GO Transit: Construction Projects (Metrolinx, various)

[crs1026]

Bolton GO is definitely gonna be a struggle, the amount of money that needs to be spent to make it feasible(In my opinion, correct me if I'm wrong)is going to be very high.

Yes and no. We don't know for sure if ML is contemplating 2WAD or simply peak service to Bolton.

The majority of the grade separations along the Bolton line do already have room roughed in for additional track. (From Steeles up through Woodbridge and Kleinburg, not so much unfortunately). That makes the civil work more affordable, provided CPKC will allow those empty separations to be shared.

To add a single track to this line, the cost per km would likely be similar to the Bowmanville extension. Bolton is about 28 kms to Weston, whereas Oshawa to Bowmanville is only about 18 kms. So Bolton would be higher by virtue of greater length.

If 2WAD is being sought, however... further track might be needed, and the price might go much higher.

- Paul

 

[sixrings]

@drum118 and others have hit this before I could, but it's the capital and operating cost of this, as well as the fact that it's not one elevator, it's two. Everything is doubled. Switchback stairs are the best bypass in this scenario, kind of like the Wallace Ave bridge in Toronto.

It's not happening.

Your Ottawa friends are right. It's not happening.

I don’t like how some people on here present themselves as insiders with sources they can’t name and job titles they can’t discuss but we’re supposed to take their word as gospel. As if they never get anything wrong. Well guess what. This is a big wrong.

 

[turbanplanner]

I don’t like how some people on here present themselves as insiders with sources they can’t name and job titles they can’t discuss but we’re supposed to take their word as gospel. As if they never get anything wrong. Well guess what. This is a big wrong.

People don’t even belive me if I dare mention I dealt with a rude TTC employee or homeless person acting selfishly

 

[Metroscapes]

I don’t like how some people on here present themselves as insiders with sources they can’t name and job titles they can’t discuss but we’re supposed to take their word as gospel. As if they never get anything wrong. Well guess what. This is a big wrong.

This is a free forum for open discussion, speculation and debate. If you're looking for qualified statements, go work in the public service or support your local newspaper.

Not an excuse for some of the brigading you've experienced, nor an excuse for complaining that your view isn't shared by others.

And I’ll speak from knowing someone who worked directly with Omar and Trudeau and their phrasing was “ford laughed at the idea.”

Some people on here present themselves as insiders with sources they can’t name and job titles they can’t discuss but we’re supposed to take their word as gospel.

Some of this can happen organically - for instance, the project would clearly demand grade separations at some current level crossings. The obvious move would be to start these, making them substantial enough to accommodate some defined number of tracks (a good planning assumption would be two CPKC tracks, two GO tracks). Perhaps some are already in the works just based on today's data and usage of the route. I'm surprised Mississauga hasn't been advocating for more of these (of course, the City would have to pay for some of this, and Council will be averse to adding that to their budget, and may actually be stalling in hope that the 2WAD project covers the cost..,,,)

However, the logical early works are mostly paper rather than civil works
- A signed agreement in principle between CPKC and ML committing to a project scoping an planning exercise, and EA, and some initial level of design
- A firm agreement between Ottawa and Ontario as to cost sharing
- A project plan to get to a procurable level of design (recognizing that CPKC may not be in favour of a procurement and execution that they don't control)
- Some sort of consultation and EA/TPAP study or refresh of past studies

The big bridge to cross is the decision as to whether to share the route with CP or move CP to a bypass. I suspect this is inevitably the elephant that has to be swallowed before any further planning or negotiation makes sense. The only way to sell that decision (one way or the other) is a business case and cost comparison.

- Paul

You are likely very correct, but it doesn't make the governance of this correct.

I'll just point to GO transit's Wikipedia article, which is properly reference and quotes a passage from Wilfred Sergeant: "The idea of GO Transit was created out of fear of becoming lost in years of planning; it was 'approached as a test, but recognized to be a permanent service'."

There's value in planning things out, and there's more people, property and environment to consider in big projects. But we've also lost something in being bold when all signs point to something having significant value.

 

[crs1026]

Some people on here present themselves as insiders with sources they can’t name and job titles they can’t discuss but we’re supposed to take their word as gospel.

Or not.... no one is obliged to believe anything that they read here, or anywhere else on social media.... but amongst all the chaff, UT does offer comments that might have more insight and authority than one gets elsewhere.

There's value in planning things out, and there's more people, property and environment to consider in big projects. But we've also lost something in being bold when all signs point to something having significant value.

No question, when I read all the news clippings about (for instance) CN's decision to build its Halton-York line across Toronto in the early 1960's, it's pretty hard to believe that project would ever have gotten off the ground had it been broached under current politics. There was lots of public outcry and debate, but the decision to proceed was made very expeditiously and in the face of that opposition. It got done quickly.

GO was bold mainly because it ran counter to the prevailing paradigm where subsidy of transit was unacceptable. (In the years GO was planned, the TTC for instance was turning a profit). But it was pretty inexpensive in its initial form, especially compared to highway construction that would have been high priority had GO not proven itself. And it didn't force expropriation of land or encroach on adjacent neighbourhoods.

The political risk was lower than Milton presents today. Something like Milton GO has much broader impacts. I'm sure people in the know could say exactly what preparatory works would be doable and prudent - but there would be bigger debate over cost, land, etc. It's a bigger elephant to swallow.

- Paul

 

[lenaitch]

There was lots of public outcry and debate, but the decision to proceed was made very expeditiously and in the face of that opposition. It got done quickly.

Do the old records mention what the theme of the concerns were? It was all farmland back then, so I can see concerns about land values, expropriation, etc.(CN was still a Crown Corp. back then) and the governments were mostly all rural townships in York County. I doubt there was anywhere near the requirement for environmental reviews, if any, and doubt there was much in the way of NGO groups guarding things like turtle habitats, etc.

 

[ProjectEnd]

Or not.... no one is obliged to believe anything that they read here, or anywhere else on social media.... but amongst all the chaff, UT does offer comments that might have more insight and authority than one gets elsewhere.



No question, when I read all the news clippings about (for instance) CN's decision to build its Halton-York line across Toronto in the early 1960's, it's pretty hard to believe that project would ever have gotten off the ground had it been broached under current politics. There was lots of public outcry and debate, but the decision to proceed was made very expeditiously and in the face of that opposition. It got done quickly.

GO was bold mainly because it ran counter to the prevailing paradigm where subsidy of transit was unacceptable. (In the years GO was planned, the TTC for instance was turning a profit). But it was pretty inexpensive in its initial form, especially compared to highway construction that would have been high priority had GO not proven itself. And it didn't force expropriation of land or encroach on adjacent neighbourhoods.

The political risk was lower than Milton presents today. Something like Milton GO has much broader impacts. I'm sure people in the know could say exactly what preparatory works would be doable and prudent - but there would be bigger debate over cost, land, etc. It's a bigger elephant to swallow.

- Paul

We've chatted about the news clippings about the York / Halton before, but to me what sets that project apart, aside from GO, is MacMillan. CN, under Gordon's leadership, was forward-looking (because the contemporaneous alternative was going the way of Penn Central) and saw a lot of value in decamping from Downtown Toronto. What nobody has been able to answer here is: what incentive does CP have to move operations off, or share them on, their mainline through-GTA corridor? Likewise using MacTier for GO Bolton. Why would they do it?

And apologies, @sixrings - do you believe this will happen or won't? Because I may have misread your post(s) on the previous page...

 

[LukaMilo8]

Do we think there's any possibility of increasing Richmond Hill line frequency without major construction work? I know electrification isn't in the plans but as someone that works in Markham but lives in the city, it seems like there is some untapped potential of running at least one train against peak direction(NB -> AM, SB -> PM) with all of the office spaces in the area. Would this be possible with the existing single track? How much does freight impact the existing schedule? Also if ALTO decides to use the Leaside spur as the ROW in the future, would there be enough space for two GO tracks in that ROW? Thanks

 

[Northern Light]

I don’t like how some people on here present themselves as insiders

Several people here do have more access to information of various kinds than is generally public.

That doesn't mean they are right about everything, it means they have some personal knowledge, in some cases, and in others access to contacts that let them see more than many do.
But sometimes people read the tea leaves wrong, or their contacts do..........

C'est La Vie. .

with sources they can’t name and job titles they can’t discuss but we’re supposed to take their word as gospel.

No. You shouldn't take my word or anyone else's as 'gospel'. You should weigh the source, based on their track record, and
accord it an appropriate level of consideration/respect.

If you think you know better, by all means say so, and if you have direct evidence, better still.

As if they never get anything wrong. Well guess what. This is a big wrong.

Who here has claimed to never get anything wrong?

****

I happen to disagree with @ProjectEnd 's conclusion here.

But I can't say much more about why than what I have hinted at publicly. It is what it is..........

I think PE's awesome, we shall see which way the wind blows on this one.

 

[Northern Light]

We've chatted about the news clippings about the York / Halton before, but to me what sets that project apart, aside from GO, is MacMillan. CN, under Gordon's leadership, was forward-looking (because the contemporaneous alternative was going the way of Penn Central) and saw a lot of value in decamping from Downtown Toronto.

Well said.

What nobody has been able to answer here is: what incentive does CP have to move operations off, or share them on, their mainline through-GTA corridor?

There is an incentive to do something on Milton..........

I haven't heard anything about Mactier/Bolton in that regard, but that's not to say it ain't so.........I just haven't heard.

 

[Northern Light]

Do we think there's any possibility of increasing Richmond Hill line frequency without major construction work?

Off-peak, there is some room, on-peak, not so much. @reaperexpress is probably best placed to model that, if he were so inclined.

How much does freight impact the existing schedule?

South of Doncaster (CN York sub) its a non-factor.

North of that this is the CN Mainline, so a substantial one.

Also if ALTO decides to use the Leaside spur as the ROW in the future, would there be enough space for two GO tracks in that ROW? Thanks

ALTO has no use for the Leaside Spur (the current bike trail).

If you mean the old Don sub (1/2 mile bridge), the answer is 'no' for the most part. There are a couple of small sections..but mostly, twin track would require extensive work.

 

[ARG1]

We've chatted about the news clippings about the York / Halton before, but to me what sets that project apart, aside from GO, is MacMillan. CN, under Gordon's leadership, was forward-looking (because the contemporaneous alternative was going the way of Penn Central) and saw a lot of value in decamping from Downtown Toronto. What nobody has been able to answer here is: what incentive does CP have to move operations off, or share them on, their mainline through-GTA corridor? Likewise using MacTier for GO Bolton. Why would they do it?

Well I can ask the same thing regarding sharing the Belleville Sub for the Bowmanville extension can't I? What incentive does CP have to share the section of the Belleville Sub between the GM Spur and Bowmanville to GO? The answer seems to be that in their eyes, as long as Metrolinx is willing to pay for easements via construction of dedicated track and facilities, CP doesn't particularly care about what Metrolinx does around their ROW so long as it doesn't significantly impact their medium term operations. That's not to say that CP/CN are good companies that do this out of the goodness of their heart, I don't doubt that any price tag they give Metrolinx is highly upcharged and filled with convenience fees - however there's probably reason to believe that they don't see a reason to be openly hostile to any passenger rail expansion.

 

[sixrings]

We've chatted about the news clippings about the York / Halton before, but to me what sets that project apart, aside from GO, is MacMillan. CN, under Gordon's leadership, was forward-looking (because the contemporaneous alternative was going the way of Penn Central) and saw a lot of value in decamping from Downtown Toronto. What nobody has been able to answer here is: what incentive does CP have to move operations off, or share them on, their mainline through-GTA corridor? Likewise using MacTier for GO Bolton. Why would they do it?

And apologies, @sixrings - do you believe this will happen or won't? Because I may have misread your post(s) on the previous page...

If we are talking about the Milton line getting all day service…

I have been told by people who work face to face with the previous pm, the current pm, Omar and ford that the liberals feel that they made an effort at one time. Ford laughed at them. The cost has since escalated. That ford has since won a land slide. That the liberals basically have a majority. That neither side has any motivation to do it. So the people who I know who once said ford laughed at them are basically themselves laughing that the project will ever go anywhere.

I do not have a job in politics. It’s a complete fluke I know these people. But in this one case I tend to believe people who I know talk to each other professionally on a daily basis. And they do not think this is getting built.

 

[Dan416]

If we are talking about the Milton line getting all day service…

I have been told by people who work face to face with the previous pm, the current pm, Omar and ford that the liberals feel that they made an effort at one time. Ford laughed at them. The cost has since escalated. That ford has since won a land slide. That the liberals basically have a majority. That neither side has any motivation to do it. So the people who I know who once said ford laughed at them are basically themselves laughing that the project will ever go anywhere.

I do not have a job in politics. It’s a complete fluke I know these people. But in this one case I tend to believe people who I know talk to each other professionally on a daily basis. And they do not think this is getting built.

That is disheartening to hear, but with the lack of progress on Milton since I was going to U of T in the early 2000s, not surprising, and I would tend to believe you.

 

[smallspy]

Do we think there's any possibility of increasing Richmond Hill line frequency without major construction work? I know electrification isn't in the plans but as someone that works in Markham but lives in the city, it seems like there is some untapped potential of running at least one train against peak direction(NB -> AM, SB -> PM) with all of the office spaces in the area. Would this be possible with the existing single track? How much does freight impact the existing schedule? Also if ALTO decides to use the Leaside spur as the ROW in the future, would there be enough space for two GO tracks in that ROW? Thanks

There are some but limited sidings on the line, which means that the distances between them will be your liming factor in terms of how frequent you can run trains.

The most critical of these is the stretch between Rosedale (the north siding switch is at mile 4.01, just north of Bloor) and Oriole (the south siding switch is at mile 11.16, under the bridge at York Mills). It takes a train approximately 22 minutes to cover that segment, which means that if you want to run a clockface schedule hourly bi-directional service is the best that you can hope for without more major work being done.

As pointed out above, freight does not really factor into the equation until Doncaster (mile 16.1). And for GO to run any more substantial service, they would likely need to built not just an additional track on the Bala Sub north of this point, but also a grade separation at Doncaster.

If we are talking about the Milton line getting all day service…

I have been told by people who work face to face with the previous pm, the current pm, Omar and ford that the liberals feel that they made an effort at one time. Ford laughed at them. The cost has since escalated. That ford has since won a land slide. That the liberals basically have a majority. That neither side has any motivation to do it. So the people who I know who once said ford laughed at them are basically themselves laughing that the project will ever go anywhere.

I do not have a job in politics. It’s a complete fluke I know these people. But in this one case I tend to believe people who I know talk to each other professionally on a daily basis. And they do not think this is getting built.

While the lack of money is quite obviously a problem, that doesn't mean that Metrolinx isn't going ahead and making plans for how the line could be built should a metric shit-tonne of money were to fall into their laps.

Because they are. They need to be prepared in case that does happen.

Dan