News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.8K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.6K     0 

thing is that there are no plans for frequent rail service to Markham. At most an eventual 30 minute GO service to Unionville with maybe 1000 people an hour using it. GO won't make a dent on subway ridership. The big move is planning hourly service on Stouffville, and I can't see it going much beyond that any time soon. In general I find Steve likes to believe that GO can take large portions of ridership off of the TTC network (its the same reason why he doesn't like the yonge subway extension, he thinks some sort of urban rail line on the richmond hill corridor is going to make it useless, which is rather silly), while in reality it will make a marginal difference at most.
 
Last edited:
innsertnamehere said:
thing is that there are no plans for frequent rail service to Markham. At most an eventual 30 minute GO service to Unionville with maybe 1000 people an hour using it. GO won't make a dent on subway ridership. The big move is planning hourly service on Stouffville, and I can't see it going much beyond that any time soon. In general I find Steve likes to believe that GO can take large portions of ridership off of the TTC network (its the same reason why he doesn't like the yonge subway extension, he thinks some sort of urban rail line on the richmond hill corridor is going to make it useless, which is rather silly), while in reality it will make a marginal difference at most.
Click to expand...
It says in the big move all day service will end at Mount Joy.

As for yonge, the supporters for it keep coming out of both sides of there mouths. One the one hand it won't overwhelm Union, on the other hand the ridership is too much for the much larger capacity Go Train? It can't be both. That's probably why steve thinks that.
 
Last edited:
yes, but that is at an hourly frequency to Mount joy, and it isn't even possible to do more than that. The corridor north of Unionville (or maybe Centennial with some squeezing) is only wide enough for a single track which means bringing the frequency down below around 50 minutes is impossible north of Unionville. Frequent rail for Markham (I.E. 15 minutes or better) is not planned for Markham and will likely not see the light of day for a very, very long time.

denfromoakvillemilton said:
As for yonge, the supporters for it keep coming out of both sides of there mouths. One the one hand it won't overwhelm Union, on the other hand the ridership is too much for the much larger capacity Go Train? It can't be both. That's probably why steve thinks that.
Click to expand...

GO trains are much. much lower capacity than a subway, don't delude yourself. at 1/2 hour frequencies, GO train capacity is roughly 1/10th of the subway system. Its also simply not as desirable of a service to to its crappy frequencies and no direct stop at your destination. The subway lines ridership simply cannot be transferred to GO, and Munro seems to think so. Even if you were to stick an LRT along yonge and place 15 minute GO service on Richmond hill, most people will still take the LRT down to yonge.
 
Last edited:
innsertnamehere said:
yes, but that is at an hourly frequency to Mount joy, and it isn't even possible to do more than that. The corridor north of Unionville (or maybe Centennial with some squeezing) is only wide enough for a single track which means bringing the frequency down below around 50 minutes is impossible north of Unionville. Frequent rail for Markham (I.E. 15 minutes or better) is not planned for Markham and will likely not see the light of day for a very, very long time.



GO trains are much. much lower capacity than a subway, don't delude yourself. at 1/2 hour frequencies, GO train capacity is roughly 1/10th of the subway system. Its also simply not as desirable of a service to to its crappy frequencies and no direct stop at your destination. The subway lines ridership simply cannot be transferred to GO, and Munro seems to think so. Even if you were to stick an LRT along yonge and place 15 minute GO service on Richmond hill, most people will still take the LRT down to yonge.
Click to expand...

What if (big hypothetical), we switched the the LRT plan and used the money saved to extend the Scar-LRT further north? I'm not sure what route. Would you prefer the current subway plan or that?
 
denfromoakvillemilton said:
It says in the big move all day service will end at Mount Joy.

As for yonge, the supporters for it keep coming out of both sides of there mouths. One the one hand it won't overwhelm Union, on the other hand the ridership is too much for the much larger capacity Go Train? It can't be both. That's probably why steve thinks that.
Click to expand...

extending the LRT much further will be putting it dangerously close to capacity on opening day. extending it beyond Malvern isn't really realistic, and the LRT has already meandered over to the far eastern end of the city at that point anyway.
 
innsertnamehere said:
GO trains are much. much lower capacity than a subway, ...
Click to expand...

$1B into a single GO line can remove choke points very rapidly.

It should be noted that Lake Shore West currently achieves 6 minute frequencies (8 trains arriving at Union from 7:43am to 8:33am) during morning rush service which carry about 20,000pph. That was this very morning, while Union Station is under construction, using the old signalling in the Union corridor, and with diesel engines. They run 7.5 minute frequencies out of Union on Lake Shore West in the evening (16:43 to 17:43; 8 trains).

Cash flow rather than technical restrictions prevent them from doing this over a longer time period.

It's not unreasonable to assume a 2 track GO line can run 12 to 15 minute frequencies comfortably with long trains and diesel equipment. An investment into that line could significantly improve on that number. Either way, GO achieves 15,000 to 20,000 pph for a single route today, which is closer to 1/2 the capacity of Yonge subway than 1/10th.

Hopefully shortly after the spring budget passes with new transit revenue (I'm optimistic) GO will become more aggressive with enhancing their service. Operating subsidy actually seems to be a huge holdup to improved service; GO frequently loses engineers to other railways due to their low pay level.
 
Last edited:
$1 billion into a single GO line gets you AD2W service at hourly frequency, not an urban rail line. once you start to go above 15 minutes all day or so you want electrification anyway. (see the huge push for electrification for the UPX and the plans for Lakeshore as it ramps up to 15 minute service over the next decade)

GOs expansion plans over the next decade largely involve getting hourly AD2W up and running on all GO lines to begin the process of slow upgrades to urban rail that Lakeshore began 3 decades ago.

Stouffville is planned to drop to around 20 minutes over peak periods, but will only have hourly off peak service, and counter peak service will be shortturned at Unionville. (10 trains will run between 4 and 7 pm)
 
Last edited:
rbt said:
$1B into a single GO line can remove choke points very rapidly.

It should be noted that Lake Shore West currently achieves 6 minute frequencies (8 trains arriving at Union from 7:43am to 8:33am) during morning rush service which carry about 20,000pph. That was this very morning, while Union Station is under construction, using the old signalling in the Union corridor, and with diesel engines. They run 7.5 minute frequencies out of Union on Lake Shore West in the evening (16:43 to 17:43; 8 trains).

Cash flow rather than technical restrictions prevent them from doing this over a longer time period.

It's not unreasonable to assume a 2 track GO line can run 12 to 15 minute frequencies comfortably with long trains and diesel equipment. An investment into that line could significantly improve on that number. Either way, GO achieves 15,000 to 20,000 pph for a single route today, which is closer to 1/2 the capacity of Yonge subway than 1/10th.

Hopefully shortly after the spring budget passes with new transit revenue (I'm optimistic) GO will become more aggressive with enhancing their service. Operating subsidy actually seems to be a huge holdup to improved service; GO frequently loses engineers to other railways due to their low pay level.
Click to expand...

I have to agree with you on that one. The potential behind the GO network is quite often underestimated, and for the grotesque amounts of money that this city + province + country seems to be willing to spend on a short subway extension into Scarborough, in a single funding injection and we could indeed get a proper urban rail line along the Stouffville corridor. Including electrification I'd wager.

Beyond that, I think that extending subway lines so deep into the low-density suburbs of this city is a major factor in bringing the TTC into the cash-poor situation that they find themselves in today (not the only, but one of the major factors). Subway lines simply aren't suited for an environment like Scarborough, and what commuter from Malvern to downtown honestly wants to stop at every Chester and Castle Frank along the line? Commuter rail like GO is a better fit, along with high-frequency bus service feeding it (one would hope for fare integration of some kind by the time that whatever project is actually decided upon in Scarborough is finished), and LRT if and where necessary.
 
innsertnamehere said:
yes, but that is at an hourly frequency to Mount joy, and it isn't even possible to do more than that. The corridor north of Unionville (or maybe Centennial with some squeezing) is only wide enough for a single track which means bringing the frequency down below around 50 minutes is impossible north of Unionville. Frequent rail for Markham (I.E. 15 minutes or better) is not planned for Markham and will likely not see the light of day for a very, very long time.



GO trains are much. much lower capacity than a subway, don't delude yourself. at 1/2 hour frequencies, GO train capacity is roughly 1/10th of the subway system. Its also simply not as desirable of a service to to its crappy frequencies and no direct stop at your destination. The subway lines ridership simply cannot be transferred to GO, and Munro seems to think so. Even if you were to stick an LRT along yonge and place 15 minute GO service on Richmond hill, most people will still take the LRT down to yonge.
Click to expand...

I thought they were laying another track down between Centennial and Mount Joy?
 
nope, the double track will end at Unionville as with hourly frequencies a train can travel up to Mount Joy and get back down to Unionville within an hour for the next train to head up.
 
Basically Chow said she'd scrap the subway and keep the tax hike.

http://www.thestar.com/news/city_ha...scarborough_subway_but_keep_its_tax_hike.html

Olivia Chow would cancel the Scarborough subway extension that requires a 1.6 per cent dedicated property tax increase — but would keep that tax increase in place even after she killed the project.

“We're working within the fiscal plan as passed by council. A fully-costed platform will be released in time. You are correct: we will re-allocate funding for the Scarborough underground,†Chow campaign spokesman Jamey Heath said Monday.
 
Eug said:
“We're working within the fiscal plan as passed by council. A fully-costed platform will be released in time. You are correct: we will re-allocate funding for the Scarborough underground,” Chow campaign spokesman Jamey Heath said Monday.[/i]
Click to expand...

That is a hugely disappointing interview. I remember why I didn't vote for her when she was my city councillor.

Also, she will find re-allocation of the SRT tax hike legally difficult (I believe it is specifically earmarked; this came up in recent council debate). She might get away with building LRT to Steeles instead of the subway, but it probably needs to stay in the same region.

It would be far easier to let the EA go on, find out the cost is 20% higher than expected ($1.8B for the city instead of $1B) and can it then.


Also, the easiest way to build affordable housing is to force private sector to give 10% of their units to the city. This will not be popular despite being effective in Vancouver. Developers don't mind a whole lot either because they unload the hard-to-sell units with poor views or layouts.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top