Allandale25
Senior Member
|
|
|
- Thread starter drum118
- Start date
The new track under the 401 will help pretty substantially with that once it's complete, no? From what I gather it's a pretty big bottleneck at the moment.
crs1026
Senior Member
Very much so…. but the tunnels will only help when the fourth track has no gaps.
The tunnels can’t be connected, and 4 tracks made operable from Airway (near Malton) to Humberview (Islington Ave), until Etobicoke North is gone, and EN won’t be gone until Woodbine is built.
And then Weston will have to be completed to extend the fouth track from Humberview eastwards to Nickle (Jane St).
And then the Railpath has to be moved and Bloor Station and Mount Dennis (and maybe St Clair and Liberty) completed to extend the fourth track to Union.
Each segment will add capacity, but it’s a packagecdeal with lots of bits to get done.
- Paul
Haydenpoon
Active Member
- $10 One-Day (valid for travel on either Saturday, Sunday or Holiday only)
- $15 Weekend (valid for travel on Saturday + Sunday, and any additional Holiday day)
DirectionNorth
Active Member
It's for off-peak demand, since they're running the service anyways, they want to encourage people to use it.
nfitz
Superstar
What's the point of F&##%ing Presto if the best deal is by buying a non-Presto ticket.. I'm not sure why they can't simply use daily rate-capping on weekends to make this easy for everyone.
- $10 One-Day (valid for travel on either Saturday, Sunday or Holiday only)
- $15 Weekend (valid for travel on Saturday + Sunday, and any additional Holiday day)
Allandale25
Senior Member
Northern Light
Superstar
Truly sad, to the point of inducing laughter and tears.
The idea that a given route, is two different fare zones depending on direction of travel is so absurd, and ought to have been caught as such before it ever actually happened................
That it either was not caught (incompetence) or that it was and no one saw fit to fix it .......(I don't type the words that describe that)...........
Completely and utterly unacceptable!
We can have honest disagreements about 'where to draw lines'; we can fairly dispute exactly how much subsidy should go to anyone route or projects..........
But this is entirely another level of ridiculous.
Coolstar
Senior Member
Goodness fare integration can't come soon enough.
rbt
Senior Member
I don't understand why this "attention to detail" makes you desire Metrolinx's control of all fares for all agencies across the GTA.
Last edited:
ARG1
Senior Member
I have to agree, this isn't a fare integration issue as whatever outcome we get - even JEnglish's proposal - can have the same problem. Granted the solution here is to make certain streets act like "common zones" if we're doing a zone system, for instance if YR and Toronto are 2 separate zones, Steeles will count for both zones, and unless you explicitly cross the border you won't pay extra.
denfromoakvillemilton
Senior Member
Tbh they have been under-delivering on certain things for a decade now. No reason why Hamilton does not still have all-day service. Need to fill in the gaps on the Stouffville corridor. Mulock GO needs to be tendered out already. And come to a deal with CN to get to Mount Pleasant already.
Allandale25
Senior Member
tmlittle
Active Member
It would be nice if weekend service wasn't so restricted on some parts of the network, or this would be tempting.
crs1026
Senior Member
^GO is certainly on to something with recreational bicycle business.Several routes could offer worthwhile destinations and it’s a great opportunity for urban dwellers to get out of the city without getting on a highway.
I wonder what the numbers say. Fourteen riders on opening day is an interesting start, but running a GO train for the benefit of 14 people is not justifiable. Storing bicycles on a lightly used GO train has no cost, but adding cars to the train just for bikes does. There has to be the right combination of volume plus non-cycling ridership.… and there may be limits to what GO can offer.
I wonder whether more standard GO cars ought to have space for 4-6 bikes instead of a few dedicated cars that sit idle at other times. Ultimately GO may want to push for more bikeshare at its stations.
I’m not raising objections, just wondering what the constraints and pitfalls might be. It’s a nice problem to have.
- Paul
I wonder what the numbers say. Fourteen riders on opening day is an interesting start, but running a GO train for the benefit of 14 people is not justifiable. Storing bicycles on a lightly used GO train has no cost, but adding cars to the train just for bikes does. There has to be the right combination of volume plus non-cycling ridership.… and there may be limits to what GO can offer.
I wonder whether more standard GO cars ought to have space for 4-6 bikes instead of a few dedicated cars that sit idle at other times. Ultimately GO may want to push for more bikeshare at its stations.
I’m not raising objections, just wondering what the constraints and pitfalls might be. It’s a nice problem to have.
- Paul