Toronto's new 25km Eglinton subway line breaks ground. To be completed by 2020.
 

well, this is great news.

2020, jeez gonna take a lifetime.

Are there laws in place against using cheap foreign labour? What's up with the slack timeline? Compared to the Canada Line this is a joke.

The partially underground LRT (not subway) may take even longer:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle2227492/

Tunnel plan for Eglinton Crosstown LRT could stymie Ford

Long before Mayor Rob Ford killed Transit City, the Eglinton Crosstown LRT was an enormously complicated engineering project, but the plan to bury the 25-km line is creating new engineering and soil disposal headaches that could drive up both cost and complexity.

The estimated cost already jumped from $4.6-billion to $8.2-billion, after Queen’s Park agreed to take the line underground.

The design riddles associated with tunneling under the Don River and Black Creek could provide Mr. Ford’s critics with an opening to block the revised plan in council next year. And there could be a domino effect on Mr. Ford’s Sheppard subway plan. Under his deal with the province, if the Crosstown line comes in under budget, unspent funds will go toward the subway.

The Don Valley

Under the Transit City strategy, the LRT was to emerge from a tunnel east of Laird and continue eastward on a right-of-way in the middle of Eglinton. But because of Mr. Ford’s changes, Metrolinx officials have spent months grappling with the question of how to get the Crosstown line across the Don Valley.

A tunnel may prove to be too deep and too steep for light rail vehicles, so Bruce McCuaig, president and CEO of Metrolinx, said the agency is looking at building a grade-separated bridge for the LRT as it crosses the ravines. Public consultations on an environmental assessment examining a bridge and other tunnel configurations will begin in early 2012.

Yet some councillors are already questioning both alternatives.

[...]

^ I'm a little confused as to why a tunnel would be too deep for LRT. Just the steepness issue?

A subway is an underground train. You're wrong in suggesting the fact that it is LRT means it's not a subway. Subways need not be heavy rail.

Will it be opening in phases as portions are complete, or will the entire 25km just open in 2020?

I see. When a subway goes above ground it becomes an LRT and when an LRT goes underground it becomes a subway. And here I thought there were capacity/cost differences.

In that case, I propose they stop calling it the Eglinton LRT and stop saying that it's upgradeable to subway.. it already is a subway!

Crazy transportation experts

^ Generally, subway is heavy rail. Until recently, I thought it was exclusively heavy rail, but as J Will pointed out, it need not be. LRT however is confined to being well, light rail transit. If it is underground, it can still be called LRT, but also subway. Oh, and there are cost differences, as it is much more expensive to build underground then on ground.

So I'm guessing that an underground LRT is a cheap version of an actual subway?

Now I get it!

Pretty much, although it can be just as good and a better fit, depending on the application.

It is a steepness issue. Not to mention, it's a complete waste of money to go that route through the areas that they mention as being obstacles like the Don Valley.

Who are these "transportation experts" who said it (the Eglinton line) is not a subway. Please cite them with a link so I can laugh at them.

subway (plural subways)
(North America) An underground railway, especially for mass transit of people in urban areas.

An LRT subway is still a subway.

Stations are planned for Wynford and Bermondsey. If the tunnel needs to pass beneath the Don Valley, then Wynford/Bermondsey will be on the approach grades. That means the construction of these stations will be astronomically expensive, since they will be so deep below ground level. I'm not sure how deep, but sometimes these stations have to be blasted out of the rock and then the only access is via elevator.

The Bloor-Danforth Line had the same problem with nearby stations (Sherbourne, Castle Frank, Broadview) which is why it crosses the Rosedale and Don Valleys on bridges.

Yep, because of its smaller width, tunneling is cheaper - kind of like the Montreal Metro! (the trains for this thing are about the same size as the Metro trains, for the record)

Yeah, habsfanman relax, these trains look almost exactly like the new Montreal Subway. The only difference is that instead of 6 cars, they will have 4 cars.

They are actually wider than Montreal's subways. - some LRT, eh:?

Also the tunnel will be larger than a normal subway to support the electric cables that power the trains overhead.

New Montreal Subway

http://www.bombardier.com/files/en/s...real_Metro.jpg

New Toronto Streetcars - The New LRT-Subway will be a modified verison of this

http://torontoist.com/wp-content/upl...streetcar1.jpg
http://torontoist.com/wp-content/upl...streetcar4.jpg
from klb86 at UT ( The NEW LRT SUBWAY WILL HAVE 4 Cars - 2 More than shown here and be slightly larger)

http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/showthr...etcars/page117

^^^ Thats just a tram! Why on earth would you run those for a subway?

Thanks, that makes sense then, if they have stations so close to the edge of the valley. But isn't Wynford a little out of the way though? You'd think they would put it closer to the Don Mills & Eglinton intersection.

These pictures are our new streetcars. Not the trains for the Eglinton line. However they will have a similar appearance as these trainsets, except they will have doors on both sides. They will be 4 car trainsets, and as I mentioned above these LRT trainsets are wider than the current Montreal subway.

As for why this LRT runs underground, ask our Mayor.

Nobody will want to cross the Don Valley Parkway on foot, and there's a lot of residential density east of the parkway.

There will be a Don Mills station too, possibly with one exit to Don Mills and another to Ferrard.

And no, that's not too close; it's about 0.75 miles between Don Mills and Wynford.

But the metro is 9 cars long.

But the metro is 9 cars long.

But the metro is 9 cars long.

Nothing is stopping the TTC from adding additional cars to the trainsets. I guess they will let the ridership determine system upgrades.

The tunnel being built will be able to support a full subway if needed.

Platform length?

If the current project isn't scheduled to be completed until 2020 (and will guaranteed be late and way over budget), how many eons will have to pass before it will ever be upgraded?

Then why is everyone (save you) calling it an LRT? Why is the link to the video that you provided titled "Construction Underway on Eglinton LRT"? Why is the name of the project 'Crosstown LRT'? Why don't they use subway cars instead of LRTs?

Why? Because it's an underground LRT, not a subway.

Former TTC Chief calls tunnel for Eglinton LRT "insane"

http://www.blogto.com/city/2011/07/f...on_lrt_insane/

Former TTC Chief General Manager David Gunn, who was brought on by the TTC as an unpaid consultant to aid with the review of its 2012 budget, had some harsh words regarding the decision to bury the Eglinton LRT. "Low-floor streetcars in a tunnel will cost you more than a subway while delivering less. I can't for the life of me figure out how this decision was made," he told the Globe and Mail in reference to the Eglinton Crosstown LRT, a project which recently broke ground.

Gunn cites the fact that LRT cars are more expensive and require bigger tunnels than subways, but can't provide the same capacity. Metrolinx, on the other hand, claims that smaller stations and the ability to repurpose the Scarborough RT makes the current plan the better option. The former chief characterizes this rationale as "nonsense."
And that's not the only criticism of the TTC Gunn was willing to share with the Globe. Here are some highlights:

[...]

Eglinton LRT ready to launch

http://www.thestar.com/news/ttc/arti...eady-to-launch

Tess Kalinowski
Transportation Reporter

Along Eglinton Ave., they’ve been waiting nearly 20 years for someone to replace the subway that former Premier Mike Harris cancelled in 1995.

This summer, that wait will finally be rewarded when the TTC starts digging the first tunneling shaft for the Eglinton-Scarborough Crosstown Light Rail Transit (LRT) line.

The $8.2 billion provincially funded LRT will be wholly owned by Ontario and is slated for completion in 2020. Construction will begin around Black Creek Dr., where, next summer, the first of four enormous tunnel-boring machines will be launched from that pit.

The LRT will run about 20 kilometres underground to Kennedy station, where it will continue seamlessly above-ground for 6 kilometres on the route of what is now the Scarborough RT.

The Toronto Star asked Jack Collins, Metrolinx vice-president for rapid transit implementation, about the project:

Given the Eglinton line will run mostly underground, how does LRT differ from subway?

Subway trains have six cars. LRTs will be run in three-car trains.

“A subway train is about 145 metres long and we are 97 metres long. Because of that you can get more people in a subway. Capacity is a difference, but we’re sizing the capacity to meet the needs of the Eglinton line and future growth, and we don’t feel a subway is necessary,” Collins said.

The original LRT plan called for only an 11-kilometre tunnel in the middle. With the switch, the trains are now expected to travel at subway speeds, averaging 34 km/h versus 22 km/h. The trip between Jane and Kennedy will take about 25 minutes, rather than 45.

[...]

Now lets argue about why- although they may all be apples to you- some apples are know as 'oranges' to the rest of the us.

How about we call it an LRT that runs underground.

This is semantics.

I'm sure when its running most people in Toronto will refer to it as the subway...just with different cars.

Cost aside an LRT, underground, running at subway speeds is a lot different than one above ground. It's basically a hybrid subway-LRT.

An underground LRT IS a subway. Is this concept really that difficult for you to understand? I gave you the definition of a subway, and you STILL don`t seem to be able to comprehend that a subway is an underground train. Heavy rail or light rail is irrelevant. If you can`t understand this than god help you.


I never said it wasn`t an LRT. You think that LRT and subway are mutually exclusive. You are wrong. Again. I even gave you the definition of a subway, but you don`t seem to be able to understand it.


No, I`d rather not argue about why. YOU started this argument. Not me. I called it a subway. You just couldn`t leave that alone. Just like you trolled the other Toronto thread in City Discussions and got it shut down, you`re trolling this thread too. I don`t get why. I don`t troll your little Montreal threads, so there`s no reason for you to troll any of my Toronto threads. Unless you just have nothing better to do. Which seems to be the case.

Once more for those who have trouble reading:

subway (plural subways)
(North America) An underground railway, especially for mass transit of people in urban areas.


-----------------

If you can tell me how it does not meet this definition, go ahead. Otherwise you`re wrong.

lets just call underground lrt mini-subway... as in it has no where near the capacity of a traditional heavy rail subway, but still runs underground and can be configured in a similar manner.. more discussion about the actual line would be great...thanks.

I agree. There was no reason for habfanman`s nonsense about it not being a subway to begin with. It IS a subway, and whoever told him it`s not is an idiot.

apparently this SUBWAY is one of the most expensive infrastructure projects in the world, running in the high ends of 8 billion.

It doesn't matter guys, because I have evidence that underground light rail is a subway. An example is the MBTA's Green Line. It has streetcar like cars, but yet it runs underground, and therefore is called a subway.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ParkStreet.jpg

SkyTrain in Vancouver is considered subway/metro eventhough relatively little of the first 2 lines {50km} is underground. Technically it is Advanced LRT but the real thing that matters is that is a medium to high capacity system with total grade separation. If any part of a line does not have this then it is LRT in the traditional sense of the word.
That said David Gunn is right......it is a waste of money as LRT tunnels are more expensive to build due to needing more space for the overhead electrical supply and this also requires more labour. LRT trains also have a lower life expectancy. They lie by saying subways need longer stations as they can be built with LRT size stations {the Eglinton line stations will be 100 meters roughly 5 subway cars} yet subway cars would have higher capacity.
Metrolinx refuses to answer questions as to why it is LRT technology. Of the four types of technolgy available..............standard metro/subway, Bombardier SkyTrain, monorail, or LRT, LRT is the most expensive to tunnel with the lowest capacity and shortest life expectancy of the rolling track.

The Green Line is not a subway, it's a streetcar that runs underground when it reaches downtown Boston. It's also the least reliable part of the "T".

If you live in Toronto, this should be a cause for concern. You're paying a first-rate amount of money for a second-rate LRT line.

By your definition, the 509 and 510 streetcars are also subway lines as they go underground at Queen's Quay.

Transit lines are defined by the equipment they use, not wether they go underground or not. Capacity, speed, stop placement are also issues. The "L" in LRT denotes it as "Light" Rail Transit- not subway (HRT). Subways, LRTs, streetcars can all operate above, at or below grade. The Eglinton LRT will do all three but will remain LRT throughout. Does the TTC subway become LRT when it operates above ground? No, therefore the Eglinton LRT will not become subway when it operates below ground. It will enter a 'subway' (much as we enter a 'subway' when we drive through a tunnel or walk under an overpass), but it will not magically transform itself into a subway when it does so.

For further information:

http://www.torontoenvironment.org/ca...eetcarvssubway

What is the difference between streetcar, LRT and subway?

• LRT vehicles are smaller and slower than subways, but travel faster and carry more passengers than streetcars or buses.

• Subways are larger and longer – a subway train can hold up to 1500 passengers (in ‘crush’ conditions). An LRV can hold 255 people in each vehicle, and it can be linked into a train of two or more cars. Streetcars carry between 75 and 100 people per vehicle.

• Like a subway, LRT vehicles can be boarded through all doors at ground level, making them wheelchair accessible and reducing loading time.

• Subways get their power from an electrified rail below the train – this requires larger stations, more infrastructure and safety separation. An LRV gets its power from a cable over head, like a streetcar.

• LRT can run aboveground at street level, like streetcars, however they operate in separate lanes, meaning they are not affected by car and truck traffic.

• LRT can also run underground, like subways, as is planned for much of the Eglinton Crosstown LRT.

• LRT stops are planned to be about 500 metres apart, slightly farther than streetcar stops (about 250 metres apart), but closer than subway stops.

• Older streetcars, like the ones we see in Toronto today, are smaller than LRVs, and require “loops” to turn around. LRVs are larger, and are “double ended” like subways, so they can change direction quickly without loops.


Are LRVs slower than subways?

• LRVs run at an average of 27km/h, slightly slower than subways which average 32 km/h, and faster than buses and streetcars that travel in mixed traffic (17 km/h). LRVs run at speeds similar to subways when they are underground (as with much of the Eglinton LRT line)

• The main reason for the speed difference between subways and LRT is that LRVs have more stops. Subway stations are also more expensive to build, so fewer stops are built with longer distances between them.


Why not just build subways?

• It costs more to build. A lot more. Subways cost an average of $300 million per km. LRT is $100 million per km for surface routes and $250 million for underground routes.

• It costs more to maintain. Not only are underground stations more expensive to build, but, they also cost more to light, keep safe and secure, and clean.

• By spending less money per kilometre to build, our money literally takes us further. By some estimates, the Transit City plan would provide 10 times as many people with access to transit than the subway extension Mayor Ford is proposing.

• Speed is a trade off with access. Subways go faster by providing stations further apart. LRT stops can be closer together, meaning shorter walks and easier access.

• LRT can be built faster. Some lines could open in as little as two years. The existing Sheppard subway extension took a decade.

• Subway isn’t needed everywhere. While an area like Finch West or Sheppard East badly needs more service than a bus can provide, it does not have nearly the amount of ridership required to justify a subway (usually about 20,000 passengers per hour in rush hour is the “floor” for subways. The Yonge line sees about 30,000 passengers in the morning rush hour. The Finch West LRT has fewer than 3,000.

• Being above ground is good for business. When the ride is fast and smooth, passengers like being above ground, where they look can out the window, and see passing businesses as they go by. Some studies have shown that subways, especially when stations are spaced far apart (as on the Sheppard subway line) can actually hurt local business by discouraging passengers from getting off to shop and dine.

• Subway construction takes longer and requires digging large sections of road, and thus is much more disruptive for local businesses, residents, car and bus traffic and pedestrians.

Wrong. I already gave you the definition of a subway. Twice. If you can show that this line doesn't meet that definition, than you're right. Otherwise you're wrong. Subway means underground rail. It does NOT mean heavy rail. We've been trying to explain this to you ad nauseum, but you cannot seem to comprehend this for whatever reason.

The subway makes sense for accommodating short range rapid transit in addition to further trips like the Bloor-Danforth subway which makes the closer stop spacing more worthwhile. Eglinton doesn't have that kind of density to warrant having a subway so LRT is the way to go and doesn't waste empty space.

Queen Street should get a line too, probably warranting a subway for it's short range dense trips.

The LRT isn't going to have cables overhead. Afaik it will be similar to Vancouver's Canada Line.

I'm still suprised they aren't using foreign labor and pushing for a more reasonable completion date in 2016.

Here in the states, the longer a project is dragged out, the more money the financiers can extract from a project they really have nothing to do with.

Vancouver's Canada Line is NOT LRT nor Bombardier ALRT like the Expo and Millenium lines. It is a standard metro/subway system using standard metro/subway cars on third rail. It is considered "light metro" due to it's small stations and limited capacity but it is a subway in all senses of the word. A standard Toronto subway could be used on the Canada Line.
As far as the LRT arugument about having more flexibility that is completely true. This is why the Eglinton Crosstown was originally LRT.........about half of the line was to be tunneled and half at grade therefore it was the only option. The new line, howver, will be completely grade/road separated by a combination of tunnel, exclusive rail corridor, and elevation. The benefit of LRT technology has been completely eradicated.
I asked Metrolinx why it was LRT and they said in case it was extended at grade. That would make sense except Metrolinx has stated the entire route will be automated.............you can't have both. The woman at Metrolinx even admitted that LRT is the most expensive system to tunnel.
To make matters worse they are going to have to not only build a new garage but an entirely new maintenance and control centre as these LRT trains have a different gauge than the downtown streetcar replacements......they are incompatible. This is not the case if they used standard subway or SkyTrain cars as both have this infrastructure in place.
This is not 26 NEW km of rapid transit but rather 20 km as they are ripping up 6km of current SkyTrain line and simply replacing it with slower, and less capacity LRT.
Get this.............they are spending a whopping $1.2 billion just to transfer the tracks of a tiny 6km of track from SkyTrain to LRT yet the stations and rail right of way are already built!!! That's $200 million to replace track and they state it will take 3 years to do it!
They don't want SkyTrain any more as they say it is uncomfortable and unreliable in the winter. That is absolute BS. All Toronto has to do is put in the cheap rail heating mechanisms, upgrade a couple small underpasses to use the very comfortable, smooth, quiet, reliable, fast new SkyTrain MK11 trains. The trains they use now haven't been built for over 10 years. By just doing that they could save a cool $1 billion and SkyTrain is much cheaper and faster to build elevated than LRT if they ever come to their senses and elevate the line as opposed to tunneling for 6 km thru an industrial area.
It's reasons like this why every transit project in Toronto costs twice as much to build and twice as long to build it.
This stupid mentality has lead to Toronto over the last 25 years having built just 1.2km of new rapid transit for every 500,000 new residents.
Toronto dolls out transit infrastructure funds like Montreal dolls out it's road repairs.................legendary corruption, very high prices, and poor quality in return.

Then I guess they should have built it as a subway, with 3 or 4 car trainsets until more is needed. Plus how is an LRT tunnel more expensive anyway....

Well that 500,000 increase over the past 30 years has been outside the 416, so downtowners have been somewhat lucky, and this line and the new streetcar trains with double the capacity of the existing fleet give us a chance to catch up.

I think with these new streetcars-trains on College/King/Queen etc, there will be upgrades because these things are super long, and more than half are running in traffic.

Its funny that crosstown line would actually cost $325 million per km!

As I've said last year, they should have cancelled the Spadina extension so they could fund a 3-4 car low capacity proper Eglinton subway. A big problem and contributer to costs is slack local pensioner labor. Canada Line was able to come in UNDER BUDGET due to the use of cheap foreign skilled workers.

Will this LRT average at least 50km/hour ?

No. There are plenty of heavy rail Metro systems in the world that get power from overhead catenary rather than third rail.

^ yeah I laughed when I read that.

North Americans - over-classification for classification's sake.

SELI was the tunnel boring contractor brought on board by SNC-Lavalin to build the Canada Line. To the best of my recollection there were only about 50 or so tunnelling contractors brought in from abroad to lead the tunnelling phase of the project, so it was not as if the entire project was foreign labour. There were more than 1500 people working on the project at its peak and if there were 50 tunnelling contractors that only comprises 2% of the project team. Cut-and-cover tunnelling was used for most of the below grade sections and local labour was used for that, along with local labour for the elevated and at-grade segments, plus station construction. The trains are South-Korean in manufacture and obviously Rotem (Hyundai Heavy Industries) sent people to oversee their delivery and commissioning. Some systems integration people from the Docklands Light Railway came over from the UK on contract to set up the train automation system.

Anyway, bottom line, foreign labour was not the reason the Canada Line came in at about $110 million per km; less than 1/3rd the cost for the Eglinton Crosstown LRT. And not for nothing, but the technical challenges for the Eglinton LRT are pretty much limited to crossing the Don River. (Here's a hint: build a bridge!) In Vancouver they built the Canada Line in a seismically active zone, which alone requires more demanding engineering than what is required in the GTA, and the Canada Line was built through the heart of the CBD, crossed three bodies of water using two bridges, including Canada's first extra-dosed cable-stay bridge, and a bored tunnel. Plus they built upon sandy alluvial ground on the Sea Island and Richmond sections where constructing elevated train columns and stations was previously said to be impossible.