I agree with your other points, but I don't think this last part is that cut-and-dry. I was under the impression that it's a unanimous agreement on these boards that RER will be a premium service, which naturally will cost the transit-using public more than generic public transit.
Not that I don't support premium service, nor believe it to be an integral component to compete with slower medium or longer-haul alternatives. But won't these trains be carpeted, bilevel, and have washrooms? Having a bathroom on board doesn't sound like a service on par with typical public transit (i.e bus, subway, lrt, streetcar). This is why I think it's unfair at this point for "SmartTrack" to be presented as if it were a subway - i.e flat low fare and high frequencies. This will (and is) screwing with projections for projects that share its catchment (particularly SSE, SRT, and DRL).
If RER does somehow end up costing the exact same per km as typical public transit (something I find doubtful), I'd imagine the core sections would become overcrowded; but the outer sections would see a steep drop in projected ridership. Reasons may be that wealthier non-Torontonian riders would prefer the comfort of less crowded higher tier services (or their car).
I don't think that more people will switch to driving, because that would mean sitting in the same traffic jams that they take the train to avoid. Do we know for sure that RER trains will cost more than a subway train of the same distance? I haven't followed the fare integration thread very closely. As for how nice the trains are, I've only been on a couple RER-style systems and the trains were just as nice as a GO train, but that doesn't stop them from acting as de facto subways in certain areas. True, if fares between the subways and regional lines are equal across equal distances it will mean more people taking GO - which is what I've been saying. Meeting that demand is the whole point of the RER upgrades.
As far as I know we don't know how all this will end up. Like whether Smarttrack will be a separate service or rolled into RER, if the TTC will adopt a distance based fare model, etc. But whatever the final fare structure, I can't see any system that doesn't raise demand for RER trains significantly, sometimes at the expense of subway ridership. And that's not a bad thing; the subway lines need all the relief they can get.
No one sane would do that if they're going short distances in the range of 2-4km because it wastes time and takes longer. One of the fairy tales the planners talk about is serving Regent Park with this. Any one living at Dundas and Sumach would be 650m or more away from the closest station. These people are going to take Dundas transit which stops right at their own door and won't eat up all of their time in extra transfers and/or long walks at both ends of their trip and this especially true for core bounders.
Well have a look at the recent posts by Tulse and nfitz, who have had daily walks of 650 m and 1.1 km to get to the subway. Those kinds of walks aren't as rare as you think. And the 2-4 km thing is a bit of a red herring - the relief line will be longer than that, significantly so when it's fully built out. There's no reason to think that people will walk shorter distances to the RL than to any other subway line.
Interesting example that probably applies to nearly no one. Moot anyway because ScamTrack is TTC fares. But let's say it isn't... even with fares integrated, explain how having a station straddling the Don and at Union serves the same market as the destinations on King. That Unilever station is 1.5km/20 min walk away from offices along narrow sidewalks with dying street trees. Sidewalk congestion is bad isn't it? That's why subway should go on Queen right? Integrated fares and King subway would actually create more synergies and open up more major destinations to the GO system and serve all of those commuters filling the office buildings. For the few destinations that exist on Queen, the minority can walk. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.
Of course few if any would use Unilever station to get to offices on King Street on the other side of the Don; that's not what I was getting at. People would, however, use it to transfer to the subway and get to their offices to the west. It would also serve the redevelopment on the Unilever lands, Queen Street East and surrounding residential neighbourhoods. And people who live and work in that area would no doubt often take RER from there to get across downtown or to Union.
Yes, your Spock reference is true. That's why, to use the Unilever/Riverdale example, RER will get people to Union, Southcore, the central waterfront, and the southern part of the financial district while a Queen subway will get people to the northern part of the financial district, Eaton Centre, City Hall, University Avenue corridor, etc. That combination covers a wider area and hits more destinations than a King alignment/RER combination.
Judging by the current two system, it is not unreasonable for them to pretend the other doesn't exist. They don't overlap much in terms of service. For example, I live downtown, and I have not take the GO even once. I mean, for what purpose? It doesn't really stop anywhere that is worth going unless someone lives here (maybe with 1 or 2 exceptions). The problem with GO is it has too few stops in central Toronto. My friend moved to Mississauga two years ago and one of the greatest thing according to him is that he never has to take the hated TTC any more. The two system in reality don't have much overlapping.
It is vastly different from RER Paris, where you hardly notice you are not on the subway, because it is a criss-cross system and RER does stop at many locations in central Paris, not just a few farflung stops which scream "suburbs".
Will TTC/Go function like the metro/RER in Paris in the future? Not a chance. Besides Union, will there be any GO station in the downtown/midtown Toronto? (Exhibition is not in downtown so that's out, nor is Liberty village). I see probably two. And other than Union, I don't see any interchange with any of the central TTC stations.
That's because DRL is too short. Of course one would definitely jump on a 505 and transfer at Yonge/Dundas to go to wherever their destination is.
DRL should at least go to Eglinton to join the Crosswtown. Now I don't know what it will do. Probably almost empty outside a few hush hours. yet we have the money to extend to Vaughan and Richmond Hill. Jesus.
Can't say I disagree about the RL being a higher priority than Vaughan and Richmond Hill. I never could quite figure out why downtown businesses haven't lobbied for it more. As for RER/GO, people who live downtown don't take it because it's currently not designed to meet their needs. But that's changing. More stations are being added, service is being electrified and upgraded, and fares will (hopefully) be integrated with local transit. The current plan for the first phase of the RL and Smarttrack has two stations where they would connect with each other, Gerrard and Unilever. And another station where the rail corridor meets an LRT-ized King streetcar. There's talk about the RL meeting up with GO somewhere in the west end, but that's preliminary still. That's at least another four stations in the central part of the city, which would make the system much more interconnected than it is now. Plus upgrading Dundas West to a true intermodal hub, which it really isn't now. My points aren't so much about where we are, but where we're going.
