Megaton327
Senior Member
EXCUSE ME?!? Barrie commuters should get a free transfer, it's only fair. How discriminatory...
Richmond Hill Yonge Line 1 North Subway Extension | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx
- Thread starter 299 bloor call control.
- Start date
EXCUSE ME?!? Barrie commuters should get a free transfer, it's only fair. How discriminatory...
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
The Yonge line would've been extended to Barrie already if Toronto hadn't dropped the ball on the relief line. Dumb Torontonians.
darth_freeman
Active Member
Really? The extension will capture a huge chunk of North York, Etobicoke, and Vaughan that would otherwise take the Yonge/Bloor lines. Also, future Finch LRT will funnel people towards the Spadina line (this will be finished before the DRL is funded).
Only on urbantoronto would providing a Subway to people in Scarborough be seen as "contributing to the growing crisis". Telling people in Scarborough they should have crappy transit just so they don't inconvenience the downtown elites at Yonge/Bloor station.
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
Calm down. That wasn't a slight against the SSE The SSE replaces an existing service. All the SRT replacement options, including the LRT, will exacerbate the Yonge capacity crisis. The only option that (presumably) wouldn't is shutting the SRT down and replacing it with nothing.
Trips from within Downtown do not make up a significant amount of B-Y Station usage. The lowest transit modal shares in Toronto are actually in Downtown Toronto, generally south of Bloor, because more of these commuters walk or bike to work than take transit. The remaining commuters who live in downtown toronto that do use transit aren't very heavy users of Bloor-Yonge Station, since their origin and destination points are both south of Bloor.
Think about it this way: I'm sure you can understand how the Gardiner expressway serves people in the suburbs, rather than Downtown residents. The subway system works very similarly.
It generally only captures previously Yonge-bound commuters on the Finch West and Steeles east buses. The Yonge Relief Network Study projected the Vaughan extension would only divert 1,300 people at peak hour. That's about the capacity of one train.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
If there was a better fare integration between GO and the TTC, people would be able to use GO as an alternative to the Yonge Subway. Just needing to get to and from the GO stations is the problem.
Currently, with free parking at the GO stations, this makes using their car as a form of "fare integration" between GO and their cars. Until the parking spaces fill up. Need public transit (TTC) to fill in that gap.
Currently, with free parking at the GO stations, this makes using their car as a form of "fare integration" between GO and their cars. Until the parking spaces fill up. Need public transit (TTC) to fill in that gap.
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
W. K. Lis
Superstar
That's SmartTrack
Depends on who's running it.
Is GO going to run it? That means GO fares.
Is TTC going to run it? That means TTC fares.
It looks like SmartTrack is going the GO fare route.
WislaHD
Superstar
A re-occurring claim in this thread has been that the Yonge Subway will be over-capacity even with the Relief Line to Sheppard and Don Mills, and that may be true in post-2050 scenarios but I was looking over the Metrolinx and City Planning documents and thinking, if we build the RL to Sheppard, we have quite a bit of breathing room. More than enough to accommodate the Yonge North extension.
The Metrolinx Report says that the Base Case 2031 scenario for the Yonge Subway is 32,300 peak hour riders and 36,000 capacity with ATC. (Or 89% volume/capacity ratio)
The Metrolinx Report found that the RL Long option to Sheppard/Don Mills took 11,600 riders off of the Yonge Subway, or more than 1/3 of peak hour riders.
The Toronto Planning report done in collaboration with University of Toronto using the updated model assumes the “Low population / medium employment” scenario. They found that 39,600 peak hour riders south of Bloor without SmartTrack or the Relief Line, and 41,600 when you add the Yonge North Extension. If we assume that the RL-Long option still takes 11,600 riders off of the Yonge subway (as per Metrolinx report), that gives us 30,000 Yonge riders. Or operating at 83% v/c ratio.
In their 2041 scenario, their 2041 base was 42,600, and 45,400 when you add the Yonge North Extension. With the RL-Long intercepting 11,600 riders, this gives us 33,800 riders. Or operating at 93% v/c ratio.
To me, it makes it pretty clear that the Relief Line to Sheppard means a Yonge North Extension, and we should advance with both projects.
The Metrolinx Report says that the Base Case 2031 scenario for the Yonge Subway is 32,300 peak hour riders and 36,000 capacity with ATC. (Or 89% volume/capacity ratio)
The Metrolinx Report found that the RL Long option to Sheppard/Don Mills took 11,600 riders off of the Yonge Subway, or more than 1/3 of peak hour riders.
The Toronto Planning report done in collaboration with University of Toronto using the updated model assumes the “Low population / medium employment” scenario. They found that 39,600 peak hour riders south of Bloor without SmartTrack or the Relief Line, and 41,600 when you add the Yonge North Extension. If we assume that the RL-Long option still takes 11,600 riders off of the Yonge subway (as per Metrolinx report), that gives us 30,000 Yonge riders. Or operating at 83% v/c ratio.
In their 2041 scenario, their 2041 base was 42,600, and 45,400 when you add the Yonge North Extension. With the RL-Long intercepting 11,600 riders, this gives us 33,800 riders. Or operating at 93% v/c ratio.
To me, it makes it pretty clear that the Relief Line to Sheppard means a Yonge North Extension, and we should advance with both projects.
LNahid2000
Senior Member
That's how things work now, but that doesn't mean this is how it's always going to be.
minilude
Active Member
When they dig the DRL can they dig a bit wider and lay another pass-through track for the Richmond hill GO, which could service as an express option. I personally think the subway has too many stops.
dowlingm
Senior Member
GO will probably run any legal and doable service Torontonians want at any fare they want - as long as GO aren't paying. Anyone who yells "TTC fares on GO tracks" without confronting that reality - that the City of Toronto is obliged to cover the difference between what GO would otherwise charge and GO fares - is dishonest.
BurlOak
Senior Member
GO buses run on city streets. I am pretty sure they do not have to pay the City for that use.
So why can't the City run on GO tracks. It is a simple matter of co-operation and integrating transit networks - the whole reason Metrolinx was created in the first. place.
So why can't the City run on GO tracks. It is a simple matter of co-operation and integrating transit networks - the whole reason Metrolinx was created in the first. place.
Tuck
Active Member
Because roads are free for everyone.
That said, I always find it stupid when different levels of government get into squabbles about who pays.
BurlOak
Senior Member
Same applies for Hydro (publicly owned) not wanting transit in their corridors.
crs1026
Superstar
The issue is not cooperation. The issue is, how many agencies do we need.
The form of ST is becoming so similar to the form of RER that there is no value in having two separate agencies working side by side. It doesn't make sense for the City to develop an agency to operate ST. They can contract it. GO and/or Bombardier have all the processes and systems to operate it. Assuming these lines will continue to operate under CROR, one labour supply for both services is preferable. Will RER operate when ST is on strike? I doubt it, might as well be one bargaining unit with one set of work rules.
The issue of scheduling is a bit trickier. It sounds like ML and the City are actually close to having this worked out, they just haven't fully shared it with the public. Look to the next set of Council reports to set this straight.
Costing is something that also needs to be worked out. If RER and ST are going to both exist for the long term, there is no point in one being a tenant and the other a landlord. However, one does need to answer the question of who pays for what. Neither should get a free ride. This ought to be simple and rough justice, not a bureaucracy or a source of argument or a "science fair" make-work project.
There's a bit of Animal Farm irony here. GO bought out the freight railways because as system owners they were not particularly friendly or helpful, and they charged too much (allegedly). Now GO is the system owner. Now we are musing that GO may not be particularly friendly or helpful, and they may charge too much. The pigs have overthrown the humans, but now they walk on two legs and hold dances. All transit operators are equal, but.....
- Paul