News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.6K     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
 5.5K     0 

Leo_Chan said:
Operate service to Highway 407 Station. Does this mean they will no longer serve/terminate at York U? Because if that is the case, and require a transfer for 1-2 subway stations, is inconvenient.
Click to expand...
challenge facing all of the bus routes that formerly went direct to campus....no?
 
Leo_Chan said:
Operate service to Highway 407 Station. Does this mean they will no longer serve/terminate at York U? Because if that is the case, and require a transfer for 1-2 subway stations, is inconvenient.
Click to expand...

TOareaFan said:
challenge facing all of the bus routes that formerly went direct to campus....no?
Click to expand...

I'd actually say that's extremely convenient--I'm not sure what the problem is? As it stands, the buses exit/enter the 407 at Keele, then go all the way down Keele to York Blvd where they unload, wait, load, and depart back on that route. Now they'll exit at Jane, travel a very short distance, service the subway station, and travel a short distance again to get back on the 407. This means:

1) For York students, at times of day with less traffic, this will come out to be just about even in terms of travel time; Keele is clogged between the 407 and York Blvd during most of the day, so having to take an escalator/elevator down, wait for a train, go 2 stops and head back up will be within 2 minutes of the bus trip time, I'll bet. Also, keep in mind that the current plan is for that subway ride to be a free transfer if you get off a GO bus and tap off the subway at York, or vice-versa, this is why TYSSE is getting tap-out faregates from day one.
2) At times of day with more traffic, this will save a significant amount of time on the trip. The bus can sit in bumper-to-bumper traffic barely moving all the way from 407 to Steeles, that stretch can easily take 10-15 minutes during rush hour when it gets especially bad.
3) For passengers not going to York, but connecting through to the other 407 GO Bus (West-East or East-West) this will save a HUGE amount of time! As it is they have to sit in traffic all the way down to york, wait for the other bus, sit in traffic all the way back up to the 407...or use keele/snidercroft to switch directions, where they have to cross a busy intersection twice and wait outdoors for a bus, plus not necessarily get a seat due to the buses being busy leaving york. Instead, they will hop off right at 407 station, which is barely a detour from the 407, walk to another bus platform, get on, and continue their journey with MUCH less time lost. This is an overlooked benefit to the change--through passengers along the 407 really see a big gain.
 
Megaton327 said:
I'd actually say that's extremely convenient--I'm not sure what the problem is? As it stands, the buses exit/enter the 407 at Keele, then go all the way down Keele to York Blvd where they unload, wait, load, and depart back on that route. Now they'll exit at Jane, travel a very short distance, service the subway station, and travel a short distance again to get back on the 407. This means:

1) For York students, at times of day with less traffic, this will come out to be just about even in terms of travel time; Keele is clogged between the 407 and York Blvd during most of the day, so having to take an escalator/elevator down, wait for a train, go 2 stops and head back up will be within 2 minutes of the bus trip time, I'll bet. Also, keep in mind that the current plan is for that subway ride to be a free transfer if you get off a GO bus and tap off the subway at York, or vice-versa, this is why TYSSE is getting tap-out faregates from day one.
2) At times of day with more traffic, this will save a significant amount of time on the trip. The bus can sit in bumper-to-bumper traffic barely moving all the way from 407 to Steeles, that stretch can easily take 10-15 minutes during rush hour when it gets especially bad.
3) For passengers not going to York, but connecting through to the other 407 GO Bus (West-East or East-West) this will save a HUGE amount of time! As it is they have to sit in traffic all the way down to york, wait for the other bus, sit in traffic all the way back up to the 407...or use keele/snidercroft to switch directions, where they have to cross a busy intersection twice and wait outdoors for a bus, plus not necessarily get a seat due to the buses being busy leaving york. Instead, they will hop off right at 407 station, which is barely a detour from the 407, walk to another bus platform, get on, and continue their journey with MUCH less time lost. This is an overlooked benefit to the change--through passengers along the 407 really see a big gain.
Click to expand...

I agree....around here, though, fare integration (or lack thereof) gets rolled into the definition of "convenience".....and that is what I meant by "challenge".....how does, say, Brampton Transit sell to its 501/501A Zum riders that the need to connect/transfer and, possibly, pay with TTC subway to get to school at York is "convenient".
 
TOareaFan said:
I agree....around here, though, fare integration (or lack thereof) gets rolled into the definition of "convenience".....and that is what I meant by "challenge".....how does, say, Brampton Transit sell to its 501/501A Zum riders that the need to connect/transfer and, possibly, pay with TTC subway to get to school at York is "convenient".
Click to expand...

I don't think they need to sell it--I think people just need to try it and see for themselves that it'll range from saving a few minutes to, at worst, adding a few minutes to their trip. And I don't expect that they'll have to pay--while it hasn't been confirmed, it's political suicide to suddenly tell transit riders "hey, we're cutting your service back so that it doesn't reach your destination, you have to pay and extra $6 per day for the convenience too!". I'm sure Zum will have the same integration deal as YRT/Viva/GO.
 
Megaton327 said:
I don't think they need to sell it--I think people just need to try it and see for themselves that it'll range from saving a few minutes to, at worst, adding a few minutes to their trip. And I don't expect that they'll have to pay--while it hasn't been confirmed, it's political suicide to suddenly tell transit riders "hey, we're cutting your service back so that it doesn't reach your destination, you have to pay and extra $6 per day for the convenience too!". I'm sure Zum will have the same integration deal as YRT/Viva/GO.
Click to expand...
there is, actually, a logical reason for BT not having the same deal as those.....York region and Ontario gov't did actually contribute capital to the construction of the subway...Brampton did not.....I agree they will likely get the same deal but am not 100% sure they will.
 
I mentioned in the Brampton Transit thread that BT plans to operate the 501A, at least, right into the campus if fare integration isn't going to happen. There will probably be more 501A service once the subway opens too; BT expects ridership to grow on the corridor, especially on the express variant.

BT's first open house for the 2017-2018 service plan is this Thursday.
 
ShonTron said:
I mentioned in the Brampton Transit thread that BT plans to operate the 501A, at least, right into the campus if fare integration isn't going to happen. There will probably be more 501A service once the subway opens too; BT expects ridership to grow on the corridor, especially on the express variant.

BT's first open house for the 2017-2018 service plan is this Thursday.
Click to expand...
Has York agreed to allow them to operate into campus? Thought York wanted buses off campus?
 
with GO release of Schedule changes effective April 8 ( http://www.gotransit.com/public/en/updates/schedulechanges.aspx ) I guess it is officially official that the roll out schedule of increase rail service on KW by fiscal 2016/2017 ain't happening.

I may have missed it but was there anything more formal announced cancelling/delaying that? (I happen to think that if you announce you are doing something and can't/don't do it you sorta have an obligation to announce it and give a new/revised schedule).

Any insiders have "updated speculation" on when it might happen or, even, why it can't/didn't?
 
Just for context and background purposes, the planned schedule change was announced on page 68 of the 2016 Provincial Budget. Below the "10 new trips...City of Brampton" was the word "dependent" and three examples. Is there any insight if these were the reasons it didn't happen in 2016-17 fiscal (ending March 2017) or the reason(s) the government would claim it didn't happen? (Not saying I would agree or disagree with such a claim)

Also, I think someone posted earlier that the mid-day trips added in September 2015 on the Kitchener Line didn't attract the expected ridership so they (Province/Metrolinx) would roll out the additional off-peak services more slowly. Just going by memory on that last piece so could be wrong.

TOareaFan said:
with GO release of Schedule changes effective April 8 ( http://www.gotransit.com/public/en/updates/schedulechanges.aspx ) I guess it is officially official that the roll out schedule of increase rail service on KW by fiscal 2016/2017 ain't happening.

I may have missed it but was there anything more formal announced cancelling/delaying that? (I happen to think that if you announce you are doing something and can't/don't do it you sorta have an obligation to announce it and give a new/revised schedule).

Any insiders have "updated speculation" on when it might happen or, even, why it can't/didn't?
Click to expand...

HhwHHPy.png
 
^yes but since fiscal 2016/17 ends in about 2 weeks and they are already announcing service enhancements for 2017/18 fiscal....I was wondering what the update on the parts of that which are not being delivered as scheduled/anticipated
 
TOareaFan said:
^yes but since fiscal 2016/17 ends in about 2 weeks and they are already announcing service enhancements for 2017/18 fiscal....I was wondering what the update on the parts of that which are not being delivered as scheduled/anticipated
Click to expand...

Fully understand and also interested in any and all updates. Just wanted to provide context/background of where it first surfaced in case there are any new UT members reading this.
 
Allandale25 said:
Also, I think someone posted earlier that the mid-day trips added in September 2015 on the Kitchener Line didn't attract the expected ridership so they (Province/Metrolinx) would roll out the additional off-peak services more slowly. Just going by memory on that last piece so could be wrong.
Click to expand...

Metrolinx was hammered by very poor ridership on UP Express, before the new fares were introduced. That could explain the very slow rollout of off-peak rail service.

Ridership on the weekend Barrie Line is very low too - I went up to Barrie on Sunday. The new schedules, with the transfer at Aurora, only increase the travel time between Toronto and points north. I don't know why Barrie (Aurora) went ahead of Kitchener (Mount Pleasant) except, perhaps Del Duca politics.
 
ShonTron said:
Metrolinx was hammered by very poor ridership on UP Express, before the new fares were introduced. That could explain the very slow rollout of off-peak rail service.

Ridership on the weekend Barrie Line is very low too - I went up to Barrie on Sunday. The new schedules, with the transfer at Aurora, only increase the travel time between Toronto and points north. I don't know why Barrie (Aurora) went ahead of Kitchener (Mount Pleasant) except, perhaps Del Duca politics.
Click to expand...

In terms of the image posted about, did the service increases referenced by "six" and "10" actually happen in fiscal 2016-2017 (ending March 2017)? Can't remember. Apologies if it's been posted here before.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top