News   Nov 01, 2024
Toronto’s Bike Lane Feud at an All-Time High
 2K     13 
News   Nov 01, 2024
Bayview Village Resubmission More Than Doubles Height Near Bessarion Station
 2.4K     3 
News   Nov 01, 2024
Drone Flight Captures Cladding Progress at Menkes' Maison 77 Clarendon
 732     0 

New Transit Funding Sources

TJ O'Pootertoot said:
I've already answered this on the other thread for the Yonge extension (as have others, multiple times) and the answer is YES. Here are some reasons:

1) GO goes to Union Station and nowhere else. It doesn't help someoen from RH get to Sheppard or Eglinton or Bloor or anywhere else.
Click to expand...

Other than the obvious that this could be said about all GO lines...couldn't the connection to other places in Toronto be handled with additional stops? I must admit I have never ridden the line but how hard would it be to move the Oriole stop so that the line better connected with Sheppard Subway? How hard would it be to add stops in between Oriole and Union? That has to be the longest that any GO line goes from Union without a stop.

Could you make the GO line more usable/useful for less money (on top of that which is needed to make it 15 minute each direction) than extending the Yonge subway?
 
ehlow said:
My personal opinion is that we should be building transit to serve existing unserved demand, which there is a lot of, rather than trying to create new demand or create development & density using multi-billion dollar transit projects.

In the first case the demand is already there and the infrastructure will definitely be well used, because the people are there already. In the 2nd case you're spending a huge amount of infrastructure money hoping someone else will spend tons of money creating the buildings to make use if your subway, and hoping people will buy the condos and use the subway. In the 2nd scenario is a much bigger risk that your subway will be under-used, and you're attempting to create demand for a huge project when demand already exists elsewhere.
Click to expand...

Again, though, the counter could be that (using your King West example) the transit users are finding a way now....they are either using existing streetcars or are finding their way to the BD subway or some combination of those.....and the revenue that those people generate is already existing....so you may spend a lot of money, say, bringing a subway to KW/LV but you will not generate any significant additional revenue...you may just move the same people more comfortably/reliably but there is limited cost recovery......I agree that using transit as a development spur is a risky game....but those in support of it will tell you that new lines/extensions actually bring new customers/revenue....in a way expanding capabilities in an existing density node simply can't (I think that is what that British company was getting at when they criticized the prioritization of the DRL...they were simply pointing out that it has a near zero chance of generating any significant new revenue).
 
TOareaFan said:
Again, though, the counter could be that (using your King West example) the transit users are finding a way now....they are either using existing streetcars or are finding their way to the BD subway or some combination of those.....and the revenue that those people generate is already existing....so you may spend a lot of money, say, bringing a subway to KW/LV but you will not generate any significant additional revenue...you may just move the same people more comfortably/reliably but there is limited cost recovery......I agree that using transit as a development spur is a risky game....but those in support of it will tell you that new lines/extensions actually bring new customers/revenue....in a way expanding capabilities in an existing density node simply can't (I think that is what that British company was getting at when they criticized the prioritization of the DRL...they were simply pointing out that it has a near zero chance of generating any significant new revenue).
Click to expand...

By that argument, the Yonge or Bloor subways shouldn't have been built because
the transit users are finding a way now....they are either using existing streetcars
Click to expand...

When the Yonge subway was built it was because the Yonge streetcar was extremely busy and it was clear higher capacity and faster was needed, just like the King streetcar today.

In terms of the "it wont' bring in new customers" argument, I think it's pretty clear that there will continue to be more development along King. The difference is that a subway would be successful now, but would still provide much more room for growth than the streetcar does now, which is at its limit.
 
innsertnamehere said:
I think Gweed is well aware of those plans. his question is that previously the plan had always been for hourly GO service to Richmond Hill, which obviously isn't adequate. but would 15 minute GO service be? thats the question and I believe the answer is yes. I think the Yonge line still needs to go to Steeles, but the extension to RHC seems rather silly now.
Click to expand...

That's exactly what I was getting at, thank you (sorry, I stepped out and didn't have a chance to reply until now). With hourly service on the Richmond Hill line, yes TJ is correct. But 15 minutes brings the line into almost subway-like frequency anyway. IMO, that's a game-changer.

Yes, the section through the Don Valley is troublesome, which is why I believe the Richmond Hill line should be incorporated into a GO REX DRL, where each current GO line (minus Barrie) would carry 2 routes: one that goes to Union, and one that goes to downtown via a DRL tunnel.

I'll admit it's not in any of the official plans right now, but I think that what I described above is the most cost-effective solution. It would also allow for further intensification along Yonge, because YR riders filling up trains at Finch wouldn't be nearly as big of an issue.
 
Last edited:
it probably wouldn't be that big a deal to upgrade the speeds through the valley, like the stouffville train the richmond hill train seems to travel much slower than it needs to for much of the trip. Chopping 10 minutes off of the travel time shouldn't be too difficult.
 
innsertnamehere said:
it probably wouldn't be that big a deal to upgrade the speeds through the valley, like the stouffville train the richmond hill train seems to travel much slower than it needs to for much of the trip. Chopping 10 minutes off of the travel time shouldn't be too difficult.
Click to expand...

If you can combine it with the DRL though, even if the RH line is converted into a full TTC subway, then you don't need to touch the tracks in the Don Valley. I prefer that the DRL would be a GO REX tunnel because that would allow other GO REX routes to use it too, but if the DRL has to be a TTC subway, I would like it to assume the RH GO ROW north of Lawrence.
 
^ On his twitter feed Murray (@Glen4ONT) has said straight out that Toronto-Kitchener-London HSR is a thing and it is happening.
 
Here are the tweets:

High Speed Rail to KW & London. Really bold economic development initiatives. Big game changer for KW & London!
Click to expand...
https://twitter.com/Glen4ONT/status/455776587146080256

RER: electrified Regional Express Rail 15 min.s across #GOTransit lines. Impact that subways had in the 50s & 60s. Will move lot more folks!
Click to expand...
https://twitter.com/Glen4ONT/status/455770266766163968

This is pretty exciting stuff, I think. It would be the only high-speed rail in Canada, I believe. I'm still surprised it's not to Ottawa and/or Montreal, but hey, I'd ride it to KW :)
 
innsertnamehere said:
Summary of what from my understanding is funded today:

What our map will look like when everything is finished:

tnvRlSw.jpg
Click to expand...

Looks like you included all GO lines except for Milton. Was this by design? Does GO/Metrolinx own all the corridors except for Milton? I didn't think it did.
 
it either owns them or they have discussed how they will be buying it and building it anyway. There may be 15 minute rail coming to Milton, but that would be a major project as you would have some very, very expensive conversations with CP. At this point GO only doesn't own a chunk of the Georgetown / Kitchener line and a small portion of the lakeshore west line in Burlington. Murray has specifically stated that they will be bringing the rail to Hamilton and Kitchener / London anyway so those two can be disregarded. This leaves the only stretch of track not owned by Metrolinx to be a small portion of the Richmond Hill line and Milton, but given the small scale of non ownership on Richmond Hill I presumed that it would be able to be worked out and put in. Milton seems like the entire reason they put "On all lines we own" as I presume CP has been a complete arse to them about it. Its likely the same reason there isn't any rail to Cambridge, CP won't co-operate.

Sadly, I don't really see Milton ever going beyond a large amount of peak trains. I would just love to be proven wrong of course, but I just wouldn't be surprised.
 
Last edited:
Is there any possibility that Metrolinx can build a new pair of tracks along the Milton corridor to resolve the issues with CP?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top