GO Transit: Service thread (including extensions)

[kettal]

Your Georgetown bus gets stuck in traffic, making it a hard sell to car owners. The train has an obvious advantage here.

In the middle of the night, there is no traffic, nor is there enough riders to exhaust the bus capacity, so the subway advantage is minimal.

The public just needs to be more aware of the night bus network.

 

[nfitz]

Technically an increase in train service does require an EA by the text of the regulations.

I don't think that's correct; when I wrote the MOE and asked for an EA be carried out to allow TTC to suspend service on the Sheppard subway line a couple of years ago, they wrote back and said an EA would only be necessary if they decommisioned it, rather than mothballing it. Presumably a service increase would be the same.

The other implication is that every time the service is increased on the subway, there has to be an EA? I think not!

 

[RedRocket191]

I don't think that's correct; when I wrote the MOE and asked for an EA be carried out to allow TTC to suspend service on the Sheppard subway line a couple of years ago, they wrote back and said an EA would only be necessary if they decommisioned it, rather than mothballing it. Presumably a service increase would be the same.

The other implication is that every time the service is increased on the subway, there has to be an EA? I think not!

The way the new regulations are written implies that upgrades required to move from rush hour service to all day service on mainline railways requires an EA. Now I'm not a lawyer, but I have read the regulations several times over for a paper a few weeks ago. It's there in black and white, but it's as easy as the minister's pen to get exempted from doing an EA for many things (and in many cases so it should be).

Your Georgetown bus gets stuck in traffic, making it a hard sell to car owners. The train has an obvious advantage here.

In the middle of the night, there is no traffic, nor is there enough riders to exhaust the bus capacity, so the subway advantage is minimal.

The public just needs to be more aware of the night bus network.

Yes the train has an advantage here, and yes it the buses get stuck in traffic from time to time - but the train comes every 2 hours until 1pm, then (until recently), every 3 hours after that. From a convenience perspective I would rather have a bus every 30 minutes than a train every 2 hours. What's the point of having a train when it doesn't come at very convenient times?

 

[kettal]

Yes the train has an advantage here, and yes it the buses get stuck in traffic from time to time - but the train comes every 2 hours until 1pm, then (until recently), every 3 hours after that. From a convenience perspective I would rather have a bus every 30 minutes than a train every 2 hours. What's the point of having a train when it doesn't come at very convenient times?

The question is whether you will be the only passenger on such a bus?

Of course it will be great news for a guy without a car, but as I understand it, that's a very limited demographic in the area.

 

[TOareaFan]

The way the new regulations are written implies that upgrades required to move from rush hour service to all day service on mainline railways requires an EA. Now I'm not a lawyer, but I have read the regulations several times over for a paper a few weeks ago. It's there in black and white, but it's as easy as the minister's pen to get exempted from doing an EA for many things (and in many cases so it should be).



Yes the train has an advantage here, and yes it the buses get stuck in traffic from time to time - but the train comes every 2 hours until 1pm, then (until recently), every 3 hours after that. From a convenience perspective I would rather have a bus every 30 minutes than a train every 2 hours. What's the point of having a train when it doesn't come at very convenient times?

I guess what I am suggesting is that the already limited weekday service on the non-lakeshore lines be replicated on Saturdays Sundays and Holidays.....since the service is limited already...why cut it back on those days....(unlike the Lakeshore line that has much greater service on workdays so it makes some sense to cut it back on S/S/H).

Frequency, as you point out , is important but so is the phsychology. Trains have a better perception and are more likely to get people out of their cars than buses (IMO). The example I always think of is during the Molson (or whatever corporate name it has now) Indy GO run all sort of ads encouraging people to take GO to the event. With Lakeshore closed all of the western traffic comes along the Gardiner so it gets jammed.....but if you are going to be stuck in traffic are you more likely to do it in your car or a bus? I think most will pick car (and I know that if everyone picked bus there would be no jam in the first place but everyone ends up wanting everyone else to do that first).

There is no physical limitation that I know of for no trains on those lines on weekends (ie. I don't think there is more freight traffic on weekends) it seems to me a simple choice by GO that if they can't run a full slate of trains on weekend they won't run any.......which has always seemed bizarrely unfair to me.

So it gets even more bizarre when I hear them offering weekend train service to NF but not to Milton/Georgetown/Richmond Hill/etc.

 

[RedRocket191]

The question is whether you will be the only passenger on such a bus?

Of course it will be great news for a guy without a car, but as I understand it, that's a very limited demographic in the area.

Would you take a service that only ran once every two hours?

I'm obviously not going to convince you, so I'm going to say this one last time and then move on. If you're going to add limited train service then you can't have two or three hour service gaps. If you want to run a true regional rail service, then you need trips in between those train departures. The bus haters can wait two hours for the next train if they like, but the regular people should not be forced to do so.

So go on and add trains all you please - just don't introduce two hour gaps between departures.

That's it.

 

[kettal]

Would you take a service that only ran once every two hours?

I'm obviously not going to convince you, so I'm going to say this one last time and then move on. If you're going to add limited train service then you can't have two or three hour service gaps. If you want to run a true regional rail service, then you need trips in between those train departures. The bus haters can wait two hours for the next train if they like, but the regular people should not be forced to do so.

So go on and add trains all you please - just don't introduce two hour gaps between departures.

That's it.

Not once did I say it was a bad idea. I'm just explaining why such a schedule might not exist.

 

[jn_12]

Service by train to Niagara Falls is purely a tourism thing. It's acting kind of as a pilot to see whether there is a market for this. I doubt it will ever become a 7 day thing other than seasonally (only if it's clear demand will be met) because there isn't a commuter market in the Niagara region for Toronto (maybe Hamilton, but even that's a stretch, Niagara really is it's own little economy).

Right now the main concern is what happens when people get dumped off at the Niagara Falls VIA station, they will be very far away from Lundy's Lane/Clifton Hill. The city will need to figure something out to accommodate.

I think if they market it properly, people will jump at the chance. It's just a matter of how aware tourists are of their travel options.

 

[APTA-2048]

Service by train to Niagara Falls is purely a tourism thing. It's acting kind of as a pilot to see whether there is a market for this. I doubt it will ever become a 7 day thing other than seasonally (only if it's clear demand will be met) because there isn't a commuter market in the Niagara region for Toronto (maybe Hamilton, but even that's a stretch, Niagara really is it's own little economy).

Right now the main concern is what happens when people get dumped off at the Niagara Falls VIA station, they will be very far away from Lundy's Lane/Clifton Hill. The city will need to figure something out to accommodate.

I think if they market it properly, people will jump at the chance. It's just a matter of how aware tourists are of their travel options.

Niagara Transit has services from the bus terminal (across the train station). Routes 2, 3, 4, and 5 run by the top of Clifton Hill. Service is hourly, however, the four routes depart at different times around 15 minutes appart from each other.

 

[jn_12]

ya, but if this is a success and a train unloads a few hundred passengers, you might have people waiting up to an hour to get on a bus. I guess what I meant was that they will need to be prepared to meet potential demand.

 

[APTA-2048]

ya, but if this is a success and a train unloads a few hundred passengers, you might have people waiting up to an hour to get on a bus. I guess what I meant was that they will need to be prepared to meet potential demand.

Yes that's very true. If it is a success, perhaps we would see and increase in service on Niagara Transit's Falls Shuttle routes. Right now depending on the day and time of year, headways are 30 to 60 minutes.

 

[ShonTron]

Niagara Transit is the worst transit operator of a city of its size class in Ontario. Most buses run hourly there. Compare with Belleville, a smaller city with all-day 30 minute service on almost all routes, though about half run hourly on weekends.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

Service by train to Niagara Falls is purely a tourism thing. It's acting kind of as a pilot to see whether there is a market for this. I doubt it will ever become a 7 day thing other than seasonally (only if it's clear demand will be met) because there isn't a commuter market in the Niagara region for Toronto (maybe Hamilton, but even that's a stretch, Niagara really is it's own little economy).

It's not necessarily as seasonal as it may seem, particularly when you factor in potential casino travellers and perhaps even Buffalo Airport travellers if a reasonably quick/cheap bus connection across the border was offered. The train could also take Niagara dwellers to Toronto for games and concerts and Eaton Centre shopping and whatnot.

Don't forget the stuff between Hamilton and Niagara Falls, from Beamsville to Brock students. It is, however, very unfortunate that the train is proposed to make stops east of Burlington only at St. Catherine's and Niagara Falls...I'd make decent use of a Grimsby stop, for instance.

 

[jn_12]

That's true, it doesn't have to be a tourism thing, but I think that's its main function. I'd maybe make use of it as well since I'm from Welland and typically take the train/bus to St Catharines from Toronto. However, given the choice, I'd take VIA for the extra comfort (and pay the extra $10 RT). The only thing GO is doing to entice me is provide more daily service than VIA, which might make it more attractive if I absolutely cannot take one of the two trains arriving/departing in St Catharines. Perhaps it will put more pressure on VIA to make more runs into Niagara.

Also, I don't think Grimsby or Beamsville have the population to warrant a stop, but I wouldn't be against it really. However, the problem with St Catharines is that it really needs to improve it's train station and how it is connected with the rest of the city. It is isolated and difficult to get to, which to me automatically forces Brock students not to use it. Also, right now it might be the most dilapidated station VIA uses.

 

[khris]

Don't forget the stuff between Hamilton and Niagara Falls, from Beamsville to Brock students. It is, however, very unfortunate that the train is proposed to make stops east of Burlington only at St. Catherine's and Niagara Falls...I'd make decent use of a Grimsby stop, for instance.

East of Hamilton you mean?
East of Burlington is Oakville.
Speaking of which, do we know which stops it will make yet?