News   Dec 20, 2024
 2.5K     8 
News   Dec 20, 2024
 1K     2 
News   Dec 20, 2024
 1.9K     0 

2014 Municipal Election: Toronto Transit Plans

The hypothetical lakeshore line would take off only a few percent from the yonge line.

I can see GO RER taking 5-10 percent of pressure off of the yonge line, but the DRL will ultimately be needed as it eliminates 25%.
 
The problems with the modifications to RER proposed by SmartTrack to RER are basic
Yonge Relief and GO Lakeshore Union capacity
Most of the new customers on the Yonge line over the last 20 years are coming from York region which is currently served by 3 GO lines. SmartTrack doesn't add any new capacity to GO lines that wasn't already proposed by GO, except the Richview underground alignment, which does little for the Yonge line. The alignment would cost a lot of money and take a lot of time to plan & build and will likely have a negative impact on Yonge relief, in that it would use up capacity that could otherwise be assigned to longer routes on existing tracks that could be up and running sooner with less money.
By putting all of Torontos money into the Richview corridor (Etobicoke), we continue to ignore the real problems of capacity on our subway, buses & streetcars. Politics is decided by voters, mostly drivers, who are more interested in getting transit off the roads than helping passengers fit on vehicles.
 
Last edited:
At least once every 15 minutes is what GO RER and I believe SmartTrack calls for.



The Downtown Rapid Transit Expansion Study already shot down the Lakeshore RT East proposal, who's alignment was similar to that of SmartTrack. It's expected to cause significantly increased crowding on 1 Yonge Line, south of Line 2.



Please use the quote feature (speech bubble icon) when quoting other members. It's easier for us to read your post if you do.
I really hate this business of Line 1,2 , etc. I have no idea what Line 2 is but I assume its Bloor (not that many lines in this city). This change of names is crazy. Its worked for decade, Yonge, Bloor, University, Spadina and now its a problem. We need to change names for the benefit of tourist? This is as cray as not electrifying the UPX because otherwise it would not be done on time for the PanAM games. Modes of transit or names should be based on citizens that live here and not tourists. When I visited New York City I walked everywhere, lots of walking but who cares as it is Summer. If I wanted to ride the subway (I did one time) then it would be up to me to ask about directions.
 
I strongly believe that the Eglinton section of Smart Tracks will not go ahead and instead the entire western section will simply be the UPX line. Yes, capacity could be an issue and more trains will need to be bought but so what?. This idea that you don't build a transit line because too many people will take it is farcical.

The entire Western portion of Smart Tracks will be completed by 2015.

Also GO RER is NOT Smart Tracks nor is it a viable alternative to it. Smart Tracks is a TTC system and RER is GO. In other words everyone will be able to afford to take ST while GO due to higher fares will still see a lot of people not being able to take it due to their income. Fare integration will certainly help but if you are a low income person and now your GO fare is just an extra $3 to $5 each way that is still to much.

Smart Tracks will be accessible to everyone and GO will not be. If money wasn't an object for people, Torontonians would already be using the service but they don't. Ridership levels in Toronto itself for GO are very poor due mostly because of it's high fares. GO fare integration will help ease the burden for 905ers which is a great idea but Torontonians need fast TTC service and that is Smart Tracks. This will help boost ridership on GO outside Toronto which is great as ridership levels for GO are still relatively low compared to other world systems.
 
I really hate this business of Line 1,2 , etc.

I hated it initially, but the new naming system has crept into my vocabulary, probably because it's easier to say. I have to be mindful not to use the Line 1 and Line 2 when giving directions to people.

This change of names is crazy. Its worked for decade, Yonge, Bloor, University, Spadina and now its a problem. We need to change names for the benefit of tourist?

Yeah it worked, but it's not very accurate.

I have no idea what Line 2 is but I assume its Bloor (not that many lines in this city).

This could become a problem when 5 Eglinton Line, 6 Sheppard East, 7 Finch West, 8 Relief Line and maybe Line 9 (SmartTrack???) open in the next few years.
 
The entire Western portion of Smart Tracks will be completed by 2015.

Nope.

We'd be very lucky if the first vote for SmartTrack happens before 2015. That vote will probably happen early 2015. Once that vote is passed, TTC and Metrolinx will need to asses the requirements for this project and associated costs (Will we need tunnels, how much will it cost, can it go on Eglinton, preferred alignment etc..). Council will then need to take a second vote based on TTC/Metrolinx recommendations. This process will take a few more months. Then the Environmental Assessments will need to be completed. That could take a long while, especially if there's any tunnelling involved.

So I'm guessing at least three votes before shovels are in the ground, likely more. We'd be very lucky to even have shovels in the ground by mid 2016.

Even if building the western portion of SmartTrack were as easy as retrofitting UPX with new vehicles (it isn't), the tendering process alone for the vehicles would take several months. The wait for vehicle delivery process would be even longer. At the very least two years under the most ideal of circumstances.
 
Last edited:
Now, let's say the TTC takes over the UPX but runs it exactly the same way except the fares are standard TTC fares, can someone please explain to me what the difference between Smart Tracks/suburban rail is and the current UPX.

UPX would be an overloaded low capacity airport express with some people pissed off about all the luggage, and Smart Tracks / RER would be a high capacity rail with more stops.
 
The hypothetical lakeshore line would take off only a few percent from the yonge line.

I can see GO RER taking 5-10 percent of pressure off of the yonge line, but the DRL will ultimately be needed as it eliminates 25%.
I can't see it even taking 5-10% off Yonge. 5-10% off people transferring from the Bloor line to the Yonge line perhaps (AM peak).

Which is probably less than the estimated growth in demand from population increases. Let alone all the extra people who are forecast to use the Danforth subway if it's extended to Sheppard, or the Yonge subway if extended to Highway 7. Or the Yonge subway because of the Eglinton line. Or Sheppard East LRT. Or just the latent demand on the Yonge line because it's already over-capacity.

Heck, with SmartTrack, I'd expect that there'd be new passengers travelling from Markham/North Scarborough to Kennedy station and then getting ON the subway, heading to destinations like U of T and Yonge/Dundas!

We need a lot more transit - SmartTrack alone isn't the answer.
 
UPX would be an overloaded low capacity airport express with some people pissed off about all the luggage, and Smart Tracks / RER would be a high capacity rail with more stops.

I know that but that doesn't stop if from starting right away. As I said more stations, frequencies, trains, electrification can be added as needed. You really wouldn't want any more stations until electrification is complete as the more stations the larger the difference in travel time becomes. Certainly adding Etobico North would be a good idea from word go but again these can be phased in.

As far as luggage being a problem well the regular riders of the TTC are use to being cramped together so I think anyone going to Humber would rather be cramped for 15 minutes than 45 minutes using the current system.
 
Lessons from London: For building transit, there’s no avoiding taxes

Read More: http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/201...uilding_transit_theres_no_avoiding_taxes.html


.....

When we found out that Martin Buck, the commercial director of Crossrail, was in town for a convention, we at the Star invited him in to explain how his line might — and might not — compare to the one Tory now has a mandate to move forward on.

- Crossrail will represent a 10 per cent increase in capacity to what Buck calls a “mature” transit network that already includes 402 kilometres of Underground subway track and 125 kilometres of commuter rail on its “Overground” network, a system that is at or near capacity. Which means that at launch, the trains will run every 2.5 minutes in each direction, versus every 15 minutes in Tory’s SmartTrack plan.

- The vehicles will also have monstrously high capacity. Buck told us of the need to construct stations that cost almost $1 billion Canadian because they’ll be 250 metres long to accommodate the trains. Tory, by contrast, is proposing SmartTrack use a kind of train smaller than existing GO trains and smaller than our subway trains.

- Buck says the plan for Crossrail emerged not in a political campaign, but in studies commissioned and passed along since the 1970s or 1980s by transit planners. The project finally came up for formal proposal in the form of legislation in 2005, when it was widely embraced by local politicians, including the then-mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, and then his successor, Boris Johnson. It is projected to be finished in 2018 — 13 years after that initial formal process was begun and decades after the initial rough plans were drawn up.

- But it is in the use of what Buck calls “innovative” financing — in contrast to Tory’s proposal — that we might most hope to learn from London’s example. Of the £14.8-billion ($26.8 billion Cdn) budget, a little less than half is being paid by the city of London. The city is raising its contribution in a few ways. Buck told us the business case to do so came in part from the potential £5 billion in land value uplift they project could come from the project and the total of £40 billion-plus in economic benefits the line is expected to deliver.

- In borrowing with the expectation of future economic value increases, this sounds a bit like Tory’s Tax Increment Financing plan. But that’s where the comparison stops. Because in London they see the projected economic improvements as a justification to raise taxes now, not as a source of magical funding. In 2010, London began levying a 2 per cent annual premium on the property taxes paid by businesses across the Greater London Area, with the revenue earmarked for Crossrail. This measure, which had vocal support from the London First business lobby group, will generate about £4 billion.

- In addition, the mayor will levy a one-time infrastructure fee on various neighbourhood ratepayers (residences and businesses alike) of between £20 and £100 when the project is completed, adding a further £300 million. The city is borrowing against the future earnings from both of these sources of revenue, so that they have the capital upfront to spend on construction.

- In contrast, the people and businesses of London are already paying increased taxes for the Crossrail and will continue to do so in the future through tax increases already announced. That, unsurprisingly, is very similar to how we in Toronto wound up agreeing to pay for the Scarborough subway extension, with a 1.6 per cent property tax increase already being phased in. It is the responsible way to pay for transit.

.....
 
This could become a problem when 5 Eglinton Line, 6 Sheppard East, 7 Finch West, 8 Relief Line and maybe Line 9 (SmartTrack???) open in the next few years.

Well what happens with Line 3 when they dismantle the Scarborough RT? Line 1, 2, 4 (Sheppard), 5 (Eglinton), etc.?

It'll be like Pearson has Terminal 1 and Terminal 3. Silly if you ask me.
 
Well what happens with Line 3 when they dismantle the Scarborough RT? Line 1, 2, 4 (Sheppard), 5 (Eglinton), etc.?
Ultimately it would get reused at some point. Perhaps in the future, 3 can be reused for the Downtown Relief Line, and lines 1 through 4 would be subway, and 5 through 7 (or more?) would be LRT.

Silly if you ask me.
If they re-use Line 3 for the Downtown Relief Line, it would be bloody brilliant if you ask me.

Montreal opened with a Line 1, 2, and 4. When they added the Blue line , it was line 5. And for a short time, the proposed Pie-IX Metro (White) line appeared on the maps in the trains as line 7. Line 3 (and 6) have never been used. Everyone seemed to survive just fine (though more recently, Montreal has been using the line numbers less and less).
 
Can't they just reserve the number 3 for the DRL after the SRT is decommissioned? As long as the SRT gets decommissioned before the DRL opens then it should work.
 

Back
Top