Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It cannot happen soon enough. Take a look at the current #63-65-68 schedule https://assets.metrolinx.com/image/u...23/TABLE65.pdf. Train service is provided primarily during peak hours (morning peak into the City, evening peak out of the City) and scant service all other times. Notice that service north of Aurora is especially scant. Even during peak times, headways run between 30-60 minutes, which is not frequent and especially problematic if you're in a hurry or missed the train. Sure there's supplementary bus service as you can see on the schedule but bustitution is not fun, fare paying riders ought not have to give up the comforts of train for a motorcoach, and besides, most buses run express between Union Station and Highway 404 so you cannot even get off on the stops between. Boston's commuter rail IMO has terrible, infrequent service and runs on a totally embarrassing and outdated model but at least runs trains consistently throughout the day. Better systems to observe can be found elsewhere in the world such as Hong Kong, which has electrified high speed commuter rail running every 10 minutes for headways. That is what GO and every other North American commuter rail system ought to strive for but they will need a lot of time and a lot of money to catch up.
Last edited by Urban Peasant; 08-31-2023 at 08:01 PM..
YEah that's great but it would have been better if they got actual electric trains and not simply electric locomotives to haul the current trains. Toronto is basically upgrading to technology is the being discarted in Europe. Better than the current diesel trains yes but far from ideal.
YEah that's great but it would have been better if they got actual electric trains and not simply electric locomotives to haul the current trains. Toronto is basically upgrading to technology is the being discarted in Europe. Better than the current diesel trains yes but far from ideal.
We are light years behind Europe on rail for sure. I see incremental improvements a good thing though. We in our society need to have paradigm shift in thinking about rail in general. We are still very car centric in our ways so if any of our cities are more car centric than Europe or Asia, it is because we are getting the reality we want. That said, comparatively we are still more transit friendly than the U.S and that is important to take stock of - but I agree we should be aiming our sites long term on other countries who have a more fulsome integration of rail.
We are light years behind Europe on rail for sure. I see incremental improvements a good thing though. We in our society need to have paradigm shift in thinking about rail in general. We are still very car centric in our ways so if any of our cities are more car centric than Europe or Asia, it is because we are getting the reality we want. That said, comparatively we are still more transit friendly than the U.S and that is important to take stock of - but I agree we should be aiming our sites long term on other countries who have a more fulsome integration of rail.
Yeah Toronto does well in numbers/ridership when it comes to RT. For example I was reading that Chicagos subway system is twice a s big as torontos yet only has half the daily ridersip of Toronto. I was bit disapointed when I heard that toronto wouldn't be getting new trains, but i'm glad they are upgrading.
As far as cars go, I don't think that will ever change. Our cities both in the US and in Canada are built for cars. Here where I live we don't have good RT or public transit in general or good car infrastructure. Winnipeg is about the worst in both areas. We don't want to invest in better roads but we don't want to invest in good transit either. Winnipeg is the only major city in Canada that does not have any rail transit or even plans for it. We will reach about 1 million in ten years and we will still have the same bus transit that we did for several decades now. The BRT is not that good here. Ottawa had a much better system. Sorry for the off topic.
Yeah Toronto does well in numbers/ridership when it comes to RT. For example I was reading that Chicagos subway system is twice a s big as torontos yet only has half the daily ridersip of Toronto. I was bit disapointed when I heard that toronto wouldn't be getting new trains, but i'm glad they are upgrading.
As far as cars go, I don't think that will ever change. Our cities both in the US and in Canada are built for cars. Here where I live we don't have good RT or public transit in general or good car infrastructure. Winnipeg is about the worst in both areas. We don't want to invest in better roads but we don't want to invest in good transit either. Winnipeg is the only major city in Canada that does not have any rail transit or even plans for it. We will reach about 1 million in ten years and we will still have the same bus transit that we did for several decades now. The BRT is not that good here. Ottawa had a much better system. Sorry for the off topic.
You've gone full turn back to my rationale for why home prices are so expensive inside and outside of the GTA, which was the O.P.'s original topic. It is because there are many forward thinkers among planners in the GTA and forward thinking attracts demand. Places with reactionary attitudes towards the future tend to fare poorer than places with smart visions. Well as to Winnipeg, all I can say is I sincerely hope the City snaps out of that mindset because I would love to see it prosper more. I've never been to Winnipeg before but I've heard good things about it - you've got the RCM's main mint, the Jets, and the Blue Bombers for starters - and more forward thinking might help attract more talent and alleviate the GTA's housing market.
Yeah Toronto does well in numbers/ridership when it comes to RT. For example I was reading that Chicagos subway system is twice a s big as torontos yet only has half the daily ridersip of Toronto. I was bit disapointed when I heard that toronto wouldn't be getting new trains, but i'm glad they are upgrading.
As far as cars go, I don't think that will ever change. Our cities both in the US and in Canada are built for cars. Here where I live we don't have good RT or public transit in general or good car infrastructure. Winnipeg is about the worst in both areas. We don't want to invest in better roads but we don't want to invest in good transit either. Winnipeg is the only major city in Canada that does not have any rail transit or even plans for it. We will reach about 1 million in ten years and we will still have the same bus transit that we did for several decades now. The BRT is not that good here. Ottawa had a much better system. Sorry for the off topic.
Chicago's system is definitely more extensive than Toronto's. For now, I think in a decade or two that'll change but it is far more likely that Toronto's ridership levels will go up strongly anytime new transit is thrown at it. Chicago for perplexing reasons just doesn't have high ridership. I remember taking the subway there after a night of karoake - I waited almost 30 mins for the subway on a main line at 10 pm. There'd be hell to pay if that happened in Toronto or Montreal.
I think honestly the crosstown LRT's are going to be mad busy. They're gonna need some crazy frequencies to keep up with the demand. It's been over 10 years its been u/c - by the time it is ready it'll already need subway like capacity but it'll be better than busses!
I have to say though that while I agree with you about cars in general - I think there could be events that change that. If cities like Toronto and Montreal and other smaller Canadian cities can keep expanding their pt footprint and affordability issues continue, it is possible people will increasingly shun cars.
Remember before the pandemic you could by a hyundai accent for 14000. Now you can't buy a car for under 20K and the average price is what well into the 30's or 40 grand. Cars are just getting too expensive. I need to have one in my living situation but I hate spending a lot on a car - I treat it as I need something basic that is reliable that'll get me from a to b but if I buy new - even a 'plain' old civic that'll run 35K all in. Plus with financing costs including interest nowadays - payments will be over longer period of time just to keep the payments below 500 bucks a month.
Winnipeg definitely should have an lrt line or 2 imo. For me not off topic. I'd like to see every city in Canada give better flow options than they have. I feel transit infrastructure investment is always something that gives back to the economy way more than what is invested in our country
It cannot happen soon enough. Take a look at the current #63-65-68 schedule https://assets.metrolinx.com/image/u...23/TABLE65.pdf. Train service is provided primarily during peak hours (morning peak into the City, evening peak out of the City) and scant service all other times. Notice that service north of Aurora is especially scant. Even during peak times, headways run between 30-60 minutes, which is not frequent and especially problematic if you're in a hurry or missed the train. Sure there's supplementary bus service as you can see on the schedule but bustitution is not fun, fare paying riders ought not have to give up the comforts of train for a motorcoach, and besides, most buses run express between Union Station and Highway 404 so you cannot even get off on the stops between. Boston's commuter rail IMO has terrible, infrequent service and runs on a totally embarrassing and outdated model but at least runs trains consistently throughout the day. Better systems to observe can be found elsewhere in the world such as Hong Kong, which has electrified high speed commuter rail running every 10 minutes for headways. That is what GO and every other North American commuter rail system ought to strive for but they will need a lot of time and a lot of money to catch up.
Sorry missed this. Interesting insights. Let's see what happens. Looks like a lot of transit initiatives can't happen soon enough in the GGH.
I was going off of memory and probably inflated the numbers a bit in my head. I just googled it and the Ontario Ministry of Finance I think predicted 8 million in the GTA by 2030 and 10 millionby2040, so less than I thought but still these years will come fast and we should be trying to exceed the housing requirements for these targets I think since we are already at a shortage of several million units. I agree with you to some extent but your point about a blank slate for a perfect city is something I think could be realized if new communities are built around the GTA than just adding density to existing places. That’s part of what helped the post WWII boom be successful and I think we can do both to meet these targets. Again though, I’m talking about areas that are “country estates” rather than actual farmland and forested areas, places like King City and Uxbridge where there’s a lot of custom built homes on large acreages but are technically part of the greenbelt.
Even if it not other 6 million by 2040. Looking at those numbers at 10 million by 2040 that is other 4 million people.
Before project approval, city staff demanded through a private “negotiation”, a payment of $26 million they say will go towards “amenities” like daycares, or community centres, even though billions paid often disappear into the black hole of government. Homebuilders know this fee is called a “community amenity contribution” or CAC, which everyone pretends is a “voluntary” payment, but if you don’t cough up the cash, your project won’t get approved.
Quote:
Government fees and taxes now consume as much as a whopping 29.25% or $327,565 for a new Vancouver apartment priced at $1.1M. and 33% of average monthly rent.
Quote:
Vancouver is no outlier. Toronto-based real estate analyst Ben Meyers dubs all these fees the “Great Housing Daylight Robbery”, growing 1,169% since 2001.
Government fees and taxes now consume as much as a whopping 29.25% or $327,565 for a new Vancouver apartment priced at $1.1M. and 33% of average monthly rent.
Vancouver example:
I keep on hearing developers complaining about all the fees, but what I would like to know is how much profit they make off each of those $1.1M units?
BTW I do think that the government should eliminate or at least make it more reasonable for 1st time homeowners to buy. The land transfer tax is criminal because you pay TWICE - once to the city and again to the Province. It's a cash grab pure and simple and puts undue stress on homebuyers.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
