[smallspy]

Does that mean ease of operations is a priority over customer convenience?

Customer convenience how, exactly?

If by "ease of operations" you mean being able to run more trains more frequently, than I guess so, yes.

Anyways, for double berthing, will it possible with only 6 car trains or they can even fit 12 car trains head to head?

The middle tracks of the station easily allow for a pair of 12-car trains to be double-berthed.

Dan

 

[crs1026]

iirc 90% do, so... (I don't believe this number will change much after full RER implementation, btw)

Especially if the schedule is designed such that it’s not consistent whether the thru run goes to Barrie, Kitchener, or wherever.

I wonder whether ML can or will find a way for those doubleberths to facilitate transfers without going downstairs. It would be desirable to minimize stairway traffic. Four stub track berths, with a track removed in the middle, would create an “upstairs” mall that could integrate four routes. The “wait downstairs until we post the track for your train” process is the worst thing about Union’s design.

- Paul

 

[Deadpool X]

iirc 90% do, so... (I don't believe this number will change much after full RER implementation, btw)

That's so because people don't have any other option apart from Union. On subway line 1, there is heavy ridership at King, Queen, Bloor, etc. because people have an option to choose.

Customer convenience how, exactly?

If by "ease of operations" you mean being able to run more trains more frequently, than I guess so, yes.

By ease of operations, I mean planning for interlined trains because not all lines will have the same frequency and they may have to manage train operator's schedule as well.

In Paris, all RER lines run across the city instead of terminating at city centre. There can be so many new potential trips that can be generated if trains don't end at Union.

 

[smallspy]

By ease of operations, I mean planning for interlined trains because not all lines will have the same frequency and they may have to manage train operator's schedule as well.

Sure. But do you really think that there is a substantially high portion of the ridership to merit forcing interlining (and with all of its resultant operational headaches) versus just ending the trains at Union and sending them back from whence they came?

To be honest - I don't.

In Paris, all RER lines run across the city instead of terminating at city centre. There can be so many new potential trips that can be generated if trains don't end at Union.

The RER lines were explicitly built to bypass all of the historical stations around the city centre, and the configurations of the lines and their stations are a result of this. Platforms are shorter but wider, and with more vertical circulation elements. At busy stations, there are two platforms for each direction to allow a train to enter the station while the previous one leaves.

Had Union Station been built 10 years ago for this same purpose, it would have been built far, far different than what we have today - and more like the Paris model. But because it wasn't, we're limited in terms of what we can and can't do with it.

Long term, a tunnel underneath it (or even slewed to the north) purposely-built for high frequency metro-like services - like Paris' RER - would be the ideal solution. But until then, we're stuck with what we have.

Dan

 

[Undead]

That's so because people don't have any other option apart from Union. On subway line 1, there is heavy ridership at King, Queen, Bloor, etc. because people have an option to choose.

RER won't be going to those locations. Plus there are much fewer destinations and much less employment at all other GO stations than Union. Not to mention that fare integration is just as important as increasing frequency if we want to create more non-Union ridership. GO RER will be awesome, but I highly doubt it will shift many people away from Union. And why would it? It's where all the employment is located (at least for the GO captive market)

 

[Deadpool X]

RER won't be going to those locations. Plus there are much fewer destinations and much less employment at all other GO stations than Union. Not to mention that fare integration is just as important as increasing frequency if we want to create more non-Union ridership. GO RER will be awesome, but I highly doubt it will shift many people away from Union. And why would it? It's where all the employment is located (at least for the GO captive market)

Sure. But do you really think that there is a substantially high portion of the ridership to merit forcing interlining (and with all of its resultant operational headaches) versus just ending the trains at Union and sending them back from whence they came?

To be honest - I don't.

The way downtown has grown and the way it is going to grow, there will be a lot more demand for peripheral stations like Exhibition, Liberty Village, East Harbour and so on. Transit planning such as this should not be done in accordance with what we have today. It should consider next 50 years instead. For all we know, we might be seeing 200 m office towers as far as Bathurst by 2070.

 

[reaperexpress]

Metrolinx Press Room

Find the latest Metrolinx news, project updates and more.

blog.metrolinx.com

Hmm, the access route from Union Station to the new Union Station bus terminal seems even less convenient than the old one. Here's the map that Metrolinx provides.

The Bay East teamway is directly accessible from the ground floor of the terminal. But it only provides access tracks 4-15 and 18-21, so people heading to other tracks will need to use the upstairs passage to get over to the Bay or York concourses.

I guess the main saving grace is that the amount of GO bus service to Union will continue to dwindle as off-peak train service is expanded. Many bus trips have been eliminated by the off-peak service on the Kitchener, Barrie and Stouffville lines, and I expect that the 16 Hamilton Express will be replaced by off-peak express train service relatively soon. Which will leave the 21 Milton as the only major bus route serving the 14-bay terminal.

I'm assuming that the plan is to close the Toronto Coach Terminal and relocate Greyhound, Coach Canada and Ontario Northland services to Union. For that purpose, I think the level of connectivity is more than adequate, it would be a huge improvement over the current coach terminal.

 

[micheal_can]

Hmm, the access route from Union Station to the new Union Station bus terminal seems even less convenient than the old one. Here's the map that Metrolinx provides.

The Bay East teamway is directly accessible from the ground floor of the terminal. But it only provides access tracks 4-15 and 18-21, so people heading to other tracks will need to use the upstairs passage to get over to the Bay or York concourses.

I guess the main saving grace is that the amount of GO bus service to Union will continue to dwindle as off-peak train service is expanded. Many bus trips have been eliminated by the off-peak service on the Kitchener, Barrie and Stouffville lines, and I expect that the 16 Hamilton Express will be replaced by off-peak express train service relatively soon. Which will leave the 21 Milton as the only major bus route serving the 14-bay terminal.

I'm assuming that the plan is to close the Toronto Coach Terminal and relocate Greyhound, Coach Canada and Ontario Northland services to Union. For that purpose, I think the level of connectivity is more than adequate, it would be a huge improvement over the current coach terminal.

Moving all intercity buses to the one terminal would be the best for travelers. I don't know how many times I was making a GO and ONR connection and it was always annoying.

 

[Allandale25]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1336752980113154049

 

[anb]

I have a feeling we might see a new go bus route once the kipling terminal and the 427 extension is both complete and open to use. It seems natural

 

[gweed123]

I have a feeling we might see a new go bus route once the kipling terminal and the 427 extension is both complete and open to use. It seems natural

With an extension down to Long Branch GO please. Would make it much easier to get to the airport if you're on LSW.

 

[nfitz]

Hmm, the access route from Union Station to the new Union Station bus terminal seems even less convenient than the old one. Here's the map that Metrolinx provides.

The Bay East teamway is directly accessible from the ground floor of the terminal. But it only provides access tracks 4-15 and 18-21, so people heading to other tracks will need to use the upstairs passage to get over to the Bay or York concourses.

Isn't that the same tracks that were accessible from the Bay East teamway previously - other than track 3, which I assume isn't seeing departures right now, and presumably will have an entrance added to the Bay East teamway when consruction finishes.

Seems more convenient to me. Shorter distance from bus bays to Bay East teamway, and now not outdoors. Perhaps more convoluted to get to UP platforms. To bad there wasn't a better connection from the York East teamway to the Skywalk - but that's a different issue really.

 

[WillTo]

Is it actually common for people to transfer from GO Train to GO Bus at Union?

 

[Richard White]

Is it actually common for people to transfer from GO Train to GO Bus at Union?

I did it once when I worked at Square One. I went from Scarborough GO to Square One via Union.

I don't see it being a common transfer. If you are coming from outside the GTA on a GO train heading back out of the GTA it is easier to find a more direct route.

 

[Jonny5]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1336752980113154049

Annoying and preposterous virus safety theater that having free rides would encourage gatherings because we're supposed to believe the GO fare was the barrier preventing people from traveling on that night. No one who would choose to travel on New Years will change their plans because of this, but they might choose to drive now, even after a few drinks. Again, it's safety theater.