TORONTO - Transit Developments

[Busy Bee]

Im not from Toronto, never been there and don't pretend to know much about it. My question is this: does GO plan on electrifying any of their lines? GO resembles so many other non-east coast commuter rail ops that use a rake of double deck coaches behind a single diesel locomotive unit. This set up works fine for infrequent service, but as ridership rises, timetables crunch, acceleration becomes more important and concern about environmental impact increases(CO2, noise, vibration), electrification becomes part of the conversation - at least should. Any chatter in Ontario about this?

[ardecila]

Short answer is yes... I don't know the full story.

It seems like the Air Rail Link project was to be electrified, but then switched to DMUs with a vague promise of future electrification.

[Innsertnamehere]

They plan on electrification of the 2 Lakeshore lines (the ones getting the 1/2 hour service now) when it is moved to 15 minute service in 5-10 years. Also of the kitchener line will be electrified because of the ARL. it will cost around $3 billion to electrify all 3 lines.


Hamilton will not be getting double tracks to its current downtown station because the ROW is too small. they will be getting double tracks to a new station on a different rail ROW though.


all of this is dependant on the transit tax of course.

[Nouvellecosse]

It's incredible how expensive electrification is. Does the study estimate the cost of doing overhead or 3rd rail? Must be overhead if it's that pricey...

[Innsertnamehere]

It also includes upgrades for many, many more trips on kitchener and Lakeshore. (there are around 10 grade crossings that need to be eliminated), as well as the double tracking to Brampton and Hamilton that doesn't currently exist. Then there is the need to buy a ton of new EMUs, and the related electrified infrastructure, with upgraded stations, new parking garages to handle the increased demand, etc. It is not just a straight electrification, it is the creation of 3 urban rail lines running 15 minute service.

[casper]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

They plan on electrification of the 2 Lakeshore lines (the ones getting the 1/2 hour service now) when it is moved to 15 minute service in 5-10 years. Also of the kitchener line will be electrified because of the ARL. it will cost around $3 billion to electrify all 3 lines.


Hamilton will not be getting double tracks to its current downtown station because the ROW is too small. they will be getting double tracks to a new station on a different rail ROW though.


all of this is dependant on the transit tax of course.

Metrolix (the GoTransit parent company) at one point had called it plan SuperGo. Also includes eventually upgrading the Union Pearson Express (currently under construction) in the future.

More details are in the Phase II section of Motrolix "The Big Move" project is available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Big_Move

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

It also includes upgrades for many, many more trips on kitchener and Lakeshore. (there are around 10 grade crossings that need to be eliminated), as well as the double tracking to Brampton and Hamilton that doesn't currently exist. Then there is the need to buy a ton of new EMUs, and the related electrified infrastructure, with upgraded stations, new parking garages to handle the increased demand, etc. It is not just a straight electrification, it is the creation of 3 urban rail lines running 15 minute service.

Well that sounds like something of a bargain then! lol.

[ardecila]

Seems like Toronto's plan is the closest North America has gotten to a Euro-style regional rail system, the experiments in Philly notwithstanding.

[Doady]

Originally Posted by ardecila

Seems like Toronto's plan is the closest North America has gotten to a Euro-style regional rail system, the experiments in Philly notwithstanding.

What about BART?

[ssiguy]

It is good news that GO is greatly increasing frequency, I don't think most Torontonians themselves will even, except for the pollution and noise, notice. GO is very much a 905 service and relatively few people in the city itself take it and much of this is because it is damn expensive and many figure that the shorter distances they travel, it really isn't worth it.

Torontonians will never really consider it a true for the city itself until they, at a minimum, integrate the fares and ideally make the fare in the city the same e as standard TTC fare. It really is ridiculous that your TTC ticket doesn't get you a discount on GO or vice-versa. It is not a way to encourage transit ridership and is a true reflection of how GO and the TTC don't acknowledge each other's existence much to the detriment of the travelling public.

[casper]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

It is good news that GO is greatly increasing frequency, I don't think most Torontonians themselves will even, except for the pollution and noise, notice. GO is very much a 905 service and relatively few people in the city itself take it and much of this is because it is damn expensive and many figure that the shorter distances they travel, it really isn't worth it.

Torontonians will never really consider it a true for the city itself until they, at a minimum, integrate the fares and ideally make the fare in the city the same e as standard TTC fare. It really is ridiculous that your TTC ticket doesn't get you a discount on GO or vice-versa. It is not a way to encourage transit ridership and is a true reflection of how GO and the TTC don't acknowledge each other's existence much to the detriment of the travelling public.

Given all the systems in the region are moving towards a common smart card I do find it odd that they do not move to simply charging based on distance traveled regardless of service provider.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by Doady

What about BART?

BART has a similar service pattern but it doesn't use any legacy rail lines and it's not compatible with mainline railroads. It just gets extended on endless viaducts further and further into suburbia.

[M II A II R II K]

It would be better if it were on the same fare system, and much more connectivity to those stations with park and ride as well as bus feeder routes.

[citizen j]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

It is good news that GO is greatly increasing frequency, I don't think most Torontonians themselves will even, except for the pollution and noise, notice. GO is very much a 905 service and relatively few people in the city itself take it and much of this is because it is damn expensive and many figure that the shorter distances they travel, it really isn't worth it.

Torontonians will never really consider it a true for the city itself until they, at a minimum, integrate the fares and ideally make the fare in the city the same e as standard TTC fare. It really is ridiculous that your TTC ticket doesn't get you a discount on GO or vice-versa. It is not a way to encourage transit ridership and is a true reflection of how GO and the TTC don't acknowledge each other's existence much to the detriment of the travelling public.

With 15-minute service and limited-stops between Union and the City of Toronto's suburban belt inside the 416, I'd take it over the overcrowded subway in a heartbeat. But you're right, the fare needs to be brought into line with TTC's fares for travel inside the City itself.

[J. Will]

Other city's commuter rail systems are not in-line with their local transit systems. Why should GO Transit by in-line with TTC?

[Innsertnamehere]

GO has already started experimenting with fare integration. In Durham you can ride GO for a DRT fare as long as you stay in durham. so for example, you could take the GO train from Oshawa to Pickering for a DRT fare of $3.00

[casper]

Originally Posted by J. Will

Other city's commuter rail systems are not in-line with their local transit systems. Why should GO Transit by in-line with TTC?

Many of the European systems operate on integrated systems.

If you want to get people out of cars and onto the transit system (TCC or Go Transit) then making the system transparent helps. I would even include Via in the mix.

[miketoronto]

Brampton keeps doing great. This map shows routes in the 905 which operate every 30 minutes or less seven days a week. Generally until midnight Mon-Fri, and until at least 10-11 pm on Sundays. Brampton has more routes providing this type of service than the rest of the 905 combined. Brampton is doing an outstanding job.

https://maps.google.ca/maps/ms?msid=...50f1eeb8&msa=0

[electricron]

Originally Posted by casper

Many of the European systems operate on integrated systems.

If you want to get people out of cars and onto the transit system (TCC or Go Transit) then making the system transparent helps. I would even include Via in the mix.

Canada isn't Europe or the USA, but is more alike the USA than Europe. Many Eurpean countries have taxes collected only at the national level, so sharing subidies (not revenues) between different train systems is possible. The USA and Canada have taxes collected and funds allocated by many different levels of government, so sharing operating subsidies between them is very difficult. It's difficult enough just to establish formulas for funding capital projects. VIA is subsidized by the national government, GO by Ontario, and TCC by Toronto.

The idea that buying a single seat ride on a TCC streetcar ticket with a small fare will be allowed for riding a higher fare VIA train seems ridiculous. Who would ever pay the higher fare when they can ride with the lower fare?

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by electricron

The idea that buying a single seat ride on a TCC streetcar ticket with a small fare will be allowed for riding a higher fare VIA train seems ridiculous. Who would ever pay the higher fare when they can ride with the lower fare?

In almost every European case, there is a central-city zone where flat fares apply for all means of transport (transfers not always free). Outside of that zone, fares begin to increase in relation to distance, just like American commuter rail.

Your post is a little jumbled, but there is a very good reason to differentiate service. Somebody in an outlying neighborhood of Toronto might choose to take a fast VIA train into downtown rather than take a slow, lumbering streetcar. This is good for the traveler, who gets to his destination faster, and good for the transit authority, which now has one more spot available on the streetcar for a different traveler who's only going a short distance. Since the net travel time between the outlying neighborhood and the core is reduced, transit becomes a more attractive option in that neighborhood, both for work trips to the core and local trips within or to nearby neighborhoods.

Your scenario, where somebody pays for a streetcar and transfers to a VIA train for free, wouldn't happen, or at least it wouldn't be the outrage you think it is. If this traveler makes the transfer within the City of Toronto and is heading to Union Station, the free transfer makes sense; it frees up capacity on the TTC subways and streetcars. If the traveler is heading out of the city, he would be subject to an additional fare because he is making a longer journey. The fact that VIA trains have comfy seats and bathrooms shouldn't matter; most S-Bahn systems or the RER are standing-room only by the time the train reaches the central zone anyway; the seats are filled with suburban residents who are paying a higher fare and boarded earlier. Our traveler's experience isn't markedly better than if he took the subway - except he gets there faster.