News   Jul 12, 2024
199 Church Showcases Heritage Facade and Artwork at Street Level
 1.1K     0 
News   Jul 12, 2024
Six Points Plaza Redevelopment Advances With 36-Storey First Phase
 953     1 
News   Jul 12, 2024
Trading Spaces: Can Real Estate Conversion Help Boost Housing Supply?
 361     0 

407 Rail Freight Bypass/The Missing Link

smallspy said:
According to whom?

Because there was never any EA, or funding, allocated to such a project.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.
Click to expand...
Before my time, but was raised a number of times at Mississauga Council that the work was to be done by 2011.

There is 3rd tracks from north of the 403 to west of Confederation Dr that service Erindale Station and watch it being built, a 3rd track at Kipling for X distance that was mostly used by CP auto racks, a number of bridges saw the 3rd bridge built beside the existing one, Lisgar Station was built so the 3rd track could be added on the north side of the platform. There were changes to other locations as well.

If this happen in early 2000's, who pay for it and where was the EA for it??
 
drum118 said:
Before my time, but was raised a number of times at Mississauga Council that the work was to be done by 2011.

There is 3rd tracks from north of the 403 to west of Confederation Dr that service Erindale Station and watch it being built, a 3rd track at Kipling for X distance that was mostly used by CP auto racks, a number of bridges saw the 3rd bridge built beside the existing one, Lisgar Station was built so the 3rd track could be added on the north side of the platform. There were changes to other locations as well.

If this happen in early 2000's, who pay for it and where was the EA for it??
Click to expand...

I'm not sure where Mississauga Council got it from, because while GO would have liked more track on the line, they never got permission to go ahead with the planning.

Those third-track sections were built in the mid-1980s, to allow for the "mid-day flips" to-and-from Erindale. It also allowed GO to build up service to 5 trains to Milton daily. Part of the agreements with CP at the time.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.
 
smallspy said:
I'm not sure where Mississauga Council got it from, because while GO would have liked more track on the line, they never got permission to go ahead with the planning.

Those third-track sections were built in the mid-1980s, to allow for the "mid-day flips" to-and-from Erindale. It also allowed GO to build up service to 5 trains to Milton daily. Part of the agreements with CP at the time.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.
Click to expand...

Helpful context Dan. Were those "mid-day flips" shown in the schedule someone else posted earlier in this thread?
 
Brief reference to the Bypass in the "Capital Projects Group" update for this week's Metrolinx Board meeting.
2seueS9
 
Someone on twitter pointed out that a new line item has been added to the Capital Working Group's report. It's for the "Kitchener Extension" and valued at $2,250,000,000. The reference was not in the February 2017 report. Pictures below.

2uaepwS

Above: June 2017 report.
2tdUErt


Above: Feb 2017 report
 
The in-service dates are both consistently listed as 2025 and then footnoted as subject to change by the successful AFP bidders. I think it's fair to assume those dates won't be moved forwards.

So, how much of this is real and how much is notional?

- Paul
 
crs1026 said:
The in-service dates are both consistently listed as 2025 and then footnoted as subject to change by the successful AFP bidders. I think it's fair to assume those dates won't be moved forwards.

So, how much of this is real and how much is notional?

- Paul
Click to expand...
Today was the first time I had really thought about ReR and AFP....so it is feasible that ReR is going to be delivered by a bunch of different companies on different lines and with different delivery dates/financial models?

So the whole "all lines 15 minute service by X" was just another magicians diversion trick?
 
crs1026 said:
The in-service dates are both consistently listed as 2025 and then footnoted as subject to change by the successful AFP bidders. I think it's fair to assume those dates won't be moved forwards.

So, how much of this is real and how much is notional?

- Paul
Click to expand...

Is there an example you can put to where this footnote appears?

TOareaFan said:
Today was the first time I had really thought about ReR and AFP....so it is feasible that ReR is going to be delivered by a bunch of different companies on different lines and with different delivery dates/financial models?

So the whole "all lines 15 minute service by X" was just another magicians diversion trick?
Click to expand...

I think I saw something in a board report from 2016 about "packages" of procurement for RER lines. I'd have to go back and check. Someone else might be able to comment more on how the RER lines will be procured.
 
TOareaFan said:
Today was the first time I had really thought about ReR and AFP....so it is feasible that ReR is going to be delivered by a bunch of different companies on different lines and with different delivery dates/financial models?

So the whole "all lines 15 minute service by X" was just another magicians diversion trick?
Click to expand...

I'm not so sure it was a magician's trick so much as the planning arm of ML generating an oversize concept and the politicians happily endorsing it..... and everybody got carried away talking it up as a concept without anyone asking the hard questions about what would be required to put it in place. (Or having the expertise to appreciate what the obstacles and long lead items would be. )

Part of the overenthusiasm is about affordability, but equally problemmatic is the idea that it can all be done at once. I can't think of another transit property that has rolled out a whole system simultaneously. That's why I scoff at those multiple 2025 target dates. It makes more sense to add one route every 18 months.....except.....that would take political courage as there will be winners and losers. The AFP procurement may be attractive as it lets a neutral third party - the bidders - deliver the bad news.

I take the development of the list in the capital reports as a sign that some fiscal discipline has sunk in, but short of a TYSSE style trust fund I'm still looking on it as a wish list. Whoever wins the next eulection, there will be cuts. Either some lines get dropped, or the amounts get cut back. Personally, hourly or half hourly diesel service, as others have suggested, may be a good goal for 2025, perhaps with electrification on the Lakeshore getting priority.

The problem with the bypass (if that's what the new "Kitchener Extension" line is, is it's all or nothing. I can't see how it can be pared back. Until it is bid and procurement completed, it's still just a paper concept.

- Paul
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top