salsa
Senior Member
What you're proposing is a good idea but would be very challenging to implement.
http://urbantoronto.ca/news/2012/08/cityrail-depth-union-station
|
|
|
- Thread starter drum118
- Start date
What you're proposing is a good idea but would be very challenging to implement.
http://urbantoronto.ca/news/2012/08/cityrail-depth-union-station
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Indeed - in fact at least one of the worldwide examples cited in the report (Hong Kong) is exactly what you've said - a high frequency, subway-like system.
Wonder if a single-deck, subway like trains offers better acceleration and loading/offloading that could allow for more in-fill stations without increasing trip time.
AoD
mdrejhon
Senior Member
The new RER report also recommends (in two places) full length higher platforms of assistive height allowing unassisted all door boarding. But compatible with low platforms. Bilevels can have level boarding.
Voltz
Senior Member
It's not hard to just cover over existing tracks at the platform level, and leaving the other tracks in place.
What you seem to be thinking of is changing the locations of existing tracks, which would of course be difficult.
TOareaFan
Superstar
They obviously agree with you because the Barrie line >400% increase assumes that off peak use equals peak use.
But, ....distance and time. TTC can generate a lot of off peak travel because someone in neighbourd A that wants to see a show or have dinner in neighbourhood B and do so efficiently. GO takes people longer distances and dinner out will tend to be closer to home.....again, I am not saying that an increase is not possible....I find the level of increase they are projecting to be beyond belief.
Take a look at the Lakeshore lines....has GO gotten anywhere close to off peak travel matching peak travel? The answer is no....and that does not even factor in that a lot of the off peak travel on Lakeshore is big event travel (sports, concerts) and a decent percentage of that is people that are better served by other lines making the drive to the closest Lakeshore line station because they are the only ones with trains....those people will still use the train (and be joined by others) but they are already in the numbers.
mdrejhon
Senior Member
And does not need peak flows in offpeak in order to mathematically achieve the 400 percent.
Therefore, your statement, as worded, is thusly mathematically N/A even if your scepticism is possibly reasonable.
There are only 7 peak trains a day per direction. 15 minutes two way will do something like approximately 70-ish trains a day per direction, an order of magnitude more train trips to Aurora. Not including any increased train rate at peak. And the 2020 increase is only partway, that 70 trains a day would be ~2025. This is Aurora+infills, not all the way to Barrie.
Do the math. 15 minutes is 4 trains an hour, times 17.5 hours a day, is 70 trains. 490 trains a week. The quoted 200 trains per week is what appears to be the half hourly scenario by 2020, that is not the 15 minute scenario by 2025.
Doesn't far more than half of Barrie commuters disembark at Aurora or south? Does anyone have a waterfall diagram of how many peak period disembarkations, for each station, for the evening peak? (Or hoardings in morning peak?)
The 400 percent increase is spread over ~1000 percent more train trips.
And we have not started talking about the infill stations which may almost double in number between Union and Aurora, in some scenarios.
Numbers exaggerated or unrealistic, maybe, but not nearly as much as you make it out to be, for a line that currently has no all-day-two-way service.
Easily 300%+ for 10x+ as many trains in a now-allday now-2way with infills. At this point, 400% isn't unobtainium today versus several years after 15min started.
Last edited:
TOareaFan
Superstar
Yet that is what they are projecting....in their table they show off-peak travel equalling peak travel on the Barrie line.
and the bulk of that thousand percent more train trips is during times of lower travel demand.....unless we are going to circle back to off-peak travel equalling peak travel.
We may have to agree to disagree here....because I see no evidence that a >400% increase in travel on that line (nor the >200% increases on other lines) is likely. But we keep churning out these reports that make up numbers to fit the conclusion we are trying to get to.
mdrejhon
Senior Member
To others:
How much did the ridership grow when Lakeshore got all day 2 way service quickly after 1967 start of peak-only trains? I seem to recall numbers grew more than 400 percent from 1967 to 1977. Anyone have access to GO historical data?
How much did the ridership grow when Lakeshore got all day 2 way service quickly after 1967 start of peak-only trains? I seem to recall numbers grew more than 400 percent from 1967 to 1977. Anyone have access to GO historical data?
mdrejhon
Senior Member
That's offpeak spread over many hours, versus a peak hour.
So basically, it is slightly more than doubled peak compared to today (the morning peak hour and the evening peak hour) plus same number offpeak (spread over, say, 15 non-peak hours), for total of over 400% relative to today.
That is how I interpreted the data on page 17.
If I am mistaken, please point it out with page number -- it is a nearly 200 page document. I will need to find exactly how sparing or generous does Metrolinx define peak period. That changes believability a huge bit.
Consider that the earliest and the late Barrie evening peak train may now be counted as an offpeak train in the 2029 scenario. We need to find out how a peak train is counted in the 2029 scenario. Is peak period reduced to one hour instead of the whole multi-hour batch of trains today?
Barrie will interchange Yonge-Bloor style (station above-below station) with the Eglinton Crosstown LRT, as another route to downtown. This may be part of these projections.
Last edited:
TOareaFan
Superstar
Table on page 19 of the summary document shows 11 million peak and 11 million off-peak.
mdrejhon
Senior Member
Not altogether unrealistic on my interpretation, assuming the Metrolinx definition of peak is 1 hour long compared to 3 hours worth of trains. That kind of makes it an asymmetric comparison.
Technically, the 3:40pm and 6:45pm Barrie trains today would be counted as an offpeak train in the 2029 "all day" scenario. If it was calculated this way, the increases look more sensible.
They just rolled all 3 hours of train into one peak period for the today calculation, but they apparently didn't do that for the 2029 calculation.
TOareaFan
Superstar
Like I said a few posts ago....we are going to have to disagree.....I don't think there is a snowball's chance in hell we see a 442% increase on this line....highly doubt a 223% increase on KW line and am disappointed there has been no attempt to look a the lakeshore lines and say "hey, maybe some of the people we are counting as off peak riders on those other lines should be subtracted from the current Lakeshore trips"....but, hey, it is a spiffy looking report that supports the conclusion they/we were looking for
Jonny5
Senior Member
What we would do is not waste time on trivial matters that inevitably cause extraordinary harm to innocent people for near zero gain. It is a callous and cowardly presumption of guilt.
Last edited:
muller877
Senior Member
He was guilty of fare evasion. If he bought a ticket like 99% of the GO Train riders he would not have had any of these issues.
He alleges that the CBSA held him for too long. He is not alleging that GO nor CBSA did anything wrong in the initial arrest. So if the person arrested isn't even suggesting the cops did something wrong why are you reading so much into it?
The police are there to assess and make arrests where appropriate. If you do not like the law, change it. Don't ask the police to selectively enforce a law.
nfitz
Superstar
Why not, we do it all the time. Isn't that the whole point of thinks like the sanctuary city plan?