steveintoronto
Superstar
Absolutely agreed. And electric traction has enabled the Brit case. But you do realize you're making my point on 'eyes glaze over'? Getting back to electrification on GO...
|
|
|
GO Transit: Construction Projects (Metrolinx, various)
- Thread starter drum118
- Start date
ShonTron
Moderator
Member Bio
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 12,409
- Reaction score
- 9,093
- Location
- Ward 13 - Toronto Centre
The closest thing there is at the moment is Wroute.
It's a private company that operates two scheduled car service between Fairview Park Mall in Kitchener, University of Guelph, and Downtown Guelph, and between Guelph and Burlington (Aldershot GO). But it's not at all subsidized, and has no transfer privileges with GO, GRT, or Guelph Transit. It's more expensive too. Really, this should be the territory of GO Transit. .
steveintoronto
Superstar
This is exactly the point. Instead of band-aid "flyovers on the fly", it should be realized that it's well beyond time for Ontario to approach the Infrastructure Bank (ya know, where McQuaig went post ML for half a year or so) to get what REM got. What can they say? "NO"?
We still have a massive waste of the Georgetown Corridor running through Toronto with a trickle of traffic on it. And yet there's massive demand to be met. If that doesn't cry out for investor participation, I don't know what does. The demand is guaranteed, and guaranteed to increase. We're already at DBFOM as an 'excuse' or 'enabler' depending which way the wiggle wind is blowing. It's time for the Big Leap (apologies to the Big Move) and that means planning a massive scale project with federal investment matched (usually 4:1 in other bank models) with Private Investment. And the Province can participate too...
My opinion is to make the Leap under Section 92..."For the General Advantage of Canada" and thus federally chartered on request, so the Province will become a passive participant unless it changes tune.
Absolutely. Completely in all respects. But they're not going to touch it when they can talk about..."Squirrel! Over there, all the great flyovers and sidings we're going to build..."
With the massive costs they're assigning to the Rube Goldberg Diversion Project, you'd think that they could find the where-with-all to buy a few smaller buses like other operators use, perhaps even contract out the servicing to GRT, Guelph, or Joe's Garage, but run it in GO colours as a bona-fide link. But alas, my eyes are now rolling back in my head...must run.
Btw! Excellent article Sean! I must run, will definitely read it later. Quick comment, since I'm on a rant: Isn't it odd how ML swears that four tracks are needed for the Georgetown Corridor south, but with their inference being that AD2W to K/W can be done on a single track with passing loops? I think someone at ML must be reading how others can do it with state of the art signalling and control, but....errr...no...can't do that on Georgetown South, UPX have to have their own pathings...
Metrolinx: Inconsistency to your door, never failing.
Last edited:
Leo_Chan
Senior Member
Short term pain for long term gain.
dowlingm
Senior Member
Opposite Acton Quarry might be a useful spot for storage, given that noise is probably an issue there as it is. Might be an excuse to grade separate Fourth Line as part of construction. That said, a NW-SE yard along Trafalgar Road towards 22 Side Road is probably as much deadheading as Metrolinx will want to add.
As for the flyover/under - the only thing about Georgetown-Mount Pleasant is the number of water crossings in addition to the unseparated grade crossings. Is there a stretch long enough to comfortably separate?
crs1026
Senior Member
As much as it grates, I suspect the announcements are all lined up, but on a political timetable rather than when ML needs the money.
$75M won’t buy a flyover, nor will it buy any grade separation. My understanding is there will be work this spring to start on those sidings, improve the track surfacing, and fix level crossings, all of which will lead to faster speeds west of Georgetown. Possibly that figure implies some work at Georgetown also. As a reference point, when VIA signalled the 28-mile Brockville Sub and installed sidings, the cost was reported as roughly $20M in 2010ish dollars. I wonder if sidings at Acton and Guelph imply platform underpasses and elevators. $75M is small dollars considering the things that might be needed.
- Paul
- Paul
Last edited:
crs1026
Senior Member
PS - while looking for old clippings on the Brockville Sub, I found this ruling about VIA’s desire to increase train frequency through Smiths Falls.
It’s an interesting read from the perspective of past discussion here about what legal recourse Ontario and/or GO and/or VIA might have had to get CN to agree to more GO service on the Halton Sub. One can read into the ruling what GO might have had to prove or disprove had they tried to litigate their way onto the Halton Sub. One can also extrapolate to how the arguments might unfold on the Milton line.
A key point is that the law works quite differently when there is already an agreement in place for passenger service versus where there isn’t. I strongly suspect that GO has been hamstrung by whatever agreements they had previously signed with CN over Georgetown Line train service. Phil Verster’s comment about being “unwelcome guests” on CN/CP lines alludes to this.
- Paul
It’s an interesting read from the perspective of past discussion here about what legal recourse Ontario and/or GO and/or VIA might have had to get CN to agree to more GO service on the Halton Sub. One can read into the ruling what GO might have had to prove or disprove had they tried to litigate their way onto the Halton Sub. One can also extrapolate to how the arguments might unfold on the Milton line.
A key point is that the law works quite differently when there is already an agreement in place for passenger service versus where there isn’t. I strongly suspect that GO has been hamstrung by whatever agreements they had previously signed with CN over Georgetown Line train service. Phil Verster’s comment about being “unwelcome guests” on CN/CP lines alludes to this.
- Paul
smallspy
Senior Member
GO had long held plans for a layover facility at Heritage Rd., to the point of claiming that they were going to start an EA in early 2016. For whatever reason, that got postponed a number of times, and I don't even recall it listed on any of the "future improvements" lists for the Kitchener Line.
Dan
Allandale25
Senior Member
^ I've seen it recently listed in a GO document. I'll try to find it.
Allandale25
Senior Member
^^ Found it. It was listed in the Full GO Expansion BCA which was on the Metrolinx Board agenda in November.
DonValleyRainbow
Senior Member
Member Bio
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2014
- Messages
- 2,867
- Reaction score
- 1,926
- Location
- Kay Gardner Beltline Trail
I believe a layover was, at some point in time, planned immediately west of Mt Pleasant GO. There's still a switch and unactivated signal on the south track. I think something happened, perhaps it was not accommodated in the development plans or the extension/grade separation of Creditview Road?
Allandale25
Senior Member
Go take the train to the horses.
Allandale25
Senior Member
From a friend: "The south main is supposed to connect to the centre main at the ‘Norval’ crossovers. The project sat idle for years, but late last year they were working on it again. I believe the connection has now been completed. I saw surfacing machinery working the ballast on the newly installed track before Christmas, so I assumed that it wouldn’t be long before its signals would be lit up."
SaugeenJunction
Senior Member
I assume the new Woodbine Casino is pitching money for this, vis-à-vis the the new TOD principles the PCs are putting in place.
Also question for the UT mods. Does it make sense for there to be a specific "GO New Stations" thread?
hw621
Senior Member
In that case they would want a connection to the airport