Subway To Mississauga: Routing

[dunkalunk]

MAP

.

 

[CDL.TO]

An even more useful plan than building a subway to MCC would be to spend the money to upgrade the entire Milton line to have two dedicated GO tracks so that frequency could be increased to every 10 minutes or better. Then, divert the line north along Hurontario to MCC, rejoining the existing route via the 403 corridor near Erindale station. A regional rail service would provide a much faster trip downtown, and also directly serve other parts of Mississauga with a rapid transit route to MCC and Toronto. If you upgraded the Orangeville line, you could even directly serve downtown Brampton and the Meadowvale office park.

The vast majority of people riding the subway from Mississauga aren't going to Royal York or Keele stations--they're going downtown. Why make them stop at two dozen stations in between? This would allow them to get from MCC to downtown in 20 minutes or less, compared with twice the time or more with a subway. Even for people going to Keele or Royal York or places like that, they can simply transfer at Kipling, while people going to the north end of downtown could transfer to the subway at Dundas West. It's a much more useful service for everyone concerned, and would likely cost even less than a subway that serves just MCC.

Something like this?

 

[drum118]

The universe does not revolved around Union station and why is everyone trying to force transit and riders there in the first place????

It is the same thing for Sq One.

Any DRL from the east needs verrrrryyyy few stations as ridership would be worse than Chester for them in the first place.

I have no problem planning for the future 100 years, but make sure you do it it in the right place for the right reason.

Dundas and Hurontario will be the high density roads in Mississauga that will support transit 100% with full recovery to making a profit. Hurontario is there now and we have yet to see redevelopment for it. If Dundas is done correctly, it will out preform Hurontario.

The idea of doing a REX to Sq One will work for EMU's.

At the same time the existing corridor needs to include milk run service which means added more stations that are smaller than today ones. These station as walk-up or service by transit service by shorter trains. If you want faster as well longer trips, you transfer to stations that provide that type of service.

I use Bloor #3 and it will have a hard time trying to justify LRT in the first place based what there today. Ridership doesn't warrant it now, let alone going to Sq One.

 

[drum118]

Something like this?

I would add Eglinton based what been plan for that area.

A Station between Dixie Kipling if that area gets developed correctly.

Downside, due to poor vision by GO there will be no station to connect with the Bolton/Georgetown line at the Junction.

 

[autopilot]

instead of a subway, why not build an RT from Cooksville GO to Square One and Eglinton BRT... the rest of Hurontario can be served by expanded bus service.

 

[jeicow]

instead of a subway, why not build an RT from Cooksville GO to Square One and Eglinton BRT... the rest of Hurontario can be served by expanded bus service.

The bus service during peak periods is already every 5-6 minutes for the most part and it's dreadfully under capacity, from pretty much Port Credit to Shopper's World. We could boost it up to levels of Finch but all that would do is cause bunching and not really help at all. LRT with higher capacity will hopefully alleviate most of the problems for the good future and encourage better development/redevelopment. Focusing development on Cooksville also makes the assumption that GO will actually be able to meet the level of service they've been promising.

 

[drum118]

instead of a subway, why not build an RT from Cooksville GO to Square One and Eglinton BRT... the rest of Hurontario can be served by expanded bus service.

What expanded bus service are you looking at?????

Current ridership is 25,000 daily.

Based on 3% for 2030, you are looking at 80,000.

Ridership at Cooksville is 60% less than Dundas.

Why built it to Eglinton when it only 1 km from Sq One and it not a trip generator now with higher riders up north????

Clearly you don't understand Hurontario.

 

[doady]

The current transit mode share along Hurontario is only 8% compared to 20% along similar corridors in places like Scarborough and North York. The number of jobs and population per acre along Hurontario is projected to double or even triple.

So considering the current ridership of 25,000, it is not unreasonable to suggest to that Hurontario could see 150,000 riders per weekday in 15 years time. And I think 150,000 riders calls for LRT at the very least, but that's just me.

 

[drum118]

The current transit mode share along Hurontario is only 8% compared to 20% along similar corridors in places like Scarborough and North York. The number of jobs and population per acre along Hurontario is projected to double or even triple.

So considering the current ridership of 25,000, it is not unreasonable to suggest to that Hurontario could see 150,000 riders per weekday in 15 years time. And I think 150,000 riders calls for LRT at the very least, but that's just me.

More like 75,000 in 15 years, but over 100,000 in 25 years.

If we change the model mode from 11% to 25% within 15 years, we will have a need for more LRT lines than what plan now. Current population is 700,000 giving us 77,000 riders today for 11%. Change that to to 25%, you now have 175,000 riders per day.

If Hurontario is carrying 25,000 for 8% of use, then 25% will see 88,000 well enough for an LRT.

Once you get over 100,000 riders daily, you are move toward something different. Hurontario will support 3 car LRT on the surface and that will give you 450 riders at peak per train. If you got 30 train running every 2 minutes, you are moving 13,500 riders at peak and into subway requirement. At 3 minute headway you are down to 20 trains or 9,000, still subway requirement.

Headway should be every 5 minutes from day one with a single LRT unit and add a extra car as demand grows until you reach the 3rd car. At that point you need to start looking where you go next to meet service needs. Do you decrease the headway or do you start looking at a subway.

Downside to a Subway, there is no need for it to go to Brampton. If so, Looong headway for it. Somewhere around the 401 is where subway will end and LRT begins going to Brampton. Brampton will only need an LRT and that pushing it today.

 

[Dan416]

So you're saying build an LRT along Hurontario for now, and then when the need arises, lengthen the LRT cars, and eventually convert to subway?

 

[Hipster Duck]

I really question the need for rail or even BRT improvements to a suburban area if it's simply based on improving ridership numbers. First of all, we have to get out of this thinking that there is this absolute hierarchy to transit modes that goes: bus<BRT<LRT<subway. Secondly, we have to realize that ridership is not the greatest indicator for a route's real transportation needs.

Instead, we should be looking at where travellers are ultimately going to on a route, and then determine how to structure the service. Unless there's a strong case for exclusively linear movement up and down Hurontario or across Dundas, a fixed (read: rail) solution probably doesn't offer the greatest social or cost benefit. And since Mississauga's intent might be to grow by intensifying its core while being cognizant of its established decentralized nature, a linear rail solution like LRT or subway will probably not work too well. Instead, we should concentrate on improving the solution that serves nodes the best (regional rail) and then disperses people in the most flexible manner from that node (buses, jitneys, whatever...but most likely a rubber tire solution). The REX proposal by CDL seems to be the best one so far.

 

[drum118]

So you're saying build an LRT along Hurontario for now, and then when the need arises, lengthen the LRT cars, and eventually convert to subway?

LRT is a given at this time using a single car. As ridership increase, add a 2nd and 3rd car.

Based on demand, decrease headway and add more trains (3 set) until headway is down to 2 minutes. If still require more capacity, then it time to look at subway or monorail or what is out at that time to carry future capacity.

Running service every 5 minutes from day one will attract more riders than every 10 minutes based on today ridership. If 19 carries 750 riders north from Dundas allowing for other riders getting on at up to Sq One, you need service every 3 minutes using 40' buses. Using 60' buses, every 5 minutes.

Going bus=BRT=LRT=Sub=rail is find if starting up routes or routes that never reach level 3-5.

When you have a route that you know that will attract development if becomes high order, you need to move to level 3 to build up the density to support level 4/5.

BRT is a poor man choice and it does not encourage development.

If one looks at new LRT's lines built in the last 5-10 years, major of them exceeded ridership within the first year if not within the first few months. Development sprang up faster along those lines.

The Orange Line in LA was supposed to be LRT, but it ended up as a BRT to the point ridership exceeded the fleet capacity. More buses have been order with planning on how to upgraded to LRT over the next few years.

Phoenix ridership has already exceed first year numbers after 4 months as well drawing new development. Other communities are requesting an extension be built to them with business requesting it run down their St.

Minneapolis ridership was reach and pass before the first year was up with an order place for more cars. Development has out strip what was thought of and at a faster rate along the route and station.

Portland is the poster child for LRT.

There are LRT line's in operation with only 12-15,000 riders daily.

Up front cost always get look at as the best choice when the back end close is where the real saving is.

Right now TTC is looking at a BRT on Kingston Rd and based on future demands it's the right choice looking at the small picture.

How can people say Hurontario should have BRT when VIVA Blue that carries 10,000 less riders is getting a subway. Hurontario will out strip VIVA Blue.

 

[Amphibius]

I really question the need for rail or even BRT improvements to a suburban area if it's simply based on improving ridership numbers. First of all, we have to get out of this thinking that there is this absolute hierarchy to transit modes that goes: bus<BRT<LRT<subway. Secondly, we have to realize that ridership is not the greatest indicator for a route's real transportation needs.

Instead, we should be looking at where travellers are ultimately going to on a route, and then determine how to structure the service. Unless there's a strong case for exclusively linear movement up and down Hurontario or across Dundas, a fixed (read: rail) solution probably doesn't offer the greatest social or cost benefit. And since Mississauga's intent might be to grow by intensifying its core while being cognizant of its established decentralized nature, a linear rail solution like LRT or subway will probably not work too well. Instead, we should concentrate on improving the solution that serves nodes the best (regional rail) and then disperses people in the most flexible manner from that node (buses, jitneys, whatever...but most likely a rubber tire solution). The REX proposal by CDL seems to be the best one so far.

The part of this post which I've highlighted is the most relevant argument towards the case for a Mississauga Subway and its ultimate potential alignment. Listing the facts:

• Square One/Mississauga City Centre is a major 905 destination seeing well over 100,000 commuters through the area on a daily basis.
• It has a high population density (2361 people per km²) unparalleled by any other GTHA community.
• Most of the traffic through to Islington Stn originates from out-of-town MT routes (85.7% of a total 42,080 daily boardings), not via the local feeders/walk-ins.
• The Milton Line @Cooksville GO in particular only sees around 3200 customers per day (13.1% of a total 24,306 daily boardings).

So based on all this data, one can infer that even if GO service was upgraded to every 15 minutes, the bulk majority of 905 West commuters would still opt for using the subway instead; even if that translates into a longer commute to get to/from downtown Toronto. This is why I voted for Poll Question #1 because while this choice subway alignment has the capability of hitting major destinations along the way (Cloverdale area, Sherway Gdns, Dixie-Dundas, Cooksville) the main goal of this extension should be to get customers from Point A (Sq1) to Point B (Kipling) in the least time possible.

Adhering to a straight line underneath a corridor (be it underneath Dundas, Bloor, B'thrope, Hurontario, etc.) would result in the inclusion of several minor stops, making for an overall slower/longer trip through eastern Mississauga. Following the Milton GO alignment at least part of way percludes any such commitments whilst still benefiting the local communities via bus reroutes into the fewer transit hubs en route (Sherway, Dixie, Cawthra, Hurontario).

 

[Hipster Duck]

The part of this post which I've highlighted is the most relevant argument towards the case for a Mississauga Subway and its ultimate potential alignment. Listing the facts:

• Square One/Mississauga City Centre is a major 905 destination seeing well over 100,000 commuters through the area on a daily basis.
• It has a high population density (2361 people per km²) unparalleled by any other GTHA community.
• Most of the traffic through to Islington Stn originates from out-of-town MT routes (85.7% of a total 42,080 daily boardings), not via the local feeders/walk-ins.
• The Milton Line @Cooksville GO in particular only sees around 3200 customers per day (13.1% of a total 24,306 daily boardings).

So based on all this data, one can infer that even if GO service was upgraded to every 15 minutes, the bulk majority of 905 West commuters would still opt for using the subway instead

But you haven't really told me where the riders from MCC are going. They're going to Islington subway station? That's like saying that my vacation involves going to the airport. What is their final destination? This should determine the type of service you provide, not arbitrarily building a subway or LRT to connect to Islington station.

Cooksville GO station, which is connected to the downtown Toronto by a handful of inbound and outbound trains (based on a traditional rush hour travel pattern) and a once an hour bus that doesn't even really follow the same route isn't a fair comparison, either.

 

[doady]

I really question the need for rail or even BRT improvements to a suburban area if it's simply based on improving ridership numbers. First of all, we have to get out of this thinking that there is this absolute hierarchy to transit modes that goes: bus<BRT<LRT<subway. Secondly, we have to realize that ridership is not the greatest indicator for a route's real transportation needs.

Instead, we should be looking at where travellers are ultimately going to on a route, and then determine how to structure the service. Unless there's a strong case for exclusively linear movement up and down Hurontario or across Dundas, a fixed (read: rail) solution probably doesn't offer the greatest social or cost benefit. And since Mississauga's intent might be to grow by intensifying its core while being cognizant of its established decentralized nature, a linear rail solution like LRT or subway will probably not work too well. Instead, we should concentrate on improving the solution that serves nodes the best (regional rail) and then disperses people in the most flexible manner from that node (buses, jitneys, whatever...but most likely a rubber tire solution). The REX proposal by CDL seems to be the best one so far.

You say Mississauga is too decentralized, so you solution solution is a transit system that concentrates on nodes??? Are you serious?

A decentralized or dispersed urban form requires a grid-like transit system, not a radial system. You can't have a radial system without a very strong core, which Mississauga does not have. That's why LRT lines along Dundas and Hurontario are best solution for Mississauga.