SmartTrack (Proposed)

[ssiguy2]

GO rail ridership in Toronto is pathetic.

Despite being served by all 7 lines, having the best service levels by a long shot, and be vastly faster and more comfortable than the TTC people still avoid it and more GO or RER service won't change a damn thing. When you have a city of 800,000 {Mississauga} getting more GO rail ridership than the much more transit reliant core city of 2.8 million then you've got troubles that no amount of service level increases will make any difference upon.

I know this may not be very touchy-feely but facts are facts..............most people who rely on the TTC are lower/working income people or those on a fixed income. In other words it's not just "price sensitivity" but just good old fashioned "I can't afford it". Even their train trip is $10 and comes every 30 minutes and they can't afford the fare so don't use the service then the train can come by every 90 seconds that won't change the fact that those same people won't take it because they still can't afford it.

Newsflash.............just because Metrolinx increases service doesn't mean the boss is going to turn around and give you a raise so you can use it.

Wynne and co. can spin it anyway she wants but using any extra fare to use RER makes it ineffective to Torontonians and all it will end up being is improved service for the 905 while the long suffering transit users of Toronto get nothing.

GO and RER will end up being failures for Torontonians until Metrolinx can get it's head around the idea it shouldn't be interested in what technology you use to get from A to B, the fare should be the same.

 

[Tuscani01]

Whether that is fare zone based, distance based , or the system they have now is irrelevant as long as it doesn't cost them any more money to take RER to get to their destination than it would if they were to take the TTC alone.

Exactly! And there was nothing in the news conference that suggested that Tory wants it to cost anyone more money than if they were to take the TTC alone.

 

[Adjei]

So the heavy rail rail options for Eglinton not only cost a magnitude more than an LRT but also has less ridership...What a fail

 

[bobbob911]

well but if highest ttc fares remains as is, but the shorter distances has fare reduction, the people who still pay $3.00 cannot get angry because fares are not going up for them. That's how you avoid this being a hot potatoe

You have just proposed an overall revenue reduction to the TTC - how do you propose to make up that shortfall?

 

[Palma]

Of course. That's the objective of this exercise, no?

I should have referenced my statement to another statement made that I agreed to what they were saying. copied and pasted below

"Never in my life have I seen anything in Toronto ever be projected to cost so much. And this is just one small part of the line"

 

[bobbob911]

Exactly! And there was nothing in the news conference that suggested that Tory wants it to cost anyone more money than if they were to take the TTC alone.

I sincerely hope Tory is willing to spend real political capital to get full fare integration, rather than just be happy that its getting built. I fear, based on what I have seen so far, that this is not the case.

 

[Palma]

So the heavy rail rail options for Eglinton not only cost a magnitude more than an LRT but also has less ridership...What a fail

So everywhere else in the city, if its heavy rail ridership is much higher than if LRT except for this? I do not believe it and makes no sense. It only makes sense if the fares are GO fares if heavy rail in the west, yet TTC fares if LRT. You need to compare apples to apples

 

[Adjei]

So everywhere else in the city, if its heavy rail ridership is much higher than if LRT except for this? I do not believe it and makes no sense. It only makes sense if the fares are GO fares if heavy rail in the west, yet TTC fares if LRT

I guess the consultants who did the report must be lying.

 

[bobbob911]

GO rail ridership in Toronto is pathetic.

Despite being served by all 7 lines, having the best service levels by a long shot, and be vastly faster and more comfortable than the TTC people still avoid it and more GO or RER service won't change a damn thing. When you have a city of 800,000 {Mississauga} getting more GO rail ridership than the much more transit reliant core city of 2.8 million then you've got troubles that no amount of service level increases will make any difference upon.

I know this may not be very touchy-feely but facts are facts..............most people who rely on the TTC are lower/working income people or those on a fixed income. In other words it's not just "price sensitivity" but just good old fashioned "I can't afford it". Even their train trip is $10 and comes every 30 minutes and they can't afford the fare so don't use the service then the train can come by every 90 seconds that won't change the fact that those same people won't take it because they still can't afford it.

I disagree. A monthly fare for GO train within 416 limits is under $200. A TTC metropass is $150. With the tax credit, the difference is even less. Even lower income people mostly value their time more than a dollar per day.

The problem is that GO stations are not well integrated into the TTC - they are designed around driving your car and hopping on the train.

 

[salsa]

So the heavy rail rail options for Eglinton not only cost a magnitude more than an LRT but also has less ridership...What a fail

When the sceptics said his heavy rail spur wasn't feasible, Tory called them nervous Nellies.

 

[goreckm]

So everywhere else in the city, if its heavy rail ridership is much higher than if LRT except for this? I do not believe it and makes no sense. It only makes sense if the fares are GO fares if heavy rail in the west, yet TTC fares if LRT. You need to compare apples to apples

My guess, and I haven't read the report yet, is that the LRT will have more local stops, therefore attracting more riders. That is, the main draw of the line is local and not regional, which makes heavy rail pointless.

 

[TOareaFan]

anyone else get the impression that once the decision was made to shift away from ST as promised there was another shift to make the original version sound as expensive as possible and as ineffectual as possible so that breaking the election promise comes across as a positive move to the public?

 

[TOareaFan]

I disagree. A monthly fare for GO train within 416 limits is under $200. A TTC metropass is $150. With the tax credit, the difference is even less. Even lower income people mostly value their time more than a dollar per day.

The problem is that GO stations are not well integrated into the TTC - they are designed around driving your car and hopping on the train.

Isn't the problem not that the gap is small bu that unless you live right on top of GO station and work right on top of another one that you probably need both of those passes to get around.....if you are a committed transit user (either by choice or necessity) in Toronto you probably have the TTC pass....but adding the GO pass also is a real stretch?

 

[gweed123]

anyone else get the impression that once the decision was made to shift away from ST as promised there was another shift to make the original version sound as expensive as possible and as ineffectual as possible so that breaking the election promise comes across as a positive move to the public?

They probably quoted the cost of the Cadillac version of the Eglinton West Spur in order to remove any doubt that it shouldn't be the preferred option going forward.

But yes, changing course in the face of an overwhelming unpopular option, even if you quote the most expensive iteration of it, makes you look like a compromiser, even if you're actually compromising on the plan that you originally put forward.

And I don't think we've seen the last of compromising on existing projects in favour of something that's obviously both technically and financially superior.

 

[TOareaFan]

They probably quoted the cost of the Cadillac version of the Eglinton West Spur in order to remove any doubt that it shouldn't be the preferred option going forward.

But yes, changing course in the face of an overwhelming unpopular option, even if you quote the most expensive iteration of it, makes you look like a compromiser, even if you're actually compromising on the plan that you originally put forward.

And I don't think we've seen the last of compromising on existing projects in favour of something that's obviously both technically and financially superior.

that would be nice