[catcher_of_cats]

If someone lived in Richmond Hill near Langstaff Station, why would they pay GO $4.85 to travel to Union when they could pay $2.75 on a subway service that will come at least every 15 minutes? That is a lot of savings over the course of a year even though the route will be slower.

 

[kEiThZ]

If someone lived in Richmond Hill near Langstaff Station, why would they pay GO $4.85 to travel to Union when they could pay $2.75 on a subway service that will come at least every 15 minutes? That is a lot of savings over the course of a year even though the route will be slower.

Because they would get a more comfortable and faster ride?

 

[Disparishun]

Because they would get a more comfortable and faster ride?

Well, no (haven't we been through this before?) -- they get a ride that varies between slower and much slower, depending on scheduling. The big wins for improving the RH line are at Oriole and Old Cummer, not Langstaff.

 

[Disparishun]

If by "transit improvements" you mean subway extensions into 905 (ahem York Region), then I have no problems with the TTC opposing it because those extensions are projected to have low ridership volumes (and likely operate in deficit) for the next 15 years and beyond.

Those massive capital expenditures could be used for things with far better ROI. Bringing the subway to Richmond Hill's doorstep to lose money and take away seats from City of Toronto users is a surefire way to get us riled up.

Musing, for a moment: is "don't steal my seat" the transit version of NIMBYism?

Anyway, back to reality: your assertions don't make sense. First you say that the Yonge extension will have low ridership volumes. Then you complaint that it will take away seats.

Choose one. If there are not enough seats to go around despite low ridership volumes pn the Yonge extension, then clearly the primary cause of not enough seats cannot be the Yonge extension -- it has to be a lack of TTC capacity to serve ridership irrespective of the Yonge extension.

(Well, unless you thought that the alternative to the Yonge extension was replacing Steeles with a giant moat, turning back all VIVA or YRT or GO buses that dare cross it, and forcing those on the barbarian side to participate only in York Region's economy. Mind you, even then those dastardly 905 hordes might deploy swan boats and go back to their seat-stealing ways!)

^ It would be much better if we had an entry/exit zone/distance based system because then you really have very good metrics on fare recovery on given lines. So if the province wants to extend TTC subway into York Region, then the province and/or other city should pick up the difference between operating cost and fare recovery.

Like the DC metro? That would be nice. How you allocate those entry/exit costs is a bit mysterious to me, but clever people can certainly figure out something that makes sense.

 

[RedRocket191]

If someone lived in Richmond Hill near Langstaff Station, why would they pay GO $4.85 to travel to Union when they could pay $2.75 on a subway service that will come at least every 15 minutes? That is a lot of savings over the course of a year even though the route will be slower.

You assume that we won't have fare integration. Under most schemes used worldwide that trip would cost the same.

 

[Disparishun]

You assume that we won't have fare integration. Under most schemes used worldwide that trip would cost the same.

I think Catcher is simply assuming reality. We don't have fare integration. Subway trips do cost $2.75. GO train from Langstaff to Union does (apparently) cost $4.85. There are no doubt versions of the future in which some of these things change.

 

[nfitz]

I think Catcher is simply assuming reality. We don't have fare integration. Subway trips do cost $2.75. GO train from Langstaff to Union does (apparently) cost $4.85. There are no doubt versions of the future in which some of these things change.

Most (and soon to be no) Subway trips include parking. Most GO trips include parking. Easy solution ... Change GO to $2.75, and add $6 a day parking.

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

Musing, for a moment: is "don't steal my seat" the transit version of NIMBYism?

Anyway, back to reality: your assertions don't make sense. First you say that the Yonge extension will have low ridership volumes. Then you complaint that it will take away seats.

Choose one. If there are not enough seats to go around despite low ridership volumes pn the Yonge extension, then clearly the primary cause of not enough seats cannot be the Yonge extension -- it has to be a lack of TTC capacity to serve ridership irrespective of the Yonge extension.

I think what most fascinates me about this contradiction we keep finding over and over (line is going nowhere/line will overwhelm the subway) is the apparent ignorance of how many 905 people are already using the subway!

There will be new riders but I suspect the biggest change on the first day will be the number of York Region residents who get on before Finch who would previously have bused or driven there. New riders will be on the subways too, but the biggest intitial difference will be where people get on at the north end.

Taking that into account, it strikes me as obvious that getting all those cars and buses off of Yonge Street is a VERY good thing.

People with no sense of what lies beyond Finch don't understand that, more than anything else, the subway provides options for northern riders. Someone working at Front/Bay will likely continue to take GO but someone who now takes GO to Union and then subway up to Bloor will likely shift to the subway. That doesn't even take into account that YR riders will be able to, say, take TTC to a concert or Leafs game which infrequent GO service doesn't account for.

As for the fare integration, I'd assume that there would still be some sort of "premium" for GO. We're talking hypotheticals but it does seem unlikely that it would cost the same from Langstaff for TTC and GO...Time will tell.

 

[TOareaFan]

You assume that we won't have fare integration. Under most schemes used worldwide that trip would cost the same.

Fare integration or not.....trips of differening "expressness" (my new word!) and comfort level should have differing prices.

Suppose a subway was extended out to Brampton......that trip to Union via subway would likely take 1 hour or more.....for, presumably, $2.75....if I take a +/- 40 minute GO train.....should I not pay more? I think I should.

Same in Richmond Hill....I am not familiar with travel times there but, presumably, the GO train is faster and more direct....it is also, likely, more comfortable.....should it not cost more even if there is a subway there? I think it should.

 

[kEiThZ]

Anybody else have ideas on how to reform Metrolinx?

 

[TOareaFan]

Anybody else have ideas on how to reform Metrolinx?

I have said it before.....the 3rd largest municipality in the GTA which also has a pretty significant transit system should have direct representation and not have to rely on a neighbouring municipality to represent it.

 

[doady]

I have said it before.....the 3rd largest municipality in the GTA which also has a pretty significant transit system should have direct representation and not have to rely on a neighbouring municipality to represent it.

Municipalities probably should not be represented at all and neither should any transit system. Metrolinx should not be dominated by opposing local interests.

Personally i think all transit systems should be combined to form one regional transit system. No more TTC getting in the way of MT, no more MT getting in the way of BT, no more GO getting in the way of everyone, because I am sick of it.

 

[Disparishun]

Same in Richmond Hill....I am not familiar with travel times there but, presumably, the GO train is faster and more direct....

Nope. Slower and less direct.

 

[DavidH]

Nope. Slower and less direct.

Less direct, yes. Slower, well, that depends on how GO operates it. GO has stated its intent to operate more express services, and presumably that would be as true for Richmond Hill as it is for Oshawa.

While I haven't done the math, presumably a GO train heading express to Union from Langstaff would make better time than a subway would, even with the less direct route.

 

[Disparishun]

Less direct, yes. Slower, well, that depends on how GO operates it. GO has stated its intent to operate more express services, and presumably that would be as true for Richmond Hill as it is for Oshawa.

While I haven't done the math, presumably a GO train heading express to Union from Langstaff would make better time than a subway would, even with the less direct route.

Today, taking the GO train from Langstaff is slower than heading down to Finch and taking the subway, if you want to go to Union. (To anywhere else on the downtown core's Yonge axis, obviously, it is much slower still, because you backtrack.)

In the future world you are talking about, if they electrify the route (is this what you mean by "express"?), then those who arrive just in time for the train at Langstaff may indeed have a faster ride. I guess we will have to wait and see. Right now, though, no.