The highest passenger volume stations on the line are west of the airport because the current GO service is almost useless for travel within the 416. That would certainly change if the 8 proposed stops were added and provided with a high service frequency and reasonable fares integrated with the TTC.
On the flip side, adding those 8 stops to a Kitchener service would make it an awfully slow commuter line -- hence why it makes more sense to add the most extra stops to the shortest-distance service in the corridor, the ARL.
Last edited by car4041; 2012-Apr-13 at 00:35.
Well, that's our point, right? GO apparently only has the money and/or the operational ability to run a single kind of service on these two very valuable tracks. And they've chosen the wrong one.
The stops should be added, local service should be offered, and it should be priced in a way that this investment is actually useful to Toronto.
- local stopping service functioning as a DRL substitute
- express ARL
- regular GO and VIA services (express or semi-express within the 416)
If the DRL service is going to have a decent frequency, it will need its own two tracks (and it'll be too slow to share with the express lines anyway). That leaves two tracks for the express ARL and all the GO/VIA services. Can a 15-minute express ARL plus eventual 15-minute GO service and the occasional VIA train all fit on just two tracks? I assume not, hence the suggestion to use two local tracks for airport services (acting as a DRL) and two express tracks for longer-distance services.
I am prepared to stand corrected if it really is possible to run all three services at high frequencies on four tracks. But it seems like we'd need at least five (the three that are currently planned for the express ARL and GO/VIA plus two more for the local DRL service with a bunch of extra stops added).
I am one of the people supporting the ARL and promoting that the local service desired can be provided by increased with far more frequent service and a few more stops (8 in my opinion is overkill). I have long (about 15 - 20 years) advocated more stops on this line....2 in particular are one at Eglinton and one in Liberty Village.
With Presto technology it would be easy to charge TTC type fares on intra-Toronto travel and you would now have a frequent service that had Toronto Stops at Union (connecting to YUS)...Liberty (connecting to the EX, King/Queen streetcars)....Bloor (BD Subway and multiple streetcar routes).....Eglinton (connecting to the new LRT)....Weston and Etobicoke North.....all of those within the "416"/Toronto.
Add in that dreamed of (by me) Airport People Mover improvement at Malton and now you have affordable, frequent service on a diagonal route NW that has 6 stops in Toronto, connecting to all the major east west transit infrastructure....providing service to the airport.....and all it cost was the building of 2 additional GO train stations (which hardly need to be fancy) and an extension/improvement to the people mover.
How do you sell that slightly (two additonal stops!) slower service to the longer commuters from KW-Guelph-Georgetown-Brampton? You don't, the improvements in the line are going to increase the average speed on the line anyway so they won't even notice any lenghtening of their commute......all they will notice is far more frequent service which is, in part, facilitated by the increased ridership on the line created by the two stops and the airport link!
Btw, I wouldn't worry about the 8 stops in the Layton-Nunziata proposal. 7 of them are presumably to get Nunziata to sign on, and I don't think she's particularly reasonable or particularly important in the long run.
As for the 12 - Car issue. Firstly, there has never been a 12-Car GO train on that line. They currently run 10 Car trains and who is to say that they need to do that? If there were frequencies of 15 minutes like people seem to be talking about they could shrink those to 8 car trains....or have some run as 10 Car (perhaps those ones "skip" the few (1?) station that could not handle them.
I understand that there is some doubt about extending the people mover as opposed to replacing it....but, even replacing it would not be that expensive...would it? And if it were replaced with something that connected to GO (@ Malton) and TTC/MiWay (at Eglinton/Renforth) you get a pretty big bang for your buck with people from many more communities now able to take transit to the airport.
I just believe that a fairly inexpensive solution that provides greater public transit access to the airport, improved commuter transit in a fairly high population centre and provides some relief to to the TTC in the West/NW is available to us and it allows us to keep the buisness/tourist level service offered by the ARL.
I don't understand why four tracks aren't going in from the start for the entire line. Could someone provide insight? Does this mean that they will get the ARL up and running and then build the 4th track to expand service on the Kitchener Line?
seems to expect on the Lakeshore lines with a new signal system and cab signalling. So I stand corrected...there is room for the ARL on the express tracks.