slickpete83
Active Member
Bolton House prices already insane !! , they don't need Go Service lol.. jk...
prices will go from insane level to super insane level
prices will go from insane level to super insane level
|
|
|
GO studies Bolton rail service
- Thread starter Prometheus The Supremo
- Start date
WislaHD
Superstar
Last edited:
Nomad_87
Active Member
Caledon seems to be the only entity keeping this idea alive. Metrolinx and all other parties look to have moved on a while ago. Still, not a terrible idea by any means as long as they can get Canadian Pacific on-board with it.
allengeorge
Senior Member
That’s unfortunate. I was excited for a hot second that a Metrolinx was seriously considering this route/line.
Nomad_87
Active Member
It's not entirely off the table, just not seriously being considered at this moment. Especially considering how unpleasant CP Rail is to work with
crs1026
Senior Member
I'm not sure that is balanced. CP is accommodating both HFR and Bowmanville GO. I'm sure that they would accommodate this service also.
The barrier is the amount of added tracking that would be required. I count four major bridges that would have to be twinned just to get to Woodbridge. ML and Ontario won't have the necessary cash flow until RER and the four subway projects are completed.
- Paul
Woodbridge_Heights
Senior Member
Have they returned to this routing? Last docs I saw had the line running on the Barrie line tracks then turning west on the tracks that parallel steeles and then continuing north on the cn tracks through woodbridge.
I always felt that routing was folly as this routing would bring rapid transit to the north west part of the city and connect many current local transit projects.
Nomad_87
Active Member
Fair enough, the feasibility study did show that while feasible the service didn’t exactly have an incredible return on investment so they’re probably waiting for the area to be built up more. Still, with the amount of freight traffic on the MacTier sub plus the fact that it’s mostly single track north of Steeles accommodating it is most likely still an issue. But one which they could find a solution for
Nomad_87
Active Member
The original report that deemed the Barrie Line the most feasible route is over a decade old now, with the Weston sub being quad tracked among other things I imagine it’s in a much better position to handle 3 passenger rail lines at this point
EnviroTO
Senior Member
Is that true? I don't know of any agreements that exist yet. In any case, I don't think CN or CP behave much differently. It just happens to be that the Milton line is high demand and on the mainline whereas GO/Metrolinx have created a parallel corridor on Lakeshore East where the CN mainline is, and stopped frequent service at Bramalea where the mainline conflict exists. People are just more aware of the conflict on the Milton line because it is central Mississauga.
ARG1
Senior Member
I'm pretty sure CN historically has always been far more accommodating to passenger service compared to CP.
EnviroTO
Senior Member
The reports from VIA and Amtrak would historically indicate otherwise.
DirectionNorth
Active Member
Currently? According to Amtrak's (slightly humorous) "report card", CP is better than CN.
Amtrak "Report Card"
Returning to Bolton service, I think that there are three challenges:
- A scroll through satellite footage shows a lack of track connections between the GO tracks and the CN tracks.
- Much of the track is single-track. For about 7.5 km north of where the current GO service is, is double-tracked, but except the section close to the yard, the rest is single-track. If any reasonable service is to be run on this track, then it has to be double tracked.
- How accommodating will CN be on its mainline? I believe that Milton GO is the line that will get the least improvements for RER. This is, of course, because it is on the mainline.
Northern Light
Superstar
Are you meaning between CP's Mainline track to Bolton and CN's mainline York Sub?
It is correct that there is no connection there. Though that is only needed if you intend to route via the York Sub to the Barrie Corridor (those 2 do have a connection).
I know that option was considered; but I still think its rather odd.
At any rate, there is open land over which a connection could be made, if that were desired.
Certainly CP would be likely to insist on that.
Bolton is also on the CP mainline (to western Canada, via Northern Ontario)
Last edited:
crs1026
Senior Member
^Let’s separate the urban legend from the reality.
Neither CP nor CN have said definitively “No, not gonna happen, stay off our tracks” to any recent commuter proposal for use of their lines in dense urban areas.
What they have insisted on is the preservation of their current and future ability to run freight, and the preservation of their assets without any form of appropriation. They have only stood in the way when they saw those two things being encroached upon.
Privately, they probably wish commuter and regional rail would disappear, and they may have been overheard muttering thusly to themselves. But in their more adult moments, they recognize that the law doesn’t support this, and in fact public sentiment is against them. They likely accept that a firmer anti-pax position might raise political impacts, and drive legislators to pass laws that would hurt their interests (I am mostly referring to dense urban areas, where there is little prospect of building new corridors, so the case for how to use existing corridors has the broadest public interest in shared use) . So they cooperate, to the extent of accepting commuter provided that the public bear the cost of adding capacity to protect their two key needs.
The only question is, does the public (via ML, in this case) see enough benefit to justify spending the amount needed to get service in place. I don’t see the railways‘ position on Bolton as any different to any other line.
- Paul
Neither CP nor CN have said definitively “No, not gonna happen, stay off our tracks” to any recent commuter proposal for use of their lines in dense urban areas.
What they have insisted on is the preservation of their current and future ability to run freight, and the preservation of their assets without any form of appropriation. They have only stood in the way when they saw those two things being encroached upon.
Privately, they probably wish commuter and regional rail would disappear, and they may have been overheard muttering thusly to themselves. But in their more adult moments, they recognize that the law doesn’t support this, and in fact public sentiment is against them. They likely accept that a firmer anti-pax position might raise political impacts, and drive legislators to pass laws that would hurt their interests (I am mostly referring to dense urban areas, where there is little prospect of building new corridors, so the case for how to use existing corridors has the broadest public interest in shared use) . So they cooperate, to the extent of accepting commuter provided that the public bear the cost of adding capacity to protect their two key needs.
The only question is, does the public (via ML, in this case) see enough benefit to justify spending the amount needed to get service in place. I don’t see the railways‘ position on Bolton as any different to any other line.
- Paul
Last edited: