Metrolinx $55 Billion Plan

[kEiThZ]

By "improving" service to Malvern, the RT extension clearly punishes 75% of existing RT riders as it means the RT must be kept. The vast majority of RT riders are going to/from the McCowan/Brimley/Midland/Ellesmere/Lawrence corridors or from STC itself and absolutely none of them benefit in any way from an RT extension that costs almost the same as a Danforth extension.

What I have suggested repeatedly is that they extend the BD line to STC and use LRT along the proposed SRT extension path. Would that not cost the same as the planned SRT extension and refurbishment? I am not suggesting and have never suggested using ART Mk IIs to service that route. I think that would be too expensive, too much capacity, noisy and very unsightly for the neighbourhoods along the route.

This would be my plan for Scarborough:

Extend the BD line to STC. Extend the Sheppard line to Agincourt. Build curbside bus lanes for the rest of Sheppard....with Sheppard E buses starting from Agincourt and STC. Extend the SRT to MTC using LRT instead. Extend any subway or LRT on Eglinton till Kingston Rd. And I'd probably have a LRT/streetcar on Kingston Road (http://spacing.ca/wire/2005/11/28/kingston-road-lrt/) from Main Station to U of T Scarborough. I would also support curbside bus lanes for Ellesmere, Lawrence, Finch E, Markham S and McCowan N.

And if T.O. really found the mooolah, then go ahead and finish the Sheppard-BD loop via STC....

 

[scarberiankhatru]

You have suggested using ART MK IIs many times, as recently as post #490 and any time you say the "SRT extension," which refers to extending the SRT. Even though I know you're aware of the pros and cons of various options, I must systematically weed out and assault any hint of SRT support, no matter how small or theoretical it may be. Even if it's for the sake of argument.

But, yeah, extending the subway to STC and branching LRT or BRT or Rocket buses out from there would both save money and improve service...it's a no-brainer! I've emailed councillors and written/spoken such comments at meetings and you should, too! Absolutely everybody wins with a subway + branched out LRT/BRT option, not just *some* of Centennial College's students.

 

[unimaginative2]

You know, if everything else were equal, the SRT's technology wouldn't be bad for the route north of STC. The only problem is with using it south of STC, where an extension of the BD subway is obviously necessary.

 

[kEiThZ]

You have suggested using ART MK IIs many times, as recently as post #490 and any time you say the "SRT extension," which refers to extending the SRT. Even though I know you're aware of the pros and cons of various options, I must systematically weed out and assault any hint of SRT support, no matter how small or theoretical it may be. Even if it's for the sake of argument.

Well I do support the extension. Do I support using ART MkIIs? NO. I also think it's ridiculous to even suggest extending the SRT down Eglinton. I have written to my councillor, the TTC and Giambrone on all this. However, if the TTC seems committed to using those vehicles, and that's the only way the extension happens then I won't complain.

Anyway, part of the confusion comes in terminology. When I am talking SRT, I usually mean the extension. Perhaps we should have a new acronym? SRTE?

And I understand your agression against the current SRT. As someone who had the joy of riding it at rush hour for its full length every day for four years of university, I came to detest it. I still cannot fathom how folks like my mother or the hundreds of thousands of others can stand that daily trip. And for the life of me, I can't figure out what possessed the Scarborough councilors and had them bail on their demand for a subway. I strongly feel that it was politics. A subway touches a few wards. Those LRT lines will get every councilor in Scarborough job security for life.

 

[kEiThZ]

You know, if everything else were equal, the SRT's technology wouldn't be bad for the route north of STC. The only problem is with using it south of STC, where an extension of the BD subway is obviously necessary.

Well put. This is the TTC hammer at work. They want to hammer the square peg into the round hole. It's a holdover from the days when they wanted to extend the RT to Markham Station (Markham/Sheppard)

I actually think using LRT on the extension would also open up new options...for example I believe someone suggested before that LRT could be routed around Consilium and Corporate before proceeding on its way down Progress. Also if the SM LRT were built in the future, then it could be routed west on Sheppard and the south on the extension back to STC....effectively creating a STC-Kennedy connection via UTS. There's a lot of options if they switch to LRT. But man are they stubborn....

 

[scarberiankhatru]

Saying you support the SRT extension but not with the SRT, and that the rest of the SRT should also be replaced will only lead to confusion.

As for how people can stand taking the SRT, many thousands of people avoid it every day. I started avoiding it years ago by taking the Midland bus north of Kennedy station, saving time in the process.

And using SRT technology NE of STC would still, apparently, cost about a billion dollars, so while the technology itself may not be that inherently bad, it's still an utterly ridiculous choice.

 

[kEiThZ]

Saying you support the SRT extension but not with the SRT, and that the rest of the SRT should also be replaced will only lead to confusion.

I can't be at fault if people get confused or don't know the issue. I am careful to explain my viewpoint. I don't see what's so hard about saying that I want the Scarborough RT to use Transit City style LRT and have the line extended to Malvern Town Centre. Most folks on here see where I am coming from....

Anyway, I am glad to have had the opportunity to get my viewpoint out there. And I appreciate the debates, I've learned a lot.....

I think we can move on to talking about more broader Metrolinx issues....

 

[scarberiankhatru]

Everyone knows the issues, but when you're using terms interchangably, it becomes difficult to talk about technologies and modes and people have to start guessing what you're specifically referring to. Immediately after telling Coruscanti what you prefer, you were talking about the benefits of the SRT extension using Mark II trains.

 

[kEiThZ]

I apologize if I've caused confusion for anyone. Now that we know where everyone stands....back to Metrolinx!

 

[kEiThZ]

Any thoughts on fare integration....I think this is key to the success of any RTP. I was disappointed to hear that the TTC wasn't moving to implement Presto across the system....though I do understand their decision, with the cost issue, etc. Fare integration would offer some unique opportunities ie. zone fares with a TTC/GO combo, allowing people to bypass the subway for some of their downtown travel needs, etc.

 

[DavidH]

TTC *is* moving to implement Presto although they are still trying to get someone to cover $300m of cost for it, and saying it will take seven years for it.

The RTP makes some mention of fare integration as a separate point from Presto. No details so we will have to see what happens.

 

[kEiThZ]

I wonder if they can move to some kind of discounted fare for using TTC and GO on a single trip.

Consider for example, going from Agincourt to Union. Using cash fare, it would cost $7.40 for a one-way trip. Using a best care scenario (monthly discounted metropass and GO monthly pass and 22 day work month with 2 trips each), it works out to around 5.72. That's still more expensive than TTC cash fare.

That's my point about integration being key. It's not just about how you pay, but what you pay. If we are going to start building GO stations are all over the inner suburbs and expect people to use those instead to reduce demand for TTC services, it does not help if a single ride downtown costs well over 2.5 times the TTC cash fare. If that's the case, most 416 riders will still be using the TTC and insisting on improved TTC services to their area (after all they are supporting the service with their taxes).

 

[DavidH]

I wonder if they can move to some kind of discounted fare for using TTC and GO on a single trip.

Don't take this as anything official, but I hear that there is talk of moving to a single fare-by-distance model using Presto as the enabler.

 

[TOareaFan]

I wonder if they can move to some kind of discounted fare for using TTC and GO on a single trip.

Consider for example, going from Agincourt to Union. Using cash fare, it would cost $7.40 for a one-way trip. Using a best care scenario (monthly discounted metropass and GO monthly pass and 22 day work month with 2 trips each), it works out to around 5.72. That's still more expensive than TTC cash fare.

That's my point about integration being key. It's not just about how you pay, but what you pay. If we are going to start building GO stations are all over the inner suburbs and expect people to use those instead to reduce demand for TTC services, it does not help if a single ride downtown costs well over 2.5 times the TTC cash fare. If that's the case, most 416 riders will still be using the TTC and insisting on improved TTC services to their area (after all they are supporting the service with their taxes).

Fare relative to distance and travel time inequities exist within the TTC already though.

What I mean is that a person living at, say, Yonge and Sheppard is a certain distance from Union and pays a ttc fare to get to Union...his/her travel time is "X" so they make their "value judgement" on transit use based on that time v money calculation.

Take the same distance from Union and stretch it out along, say, the Queensway. There is a Toronto (416) resident, equally contributing through tax dollars to the ttc and paying an equal fare.....but their travel time will be X * Y = Z.

So, perhaps, the problem isn't that people will be asked to pay more for the "new" faster services......perhaps the problem is that the existing faster services are sold at the same price as the existing slower services.

Not sure if that is clear but I know what I mean (really all that matters )

 

[kEiThZ]

Fare relative to distance and travel time inequities exist within the TTC already though.

Not sure if that is clear but I know what I mean (really all that matters )

I understand the inequities, but a large part of Metrolinx's plan and certainly much of the criticism of the plan (like Scarberian's) assumes that riders near GO station in the 416 will switch to Go for commutes to downtown. I am merely pointing out that if that is to be accomplished, the current fare structure simply won't cut it. There are some who pay 2.7 times the TTC cash fare to get to downtown 30 mins faster and with one less transfer (assuming you have to use a bus to access the subway or the GO station). But I highly doubt most commuters would. So if we are not going to have fare integration, then the TTC must commit to providing improved service in many of those areas since the majority of riders will still be using the TTC. As Scarberian pointed out, this is an inefficient use of transit dollars. Far better would be to integrate the two systems and allow each GO station in the 416 to act like a mini-hub.