[innsertnamehere]

because it is a premium service. Its designed so that 80% of riders get a seat, and crowding standards are way, way below the TTC.

You also have the realities of capacity issues. If you priced GO the same as the TTC it would get quickly overloaded, the capacity of even 6 car EMUs every 15 minutes is roughly 4,000 PPHD. The current pricing system of GO means that almost nobody in Toronto uses GO, and lowering it to cheaper fares and a $0.75 TTC connection would already boost ridership considerably in the city.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Then maybe we should find ways to deal with the capacity issues, rather than pricing people out of transit. To artificially limit the amount of people moved on these corridors is a huge waste, in my opinion.

 

[M II A II R II K]

Maybe more smaller trains that can have 5 minute frequencies would be better. If the regular GO Trains don't stop at the additional stations then there'd be less of a need to build gigantically long stations.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Is that even possible on these corridors?

 

[innsertnamehere]

it isn't really fair to have GO jump to $6 as soon as you cross Steeles either. A slow, gradual increase in fares as distances increase is what should be done. Right now GO jumps right to $5.20, and then doesn't increase more than 30 cents or so until you leave Toronto, where it starts to go up quicker. Dropping the base GO fare to $3.00 and having it slowly increase as you get further away so that by the time you leave Toronto it is back at its regular fare price is what is needed.

Toronto's TTC pricing structure suffers from people making unpreferred trip patterns due to pricing. Bringing GO into the style of pricing I have been discussing will eliminate most of that, as all but the people who cannot physically afford it will be taking those trips. $3.20 a trip under the GO pricing structure with a $0.75 TTC connection works out to $144 a month for 40 monthly trips. hardly "unaffordable", in fact its barely more than a TTC metropass. Plus, any additional trips past those 40 only costs $0.75 each. (for the TTC connection)

if you don't make the TTC connection, the pricing would be $114 dollars a month, only $6 more than paying $2.70 for 40 trips.

 

[andrewpmk]

Maybe more smaller trains that can have 5 minute frequencies would be better. If the regular GO Trains don't stop at the additional stations then there'd be less of a need to build gigantically long stations.

The system needs to be designed for the same 12 car GO trains we use now, for future expansion capacity, and with a signalling system that can run trains every 2 minutes. We shouldn't make the same mistake as we did with the airport rail link. Time and time again governments build infrastructure with too little capacity and regret it (e.g. Eglinton). The only place this really increases costs is the Union Station tunnel.

 

[diminutive]

Then maybe we should find ways to deal with the capacity issues, rather than pricing people out of transit. To artificially limit the amount of people moved on these corridors is a huge waste, in my opinion.

Especially when you end up building multibillion dollar projects to add new capacity elsewhere. For the price of expanding Yonge and Bloor you could get pretty substantial capacity improvements on parts of the GO system.

 

[dowlingm]

the 140 series services set a precedent on premium fares in Toronto. For the extra money on intra416 GO you're buying time saved.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Canadian National Electric Railways used to own and operate the NIAGARA, ST. CATHARINES & TORONTO RAILWAY, which was electric.

See link.

 

[ehlow]

The system needs to be designed for the same 12 car GO trains we use now, for future expansion capacity, and with a signalling system that can run trains every 2 minutes. We shouldn't make the same mistake as we did with the airport rail link. Time and time again governments build infrastructure with too little capacity and regret it (e.g. Eglinton). The only place this really increases costs is the Union Station tunnel.

Yes we always build too little capacity. Last time I used the Sheppard subway two other people got off at the same station and the door guy actually held up the whole train and waited for me to come down the stairs.

 

[EnviroTO]

Time and time again governments build infrastructure with too little capacity and regret it (e.g. Eglinton). The only place this really increases costs is the Union Station tunnel.

What?? What government is regretting building infrastructure with too little capacity? The 401 is at capacity now but I doubt anyone regrets the size they chose originally because it made sense at the time. The Yonge line is at capacity but nobody regrets what was built 50 years ago because it was the right size at the time. What infrastructure is on Eglinton other than the roadway? Are you saying some government regrets not having built Eglinton with more lanes?

The only place where increasing capacity increases costs is Union Station?? You build a 5,000 seat stadium versus a 50,000 stadium and it is a huge difference in price. Build a local street with 2 lanes, or the 401 with 16 and there is a huge difference in price. Build LRT in Scarborough versus a subway and there is a huge difference in price. An articulated bus is about 30% more than a non-articulated bus which is a significant cost. I find no truth in the statement that capacity increase does not increase costs.

 

[andrewpmk]

What?? What government is regretting building infrastructure with too little capacity? The 401 is at capacity now but I doubt anyone regrets the size they chose originally because it made sense at the time. The Yonge line is at capacity but nobody regrets what was built 50 years ago because it was the right size at the time. What infrastructure is on Eglinton other than the roadway? Are you saying some government regrets not having built Eglinton with more lanes?

The only place where increasing capacity increases costs is Union Station?? You build a 5,000 seat stadium versus a 50,000 stadium and it is a huge difference in price. Build a local street with 2 lanes, or the 401 with 16 and there is a huge difference in price. Build LRT in Scarborough versus a subway and there is a huge difference in price. An articulated bus is about 30% more than a non-articulated bus which is a significant cost. I find no truth in the statement that capacity increase does not increase costs.

Infrastructure that was built with too little capacity that is now over capacity is a constant problem. For example, the Canada Line, the DVP and Gardiner. Building Eglinton as light rail for political reasons when a subway that ends at Don Mills would provide much higher capacity for lower cost makes no sense. Obviously the 401 can't be made any wider, its traffic problems are largely caused by high 407 tolls.

 

[ehlow]

So, obviously to run GO as rapid transit you'd need to add tracks in some locations, grade separate in some places where it hasn't currently.

Where would you guys add or move stations, if we are to make GO into a subway-like service?

For example, on the Stouffville line, would you have stops every 2 km like a subway through Scarborough (existing Eg, Lawrence, Ellesmere, existing Sheppard, Finch etc)?

Miliken near Steeles on that line could be moved into the parking lot just north of Steeles for easy connection with the Steeles bus.

An obvious one: moving Oriole north to Sheppard to connect with the subway.

Electrification should allow for adding stops without slowing trip times as much. Would you add stops?

More obvious: adding Liberty Village, Gerard & Carlaw. What about places like Queen & Dufferin? St Clair & Weston?

A new GO station is planned at Eglinton & Weston that connects to the Eglinton LRT, so along with Lawrence & Weston it already seems not too far off from subway-like stop spacing.

What about adding a stop on Lakeshore in south Etobicoke at Park Lawn Rd?

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Infrastructure that was built with too little capacity that is now over capacity is a constant problem. For example, the Canada Line, the DVP and Gardiner. Building Eglinton as light rail for political reasons when a subway that ends at Don Mills would provide much higher capacity for lower cost makes no sense. Obviously the 401 can't be made any wider, its traffic problems are largely caused by high 407 tolls.

Must you bring Sheppard into every discussion? We could be talking about strawberry cheese and you'd still find a way to drag Sheppard into the discussion. Gosh

 

[ehlow]

Must you bring Sheppard into every discussion? We could be talking about strawberry cheese and you'd still find a way to drag Sheppard into the discussion. Gosh

Speaking of strawberry cheesecake, did you know that Eglinton is the most expensive LRT in the world? It's also the most expensive non-grade separated line in the world. Did you know it can be a subway for cheaper, fully grade separated at lower cost? We already regret building it, even though it's at least 6 years away from opening.