The Great Canadian Transit Thread

[Innsertnamehere]

Also, apparently ridership on the lakeshore lines since the introduction of 30 minute GO train service off peak has skyrocketed 29% in just 8 months. 41% on the western part of the line (!!!) and 17% on the eastern part.

Hard to imagine such a huge increase in use, especially on the western side.

[dleung]

It makes sense for suburbanites to prefer commuter rail to downtown from such far-away distances. That's where the Vaughan subway money should've gone. Subways are meant for huge capacities, not "I get to park my car at highway 7 instead of at finch!"

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

Also, apparently ridership on the lakeshore lines since the introduction of 30 minute GO train service off peak has skyrocketed 29% in just 8 months. 41% on the western part of the line (!!!) and 17% on the eastern part.

Hard to imagine such a huge increase in use, especially on the western side.

I've seen a few obviously messed up ridership models that assumed a more or less linear relationship between frequencies and demand. In reality what you get is more of a step-wise effect, because people have to make decisions like "zero cars vs. one car vs. two". The seldom-used off-peak service might be enough for somebody to ditch their car, and if a person has a car they're going to use it more than strictly necessary.

Other good questions are "do I need to worry about schedules/routes?" and "how long is my trip going to take?" High-frequency trains are very reliable (more than cars) and you don't have to worry about schedules. You just show up. The worst is when you get hourly trains/buses or when you have to catch the last one of the night, so you're never sure if you'll be stranded.

Vancouver transit planners seem to get this (except for night service, which seems like a union issue) whereas Halifax transit planners and councillors for example do not seem to. Up until very recently the prevailing wisdom there was that the best way to get ridership up was to make sure that milk-run buses covered as many car-dependent suburbs as possible. That is not a winning strategy.

[miketoronto]

Originally Posted by dleung

It makes sense for suburbanites to prefer commuter rail to downtown from such far-away distances. That's where the Vaughan subway money should've gone. Subways are meant for huge capacities, not "I get to park my car at highway 7 instead of at finch!"

I am sorry but I have to disagree. I really don't get the hate on for the subway extensions.

Are you saying that the subway should never have gone to North York, Etobicoke, or Scarborough either? Despite the fact that riders from these areas pack the subway at 2-5 minute frequencies, seven days a week.

The fact is that the Spadina subway will offer a much better service to that area of the GTA than commuter rail can provide. It will also provide service to wide range of areas and not just downtown.

Yes there are rapid transit lines which need to be built in the inner core. But I see no problem with the Spadina extension.
It will provide the needed boost in that area of the city, to make transit attractive.

You guys are aware that subway lines in London reach out this far if not farther.

Also you don't move high volumes of people until you actually build the rapid transit lines.

[miketoronto]

Originally Posted by someone123

Vancouver transit planners seem to get this (except for night service, which seems like a union issue) whereas Halifax transit planners and councillors for example do not seem to. Up until very recently the prevailing wisdom there was that the best way to get ridership up was to make sure that milk-run buses covered as many car-dependent suburbs as possible. That is not a winning strategy.

I have found that with Vancouver's bus optimization program, that service is being made worse in many areas of the region. There have been a number of bus routes with service reduced from every 30 minutes to every 60 minutes, because there is "extra capacity" on the routes. If the goal is about providing attractive service, Vancouver would not be doing this.

[miketoronto]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

Also, apparently ridership on the lakeshore lines since the introduction of 30 minute GO train service off peak has skyrocketed 29% in just 8 months. 41% on the western part of the line (!!!) and 17% on the eastern part.

Hard to imagine such a huge increase in use, especially on the western side.

Where was this stat published?

While still not frequent enough, I find the 30 minute service is the bare minimum service level at which transit becomes sort of attractive.

The new 30 minute GO Train service has also made a difference in my commutes to downtown. The other weekend I took the GO Train for all my trips downtown instead of the TTC. And that was because the 30 minute service allowed me much more flexibility.

Now if you really want to see GO Train ridership skyrocket in off peak hours, and fill up all the seats, then reduce the fares . The fares are much too expensive in off peak hours, and they could probably bring in more revenue by reducing the fares and filling up the trains.

[Innsertnamehere]

Off peak fares would be neat. Drop the base fare to $3.20 instead of $5.20 between 9:30am and 3:30pm, and again after 6:30.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by miketoronto

I have found that with Vancouver's bus optimization program, that service is being made worse in many areas of the region. There have been a number of bus routes with service reduced from every 30 minutes to every 60 minutes, because there is "extra capacity" on the routes. If the goal is about providing attractive service, Vancouver would not be doing this.

I think it depends on where these routes are. If they are only useful to people living on one area and those people aren't using them then it makes sense to cut them. If they're useful to the whole metro area, like airport service, then it's probably worth it to subsidize them a bit more. There's a trade-off between coverage and high service levels along major corridors, but generally I think the sweet spot is much closer to the "major corridors" end.

The examples I'm thinking of in Halifax are routes like the express bus to Porters Lake. It's a 30 km route that costs $3.50 (normal buses are $2.50).

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Currently U/C:
-Vancouver: Evergreen line.
-Edmonton: NAIT extension.
-Kitchener/Waterloo: ION LRT
-Toronto: Union Pearson Express, Spadina subway extension, Eglinton line, Richmond Hill GO extension.
-Ottawa: Confederation Line
-Montreal: Train de l'Est

This may be a record.

Wow, I hadn't heard anything about the Richmond Hill Extension. Anybody know how it's going?

Also, anybody know how the Mascouche Line is doing?

Originally Posted by miketoronto

I have found that with Vancouver's bus optimization program, that service is being made worse in many areas of the region. There have been a number of bus routes with service reduced from every 30 minutes to every 60 minutes, because there is "extra capacity" on the routes. If the goal is about providing attractive service, Vancouver would not be doing this.

Translink is really struggling with money right now so they're taking service from money-losing routes and adding them to profitable/not-losing-as-much-money routes. I am being hit by this for the first time this round of cuts, and it is going to suck bad.

[Innsertnamehere]

I will be in the area of the Richmond hill extension next week, I'll see if I can stop by.

My understanding is that it is supposed to open sometime early next year. It's largely being built to add a permanent train yard to the line to allow for increased service levels, the station on the extension is kind of in the middle of nowhere.

[eemy]

Originally Posted by someone123

Vancouver transit planners seem to get this (except for night service, which seems like a union issue) whereas Halifax transit planners and councillors for example do not seem to. Up until very recently the prevailing wisdom there was that the best way to get ridership up was to make sure that milk-run buses covered as many car-dependent suburbs as possible. That is not a winning strategy.

The problem is that a municipality is generally obligated to provide a basic level of service to the whole urban area. The ridership might not necessarily warrant it, but it is done as a public service.

[caltrane74]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

Also, apparently ridership on the lakeshore lines since the introduction of 30 minute GO train service off peak has skyrocketed 29% in just 8 months. 41% on the western part of the line (!!!) and 17% on the eastern part.

Hard to imagine such a huge increase in use, especially on the western side.

The electrifying of the Lakeshore Line might be a bigger game changer for Toronto Transit than even the DRL. It can be done faster and cheaper than the DRL and with a proper frequency will do much to lift pressure from the Yonge Subway.

[WhipperSnapper]

Still some pockets left to buy on the Lake Shore West line, no?

That's the legacy of more than a billion dollars spent in the last five years. Metrolinx gaining control of the coridors and now leasing time to CN, CP instead of the reversal.

[caltrane74]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

Still some pockets left to buy on the Lake Shore West line, no?

That's the legacy of more than a billion dollars spent in the last five years. Metrolinx gaining control of the coridors and now leasing time to CN, CP instead of the reversal.

I didn't realize that.


Ok, well focus on electrifying the Milton/Kitchener/UPX Line first I guess.

[Chadillaccc]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Currently U/C:
-Vancouver: Evergreen line.
-Edmonton: NAIT extension.
-Kitchener/Waterloo: ION LRT
-Toronto: Union Pearson Express, Spadina subway extension, Eglinton line, Richmond Hill GO extension.
-Ottawa: Confederation Line
-Montreal: Train de l'Est

This may be a record.

If we're gonna include the 3 km NAIT extension, we should probably include Calgary's 2.5 km Tuscany Extension.

With that, it is almost certainly a record.

[ScreamingViking]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

Still some pockets left to buy on the Lake Shore West line, no?

That's the legacy of more than a billion dollars spent in the last five years. Metrolinx gaining control of the coridors and now leasing time to CN, CP instead of the reversal.

GO's president's update from June 2013 shows that most of the Lakeshore line is owned by Metrolinx, with only the sections west of Burlington GO remaining in CN and CP hands.
http://www.metrolinx.com/en/docs/pdf/boa...130627_BoardMtg_GO_Transit_Update_EN.pdf (slide 6)

Amazing that they've gone from 6% to 68% ownership of the network in 15 years.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

If we're gonna include the 3 km NAIT extension, we should probably include Calgary's 2.5 km Tuscany Extension.

With that, it is almost certainly a record.

Oops. Knew I forgot something. When is Calgary's new transitway being built? My understanding is that its starting soon.

I only included rail projects in my list, but it should be noted that there's bunch of new BRT projects in the works in Canada as well. Aside from the Calgary Transitway, Ottawa is very soon going to break ground on a Transitway extension from Bayshore to Moodie Dr--not a very long extension, but it will remove buses from an often heavily congested section of mixed traffic thus creating a big improvement. York Region is continuing to build its in-median BRTs on the VIVA network. Mississauga continues to build its Transitway. Montreal has that BRT on Pie-IX that I heard a few years ago was opening in 2013--anyone have any updates on that one?

Winnipeg has a BRT system in the works too right? (I've also heard that Saskatoon does as well although in their case I'm pretty sure it's more long-term).

[Chadillaccc]

Yes Winnipeg already has a Bus Rapid Transit line, it's just very short, but the vast majority of it is grade separated. The 2nd phase will bring it all the way to the Southwest of the city, to Investors Group Stadium and the University. Calgary is planning several transitways, most people are hoping that the 203 will be built as LRT right away rather than bus RT.

[Coldrsx]

Edmonton's 2040 vision for LRT. Just back from the Mayor's lunch where he directed specific goals, requests and vision to Premier Redford sitting just in front of him.


(http://www.4lrt.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/lrt-map-lazin-FUTURE2040x-1170x430.png)

[Coldrsx]

^

EDMONTON - Mayor Don Iveson used his first state of the city speech Wednesday to make a direct public plea to Premier Alison Redford for more LRT funding.

“Madam Premier, never has the opportunity and timing to fully build out Edmonton’s LRT network been more worthy of your government’s leadership, commitment and support,” he said.

“Show that you understand the needs of this city in the same way that my council does. Show Alberta’s capital city that we are worth investing in.”

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/edmo...calls+Premier+Redford/9582962/story.html