News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 11K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 43K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 6.8K     0 
nfitz said:
I'm not sure how a once every 15-minute commuter rail service would have much impact on travel between Scarborough Centre and Kennedy by those currently on the SRT.
Click to expand...

SCC isn't a destination, it's a transfer point (from bus to SRT). Massively boosted service at Millikin and Agincourt (perhaps new stations too), including bus integration with nearby routes, is bound to have some impact on travel patterns. Heck, for some it would mean they don't need to take the bus component to SCC at all.

I'm not sure what the impact would be but that's why we do an EA which considers such things. I'm highly doubtful that the assumptions used to justify the subway are entirely unchanged.
 
ehlow said:
placement for DRL or service to STC. All I'm saying is that it's possible GO RER on the Stouffville line could have more frequent service than once every 15 min during peak hours.
Click to expand...
My comment that you responded too was I don't see how it replaces either the DRL, or the SRT/Subway extension. Sure, there's a chance they may be some extra peak-hour runs (presumably some will be express). But that's not my point.

rbt said:
SCC isn't a destination, it's a transfer point (from bus to SRT).
Click to expand...
And yet when I arrive at Scarborough Centre on the SRT, many people seem to get off the SRT and walk into the mall. Note, I don't travel in peak, however the SRT seems well used.

rbt said:
Massively boosted service at Millikin and Agincourt (perhaps new stations too), including bus integration with nearby routes, is bound to have some impact on travel patterns. Heck, for some it would mean they don't need to take the bus component to SCC at all.
Click to expand...
For some. For those east of McCowan though, it will increase their commute times, and require many to change at Kennedy to the subway. I really don't see having trains every 5 minutes on the Stouffville line that will be stopping at Agincourt, Millikin, and Kennedy.
 
Last edited:
rbt said:
Not really. The EA is very likely to kick out a large number of issues with the current plan. In fact, I think the Smart-Track proposal killed it, but Tory is taking the politically smart route and letting the experts do the actual killing rather than saying it himself; voters demand we spend millions of their dollars coddling them.
Click to expand...

As much as I would like the plan to revert back to LRT upon completion of the EA, I'm not sure if the new Kennedy station will be designed for it since the assumption right now is that a subway extension will be built. If Kennedy has to be redesigned again, it could delay the crosstown.
 
ehlow said:
I'm not sure why everyone assumes that SmartTrack or GO RER will operate at an exact frequency of 15 min, no more, no less, all day. GO already operates more frequent than that in some cases during peak hours.

The 15 min figure has always meant 15 min minimum frequency.

Besides, it's simply too early to know the exact service levels of GO RER or SmartTrack. It could very well be every 5 or 10 min at peak times, 15 min off peak.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

To compare that to Toronto's subways, they operate at approximately 7 minutes or more frequencies.

Metrolinx has always said 15 minutes or more. I can't understand why it's so difficult for people to get that straight.
 
TheTigerMaster said:
Metrolinx has always said 15 minutes or more. I can't understand why it's so difficult for people to get that straight.
Click to expand...
It's often confusing for lots:
15 minutes or more [more frequency] -- e.g. fewer minutes, more trains per hour
15 minutes or more [more interval] -- e.g. more minutes, less trains per hour

The terminology, "Minimum 15 minute frequency" means trains no less infrequent than 15 minutes.

However, a sleuth of wording can easily flip it either way, if "minimum" is applied to the "15" number; making 15 the smallest number. Low frequency is the opposite of low interval. Lots of room to confuse, in a series of Chinese whispers, and out-of-context media quoting.

To me, GO RER means trains are at the absolute minimum, as infrequent as 15 minutes in the longest interval between trains, during typical transit off-peak -- go to a station at 1pm or 8pm, wait no more than 15 minutes to catch the train, often far shorter wait.
 
Last edited:
TheTigerMaster said:
Metrolinx has always said 15 minutes or more. I can't understand why it's so difficult for people to get that straight.
Click to expand...
I don't know ... people seem to think that DumbTrack is going to be frequent. But as you point out, it will be 15 minutes or more between trains much of the time.
 
mdrejhon said:
It's often confusing for lots:
15 minutes or more [more frequency] -- e.g. fewer minutes, more trains per hour
15 minutes or more [more interval] -- e.g. more minutes, less trains per hour

The terminology, "Minimum 15 minute frequency" means trains no less infrequent than 15 minutes.

However, a sleuth of wording can easily flip it either way, if "minimum" is applied to the "15" number; making 15 the smallest number. Low frequency is the opposite of low interval. Lots of room to confuse, in a series of Chinese whispers, and out-of-context media quoting.

To me, GO RER means trains are at the absolute minimum, as infrequent as 15 minutes in the longest interval between trains, during typical transit off-peak -- go to a station at 1pm or 8pm, wait no more than 15 minutes to catch the train, often far shorter wait.
Click to expand...

Yes the language is confusing.

nfitz said:
I don't know ... people seem to think that DumbTrack is going to be frequent. But as you point out, it will be 15 minutes or more between trains much of the time.
Click to expand...

It's simply too early to determine the frequency of GO RER, other than the provincial Liberal's promise of at least one train every 15 min.

However, we all know that most rapid transit runs more frequent service at peak hours and less frequent service at off peak hours to accommodate different levels of ridership throughout the day. It's not unreasonable to assume that all day GO RER service would run more frequent service during the morning and afternoons, and less late at night.
 
ehlow said:
However, we all know that most rapid transit runs more frequent service at peak hours and less frequent service at off peak hours to accommodate different levels of ridership throughout the day. It's not unreasonable to assume that all day GO RER service would run more frequent service during the morning and afternoons, and less late at night.
Click to expand...
There's no indication however that such extra capacity wouldn't be achieved by using express trains, so the effective frequency for riders may well be every 15 minutes, even if a train whizzes past every 5 minutes.
 
Carried over from the SmartTrack thread:

dunkalunk said:
desismileys_3267.gif


I'd even be OK with surface LRT if the stop spacing is wide enough. For suburban arterial LRT, 1km spacing is more than appropriate, 500m is overkill.

Now, what should the Eglinton LRT be extended from the airport to Renforth Gateway?

Since they'll be the same gauge (yes, the Flexity Swifts being delivered are standard gauge vehicles), my preference is to extend the UPX spur South to connect with it and run Eglinton LRVs on it all the way to the Kitchener Line to intersect with a High Speed Rail station around Highway 427.

Now, how low-floor LRVs are supposed to work with a high-level platform at Pearson without significant reconstruction? With the current Terminal 1 station layout, is a southern extension of UPX viaduct even physically possible, let alone financially reasonable? I have no idea. This could just be throwing more money at a sunk cost fallacy.

I guess having LRT extended to the airport would't be that bad of an option, but it might not be necessary given that most people coming from Toronto will be on RER and most people coming from Mississauga will already be on a bus. Maybe just have a free transfer at Renforth to a shuttle bus? Extend the LINK train? Convert the LINK to LRT?

(might be good to copy this discussion to the Eglinton Crosstown Thread)

...

Back on topic; low-floor or high-floor EMU vehicles for GO RER/SmartTrack? I like the idea of switching to high-floors, but GO's entire system is low-floor and would require some conversion. High-floors are better for tunnels, but are there even going to be that many station tunnels to begin with?
Click to expand...

They could always continue the Eglinton Crosstown straight across Eglinton into Mississauga and convert the Mississauga Transitway into a mixed bus/LRT operations right-of-way; and have SmartTrack continue northwest through the rail corridor to Pearson via the UPX spur and essentially takeover UPX's role in providing rapid transit between Union and Pearson, only with more stops en route. This presupposes that DMU or electric trains could be utilized along the entire SmartTrack route. Also the LINK train could be extended to Renforth Gateway with intermediate stops at Carlingview and Convair eliminating the need for branched service on the Crosstown Line. Something like this:

 
Last edited:
Hopkins123 said:
Carried over from the SmartTrack thread:
Click to expand...

Wow!

I'd be quite pleased if that's what we turned out with. The only key things missing that I had on my fantasy map are the BRT on Highway 27/427/Browns Line and a GO station at 401/Islington in place of Kipling.
 
What was the ridership numbers for east of don mills versus the potential ridership numbers west of mount dennis?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top