2014 Municipal Election: Toronto Transit Plans

[ehlow]

I think the fact that the folks at Liberty Village are source-funding a bus tells you all that you need to know about the perception of GO service in the 416.

SmartTrack needs to be put on the TTC map alongside with fare integration.

Yes, maps, logos etc are important because people won't use a service that's difficult to understand or that they are unaware of.

Even if GO RER cost TTC fare with free transfers to the TTC, it's not perceived as part of the system unless it's on the subway map, part of the TTC map & has TTC signage. That's part of why the idea of SmartTrack caught on, not only was it about adding stations and increasing service, but also the TTC fare, and making it part of the TTC system and having it on the TTC rapid transit map, with all that that implies re: fares & service levels.

When a person decides to visit someone at Liberty Village, they will look at a TTC map to decide how to get there. They won't look at a GO map, because GO is known to be for those commuting in from out of town, not for trips within the city.

 

[interchange42]

I'm only suggesting re: bike parking that more spaces not be 'demand' dependent, but that Metrolinx and the TTC get out ahead of the demand by providing far more spaces. Make a statement that there will always be a free space to lock up, and more people will make the move to transit. For example, there are about a dozen spots at Mimico station. That's nowhere near enough to make me comfortable that there will always be a spot to park my bike there, and I'm not going to bike to the station if I'm not sure where I can lock the bike up.

42

 

[rbt]

That's part of why the idea of SmartTrack caught on, ..., but also the TTC fare, ...

I think anybody expecting a standard (non-express) TTC fare (with no property tax or TTC fare increase) is going to be disappointed.

 

[nfitz]

We don't need more parking at GO Stations in the 416. Certainly not in surface lots in any case, and not in free spaces

And yet if you look in the 2014-2015 business plan they have committed to construct a multi-level parking lot at Danforth.

 

[ssiguy2]

More parking at GO in Toronto would be a mistake.

If GO wants to actually be useful to Torontonians TOD is what should be encouraged.

Tory, in large part, got the support he did due to SmartTrack because people see the logic of using existing transit corridors for Torontonians themselves. It is a TTC fare system and offers true rapid transit for long distance hauls within the city itself. They also know that it could be phased in as opposed to another "trust me it's coming" from politicians and Metrolinx which means somewhere between a decade and a half century.

People also want some kind of return for their taxes. They appreciate that infrastructure takes time to build but that doesn't make them feel as rosy for the next decade as they suffer a long commute in a packed bus/subway. ST also gained traction with Torontonians because they don't trust Metrolinx and with good reason. The UPX has been a fiasco from day one and will continue to be. Hell Metrolinx even caved in to the GTAA and got them an extra $2 for lost parking revenue. How any transit authority would even contemplate subsidising a corporation because they have to tolerate new transit right to their door is mind numbing.

If Metrolinx ever showed any interest in serving the 416 then maybe ST would not have gotten the traction it did with voters.

Also ST reinforces an idea that Metrolinx can't seem to get it's head around..............it shouldn't matter how you get to your destination, regardless of technology, the price should be the same.

 

[gweed123]

I'm only suggesting re: bike parking that more spaces not be 'demand' dependent, but that Metrolinx and the TTC get out ahead of the demand by providing far more spaces. Make a statement that there will always be a free space to lock up, and more people will make the move to transit. For example, there are about a dozen spots at Mimico station. That's nowhere near enough to make me comfortable that there will always be a spot to park my bike there, and I'm not going to bike to the station if I'm not sure where I can lock the bike up.

42

I agree completely. A step further would be to place bike lanes on the major avenues on which those stations are located, at least a KM or two in each direction from the station. That would send an even more powerful message.

 

[nfitz]

And yet if you look in the 2014-2015 business plan they have committed to construct a multi-level parking lot at Danforth.

Sigh, Metrolinx just tweeted that it was typo, and that there's to be repairs at Danforth (already in progress) rather than a parking structure. https://twitter.com/femwriter/status/532263759520481280

Not a big surprise really, given the expropriation which would be necessary for a parking structure.

 

[ehlow]

I think anybody expecting a standard (non-express) TTC fare (with no property tax or TTC fare increase) is going to be disappointed.

Alright. Yes I've heard many people on this forum give many reasons about how SmartTrack can't be done, is impossible etc. Sometimes these reasons change (ex. now that Wynne has spoken favourably about SmartTrack and integrating it with the existing RER plan).

But regardless, I'm discussing why the idea caught on during the campaign and the importance of fares and the meaning of having it be on the TTC subway map vs as a separate system in GO.

TTC fares was a key part of the SmartTrack promise, since when you see SmartTrack on the TTC map as it was on all the campaign materials, it implies that it's part of the TTC system with TTC fares. In fact the SmartTrack campaign material explicitly said it would cost TTC fare and be part of the TTC system (free transfers to the rest of the system like a new subway).


As a side note: I liked overall ideas of what SmartTrack represented and I stand by that, despite the constant disparagement by 90% of people in this forum (ex constantly calling it "dumbtrack" by nfitz).

 

[rbt]

TTC fares was a key part of the SmartTrack promise, since when you see SmartTrack on the TTC map as it was on all the campaign materials, it implies that it's part of the TTC system with TTC fares. In fact the SmartTrack campaign material explicitly said it would cost TTC fare and be part of the TTC system (free transfers to the rest of the system like a new subway).

I get that. But Tory made the promise and may not be the mayor who is setting the fare. At very least, he'll need to get re-elected in order to control that process.

If Tory does commit the TTC to paying GO an annual operating subsidy, we should expect the next mayor will immediately boost the TTC fare to close that revenue gap. Preparation for Eglinton operating costs will also be competing for funds for the mayor after Tory.

I'm expecting it'll be similar to what Metrolinx was hoping for REX fares. That is, a little below the TTC express fare (~$4.50) including free transfer to TTC services.

 

[innsertnamehere]

The TTC will likely continue inflationary fare increases no matter what, or $0.05 annual cost increases.

 

[Rainforest]

Preparation for Eglinton operating costs will also be competing for funds for the mayor after Tory.

Is there any chance that the ridership growth, plus the reduction in the cost of buses operating on Eglinton, will cover the LRT's operating costs?

Without LRT, Eglinton requires a lot of buses. And, they are used rather inefficiently due to the traffic congestion. When a transit line runs slowly, more vehicles are required to maintain same frequency of service on the same route.

 

[innsertnamehere]

depends if maintenance is handled by the province or not, which it likely will be. If all the TTC is doing is staffing the trains, it will likely save money for the TTC.

 

[cplchanb]

I get that. But Tory made the promise and may not be the mayor who is setting the fare. At very least, he'll need to get re-elected in order to control that process.

If Tory does commit the TTC to paying GO an annual operating subsidy, we should expect the next mayor will immediately boost the TTC fare to close that revenue gap. Preparation for Eglinton operating costs will also be competing for funds for the mayor after Tory.

I'm expecting it'll be similar to what Metrolinx was hoping for REX fares. That is, a little below the TTC express fare (~$4.50) including free transfer to TTC services.

IMO I think the TTC fare structure is the bane of their revenues. They are the largest system in the GTA with a below avg fare (most are at least $3.25) and free transfers. Since theyre boasting that their ridership is an all time high, by bringing up their fares to the gta avg, they can still afford to lose some ridership and make more money. Distance based fares on the subway and the RER/S.T. would help too.
Oyea and if they were to miraculously be able to fully implement all their magical presto faregates and phase out tokens they can make that much more easy to achieve.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

As a side note: I liked overall ideas of what SmartTrack represented and I stand by that, despite the constant disparagement by 90% of people in this forum (ex constantly calling it "dumbtrack" by nfitz).

I'm pretty certain that almost everyone in this forum likes to concept of regional express rail, but are off put by the poorly thought out details of the SmartTrack plan. This is what happens when you hang out in a forum with a bunch of detail oriented transit nerds who will willingly read 60 page+ reports and tear it apart for the smallest of inconsistencies and/or errors and/or lies.

 

[diminutive]

I'm pretty certain that almost everyone in this forum likes to concept of regional express rail, but are off put by the poorly thought out details of the SmartTrack plan. This is what happens when you hang out in a forum with a bunch of detail oriented transit nerds who will willingly read 60 page+ reports and tear it apart for the smallest of inconsistencies and/or errors and/or lies.

It's not really candidates' job to make detailed technical proposals. They're making promises not EAs.

And, from my perspective, much of the amateur "detail obsession" on these forums (+places like SM's blog) tend to be highly selective and unsystematic. People tend to just bury their own opinions under arbitrary technical mumbo-jumbo. The reality is that almost all transit projects in the world start off as vague, unspecific proposals, parts of which later turn out to be impossible. Big parts of the Transit City network were basically unbuildable. UPE/ARL/Blue22 has gone through god knows how many incarnations. Network 2011 was grossly uneconomic. The DRL's been around for several decades and people are still hashing out where it will go or if it's even needed!