CDL.TO
Moderator
That's about 1/3 of capacity. That describes every seat being full and there being a few standees. For the top 1/3 of the line, that sounds fine to me. How would it make sense for a train to be full already at the start of the line?
|
|
|
- Thread starter W. K. Lis
- Start date
That's about 1/3 of capacity. That describes every seat being full and there being a few standees. For the top 1/3 of the line, that sounds fine to me. How would it make sense for a train to be full already at the start of the line?
Paleo
Active Member
If they're headed that far south, they should be using GO. If they're not, then we should be building LRT/BRT feeders that act like the east-west routes do instead of vastly overbuilding.
Will anyone be using those stations outside of peak hours?
kEiThZ
Superstar
Anyone have examples of transit boards other than TfL or Translink that provide a similar function to Metrolinx?
Disparishun
Active Member
If a mere 1,000 or 2,000 new riders from the north end end heading south will put it over, and ridership is growing and not shrinking, then whether or not the extension is constructed is absolutely irrelevant to whether or not the Yonge line will be overwhelmed. It will, in that scenario, certainly be put over. Time, maybe, to do something about it (although I agree it is much easier to rail against the 905 barbarian hordes who, really, should be kept in their place. A moat perchance?).
Or did you think that, when the Yonge extension is eventually killed -- as I've said before, part of me just does not believe it will ever get built, despite (I will admit) pretty strong evidence to the contrary -- we will also be killing any further development along that extension? Or, more importantly, further development in areas that have nothing to do with the extension, but will continue (like everyone else, in the absence of a better alternative like, oh, destubbifying Sheppard or doing what must be done with GO) to shuttle over to Finch from the east (and west) and continue to load the Yonge line at its north end? In short: yes, ridership will grow. And if it's close to being overcrowded, it's gonna get overcrowded.
(Unless you are a partisan of the Steeles moat project.)
Last edited:
Disparishun
Active Member
Good points. I think you're right that a lot of the traffic on the Yonge extension, were it ever built out, would be to the other city centres that are also getting built it. NYCC, Yonge-Eg, etc.
And, of course, it's certainly true that doing something about electrifying and fare- and physically-integrating the RH GO line would certainly take considerable long-haul Union-bound traffic off the Yonge line. The biggest gains are to be had in Scarborough and east North York, at Old Cummer and Leslie/Oriole. They should probably add another stop at Eglinton.
And, who knows, with electrification the GO train might even become a faster option for getting to Union than the subway, for those starting at RHC. But we've got to walk before we can run, and Old Cummer and Leslie/Oriole are the easier and bigger wins here.
Paleo
Active Member
If I'm not mistaken, wasn't the plan for Yonge Street originally LRT to begin with?
scarberiankhatru
Senior Member
What far south? If someone's going from Richmond Hill to Union, yeah, GO could work for them, but the vast majority of people are going to be using the line by getting on or off between Richmond Hill and Union, and GO will not work for them. For every bus rider in Scarborough or Markham diverted off the Yonge line and onto GO, two new Yonge riders would pop up in Yonge corridor developments and three or four existing riders would have to go many miles and minutes out of their way to use GO (they won't do it).
How many thousand bus trips a day are made along Yonge north of Finch? As others have said, the case for extending the line north of Finch is unimpeachable. People who whine about how the line is simultaneously overcrowded and not using its full capacity will only be happy if the entire Yonge subway train empties out and fills back up at every single station, keeping the line at capacity but not overcrowded...such a scenario is impossible.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
How long will the price of gasoline/diesel be low? Has it reached bottom and is now rising? How long before the price returns to the highs of 2008?
I don't think the price will stay low. We should be planning for the price to rise again and public transit should be prepared for it. Don't use today's capacity or short term planning. Metrolinx should be planning for the long term and higher fuel prices. Now is the good time to build all types of rapid transit.
I don't think the price will stay low. We should be planning for the price to rise again and public transit should be prepared for it. Don't use today's capacity or short term planning. Metrolinx should be planning for the long term and higher fuel prices. Now is the good time to build all types of rapid transit.
jamesbow
New Member
I choose take away seats. Back in 2002, the TTC compared a Yonge extension to Clark Blvd against the York University extension and the Sheppard extension to Victoria Park, and found that the Yonge extension actually had a higher ridership potential than either extension, close to 10,000 pph. That's no slouch in the ridership department. The only reason they declined to make such an extension a priority was specifically because of capacity concerns south of Lawrence.
You have a fair amount of density on North Yonge, and you certainly have a lot of surface traffic feeding into the line, so it's no surprise to me that the extension would be well used.
The danger of the DRL discussion is that it could be framed as a 905 vs 416 battle, but perhaps there is a way to turn this around. Maybe the marketing campaign should say "Yes, you will get a seat, but come Bloor, somebody will sit on your lap. Do you want that to happen? Then build the DRL before the North Yonge extension."
...James
Railization
Active Member
Nope. BRT, yes. However, the whole reason the subway is going through is because LRT was completely ignored by YRT/Viva when they studied the corridor, and subsequently by Metrolinx, too. LRT was never given a shake at this, and was never considered. It'd still have to be underground until Royal Orchard-ish, but.
The subway is only is genuinely needed upto Steeles, where even LRT would struggle.
kEiThZ
Superstar
^ This goes to the root of the problems with some of Metrolinx's analysis. If you take the corridor as a whole, the averages flatten out so that the significant ridership south of steeles compensates for lower ridership north of steeles. Hence, where you should have gotten subway + LRT (beyond RHC) , you now get a subway to RHC. They also made the same mistake, imo, on the Sheppard corridor where some eastward and likely a westward subway extensions are certainly warranted, but are instead replaced with LRT to Meadowavale. And again on the SRT corridor where they considered the current SRT corridor and the extension to Malvern together, which would have been better suited with a subway to STC and a LRT to Malvern Town Centre.
The only way to fix all this is for Metrolinx to do its own analysis….right down to their own ridership forecasts….no using anybody elses forecasts….relying on the TTC or YRT/Viva for data on projects that benefit them is probably at least a tad dangerous.
The only way to fix all this is for Metrolinx to do its own analysis….right down to their own ridership forecasts….no using anybody elses forecasts….relying on the TTC or YRT/Viva for data on projects that benefit them is probably at least a tad dangerous.
waterloowarrior
Senior Member
A region stuck in traffic
It's time to implement large-scale projects to bring transportation system into 21st century
OPINION - The Toronto Star
http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/605957
March 23, 2009
MICHAEL WARREN
FORMER CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER OF THE TORONTO TRANSIT COMMISSION
Sixty minutes each way: That's the average commute to and from work in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA). It is equivalent to three full work-months a year. No wonder there is growing anger and frustration among those who try to move around this region.
The cause is apparent. Neither the province nor the area municipalities have made major investments in the GTHA's transportation system for over a generation. They have tried to accommodate rapid population and economic growth by relying on a decades-old transportation network, one that is collapsing under the weight of endless political rhetoric and inaction.
Congestion and gridlock have become the norm. Transit has lost the battle with the car. As a result, we are suffering record levels of pollution, congestion, oil dependence and car-driven urban sprawl. The economic competitiveness of the GTHA is being diminished by our antiquated transportation system.
There is no incremental way out of this mess. The McGuinty government and the GTHA municipalities have done enough planning. It is time to begin implementing large-scale projects that will move our transportation system into the 21st century.
Two years ago the province announced the establishment of Metrolinx (formerly the Greater Toronto Transportation Authority). It was clear recognition that transportation is a regional issue that requires regional solutions. At the same time, Premier Dalton McGuinty made a widely applauded funding promise. He committed $11.5 billion to be spent on Greater Toronto transit projects.
Since then only a trickle of the promised billions has actually been invested anywhere in the GTHA. The Metrolinx board, made up of the mayors from across the region, has given Queen's Park an in-depth "common vision for transportation in the GTHA" for the next five years. But so far the board has been unable to get funds flowing from McGuinty's "MoveOntario 2020" program. Shovels need to go into the ground this year and to do that the premier has to make good on his funding promise.
As well, the original mandate of Metrolinx needs to be re-established. Metrolinx should be responsible for overall transportation planning in the GTHA. After identifying priority projects (which it has already done), Metrolinx should act as the provincial funding conduit to the municipalities in the region. Go Transit needs be transferred to Metrolinx, as originally envisioned, to give it an operational arm.
Metrolinx also needs to look at the feasibility of amalgamating all nine of the transit systems within the GTHA, including the TTC and Go Transit, into a single regional operating entity – something that many other regions in North America have already done. Existing transit fiefdoms, boundaries and rivalries are of no interest to passengers. They want a seamless regional transit network that is accessible, rapid and affordable.
The City of Toronto can also take initiatives to raise money for transit, reduce congestion and pollution. A growing number of cities have introduced "congestion" and "climate" tolls for drivers entering their inner cores. Stockholm, London and Singapore have extensive experience and proven results. The technology for applying congestion tolls is in place and fully tested.
Milan has launched a one-year trial. New York City Council has voted for a three-year trial. Stockholm adopted its congestion charge in 2007 following a seven month test. It showed a 14 per cent reduction in CO2 emissions (25,000 tons annually), and a 22 per cent reduction in traffic (100,000 passengers per day). The revenue raised from the tolls went to a transit project and inner-city road improvements.
Meanwhile, the risk-adverse Toronto City Council seems more comfortable asking for handouts from Queen's Park and Ottawa than taking action to deal with the growing gridlock on its streets. At the very least, Toronto should join the other "world class" cities that are testing this strategy. Some will argue that a recession is the wrong time to introduce a new tax. However, with everyone being forced to re-examine their own economic and environmental behaviour, it may be precisely the right time to test this idea.
It should be evident by now that there isn't enough government money to fund even a small portion of the infrastructure needs of this country's municipalities. In 2007, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities reported that Canadian cities face an infrastructure "deficit" of more than $123 billion. About $45 billion of this is for roads and transit.
The recent federal budget, despite its promised billions, comes nowhere near addressing this mammoth need for municipal capital. And the recently announced financial contributions to Union Station and GO Transit represent only a very small fraction of the $7 billion required over the next five years to meet this area's future transportation needs.
Creative cities in other countries long ago realized the limits of the public purse. They have developed the ability to work effectively with the private sector, engaging them in the financing, design, building and operation of major transportation systems. London's 118-kilometre east-west King's Cross Line is expected to bring $40 billion to the U.K. economy. It is being developed mainly with private funds. Tokyo, Madrid, Hong Kong and many other cities have used private capital to finance airports, subways and roads.
The longest bridge in the world, the Confederation Bridge that links P.E.I. to the rest of Canada, cost more than $1 billion. It was financed, built and is being operated by a private-sector consortium. The return on its investment comes from the toll revenues it receives over a 25-year period. After that, ownership of the bridge reverts to the federal government.
Despite this myriad of successful precedents, the governments responsible for getting the GTHA moving again have been reluctant to seek out private funding. The financing models usually involve an element of "user pay." As a result, the benefits of the project have to be sold to an electorate accustomed to so-called "free" infrastructure. Instead, it's easier for Metrolinx and the GTHA municipalities to maintain an illusion. They think that all of their capital needs will be met by the Ontario and federal governments, both of whom are drowning deeper in debt.
If Metrolinx is going to be a key player in building a vastly expanded GTHA transportation network, it will have to learn how to attract private capital. One of its priority projects is the much needed Union Station to Pearson airport rail link. This project has the potential for a private-public finance, construction and operations partnership. Building the link would inject 10,000 new jobs into a faltering construction industry.
There are billions of institutional dollars sitting on the sidelines in money market funds. This money is waiting for investments that will provide reasonable rates of return with modest risk once the markets bottom out. In the meantime, Metrolinx should be exploring partnership models with potential private-sector investors now, in advance of the economic recovery.
The cost of not moving ahead with Metrolinx's transportation plan for the GTHA is staggering. The TD Bank Financial Group estimates that, in the Greater Toronto Area alone, the costs of congestion, delays and wasted energy resulting from the lack of infrastructure investment are on the order of $2 billion every year.
The plan to get the GTHA moving again is already in place. Now it's time for McGuinty to "show us the money" in his forthcoming budget. And a renewed Metrolinx has to reach out to the private sector to help finance the region's long-term transportation needs.
Michael Warren is a corporate director and chairman of The Warren Group, a former Ontario deputy minister and former CEO of Canada Post Corporation. r.michael.warren@gmail.com
It's time to implement large-scale projects to bring transportation system into 21st century
OPINION - The Toronto Star
http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/605957
March 23, 2009
MICHAEL WARREN
FORMER CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER OF THE TORONTO TRANSIT COMMISSION
Sixty minutes each way: That's the average commute to and from work in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA). It is equivalent to three full work-months a year. No wonder there is growing anger and frustration among those who try to move around this region.
The cause is apparent. Neither the province nor the area municipalities have made major investments in the GTHA's transportation system for over a generation. They have tried to accommodate rapid population and economic growth by relying on a decades-old transportation network, one that is collapsing under the weight of endless political rhetoric and inaction.
Congestion and gridlock have become the norm. Transit has lost the battle with the car. As a result, we are suffering record levels of pollution, congestion, oil dependence and car-driven urban sprawl. The economic competitiveness of the GTHA is being diminished by our antiquated transportation system.
There is no incremental way out of this mess. The McGuinty government and the GTHA municipalities have done enough planning. It is time to begin implementing large-scale projects that will move our transportation system into the 21st century.
Two years ago the province announced the establishment of Metrolinx (formerly the Greater Toronto Transportation Authority). It was clear recognition that transportation is a regional issue that requires regional solutions. At the same time, Premier Dalton McGuinty made a widely applauded funding promise. He committed $11.5 billion to be spent on Greater Toronto transit projects.
Since then only a trickle of the promised billions has actually been invested anywhere in the GTHA. The Metrolinx board, made up of the mayors from across the region, has given Queen's Park an in-depth "common vision for transportation in the GTHA" for the next five years. But so far the board has been unable to get funds flowing from McGuinty's "MoveOntario 2020" program. Shovels need to go into the ground this year and to do that the premier has to make good on his funding promise.
As well, the original mandate of Metrolinx needs to be re-established. Metrolinx should be responsible for overall transportation planning in the GTHA. After identifying priority projects (which it has already done), Metrolinx should act as the provincial funding conduit to the municipalities in the region. Go Transit needs be transferred to Metrolinx, as originally envisioned, to give it an operational arm.
Metrolinx also needs to look at the feasibility of amalgamating all nine of the transit systems within the GTHA, including the TTC and Go Transit, into a single regional operating entity – something that many other regions in North America have already done. Existing transit fiefdoms, boundaries and rivalries are of no interest to passengers. They want a seamless regional transit network that is accessible, rapid and affordable.
The City of Toronto can also take initiatives to raise money for transit, reduce congestion and pollution. A growing number of cities have introduced "congestion" and "climate" tolls for drivers entering their inner cores. Stockholm, London and Singapore have extensive experience and proven results. The technology for applying congestion tolls is in place and fully tested.
Milan has launched a one-year trial. New York City Council has voted for a three-year trial. Stockholm adopted its congestion charge in 2007 following a seven month test. It showed a 14 per cent reduction in CO2 emissions (25,000 tons annually), and a 22 per cent reduction in traffic (100,000 passengers per day). The revenue raised from the tolls went to a transit project and inner-city road improvements.
Meanwhile, the risk-adverse Toronto City Council seems more comfortable asking for handouts from Queen's Park and Ottawa than taking action to deal with the growing gridlock on its streets. At the very least, Toronto should join the other "world class" cities that are testing this strategy. Some will argue that a recession is the wrong time to introduce a new tax. However, with everyone being forced to re-examine their own economic and environmental behaviour, it may be precisely the right time to test this idea.
It should be evident by now that there isn't enough government money to fund even a small portion of the infrastructure needs of this country's municipalities. In 2007, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities reported that Canadian cities face an infrastructure "deficit" of more than $123 billion. About $45 billion of this is for roads and transit.
The recent federal budget, despite its promised billions, comes nowhere near addressing this mammoth need for municipal capital. And the recently announced financial contributions to Union Station and GO Transit represent only a very small fraction of the $7 billion required over the next five years to meet this area's future transportation needs.
Creative cities in other countries long ago realized the limits of the public purse. They have developed the ability to work effectively with the private sector, engaging them in the financing, design, building and operation of major transportation systems. London's 118-kilometre east-west King's Cross Line is expected to bring $40 billion to the U.K. economy. It is being developed mainly with private funds. Tokyo, Madrid, Hong Kong and many other cities have used private capital to finance airports, subways and roads.
The longest bridge in the world, the Confederation Bridge that links P.E.I. to the rest of Canada, cost more than $1 billion. It was financed, built and is being operated by a private-sector consortium. The return on its investment comes from the toll revenues it receives over a 25-year period. After that, ownership of the bridge reverts to the federal government.
Despite this myriad of successful precedents, the governments responsible for getting the GTHA moving again have been reluctant to seek out private funding. The financing models usually involve an element of "user pay." As a result, the benefits of the project have to be sold to an electorate accustomed to so-called "free" infrastructure. Instead, it's easier for Metrolinx and the GTHA municipalities to maintain an illusion. They think that all of their capital needs will be met by the Ontario and federal governments, both of whom are drowning deeper in debt.
If Metrolinx is going to be a key player in building a vastly expanded GTHA transportation network, it will have to learn how to attract private capital. One of its priority projects is the much needed Union Station to Pearson airport rail link. This project has the potential for a private-public finance, construction and operations partnership. Building the link would inject 10,000 new jobs into a faltering construction industry.
There are billions of institutional dollars sitting on the sidelines in money market funds. This money is waiting for investments that will provide reasonable rates of return with modest risk once the markets bottom out. In the meantime, Metrolinx should be exploring partnership models with potential private-sector investors now, in advance of the economic recovery.
The cost of not moving ahead with Metrolinx's transportation plan for the GTHA is staggering. The TD Bank Financial Group estimates that, in the Greater Toronto Area alone, the costs of congestion, delays and wasted energy resulting from the lack of infrastructure investment are on the order of $2 billion every year.
The plan to get the GTHA moving again is already in place. Now it's time for McGuinty to "show us the money" in his forthcoming budget. And a renewed Metrolinx has to reach out to the private sector to help finance the region's long-term transportation needs.
Michael Warren is a corporate director and chairman of The Warren Group, a former Ontario deputy minister and former CEO of Canada Post Corporation. r.michael.warren@gmail.com
Second_in_pie
Senior Member
I agree with the point about putting up "congestion tolls." Simply putting tolls on the DVP and Gardener would get people out of their cars and bring money into the city.
Other than that, things are looking pretty bleak...
Other than that, things are looking pretty bleak...
Rainforest
Senior Member
... only if they have a viable public transit alternative.
Otherwise, most of those cars will simply spill into regular streets.
TOareaFan
Superstar
The un-intended consequence of congestion tolls on the gardiner.....a wide open freeway while King St./Lakeshore/Queen Street (and other even more local streets) are jammed with penny pinching commuters!!!
People will go to great lengths to avoid tolls...but getting out of their cars is not one of them. I remember when the 407 was first opened and it was free for a few months.....it got very quick acceptance and "everyone" was using it.....then the day the tolls came on I remember driving on it and wondering if I was the only person in the GTA who still had a car! People moved very quickly back to the overcrowded 401.....traffic eventually found its level but people will endure some pretty awful congestion to avoid tolls.