[ssiguy2]

I don't his point to run it as a business meaning only serving high ridership lines and let the other one's die. I think he is implying that transit expansion should have a solid business case as to whether the dividends returned is worth the money invested.

As a make-believe example..... it's kind of like giving a business $3 billion dollars and telling them that they must use it for rapid transit and you will get 50% of the proceeds from all fares but you have to maintain the line/service at frequencies of our choosing. The businesses would look at different routes where they could get the most bang for the buck. They would not be concerned with politics or which lines provide ribbon cutting ceremonies before the next election. They would instead study the lines that make the most sense financially and build those lines in an affordable fashion to spread the money out further........the more lines they can build with their $3 billion, the more fare revenue they would get.

Automatically they would cancel the the SRT subway and make the Renforth-Eglinton-Kennedy-SRT-Malvern one long grade separated route using SkyTrain. The maintenance facilities and garage as well as 7 km of line are already built backed by the fact that Skytrain is built to be automated, has several different suppliers, has very high frequency potential, and has lower long-term costs due to less interaction between the tracks and train and fewer working parts so SkyTrain trains last longer than standard third rail and requires less track maintenance/refurbishment. SkYtrain is also quicker and cheaper to build elevated than LRT which also requires catenary or subway where there have to more and larger concrete pillars for the support structure.

They would also can Finch, Sheppard, and Eglinton West LRT in place of a light supported monorail system due to automation, easier to build & maintain. A suspended monorail would probably be cheapest. They would buy the UPX from Metrolinx, electrify, and bring down fares to the TTC level so ridership would increase ten fold overnight.

 

[cplchanb]

Might I throw in another city as an exemplar.....Hong Kong found a business model decades ago through smart managed privatization into several companies. They are making a profit every single year and their service levels have nlbeen excellent compared to us. Not to mention no dumb corporate branding of their terminals like that God awful amendment to the VMC name

 

[Tuck]

New expressways, tolled and underground, incorporating subway or other rail should be part of the solution. I'm so sick of hearing that somehow our horrible traffic is a virtue because it turns people towards transit. Congestion is idling, which is terrible for the environment, business, and quality of life. Really, what transit options do these people have? RER will help, but the cost has to moderate and have some tranferability to the TTC. That's the virtue of Smart Track, if it's implemented as intended, to provide frequent, affordable, subway like service along existing rail corridors.

There's far too much left versus right politicking going on. The right don't see the value in making transit a public spending priority. The left don't see that building all forms of transportation, highways included, where there are users demanding service and willing to pay user fees, is an equally important means of delivering the transportation system we need.

Isn't it a well proven fact by now that highways will do very little to help our congestion problem?

Even then, the government did just open a highway extension and a new highway, has another extension and new highway coming, and just announced a third extension. So... I'm not entirely sure what you're point is.

 

[cplchanb]

Isn't it a well proven fact by now that highways will do very little to help our congestion problem?

Even then, the government did just open a highway extension and a new highway, has another extension and new highway coming, and just announced a third extension. So... I'm not entirely sure what you're point is.

True, but the problem with Toronto is that fundamentally their highways are flawed to begin with. Apart from the dvp the only way in and out of the downtown core is 427 which for most in the 905 out of realistic reach. Not to mention, the dvp has reached its saturation point. Back when they had a chance to they really should've had 2 means of ingress and egress dt. The Allen should've gone down to university. But obviously petty lobbying and self serving politics as usual canned that and we've been suffering through the consequences ever since. So yes highways only serve up to a limit but for Toronto the limit is far below what it should be due to fundamental network flaws.

And on the point of those extensions...the new extensions to 407 are a moot point anyways since it's realistically too far away from the downtown core to mean much

 

[Rainforest]

Isn't it a well proven fact by now that highways will do very little to help our congestion problem?

Even then, the government did just open a highway extension and a new highway, has another extension and new highway coming, and just announced a third extension. So... I'm not entirely sure what you're point is.

Nobody ever claimed that any of those extensions will help relieve the congestion in the Toronto's core, or even in the near suburbs. All of them happened very far from the core.

They are built to help the movement of people and goods in those low-density areas, where public transit is mostly impractical, and there isn't much local congestion.

New highways in the Toronto's core would be a waste of money, investing the same funds in transit would result in much better outcomes. But, the responsibilities of the provincial government are not restricted to GTA, and other areas need another kind of solutions.

 

[TOareaFan]

True, but the problem with Toronto is that fundamentally their highways are flawed to begin with. Apart from the dvp the only way in and out of the downtown core is 427 which for most in the 905 out of realistic reach. Not to mention, the dvp has reached its saturation point. Back when they had a chance to they really should've had 2 means of ingress and egress dt. The Allen should've gone down to university. But obviously petty lobbying and self serving politics as usual canned that and we've been suffering through the consequences ever since. So yes highways only serve up to a limit but for Toronto the limit is far below what it should be due to fundamental network flaws.

And on the point of those extensions...the new extensions to 407 are a moot point anyways since it's realistically too far away from the downtown core to mean much

Just a question for clarity...how is the 427 out of realistic reach for most of the 905?

 

[steveintoronto]

Nobody ever claimed that any of those extensions will help relieve the congestion in the Toronto's core, or even in the near suburbs. All of them happened very far from the core.

They are built to help the movement of people and goods in those low-density areas, where public transit is mostly impractical, and there isn't much local congestion.

New highways in the Toronto's core would be a waste of money, investing the same funds in transit would result in much better outcomes. But, the responsibilities of the provincial government are not restricted to GTA, and other areas need another kind of solutions.

Agreed, (with caveats) which ties this back to the forum surmise, worded as unfortunately as it is by the UofT headline it appeared under. London, like NYC, like Paris, like many *World Class Cities* appeals to those wishing to pay the price of quality transit as well as being economical enough for the Average Pleb, albeit London (the entire UK) fails miserably on behalf of cost for Average Pleb (7 times the European average for rail travel).

Even though Schabas is based in London, and uses that as his prime template, his points are still valid when compared to Toronto (also high-priced compared to most North Am conurbations):

Few transit systems hold a candle to London’s sprawling network of trains. Its comprehensive web of rail lines serve everyone from well-to-do businesspeople to blue-collar workers, transporting them to every corner of the city.

Absolutely true, there's nary a part of London where rail transit of some sort is more than a fifteen minute walk away.

“The book is about how London learned to build railways that were worth having that attracted passengers, that operated efficiently, that were affordable and efficient,” says Schabas.
[...]
You have to learn from other cities. You can't just learn from your own city because it's probably too long ago.

London learned from Vancouver when it built the SkyTrain. I worked on the first line in the early 1980s, and London copied it with the Docklands Light Railway, an automated, elevated system that other cities around the world have also copied. But Toronto still learns only from itself so it only wants to build subways and streetcar lines.

What are Toronto's other transit shortcomings?

Toronto only thinks about the capital costs. It assumes that a railway always loses money and doesn't do analysis of business cases – so you have plans like the Scarborough subway, which is supposed to replace the Scarborough RT but obviously won't attract any more passengers because it's going to do pretty much exactly the same thing as the existing line. And, it may actually cost more to operate than the RT it will replace.

Most of the investment in London over the last 30 years has been to upgrade the surface railway. The London Overground is a new service created by knitting together and electrifying surface railways. That's the lesson Toronto is learning with the Regional Express Rail project that's now going ahead.
[...]
What score would you give Toronto?

At the moment, we don't want to talk about it. But I would say if I write the same book on Toronto in 2040, 8/10 is still within reach.

How do we get past the roadblocks Toronto's transit system is currently facing?

Toronto needs to learn that transport is a business as well as a social service. You need to offer a better service quality – faster and more frequent trains, all day and on weekends. There's a line I use as a title of one of my chapters, which is credited to the mayor of Bogotá: the successful city isn't a place where the poor people have cars, but it's a city where the rich people use public transit.

By rich people, I don't think he meant millionaires. He meant people with jobs, people with cars, people carrying knapsacks with laptops in them.

In Toronto, those people do use public transit to go downtown, and they love it. But they don't use it to go from Scarborough to Mississauga because it's too slow, and they end up sitting in their cars on the 401.

In London, those people use public transit. Toronto is a rich city, and it needs its public transit system to also be for "rich” people.
[...]
Toronto is a potential railway metropolis. It's very dense, even in the suburbs. Even Scarborough and Mississauga are much denser than American suburbs. People don't realize that.

Toronto has six freeway lanes in to the downtown. Houston has 43.

Toronto has very little in the way of a freeway system. Rail is the only way to make Toronto keep growing, and luckily for Toronto, it's not too late – the corridors are there for the RER, and Toronto never had the problems American cities had that made “rich” people stop using transit.

https://www.utoronto.ca/news/transi...st-recognize-transportation-business-not-just

What I didn't include in the above is this:

How optimistic are you that Toronto will get to the point where it can create the transportation systems it needs?

I'm very optimistic.

Schabas has been retained to help develop RER, what else is he going to answer?
It's rather odd considering Metrolinx claim to have it all figured out with studies that go back....errr...last year, the year before that, the year before that, the year before that, etc, etc. Not to overlook at least five public announcements featuring Little Jack Horner ("what a good boy am I") at each.

Queen's Park, Toronto and the GTHA had better take a damn good look at themselves and the pathetic degree of accountability, let alone planning process and financing, on the current heading. Schabas has dropped some stinkers himself, doubtless, a number come to mind, but in this instance, his message is an exceptionally valid one. I just hope to hell he has some positive influence on the zombies at Metrolinx and QP.

 

[cplchanb]

Just a question for clarity...how is the 427 out of realistic reach for most of the 905?

Imo 427 and qew are more for people in the west like Mississauga and Hamilton. However for a huge bulk of 905s from York Region are hamstrung by the 404 grid lock daily

 

[TOareaFan]

Imo 427 and qew are more for people in the west like Mississauga and Hamilton. However for a huge bulk of 905s from York Region are hamstrung by the 404 grid lock daily

well they are, to some extent, "twin" roads.....the 404/DVP serve as the n/s access to Toronto for those in the Centre/East part of the GTA and the 427 does the same in the Centre/West.....if you were planning a highway access to Toronto what is really missing is a centre freeway but the decision to stop the Allen at Eglinton happened a long time ago.

Neither the 427 nor the 404/427 are out of reach for "most" of the 905...they "work" together and both get jammed with traffic at various times...that said, if you simply base it on population, the 427 is probably accessible by more people.

the 427 is no harder for people in the eastern/north eastern GTA to get to than the 404 is for people in Mississauga, Brampton, Vaughan..etc.

 

[mdrejhon]

Why is it outlandish? Other cities have done exactly that. Paris, for example, has train service at subway-like frequencies (every 3-4 minutes all day) on some two-track lines. You can't expect subway-like stop spacing, but it's not crazy to ask for Go RER to work like Paris' RER does, where you can take it within the subway's fare zone as if it were a part of the subway system, and where the system is actually intended to serve people living in the city, not just its surrounding suburbs.

Yes....

Not outlandish to transit fans here,
...but an outlandish idea to most of Greater Toronto.

Long time UrbanToronto members know that I have frequently wrote about RER in other cities, including Paris. Many posts in 2014 and 2015 about various RER systems. But it is still a big leap of an idea (at the time) for the average GTHA resident.

In past years, I frequently extolled exactly what amnesiajune said, to the point forum members said I was repeating the same thing too often. The principles are a great idea.

 

[cplchanb]

well they are, to some extent, "twin" roads.....the 404/DVP serve as the n/s access to Toronto for those in the Centre/East part of the GTA and the 427 does the same in the Centre/West.....if you were planning a highway access to Toronto what is really missing is a centre freeway but the decision to stop the Allen at Eglinton happened a long time ago.

Neither the 427 nor the 404/427 are out of reach for "most" of the 905...they "work" together and both get jammed with traffic at various times...that said, if you simply base it on population, the 427 is probably accessible by more people.

the 427 is no harder for people in the eastern/north eastern GTA to get to than the 404 is for people in Mississauga, Brampton, Vaughan..etc.

Well I never suggested that the Allen be extended...just lamenting that they should've done it back then instead of caving to the lobbying minority

 

[TOareaFan]

Well I never suggested that the Allen be extended...just lamenting that they should've done it back then instead of caving to the lobbying minority

No what you suggested (actually stated) is that the 427 is inaccessible for "most in the 905"...it is just not true.

 

[cplchanb]

No what you suggested (actually stated) is that the 427 is inaccessible for "most in the 905"...it is just not true.

I guess our thinking of 905 differs... I assume 905 as York Region..east to Markham Richmond Hill and west to around Vaughan... We've got over a million people on yr.. Not sure how much peel region has...

Anyways let's move on... Plain fact is that the "central" highway is missing

 

[TOareaFan]

I guess our thinking of 905 differs... I assume 905 as York Region..east to Markham Richmond Hill and west to around Vaughan... We've got over a million people on yr.. Not sure how much peel region has...

Anyways let's move on... Plain fact is that the "central" highway is missing

Yep you are looking at the GTA thru only your own eyes....at the last census (2011) Peel Region alone (so just Brampton, Mississauga and Caledon) had a population of 1.297MM compared to York Region's population of 1.033...now, not all Peel region people would use the 427 to get downtown...but a decent number of people in York region would use it instead of the 404....like I said, neither road is more or less accessible...they are highways that bookend the 416.

 

[M II A II R II K]

RER is the only way forward in the short term to have commuter rail that's frequent within Toronto at no extra fare.

A Scarborough subway to get downtown from there doesn't cut it and not to mention too crowded.