Street Car vs. Bus

[Dan416]

Really??

Then why do you always advocate for a subway to Mississauga when a GO train will do the same job in half the time?

Because a subway to Mississauga is important. MCC is the most important part of the GTA outside of the 416, not VCC or RHC (which are both getting subways). I fully support both Regional Express on the Milton line and a subway to MCC. And clearly you don't know Mississauga very well if you think the GO train gets you there.

Basically, the poor would take the Bloor line extension, whereas people who can afford to splurge on the GO train will continue taking it.

Also, people who have destinations along Bloor or which can be accessed more easily by Bloor (basically, any station along Bloor before Spadina) would take the subway. People who need to get downtown (i.e. accessible by the PATH) would take the GO. I imagine few people would take GO and then take the subway up to Bloor and head back west (or east for that matter).

So in summary, they're completely different commutes, and one won't serve the other type of commuter. The Bloor extension to Square One won't help the GO passenger. More frequent GO service won't help those who have destinations along Bloor-Danforth.

 

[kEiThZ]

Speed is so important, but a faster service won't attract new riders?

Not if it's not fast enough to make any real difference compared to a car.

Right now in rush hour from Malvern it takes about 1h 10 mins to 1.5 hours to get to Union (depending on where you live in the neighbourhood). In rush hour, it takes an hour by car. Outside rush hour it takes 30-40 mins. How much is saving 10 mins on any of the proposed LRTs really going to change anything?

 

[unimaginative2]

Basically, the poor would take the Bloor line extension, whereas people who can afford to splurge on the GO train will continue taking it.

CC, under any scenario with decent transit in this region, there would be no difference in fare whether you ride the Milton line or a hypothetical subway for the same trip.

 

[MisterF]

I suggest you follow the same links. "They" are Light Rail Now (totally unbiased, I'm sure), and they are comparing LRT to BRT but Tennyson was not. His claim of "equivalent service" is part of a study comparing bus vs rail (including subways and commuter rail) in the most general terms possible, using cherry-picked ridership figures between WWII and the present with all context removed.

Immediately before the "equivalent service" quote, Tennyson says that "Because transit use is a function of travel time, fare, frequency of service, population, and density, increased transit use can not be attributed to rail transit when these other factors are improved." Tacoma was questioning whether equivalent service was being looked at, which it wasn't, but there's also the question of whether or not equivalent service can exist at all.

Light Rail Now didn't do the study. They're just the messenger. It would be interesting to read the actual study - do you have a link?

Subway and GO go to different places and server different areas.

Not everyone is Going Downtown or to MCC.

Not everyone can afford the fare cost nor it it easy to get to GO station. Pay a TTC, MT and GO fare is expense. Not bad for one person, but a family of 4-5 is not great.

GO only run Peak service one way.

GO does not help to develop the land use along the corridor where Subway can.

Until GO runs duel direction every 20 minutes or less, still not fast as a subway.

This is shortsighted. There's no reason that fares can't be integrated to the point where travelling between two points costs the same regardless of which type of transit you take (many cities work like this, if not most). GO can be electrified and upgraded to provide frequent all day service, easy transfers can be built at key locations, the line can be diverted through MCC, and regional rail can encourage intensification at stations. Most of this is already planned. And maybe most importantly, it can all be done for less than extending the Bloor line, and provide a faster trip.

 

[kettal]

Because a subway to Mississauga is important. MCC is the most important part of the GTA outside of the 416, not VCC or RHC (which are both getting subways). I fully support both Regional Express on the Milton line and a subway to MCC. And clearly you don't know Mississauga very well if you think the GO train gets you there.

Basically, the poor would take the Bloor line extension, whereas people who can afford to splurge on the GO train will continue taking it.

Also, people who have destinations along Bloor or which can be accessed more easily by Bloor (basically, any station along Bloor before Spadina) would take the subway. People who need to get downtown (i.e. accessible by the PATH) would take the GO. I imagine few people would take GO and then take the subway up to Bloor and head back west (or east for that matter).

So in summary, they're completely different commutes, and one won't serve the other type of commuter. The Bloor extension to Square One won't help the GO passenger. More frequent GO service won't help those who have destinations along Bloor-Danforth.

What I see here is you saying that it's okay to spend billions on unneeded infrastructure, so long as it's in your neck of the woods.

Since the GO train will take passengers to Kipling station, it indeed WILL be the faster way to go ANYWHERE on Bloor between Kipling and Kennedy stations.

The idea of a poor person train and a rich person train is actually kind of sickening, too.

 

[Justin10000]

Speed is so important, but a faster service won't attract new riders?

Oh, the SELRT will attract new riders. The problem is, the critics probably have not even ridden any LRT system. I have ridden more than a few(Europe included), and LRT works. Smooth, fast, great ride. It is a significant improvement over a bus. It's the perfect answer when subways cannot be justified.

I do not get why members would advocate for a subway anyways. If you truly want fast service to the suburbs, I would be pushing for am RER/S-Bahn style of service. Very quick, great ride, and massive infrastructure. Puts subways to shame. Certain members should read up on the history of the Paris RER. Probably one of the greatest urban transportation projects ever built.
Actually, isn't that GO should be doing?

 

[unimaginative2]

I've also been on quite a few LRT systems. Have you been on any in Europe that run entirely in the street median and are as long as SELRT?

 

[nfitz]

I've also been on quite a few LRT systems. Have you been on any in Europe that run entirely in the street median and are as long as SELRT?

That's a tough standard, and the SELRT doesn't fit it either, as over a kilometre of the SELRT in North York will be grade-separated.

 

[unimaginative2]

Sigh. Alright, entirely in the median outside the terminal. Find one as long as SELRT's median running section.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

Light Rail Now didn't do the study. They're just the messenger. It would be interesting to read the actual study - do you have a link?

Yes, I know they didn't do the study...I was pointing that out to threnody. Light Rail Now wrote the article comparing BRT to LRT. I followed your links to Tennyson's article, but you or WK Lis or somebody else has posted it several times before.

Oh, the SELRT will attract new riders.

No, it won't. We can't afford to build LRT lines like Sheppard East, where a billion dollars is spent replacing buses and nothing is gained other than a grade-separated GO crossing at Agincourt (which will at least help drivers).

 

[kEiThZ]

Oh, the SELRT will attract new riders. The problem is, the critics probably have not even ridden any LRT system. I have ridden more than a few(Europe included), and LRT works. Smooth, fast, great ride. It is a significant improvement over a bus. It's the perfect answer when subways cannot be justified.

Your credibility is questionable as long as you refuse to answer proper questions put to you by others. Answer U2's question please:

Have you ever ridden a LRT in Europe that's 15 km long in the middle of an avenue of a major city?

As for SELRT getting riders. We agree it will. Everybody who rides the Sheppard bus will be riding the LRT. Big success! However, even the EA put out by the TTC claims a subway would get 2000 more riders per hour. That's not subway fanboyism. That's straight from the Red Rocket's exhaust.

 

[kEiThZ]

I do not get why members would advocate for a subway anyways. If you truly want fast service to the suburbs, I would be pushing for am RER/S-Bahn style of service. Very quick, great ride, and massive infrastructure. Puts subways to shame. Certain members should read up on the history of the Paris RER. Probably one of the greatest urban transportation projects ever built.
Actually, isn't that GO should be doing?

Please drop your condescending attitude. Many of the folks have not only read about S-Bahns and RER. They have first hand experience on those systems. We aren't harping on that topic because GO is actually working towards implementing those types of services. And most of us are pleased to see that progress. What disquiets us, is the TTC's insistence on putting the cart before the horse. Before building a subway network they are going to blanket the city in LRTs that should be used to feed the subway and GO networks.

 

[kEiThZ]

The irony here is that Transit City is going to make us more like an American city than a European City. The only major cities that use LRTs for trunk routes are found in the US. Elsewhere they build subways and LRTs and BRTs to support those subways.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

As for SELRT getting riders. We agree it will. Everybody who rides the Sheppard bus will be riding the LRT. Big success!

Err...actually, there's no guarantee that it will even absorb all the existing ridership in the corridor (let alone lure new riders), because we don't yet know what will happen to the 190.

 

[waterloowarrior]

The irony here is that Transit City is going to make us more like an American city than a European City. The only major cities that use LRTs for trunk routes are found in the US. Elsewhere they build subways and LRTs and BRTs to support those subways.

The American LRTs will use a lot of existing rail corridors or even expressway ROW. Many also use ROW on the side of the streeet. Transit City must be in the middle of the street like ye olde Europe (to be fair there are a couple of exceptions)