[DENTROBATE54]

You're confusing silly rules that exist now with ideas about what should be.

Actually I wasn't confusing the rules at all. The Toronto Transit Commission is obligated to it's citizens first and foremost. Routing subways further and further into suburban hinterlands whilst neglecting the downtown city core with outdated streetacrs running on 10-minute headways, is precisely what the problem is. GO services should be handling the fringe while the TTC focues on the crumbling transit infrastructure occuring right in its backyard. Inner-416 GO stops should also be phased out gradually as TTC service improves to GO station areas such that out-of-towners can go to and fro alot quicker.

The TTC isn't just for the local 416 -- it runs routes into 905 -- but, more importantly, that style of unintegrated system is exactly the problem. No need to encourage it. In particular, why on Earth would we want trains already stopping at multiple, and distant, points within 416 not to allow people to get on and off there? Uf GO can get them from Kipling to Kennedy by cutting their trip by two-thirds and not making them sit through 32 agonizing stops, then we need a fare system, frequency, and system integration that will do that. Continuing to erect a shrine to arbitrary lines at the expense of white elephants is not particularly useful.

The infrequency of scheduled GO train trips makes it infeasible to use commuter rail over subway. Trying to transfer trains alone at Union Station often means 20-30 mins waits depending which lines you're transfering to. And given that the GO's a shared corridor with freight trains I don't anticipate much improvement in frequency any time soon.

Case in point: the Richmond Hill line. How would it make any sense to run a Yonge express subway alongside an express GO train on almost exactly the same route -- even if it's a route with its problems (no Bloor collection)? Similarly, why would you want to prevent people commuting between Union and, say, somewhere on the stubway from expressing it up to Oriole and transferring?

I've said this before, that improving service on the Richmond Hill Line is more cost-effective than extending the subway. However if you read carefully, I also said if an express line were built along Yonge I'd support limited access stops within the 416 i.e. Sheppard, Eglinton, Bloor, Queen and Union- stops currently or in the future to have an east-west line to interchange with.

Maybe a TTC Yonge Express makes sense, sure. In which case, though, scrap GO Richmond Hill.

It is the least used of all the GO lines and if linking to even a marginal node like the Sheppard corridor is such a big deal technically speaking, then maybe you're right.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

Actually I wasn't confusing the rules at all. The Toronto Transit Commission is obligated to it's citizens first and foremost.

No...it has obligations to its riders, who may or may not live in the 416.

 

[DENTROBATE54]

King was a devil do or not because what it service.

As for Coxwell, that depends on what happens to the Don Mill line location. That is why I have (Boardview) as this seems to where TTC wants it to go to at this time. Again it is ridership demand. Victoria out weight Main on ridership outside routes. GO has little impact on the BD line in the first place. Warden is a tossup also.

In all honesty an express station would be mutually beneficial to King/Bay as it would be to Toronto Union, provided the express line route down Bay south of Bloor. The first downtown stop (City Hall, located to the north of Queen St) would be juxtaposed between several massive trip generators- Toronto Coach Terminal/Atrium to the north, City Hall to the west, Eaton's Centre/YUS to the east and the new downtown line to the south. Heading south from there the next station (CBD) would be at Wellington St. With extended cars and platforms, northern exits would lead to the 4 major bank plazas and the southern end opens right into the Front Street grotto.

As far as the Danforth goes, the highest preforming stations- Broadview, Pape, Coxwell and Main Street- should never be omitted from an express line. From Main eastward you could serve all the stops given their far-apart status. A Don Mills line is interesting as there's justification for routing along any of Broadview, Pape or Coxwell as all three have intensified intersections @Queen, Gerrard, Danforth and Montimer. It'll be interesting to see which route and technology prevails .

I see a subway on Queen looping up Victoria/Woodbine to Elgin Mills in the 905 for the east and looping up Jane St to Elgin Mills in the west for 905.

Eglinton line goes from Pickering to Sq One in Mississauga by the Airport.

Daring to dream I see. Such excessively long lines might compromise stop proximity though. A series of appendage lines makes more sense than a single line running on forever. Even splitting the Eglinton Line into two lines at Kennedy (as Transit City proposes) might in the long be better.

 

[RedRocket191]

Actually I wasn't confusing the rules at all. The Toronto Transit Commission is obligated to it's citizens first and foremost. Routing subways further and further into suburban hinterlands whilst neglecting the downtown city core with outdated streetacrs running on 10-minute headways, is precisely what the problem is. GO services should be handling the fringe while the TTC focues on the crumbling transit infrastructure occuring right in its backyard. Inner-416 GO stops should also be phased out gradually as TTC service improves to GO station areas such that out-of-towners can go to and fro alot quicker.

I believe that you are entitled to your opinion, but I believe this opinion is what's holding our network back. I agree with you that we cannot neglect downtown Toronto, but we cannot neglect the suburbs either.

The infrequency of scheduled GO train trips makes it infeasible to use commuter rail over subway. Trying to transfer trains alone at Union Station often means 20-30 mins waits depending which lines you're transfering to. And given that the GO's a shared corridor with freight trains I don't anticipate much improvement in frequency any time soon.

I also don't anticipate much subway expansion any time soon either. The point is that both will eventually get there. Eventually, GO will run every 15 minutes or better all the time. One of the main points of the regional transportation plan is to decide the timeframe of those improvements. We have to plan for the future.

I've said this before, that improving service on the Richmond Hill Line is more cost-effective than extending the subway. However if you read carefully, I also said if an express line were built along Yonge I'd support limited access stops within the 416 i.e. Sheppard, Eglinton, Bloor, Queen and Union- stops currently or in the future to have an east-west line to interchange with.

There is nothing to say that we can't have both, and I am willing to bet that we will have both. The question is which one we want first.

 

[CapitalSeven]

I see very little possibility of any four-track subways happening. None of the proposed new lines have the ridership to justify it, and adding additional tracks to Yonge or Bloor would be technically challenging and expensive - cheaper and easier just to build another line and serve additional areas. That said, passing tracks to skirt a few less-used stations might make sense.

 

[drum118]

RedRocket191 you can fill us in now.

Metrolinx board told staff to include a map of the proposed RTP in the Official Release Green Paper at Friday meeting. This was done to give the public some idea what is in the work for the RTP so the public could supply comments on it related to the Official Release Green Paper approved by the Board on Feb 22 meeting.

Highlights of a TTC model for comparison to London will be added to the Green Paper Report. Oh!! me, that crying is starting to hurt.

 

[Chuck]

I believe that you are entitled to your opinion, but I believe this opinion is what's holding our network back. I agree with you that we cannot neglect downtown Toronto, but we cannot neglect the suburbs either.

I agree with this statement 100%. The TTC made sense decades ago when 95% of the residents and jobs in the "GTA" (which was really just Toronto back then) were in the TTC's service area. Today, a good 30-50% of the people within the TTC's service area don't even work in Toronto. For the people that can use the TTC to get to work, 10-20% of them didn't start their trip in Toronto.

The TTC's service boundaries are no longer practical not only for the GTA, but for the people that live in Toronto itself. The TTC's service boundaries either need to be expanded, or the TTC should be disbanded entirely. In its current form, the TTC is one of the biggest obstacles holding back transit growth in the GTA - including downtown.

What the GTA needs most is subways where subways make sense (which includes little stubs into the 905 area) commuter rail where commuter rail makes sense (which includes the entire area of Scarborough, North York, and Etobicoke), and above all route planning and fare policies geared around where people travel, rather than where people live.

Sure, keep all of the the TTC's route planners. Keep YRT's, MT's, and BT's as well. Local input is key to any transit system. But at the same time, a whole new crop of planners is necessary. For all the cross boundary roads that are at capacity today, I doubt that there is a single person in any of the GTA's transit systems that was hired to research and improve cross boundary local TRANSIT routes.

 

[RedRocket191]

Look...

Either the TTC's attitude towards regional transportation has to change, or the TTC's structure has to change.

That's the bottom line, and if neither of those change then in 30 years we'll be exactly where we are now. That is unacceptable.

My first preference is to have their attitude change. This is the least disruptive solution. However, that decision falls on City Hall. Do they want to negotiate in good faith to come to a mutually satisfactory solution, or do they want stand their ground and have a solution imposed on them?

In my opinion, if the TTC gets completely taken over by the province then it will by city hall's fault.

 

[unimaginative2]

These plans are tremendously interesting. People outside the City of Toronto don't seem to have latched on to the light-rail-only fad yet. Building any of these proposed subways in the 416 will face intense opposition from the TTC and transit "advocates". I think the only way they could happen is if the province took over transit operations. I'd love to see Metrolinx shove a subway down the TTC's throat, as the commissioners and transit advocates scream "No! It's too expensive! You can't afford it!"

 

[Edward Skira]

Aren't they already doing that with the subway to Jane and 7?

 

[scarberiankhatru]

Aren't they already doing that with the subway to Jane and 7?

Didn't the TTC always [claim to] want to extend the subway to York U? Forcing them to go another 2km isn't the same as forcing, for a totally random example, a DRL.

 

[RedRocket191]

These plans are tremendously interesting. People outside the City of Toronto don't seem to have latched on to the light-rail-only fad yet. Building any of these proposed subways in the 416 will face intense opposition from the TTC and transit "advocates". I think the only way they could happen is if the province took over transit operations. I'd love to see Metrolinx shove a subway down the TTC's throat, as the commissioners and transit advocates scream "No! It's too expensive! You can't afford it!"

True advocates, such as myself, support whatever we can get the most of. If building subways doesn't jeopardize any of the other projects, then I support these subways.

 

[unimaginative2]

Yeah, but you also have to recognize that there's a difference in the standard of service between a subway and a streetcar in the middle of the road, stopping at every stop light. 10 km of each is not equivalent.

 

[DENTROBATE54]

True advocates, such as myself, support whatever we can get the most of. If building subways doesn't jeopardize any of the other projects, then I support these subways.

Great attitude! Whining over which line should be built first only postpones work on anything. I think it's general concensus here that the majority of us would like to see the two Hwy 7 extensions, BD to Sherway Gdns and STC, Sheppard to Downsview and eastwards and most would prefer new subways along Eglinton, Don Mills and somewhere east-west through the downtown core.

In a perfect world we wouldn't be subjected to waiting for one line's completion to commence another as that only helps one set of commuters and corridors at a time. However it's better than the bus to have them, so I too say build away!

Yeah, but you also have to recognize that there's a difference in the standard of service between a subway and a streetcar in the middle of the road, stopping at every stop light. 10 km of each is not equivalent.

Then a mixture of both is adequate. Eglinton's a perfect example of this. I could and think many people would live with the section between Jane and Midalnd becoming an actual subway and connecting to a surface streetcar thereafter. Giving the land use in the outlying areas it should come as no surprise that one stop every 450m is normal and tolerable. West of Lord Manor Dr the LRT could run in its own alignment to the airport, making the surafce route highly competitive with the subway in terms of speed and reliability.

Jane and Finch West don't really need LRTs but of the seven routes these two are the most suitable as the others clearly need to be partial or full-length subways.

 

[Dan416]

Great attitude! Whining over which line should be built first only postpones work on anything. I think it's general concensus here that the majority of us would like to see the two Hwy 7 extensions, BD to Sherway Gdns and STC, Sheppard to Downsview and eastwards and most would prefer new subways along Eglinton, Don Mills and somewhere east-west through the downtown core.

In a perfect world we wouldn't be subjected to waiting for one line's completion to commence another as that only helps one set of commuters and corridors at a time. However it's better than the bus to have them, so I too say build away!



Then a mixture of both is adequate. Eglinton's a perfect example of this. I could and think many people would live with the section between Jane and Midalnd becoming an actual subway and connecting to a surface streetcar thereafter. Giving the land use in the outlying areas it should come as no surprise that one stop every 450m is normal and tolerable. West of Lord Manor Dr the LRT could run in its own alignment to the airport, making the surafce route highly competitive with the subway in terms of speed and reliability.

Jane and Finch West don't really need LRTs but of the seven routes these two are the most suitable as the others clearly need to be partial or full-length subways.

I think most people would agree that if TWO subway lines go to Hwy 7, Mississauga should be getting getting at least one.