GO Transit: Construction Projects (Metrolinx, various)

[micheal_can]

University student pitches bold visions to improve Toronto area transit

A university student has some big ideas for the Greater Toronto Area's rapid transit network, mapping out new lines that could serve millions across …

www.blogto.com

It could be argued that all transit plans, if they were built would have also improved transit around Toronto. Less talk and more action is what is needed.

 

[EnviroTO]

It could be argued that all transit plans, if they were built would have also improved transit around Toronto. Less talk and more action is what is needed.

It could be argued that at this point there are no bold plans, especially ones that use existing transit ways and railway lines. The GO Midtown Line service has been a topic of discussion since the 1980s (and obviously had passenger railway service if you go back almost a century). A bold plan would be five new lines, all V-shaped running from the northern reaches of the suburbs to the waterfront, making a 90 degree turn, and heading back into the suburbs, all going diagonal to the street grid to make it impossible for surface transportation to beat. The points of the Vs would be Port Credit, Kipling @ Lakeshore, Exhibition, East Harbour, and Scarborough GO. Boom... bold and not happening. Mic Drop.

 

[crs1026]

It could be argued that at this point there are no bold plans, especially ones that use existing transit ways and railway lines. The GO Midtown Line service has been a topic of discussion since the 1980s (and obviously had passenger railway service if you go back almost a century). A bold plan would be five new lines, all V-shaped running from the northern reaches of the suburbs to the waterfront, making a 90 degree turn, and heading back into the suburbs, all going diagonal to the street grid to make it impossible for surface transportation to beat. The points of the Vs would be Port Credit, Kipling @ Lakeshore, Exhibition, East Harbour, and Scarborough GO. Boom... bold and not happening. Mic Drop.

I would argue the opposite - there has always been a bold plan, and it still exists. If only people would read it.

The Big Move was produced in 2008, and has seen regular updates since. If you consider the total capital and operating envelopes for all its elements, and its impact on transit capacity and coverage, it's hardlly a wallflower. Nor is it perfect, but it's a tool to keep people on the same page. It is the definitive plan offered by the supposed leadership in transit planning, after all. (yeah, I choked a little on those words... but less cynically, its authors had that mandate)

The real enemy of bold transit in the GTA is when people come along and draw new lines on the map and think up sexy ideas that are unplugged from an overall strategy, and then advocate for these on a political level just because they are sexy, undoing whatever planning has just been completed. So much for sticking to a plan.

Having said that, TBM and its successors all suffer from a lack of cross-GTA lanes other than LSE-LSW. So the latest idea isn't wrong headed, and might prove worthwhile.....but it needs a business case analysis, which is a level of careful thought and rigour that BlogTO isn't known for.

- Paul

 

[ProjectEnd]

What these folks never seem to take into account is that the North Toronto / Galt is one of the two national freight carrier's main routes east-west across Toronto. When prompted on this, they go: well just send that traffic up to the York / Halton as if it's as easy as a hand wave...Like, sure, it's an interesting idea and it would bring more frequent two-way service to Mississauga much closer to reality, but the fact is it isn't easy. And all these 'napkin drawing' ideas, while interesting thought exercises, aren't really worth much more than that.

Maybe I'm just grumpy and making mountains out of molehills - and please let me know if this is the case - but I just don't see this happening in any term without some massive tripartite agreement between governments, owners, and operators and a huge payment to boot.

(And the CPKC Toronto Yard?!?!?)

 

[Northern Light]

Maybe I'm just grumpy

Nah, I've seen you grumpy, PE, this is not that.

and making mountains out of molehills - and please let me know if this is the case - but I just don't see this happening in any term without some massive tripartite agreement between governments, owners, and operators and a huge payment to boot.

(And the CPKC Toronto Yard?!?!?)

I'm not a huge fan of added fantasy drawings for the simple reason that there's not an unlimited pile of money, and there are other priorities in the queue with varying degrees of real traction that all but preclude this getting serious attention, even at a planning level in the next decade.

That said, I would consider the use of the CPKC corridor from the Junction eastwards to be mostly straight forward and viable, because the majority can accommodate 2 dedicated tracks for GO.

There would be some seriously expensive bridges, and some retaining walls, but its not that pie-in-the-sky, because CPKC can retain in its existing capacity, and even add over-night capacity assuming GO would not run a midtown line 24/7.

West of the Junction, room can also be found for additional GO Tracks, however, if you continue to run a distinct GO Milton service to Union, that's a lot more traffic to manage, and it limits the potential service profile of any 'crosstown' type service from that point west.

****

Toronto Yard has lots of spare room, 72 tracks have been removed; but ensuring no conflicting movements would likely require some costly re-arranging.

The outlined portion of Toronto yard is all former (removed) track, about 75 acres worth.

 

[crs1026]

The outlined portion of Toronto yard is all former (removed) track, about 75 acres worth.

You can extend your rectangle southwestwards to include the hump itself - more acres that could be repurposed.

Actually, Toronto Yard is no longer optimal - so I would not put back any trackage. A new yard should be longer and thinner.

Where one could find land for such a yard, I'm not sure.

- Paul

 

[drum118]

Nov 29
Confederation Station

I stand to be corrected, but what I saw today is not what been talked about for this station.

The station foundation is ready for the structure on the northside of the tracks and it has an ramp to the tunnel under the rail corridors to the south side. This eliminates the need for elevators. Core drilling taking place in the original CN main corridor.. Looks like CN has switch corridor for this station now.

The southside has an retaining wall being built next to the car dealership that will support a platform. To the east and no way to get close for a closer look to make sure, it looks like a structure is being built to house elevators and stairs. No idea if there is another platform being built the 2 rail corridors to allow westbound/southbound trains from NF to stop there that are heading to Toronto.

With the GO platforms on the southside of the station is a better option for both CN and GO as there is less interference for train movements from the Lewis Yard as well the West Harbour, let alone to NF.

Every little corridor east of West Harbour for the 3rd track that goes 2 blocks east of John St. Asphalt has been place where the 3rd is to go for a short distance east of West Harbour to where excavation is taking place. Still need some clearing on the south side before any trackwork can take place. There is no other trackwork taking place between this trackwork and Confederation GO Station.

No GO rail service this weekend from Oakville to West Harbour with buses replacing the trains.

Photos to follow.

 

[smallspy]

Where one could find land for such a yard, I'm not sure.

- Paul

Both railways have long held plans for the projected eventual sale of their respective main yards & facilities.

In the case of CP, the Trenton area has been thrown about as a potential location for a facilities to largely replace Agincourt.

Dan

 

[ProjectEnd]

Both railways have long held plans for the projected eventual sale of their respective main yards & facilities.

In the case of CP, the Trenton area has been thrown about as a potential location for a facilities to largely replace Agincourt.

Dan

What's the reasoning there? For CN, what would happen to MacMillan? That would be an odd move as it sits right off the York, no?

 

[ProjectEnd]

Nah, I've seen you grumpy, PE, this is not that.



I'm not a huge fan of added fantasy drawings for the simple reason that there's not an unlimited pile of money, and there are other priorities in the queue with varying degrees of real traction that all but preclude this getting serious attention, even at a planning level in the next decade.

That said, I would consider the use of the CPKC corridor from the Junction eastwards to be mostly straight forward and viable, because the majority can accommodate 2 dedicated tracks for GO.

There would be some seriously expensive bridges, and some retaining walls, but its not that pie-in-the-sky, because CPKC can retain in its existing capacity, and even add over-night capacity assuming GO would not run a midtown line 24/7.

West of the Junction, room can also be found for additional GO Tracks, however, if you continue to run a distinct GO Milton service to Union, that's a lot more traffic to manage, and it limits the potential service profile of any 'crosstown' type service from that point west.

****

Toronto Yard has lots of spare room, 72 tracks have been removed; but ensuring no conflicting movements would likely require some costly re-arranging.

View attachment 523690

The outlined portion of Toronto yard is all former (removed) track, about 75 acres worth.

You can extend your rectangle southwestwards to include the hump itself - more acres that could be repurposed.

Actually, Toronto Yard is no longer optimal - so I would not put back any trackage. A new yard should be longer and thinner.

Where one could find land for such a yard, I'm not sure.

- Paul

Wasn't paying attention and I didn't realize so much trackage had been removed here. Looking at Toronto Maps, it seems it was somewhere from 2012-2014. What was the reasoning? Maybe @smallspy can chime in here too? Wild stuff!

 

[CapitalSeven]

I've been wondering whether that empty section of Toronto Yard could be a subway depot for Sheppard and the SSE at some point.

 

[TwinHuey]

I was in the area taking drone shots of The Dawes and grabbed some images of Danforth GO.

The Dawes | 143.91m | 43s | Marlin Spring | Arcadis

Why Ontario saves some of these "historic" buildings still baffles me. We see these huge subdivisions and a tiny farm house, or a massive condo development and a tiny shack in the middle...anyway...Not sure why anyone would wish Marlin Spring "go under". They do decent buildings and have...

urbantoronto.ca

 

[Allandale25]

I was in the area taking drone shots of The Dawes and grabbed some images of Danforth GO.

The Dawes | 143.91m | 43s | Marlin Spring | Arcadis

Why Ontario saves some of these "historic" buildings still baffles me. We see these huge subdivisions and a tiny farm house, or a massive condo development and a tiny shack in the middle...anyway...Not sure why anyone would wish Marlin Spring "go under". They do decent buildings and have...

urbantoronto.ca

View attachment 523862
View attachment 523863

View attachment 523867
View attachment 523868

Nice to finally see those storage lockers gone.

 

[drum118]

Nov 29
Barrie Line At Eglinton

 

[Northern Light]

I've been wondering whether that empty section of Toronto Yard could be a subway depot for Sheppard and the SSE at some point.

Theoretically feasible. However, the Sheppard subway is on TTC Gauge rather than standard, so it would not play nicely with the existing track.

The connection and yard would need to be segregated from CP's mainline and any of their yard functions. That would require altering the layout of the current yard.

Its not a bad site for it, but does have its complications and costs.