micheal_can
Senior Member
What they really should have is a race with politicians taking different modes. Show how long each method really takes.
|
|
|
VIA Rail
- Thread starter ehlow
- Start date
What they really should have is a race with politicians taking different modes. Show how long each method really takes.
kEiThZ
Superstar
They absolutely do. Which is why you'll hear so often, "Driving is faster.". Implicit in that response is the inclusion of the last mile trip.
Not seeing how they can. Most of HFRs proposed stations are existing stations with established connections to transport networks. They won't be able to change connections at stations in Toronto, Ottawa or Montreal. Maybe Peterborough can build a transit hub at their station. The hypothetical Eglinton station improves on Guildwood a bit by adding an Eglinton LRT connection to Lakeshore East access. Would be about 600m from a potential subway station at Danforth/Eglinton.
Other than that capital investment is needed to bolster the suburban stations. But not sure how much it adds. Extending the Confederation Line in Ottawa to Fallowfield, and the REM to Dorval in Montreal, would help accessibility a bit. Not sure it would massively bolster last mile trips though. It would just help specific sets of riders.
Darwinkgo
Active Member
In travel time conversations, we're missing the frequency side of the speed equation. Having the potential to add enough capacity that 99% of the time one can just show up and get on the next train is significant, as is having the next train being within an hour. That flexibility doesn't exist for air travel for all except power users (and since the flexibility doesnt, the frequency of air travel doesnt matter in the same way).
As for suburb to suburb travel as a use case, it is almost a fallacy the opposite of the subway to the sea/airport problem (people can see using it occassionally to alleviating a frustrating experience - driving to and finding parking at the beach/airport so therefor it must be useful transit). TBH HFR isn't going to be capturing very many families of four traveling for a friends, family or leisure trip. (the fallacy - people can't see transit working for them so therefor it must be bad) That is ok. It doesn't mean HFR is bad. Just as it doesn't mean a subway to the sea is good.
There are lots of people it will work for. The Report for the JPO will project whether HFR will work for enough people to profit maximize and pay for as much of the capital cost as possible.
As for suburb to suburb travel as a use case, it is almost a fallacy the opposite of the subway to the sea/airport problem (people can see using it occassionally to alleviating a frustrating experience - driving to and finding parking at the beach/airport so therefor it must be useful transit). TBH HFR isn't going to be capturing very many families of four traveling for a friends, family or leisure trip. (the fallacy - people can't see transit working for them so therefor it must be bad) That is ok. It doesn't mean HFR is bad. Just as it doesn't mean a subway to the sea is good.
There are lots of people it will work for. The Report for the JPO will project whether HFR will work for enough people to profit maximize and pay for as much of the capital cost as possible.
micheal_can
Senior Member
I group the "last mile" of everything as anything that makes the journey longer than the stated time. Congestion, accidents, pee breaks, etc are all ""last mile" issues with driving.
ec_traindriver
New Member
The "last-mile problem" isn't just a Canadian problem. I've argued with many people who are convinced that driving A to B would still be the best option, even with a train departing every 15 minutes for their destination. Others simply drive to suburb metro/underground stations, and then change to public transport, no matter the fact they live beside a rail station with at least a train departing every 30 minutes from 5 AM to 10 PM. 
If anything, city officials should encourage their people to simply leave their cars at home, not VIA. After all, that choice lies more in the municipal government's ability to provide their citizens with alternatives both regarding transit and, most importantly, urban development. I don't know if Canada has the same stupid law regarding zoning and parking the USA has, but elsewhere in the world municipalities have realized that the only way to get people out of their cars and cars out of the roads is to eliminate free parking (especially in the city centers) and introducing congestion pricing. As I've said, this is something VIA cannot control.
If anything, city officials should encourage their people to simply leave their cars at home, not VIA. After all, that choice lies more in the municipal government's ability to provide their citizens with alternatives both regarding transit and, most importantly, urban development. I don't know if Canada has the same stupid law regarding zoning and parking the USA has, but elsewhere in the world municipalities have realized that the only way to get people out of their cars and cars out of the roads is to eliminate free parking (especially in the city centers) and introducing congestion pricing. As I've said, this is something VIA cannot control.
Northern Light
Superstar
The "last-mile problem" isn't just a Canadian problem. I've argued with many people who are convinced that driving A to B would still be the best option, even with a train departing every 15 minutes for their destination. Others simply drive to suburb metro/underground stations, and then change to public transport, no matter the fact they live beside a rail station with at least a train departing every 30 minutes from 5 AM to 10 PM.
If anything, city officials should encourage their people to simply leave their cars at home, not VIA. After all, that choice lies more in the municipal government's ability to provide their citizens with alternatives both regarding transit and, most importantly, urban development. I don't know if Canada has the same stupid law regarding zoning and parking the USA has, but elsewhere in the world municipalities have realized that the only way to get people out of their cars and cars out of the roads is to eliminate free parking (especially in the city centers) and introducing congestion pricing. As I've said, this is something VIA cannot control.
We do indeed have stupid zoning laws; in respect of parking.
Though, by and large they are not as stupid as those in many U.S. locales.
Keep in mind, in both the U.S. and Canada, that these rules are local and vary widely from one place to the next.
As such, any comparison is a generalization.
That said, there is movement on this in Canada.
Edmonton has eliminated parking minimums in zoning.
Vancouver has approved studying the same.
So we're getting there, slowly.
Commercial and on-street parking are rarely free in the downtowns of Canadian Cities of any size; though on-street parking in non-retail areas is often free outside the downtown areas.
kEiThZ
Superstar
I addressed that in my post when I discussed the flexibility of driving. And @Urban Sky has addressed this before too. Frequency improves flexibility and this appears to have been at least somewhat foundational to the thinking behind HFR.
Except that it does. Just look at all the schedules of all the airlines. They all offer hourly or better departures from Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal. Air Canada even brands such flights differently. Previously Rapidair and now Express Service.
I beg to differ. And we've discussed this before. It's counter-intuitive but increased frequency should substantially boost capacity while actually reducing unit costs, which should in turn allow VIA to offer more competitive fares. And this is the only way they'll be able to get drivers to switch.
Making up your own definition doesn't make it true. "Last mile" came from the telecom industry and referred to the difficulty of connecting a premises to a junction on the network. It has a specific meaning in logistics and transportation planning today.
What you're referring to is variability where travel times for a given route follow some kind of statistical distribution once you incorporate all the variables that can impact a driving trip. But you don't need to be a statistician to get an idea of how competitive driving is with rail travel. VIA's meager modal share says it all. Either most people don't think there's time savings. Or they don't consider the time savings enough to justify paying what VIA wants.
Last edited:
kEiThZ
Superstar
This whole parking discussion is sort of irrelevant.
1) VIA doesn't control parking at many major stations.
2) Most of VIA's major stations are co-located with major transit nodes.
3) VIA's suburban stations are always co-located with transit stations which may or may not have parking dedicated to it.
But all this is sort of relevant in the end because an intercity rail operator isn't responsible for your last mile transportation. The only relevancy here is in determining how fast VIA needs to be to compete with door-to-door trips. I'd argue 3.5 hrs for Toronto-Ottawa, 1.5 hr for Ottawa-Montreal and 4 hrs for Toronto-Montreal. HFR will be closer on some of those than the rest.
kEiThZ
Superstar
I actually find @Northern Light quite thoughtful. Dunno what triggered him today. Didn't think my post was particularly pointed at him. Just thought the whole parking issue was kind of irrelevant. Especially to VIA which doesn't really control much parking at most urban and suburban stations. Of the big three metros, Ottawa might be the exception.
micheal_can
Senior Member
Does Air Canada control the parking at Pearson? This is why it is relevant to discuss parking.
kEiThZ
Superstar
No. And yes. Being an anchor airline at an airport is a lot like being an anchor tenant at the mall. You get to dictate quite a bit. You can be damn sure the GTAA consults with Air Canada on parking rates and damn near everything else that impacts AC's business at Pearson. And if the airport authority proves disagreeable? Well just grow the other hub instead.
You'll notice that the GTAA didn't start discussing the transit hub and HSR until Pearson got really busy. All of a sudden, slots on London and Kitchener are wasteful and they need more passengers to arrive by rail instead of puddle jumpers or cars. Think that's a coincidence?
micheal_can
Senior Member
So, you think stations that have Via at them do not talk to Via about potential changes?
kEiThZ
Superstar
About parking? I doubt it. Do you think GO or Exo really cares about parking requirements for VIA? How many reserved spots for VIA customers do you see at their stations?
There's a massive size difference to keep in mind. VIA moves ~ 5 million pax a year. GO moves ~70 million. They most certainly won't be going out of their way to accommodate VIA.
Like I said above, the only time I've seen VIA stations have dedicated parking is when VIA owned the station. And those aren't in the major metros or suburbs. Ottawa is the only exception here and that's because it is not in downtown Ottawa.
Last edited:
micheal_can
Senior Member
Flip it around the other way... Do you think that Via does not get consulted when a GO/EXO/TTC, etc station is being modified?
kEiThZ
Superstar
Modified? Depends on what the modification is....
Do you think if GO is putting in a new washroom at Guildwood or Oshawa, they are going to seek VIA's input?
Also, we were specifically discussing "last mile" travel and parking was supposed to be relevant in that regard. So where exactly is this line of discussion going?
Like I said earlier, last mile service is almost never the purview of an intercity rail operator. And not just in Canada.... VIA isn't going out of their way to get you from the station to your final destination. They'll do some integration where they can. But this is mostly your problem. Not all that different than say how much Air Canada cares for what happens after you deplane at Pearson or Dorval.