Tuscani01
Senior Member
Well, one difference everyone seemed to skip over was the fare cost. 24,000 was under the RER plan, using GO fares. Metrolinx is still studying what Smart Track will do to that number.
|
|
|
SmartTrack (Proposed)
- Thread starter aquateam
- Start date
edmundoconnor
Active Member
If ST did have 5 minute frequency and was run on TTC fares, then I am not surprised that lots of people would ride it. Whether that is remotely achievable without the reduced budget multiplying many times and requiring hefty ongoing subsidies is another matter entirely.
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
I think you misunderstood.
Metrolinx evaluated ST to have 12,000 riders on a GO fare. On TTC fare, ridership would grow 2 to about 2.5 times. So 24,000 to to 30,000 riders.
Tuscani01
Senior Member
Smart Track
RER
RER
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
The reports from Metrolinx and City Planning aren't at all incongruent, as Elliot's article may imply to some readers.
City Planning's numbers were a best case scenario, which probably is not be feasible. This is with 25 stations, 55 km, Eglinton West spur and 5 min frequencies. This is cost prohibitive, effectively impossible, to achieve if you believe the various past reports. Apparently this plan has been totally scrapped, as per Elliott's last article.
Metrolinx's numbers were based off a more realistic scenario, and the scenario that City Planning was evaluating in Elliott's last article. This is with 4 or 5 new stations, 5 to 10 min frequencies and GO and TTC fares. With GO fares, daily ridership is 12,000. With TTC fares, ridership is 24,000.
So the findings can be summarized as this: The allegedly impossible version would move 300,000 per day. The more realistic version would move 24,000
City Planning's numbers were a best case scenario, which probably is not be feasible. This is with 25 stations, 55 km, Eglinton West spur and 5 min frequencies. This is cost prohibitive, effectively impossible, to achieve if you believe the various past reports. Apparently this plan has been totally scrapped, as per Elliott's last article.
Metrolinx's numbers were based off a more realistic scenario, and the scenario that City Planning was evaluating in Elliott's last article. This is with 4 or 5 new stations, 5 to 10 min frequencies and GO and TTC fares. With GO fares, daily ridership is 12,000. With TTC fares, ridership is 24,000.
So the findings can be summarized as this: The allegedly impossible version would move 300,000 per day. The more realistic version would move 24,000
Tuscani01
Senior Member
But then Metrolinx when asked about the numbers, said they are not yet final and are still being worked out with the city. So likely to change. I don't think Metrolinx's original numbers were based off the plan city staff will be recommending, at least that's what Anne Marie Aikins seems to be saying.
44 North
Senior Member
Where are you getting the 24k ridership number? The Oliver Moore article I read only mentioned 12k (with GO fares). Either way, the realistic numbers seem pretty low. I don't even want to consider the 300k number considering how outrageously ridiculous they are, so hopefully Tory won't be bandying that number about tomorrow morning.
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
It must be emphasized that all these numbers, including from City Planning, are preliminary. They're not the final results; they merely give an idea of where this is headed.
That said, read the description of what Metrolinx modelled in their projection, and compare it to the plan City Planning is expected to endorse, and worked with Metrolinx to formulate. Both plans are very similar. Metrolinx projects only 24,000 daily ridership. If so, this is very bad news for Tory. There's not a chance in hell of that being approved.
andrewpmk
Senior Member
There is a massive difference in ridership depending on whether SmartTrack goes every 5, 10 or 15 minutes.
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
See these paragraphs article:
The unreleased Metrolinx projection, meanwhile, paints a very different picture. It shows daily ridership in the range of 12,000. This assumes a change from heavy to light rail along Eglinton Avenue West, fewer stations, a GO fare and trains every five to 10 minutes.
And
These figures assume a Toronto Transit Commission fare, and the report shows that charging the same as GO Transit would cut the ridership by half to two-thirds.
City Planning expects GO fare to cut ridership in half. The ridership estimation of the plan City Planning is expected to endorse is 12,000 per day with GO fare. Multiply that by 2x or 2.5x, and we get 24,000 to 30,000 per day with TTC fare
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
Frequencies don't have to be the same all day. I took that description to mean 5 mins on peak, and as infrequent as 10 min off peak.
WislaHD
Superstar
300,000 per day? Holy hell, if that were true, then SmartTrack would have completely overwhelmed Union Station!
We would be talking about billions of dollars to just upgrade Union Station to handle SmartTrack's capacity, let alone the upgrades needed to actually achieve those levels of frequencies or the Eglinton West tunnel.
We would be talking about billions of dollars to just upgrade Union Station to handle SmartTrack's capacity, let alone the upgrades needed to actually achieve those levels of frequencies or the Eglinton West tunnel.
Tuscani01
Senior Member
The description doesn't give enough information to come to the conclusion that both plans are very similar.
Less stations could mean simply using existing stations, or 2-3 less stations than Smart Track was proposing. We don't know which it is according to the description from the article. 5-10 minute frequency isn't the same as 5 minute frequencies either. And then you also have to consider the fares, which are also different.
WislaHD
Superstar
Another way of saying 24,000 daily ridership is "just over 1/3 of the 504 King Streetcar ridership".
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
Upgrades to union station alone might cost around $3 Billion.
Western spur was $5 Billion.
Upgrades to RER infrastructure within Toronto would be billions more (new rights of ways, track widening, tunnels, expropoation).
Upgrades to RER infrastructure outside of Toronto might be needed as well.
This plan will likely be rejected because it was outrageously expensive. This plan is also is likely not competitive with the Relief Line on a capital cost/rider basis.