an agency like Metrolinx doesn’t publish a plan like that without knowing approval is certain. The real news was that Ontario has embraced LRT by actually ordering vehicles.
The irony of the location, a site where we might have seen Toronto’s first LRT line three decades ago, made this event one I just had to attend even if I will have to wait almost a decade to see the new cars rolling out of Kennedy on a rebuilt, extended SRT.
This order builds on the already-approved TTC “legacy” order of 204 LRVs from Bombardier. That contract included an option for up to 400 additional cars of which 300 were assigned to Metrolinx and the remaining 100 stayed with the TTC. If Metrolinx wants to bump its order, it has six years to exercise the option for its remaining 118 cars. This lies well within the timeframe of announcements for another round of LRVs for Toronto or possibly other Ontario systems, but on the timescale of transit planning, is short enough to focus attention on the question “what’s next”.
The new cars (5MB pdf) are slightly longer and wider than the “legacy” LRVs, and the Transit City lines have been designed to match the specs of an “off the shelf” vehicle rather than the more restrictive TTC streetcar system. A comparison chart shows the major differences between the two new fleets as well as the existing CLRVs and ALRVs.
The contract price is $770-million not including taxes, spare parts and future change orders. This $4.23-million unit cost compares favourably with the TTC’s $1.2-billion contract for 204 cars (roughly $6-million each), but the actual difference will only be in the range of 5-10% according to Metrolinx CEO Rob Prichard. Much of the difference lies in the way the TTC and Metrolinx quote pricing and inflation (the TTC’s is an all-in price because as-spent dollars must be quoted in capital budget projections).
The TTC and Metrolinx would do well to present a price reconcilliation so that everyone can make an apples-to-apples comparison. The last thing we need is a bunch of ill-informed Mayoral candidates presenting the difference as an example of how streetcars are too expensive in Toronto.
The base price for each set of vehicles can be found in Bombardier press releasesThe first of the new cars will run on the Sheppard East LRT scheduled to open in 2014. The remainder of the fleet isn’t needed until 2019/20 when the Finch, Eglinton and (rebuilt/extended) SRT lines are scheduled to open. This puts much of the order at the back end of the TTC legacy car deliveries running to 2018. Bombardier and their workers in Thunder Bay are quite happy to see production continuing at their plant. They have committed to 25% Canadian content, and Bombardier hopes to improve on that figure.
Metrolinx order: 182 cars for $770-million, or $4.23-million each
TTC order: 204 cars for $851-million, or $4.17-million each
This order sets the technology pattern for other LRT projects in the GTA including Hamilton, Mississauga and Kitchener-Waterloo if any of these progresses beyond the planning stage. Less clear, however, is the relationship with Ottawa whose LRT scheme recently got back on track with announced 1/3 funding from the federal government. Siemens was the chosen supplier for the original Ottawa proposal, and will no doubt have a presence in any revival of that scheme.
So begins the long-overdue introduction of LRT to suburban Toronto, although much remains just lines on a plan. There are the “Phase 2” elements of the four LRT lines, the proposed Sheppard East extension south to University of Toronto Scarborough Campus, the rest of Transit City, and who knows what beyond the 416. The UTSC extension proposal will be on the Metrolinx Board agenda for its June 29, 2010, meeting, while the remainder awaits the “Investment Strategy” and discussions on how to fund a growing regional network.
Updated June 8, 2010 at 11:00 pm:
The Smitherman campaign has posted a backgrounder to his transportation plan which has been updated to reflect the funding of inflation by Queen’s Park.
In a previous update, I noted that there was a bit over $1-billion still unaccounted for. This is explained in the backgrounder as follows:
Once the provincial government formally approves their contribution escalation the Smitherman construction cost increment is reduced to $3.87billion, or $5-billion once financed to 2021. [Page 3]
Although this issue has been addressed, the method of paying for transit investments has not been changed. Smitherman still depends on revenue from gas tax and dividends from City agencies, money that is already spoken for by existing budgets at the TTC and the City. He also depends on new tax revenue from developments along the routes to be built. However, those taxes traditionally have been at least partly spent to serve new residents and businesses these developments would bring.
While I applaud Smitherman for at least producing a detailed plan, I still do not agree with elements of it such as the Bloor-Danforth subway extensions or with his financing scheme. (For the record, at Council today TTC staff responded to a question from Councillor Thompson about a subway extension and explained that any subway extension could not be built along the existing SRT corridor.)
The original content of this post follows the break.
The post on George Smitherman’s transit platform has spawned a comment thread dealing with how the TTC manages operations on the subway. These comments really don’t belong where they were posted, and I have moved them here.
John F. Bromley sent me a photo of a new LRT line running through a commercial development.
Look familiar? Can you say Scarborough Town Centre?
The photo is from June 1972. The cars were the first in Europe to be air conditioned.
This shows the kind of thing done with LRT in Europe even before the TTC reversed its anti-streetcar policy, about the time Queen’s Park decided that we needed an “intermediate capacity” system midway between buses and subways, and before the TTC collaborated with Queen’s Park in destroying an LRT plan that could have been built 40 years ago.
On May 27, TTC Vice-Chair Joe Mihevc staged a most unusual press conference at Christie Station. The purpose? To announce a new website, ttcpassengeraudit.com, where riders can report issues about the subway stations they use.
On July 17, 2010, volunteers who sign up for a specific station will audit their sites and post responses via an online form (available only in hard copy as I write this). Topics to be reviewed include lighting, cleanliness, maintenance, way-finding, the station exterior and surroundings, safety and quality of ride (not strictly speaking a “station” related issue).
The need for customer-based reporting is an admission of failure in “official channels” to get things done. Customers report lots of things to the TTC today, and some are even addressed, but many languish for months with no apparent action. The TTC maintains web pages with information about escalator and elevator maintenance, as well as construction projects, but these cover the large, planned works, not day-to-day housekeeping.
Some issues, such as the long-standing closure of the “new” entrance to Broadview Station, are not listed on the TTC site at all. (As a passing update, some work appears to be taking place, but very slowly, and the notices now claim the entrance will reopen by June 30, 2010.) Riders should be able to get up-to-date information about the status of such projects online without counting on transit activists or Councillors to chase TTC staff.
The TTC hires an outside agency to audit its stations to give an unbiased view of what is happening. Although there are goals for improvement, the index for the system as a whole inches up very slowly. TTC claims that it is hamstrung by the availability of staff and things would be so much better if only there was a greater subsidy. Whether the staff they have is properly managed and monitored is not discussed, at least not publicly.
The press conference was unusual in that it had no TTC official presence, and it was conducted, at least initially, outside of the station. It was very hot, and Mihevc’s assistant Anthony Schein held a reflector to act as a parasol.
Later, we all moved inside, and things took quite an amazing turn. Strangely enough, the TTC had two workers on hand cleaning the station. I had seen one sweeping the platform when I arrived, but upstairs there was another. As Joe spoke, the cleaner was washing the glass of the Collector’s booth. I have been riding the subway since it opened, and I have never seen this activity. Maybe I just don’t frequent the right stations.
Note also that the signs in the booth window are all lined up. If you look closely, you will see that only one of them is hand-written.
Meanwhile, elsewhere in the station, we have:
The entrance sign bearing a tag, and …
The long-missing vicinity map. After the debacle of new and wildly inaccurate maps last September, maps that vanished in the blink of an eye once the problem was reported, the TTC assured us that new maps would be in place by November. It is now May.
On the subject of removing and installing signs, the TTC has outdone itself in recent days. An ongoing problem is that old signs are never taken down, they just fall down, eventually, after being vandalized, shredded, or just slowly crumbling off of the wall. Last weekend, there was a subway diversion at St. George, and posters announced the temporary routing. Starting this weekend, there are nightly shutdowns of parts of the Yonge-University line. Signs for the new diversion were installed days after the St. George diversion ended, but the old signs remain in place.
At Broadview, main level, they are side by side. At the mezzanine level, the St. George notice occupies pride of place at the foot of the main stairway in front of the newsstand, while the YUS notices are tucked away in corners.
Why is it not possible to take down out-of-date notices, especially when the space could be better used for current information? How long will these two signs languish at my station? Will we give a prize for the station with the most out-dated signs or maps?
For many years, I have urged the TTC to adopt a simple tactic I saw decades ago in Boston where all notices have a “stale date” and text at the bottom saying “Remove after xxx”. Station cleaning staff take down old signs as part of normal housekeeping. Somehow, this simple process is beyond the abilities of the best transit system in the known universe.
Riding over to Christie Station, I was on a train that was not just dirty, the exterior was black. The fleet number on one car was covered with a tag, and many people had “finger painted” in the dirt on the windows. Indeed, I started to notice how few cars did not have such “inscriptions”, and was astounded a day later to see a train that was almost gleaming, the only freshly-washed train I have seen in months. The problem seems to exist mainly on the Bloor-Danforth line.
This train is fairly typical of BD-line equipment. Dirt streaks run down from the roof, and although it’s not immediately obvious, the windows are coated with dust. Our stations may be spotless, but from inside the trains, it’s like looking through a fog.
This car has beautiful clean, shiny doors. That’s the colour the whole thing is supposed to be. Maybe not mirror-bright, but a decent silver, not a shoddy imitation of pewter.
This shows a common problem with doors on cars that are somewhat cleaner than average. There is an area at the top of the doors that simply doesn’t get scrubbed clean.
[Technical note: These photos were taken in Old Mill Station using daylight that came in through the north window on a cloudless late afternoon. You can see the exterior lighting condition in each of these photos, one way or another.]
Joe Mihevc wants riders to have a sense of ownership in their system. At times, riding the TTC is like living in a run-down apartment building where I want the place to look nice, to be proud to bring friends, but the landlord has excuses for not doing anything. There is even plaque in the lobby congratulating him for the condition of his building.
When the TTC starts to care about its system again, when it stops using the “we need more money” excuse as a blanket response to every criticism, riders might really feel they are part of the TTC.
Steve Munro 