Toronto Park Lawn GO Station | 12.83m | 2s | First Capital | Hatch

[Bojaxs]

Well if it can stop 500 cars a day from Park Lawn/Lakeshore from driving downtown & back... will help this congestion for local residents.

Will it stop 500 cars a day? Don't most of the people who live in this area take the streetcar into downtown?


I was taking the LSW back to Oakville and opened my stop watch on my phone. I started it at roughly where the Mr. Chrisite tower is, and stopped it once I saw the Mimico platform. It was 55 seconds....

The only way this will work is if trains going along LSW alternate between stopping at Mimico and Park Lawn. Otherwise having all trains stop at both station consecutively will add a lot of time to the trip and make the train less competitive with the automobile.

Frankly this is an issue with a lot of the smart track stations being added to the GO network. Lets just keep adding stops to our network so everyone can have a station at their doorstep, completely sacrificing the meaning of "rapid", and eventually the GO trains will suffer the same fate as Toronto's streetcars.

 

[rdaner]

Yes a problem. Is there a way for GO trains to bypass Smarttrack stations at speed?

 

[Willybru21]

Will it stop 500 cars a day? Don't most of the people who live in this area take the streetcar into downtown?


I was taking the LSW back to Oakville and opened my stop watch on my phone. I started it at roughly where the Mr. Chrisite tower is, and stopped it once I saw the Mimico platform. It was 55 seconds....

The only way this will work if if trains going along LSW alternate between stopping at Mimico and Park Lawn. Otherwise having all trains stop at both station consecutively will add a lot of time to the trip and make the train less competitive with the automobile.

Frankly this is an issue with a lot of the smart track stations being added to the GO network. Lets just keep adding stops to our network so everyone can have a station at their doorstep, completely sacrificing the meaning of "rapid", and eventually the GO trains will suffer the same fate as Toronto's streetcars.

View attachment 547451

You’re forgetting that travel times will be significantly faster when electrification happens, both for electric and diesel hauled trains. The travel times are so good that you can probably add 9 additional stations on the Lakeshore West and still have better travel times than today

 

[Bojaxs]

You’re forgetting that travel times will be significantly faster when electrification happens, both for electric and diesel hauled trains. The travel times are so good that you can probably add 9 additional stations on the Lakeshore West and still have better travel times than today

People always refute with electric trains.

What if we had electric trains and didn't add these stops? Imagine how quickly you could get to and from Toronto.

And what's the benefit of electrification (speed wise), if we're just going to add even more stops then?

 

[crs1026]

People always refute with electric trains.

What if we had electric trains and didn't add these stops? Imagine how quickly you could get to and from Toronto.

And what's the benefit of electrification (speed wise), if we're just going to add even more stops then?

Your point is valid in the abstract, but Park Lawn is a huge population area (and with even more growth coming) that is underserved by transit, and it's unquestionably somewhere a stop is needed.

I would point you back to the IBC Document where ML documented their rationale for having both stops. Electrification was the enabling development that changed ML's position on this.

- Paul

 

[Bojaxs]

Your point is valid in the abstract, but Park Lawn is a huge population area (and with even more growth coming) that is underserved by transit, and it's unquestionably somewhere a stop is needed.

I would point you back to the IBC Document where ML documented their rationale for having both stops. Electrification was the enabling development that changed ML's position on this.

- Paul

But the whole point of the GO train from it's inception in the 1960's was to serve the people outside of Toronto as a means to move people efficiently across the GTA without a car. Or vice versa, efficiently move people in Toronto to other places within the GTA (2WAD). Smart track essentially tries to relegate the GO trains to a metro for Toronto residents. Why not just expand Toronto's existing subway network to better serve these communities?

Andy Byford was very much aware of this when he worked for the TTC. He complained that smart track could "cannabalise" ridership from the TTC.

The only smart track station that makes sense IMO is Lansdowne. Giving riders on the Barrie line access to the west side of downtown Toronto and the Bloor line. Every other station is simply squeezing in another station in-between two existing ones. Unnecessarily increasing trip length.

Park Lawn and other Smart Track stations should be seen as "Tier 2" stations that should be bypassed by every other train.

 

[afransen]

Your point is valid in the abstract, but Park Lawn is a huge population area (and with even more growth coming) that is underserved by transit, and it's unquestionably somewhere a stop is needed.

I would point you back to the IBC Document where ML documented their rationale for having both stops. Electrification was the enabling development that changed ML's position on this.

- Paul

Indeed. This is more an argument to add Park Lawn and cut Mimico, if anything.

 

[adys123]

But the whole point of the GO train from it's inception in the 1960's was to serve the people outside of Toronto as a means to move people efficiently across the GTA without a car. Or vice versa, efficiently move people in Toronto to other places within the GTA (2WAD). Smart track essentially tries to relegate the GO trains to a metro for Toronto residents. Why not just expand Toronto's existing subway network to better serve these communities?

Andy Byford was very much aware of this when he worked for the TTC. He complained that smart track could "cannabalise" ridership from the TTC.

The only smart track station that makes sense IMO is Lansdowne. Giving riders on the Barrie line access to the west side of downtown Toronto and the Bloor line. Every other station is simply squeezing in another station in-between two existing ones. Unnecessarily increasing trip length.

Park Lawn and other Smart Track stations should be seen as "Tier 2" stations that should be bypassed by every other train.

This strict modal thinking really needs to stop. Transit should function as a network, detailed calculations are done to determine if additional stops should be added and balanced against the people inconvenienced. In transit, there is no such thing as cannibalizing ridership, it only means that the network functions better as a whole when it works cohesively to encourage people to ride transit. If the trip time is competitive, then there shouldn't be any problem adding stops, given that the travel times are expected to be far better than today regardless.

 

[Bojaxs]

If the trip time is competitive, then there shouldn't be any problem adding stops, given that the travel times are expected to be far better than today regardless.

The problem is the train is already not competitive with driving. Driving from Oakville to Toronto is already faster than taking the train. Add more stations and GO transit is committing suicide.

Oakville GO - Toronto Union station, as of right now of this posting.


GO transit cannot be both a Regional rail service for the GTA and a metro for Toronto. It has to be one or the other.

 

[EnviroTO]

The whole idea behind all day two-way service is to serve more than just a commute to downtown market. For all day two way to make any sense trains need to stop in places that serve large residential populations or employment areas. The 905 servicing GO worked when people were only going to or from downtown on transit, but that isn't the model anymore. For rush hour I imagine there will continue to be express trains that bypass stations for the old model of service.

 

[Bojaxs]

The whole idea behind all day two-way service is to serve more than just a commute to downtown market. For all day two way to make any sense trains need to stop in places that serve large residential populations or employment areas. The 905 servicing GO worked when people were only going to or from downtown on transit, but that isn't the model anymore. For rush hour I imagine there will continue to be express trains that bypass stations for the old model of service.

Re-read my post. I corrected it to mention Toronto people wishing to travel outside of Toronto and across the GTA.

GO transit cannot be a regional rail service while adding so many stops within Toronto. TTC needs to step up and fill the gaps.

 

[Amare]

But the whole point of the GO train from it's inception in the 1960's was to serve the people outside of Toronto as a means to move people efficiently across the GTA without a car. Or vice versa, efficiently move people in Toronto to other places within the GTA (2WAD). Smart track essentially tries to relegate the GO trains to a metro for Toronto residents. Why not just expand Toronto's existing subway network to better serve these communities?

Andy Byford was very much aware of this when he worked for the TTC. He complained that smart track could "cannabalise" ridership from the TTC.

The only smart track station that makes sense IMO is Lansdowne. Giving riders on the Barrie line access to the west side of downtown Toronto and the Bloor line. Every other station is simply squeezing in another station in-between two existing ones. Unnecessarily increasing trip length.

Park Lawn and other Smart Track stations should be seen as "Tier 2" stations that should be bypassed by every other train.

1) The GO Network is evolving, we're not in the 1960's anymore. Toronto and it's surrounding municipalities have exploded in growth and we need a transit system that can accommodate all that growth. Having the GO Train stuck in a 1970's model is not going to help anyone.

2) Smarttrack was always a fairlytail myth devised by an old man who drew maps on a paper who thought more trains could magically run side by side the GO Network probably because he saw empty land on some city overpasses. The GO Network is and always has been able to accommodate more growth (ie: more stations and trains). He was too stupid to realize that he could've gone to Metrolinx and simply ask them to build more stations in Toronto instead of devising some idiotic plan that wasted everyone's time.

3) The cost of expanding Toronto's subway system is substantially more compared to expanding the GO Network. You get more bang for your buck doing so with GO's network as you can serve more people with less dollars. The question that would be more appropriate for you to ask is why have we wasted billions expanding the subway network to suburban parks with 0 existing density when that same money could've been used to service existing densities in Toronto (I know the answer myself, i'm not sure that you do).

4) Suggesting that stations in Toronto be served as "Tier 2 stations" (whatever that means) does a disservice to a whole massive swath of GO's ridership. Your beloved express service is still being provided by Metrolinx for now. In the future the consortium operating the GO train network may very well choose to eliminate it, and you'll have no choice but to live with that if so.

 

[Bojaxs]

1) The GO Network is evolving, we're not in the 1960's anymore. Toronto and it's surrounding municipalities have exploded in growth and we need a transit system that can accommodate all that growth. Having the GO Train stuck in a 1970's model is not going to help anyone.

2) Smarttrack was always a fairlytail myth devised by an old man who drew maps on a paper who thought more trains could magically run side by side the GO Network probably because he saw empty land on some city overpasses. The GO Network is and always has been able to accommodate more growth (ie: more stations and trains).

3) The cost of expanding Toronto's subway system is substantially more compared to expanding the GO Network. You get more bang for your buck doing so with GO's network as you can serve more people with less dollars. The question that would be more appropriate for you to ask is why have we wasted billions expanding the subway network to suburban parks with 0 existing density when that same money could've been used to service existing densities in Toronto (I know the answer myself, i'm not sure that you do).

4) Suggesting that stations in Toronto be served as "Tier 2 stations" (whatever that means) does a disservice to a whole massive swath of GO's ridership. Your beloved express service is still being provided by Metrolinx for now. In the future the consortium operating the GO train network may very well choose to eliminate it, and you'll have no choice but to live with that if so.

So we should just accept more stops and longer train trips?

Thanks, but I'll drive my own car instead. My time is valuable.

GO transit shouldn't have to pick up the slack for municipalities who can't keep up with their exploding populations. Cities like Toronto should figure out how to quickly move their residents to existing GO trian stations instead of expecting completely new ones to be built.

Again, posting for your consideration.

 

[Amare]

So we should just accept more stops and longer train trips?

Where's the evidence that train trips will be longer once significant portions of the GO train network is electrified and there's more frequent service?

Thanks, but I'll drive my own car instead. My time is valuable.

Sure feel free we arent forcing you. Just know that your commute time by car will continue to get worse over the years since our population is increasing and we're not building anymore roads to accommodate that growth.

View attachment 547468

Let us know how that same commute is during the rush hour because I guarantee you it wont look as pretty.

 

[Bojaxs]

Let us know how that same commute is during the rush hour because I guarantee you it wont look as pretty.

Thought we were trying to encourage off peak travel???

Where's the evidence that train trips will be longer once significant portions of the GO train network is electrified and there's more frequent service?

Won't electrified trains have to stop at stations just as long as diesel trains? In terms of acceleration from a station, how much time is an electrified train shaving off from a diesel pushing a 6 car consist?

As I asked earlier. Why not have electrified trains and not add all these stops?