SaugeenJunction
Senior Member
Great video, and part of the reason I’m so excited the connection work is finally getting done. Saving 9 to 10 mins each direction is so important.
|
|
|
GO Transit: Construction Projects (Metrolinx, various)
- Thread starter drum118
- Start date
crs1026
Superstar
At West Harbour, the new trackage and signalling is on property owned by CN. So you can be sure that they only do the work when they are good and ready. The station at West Habour opened in 2015...... unbelievable that it is taking this long, some blame is owed to CN but some to ML.
As for Guelph, the trackage is owned by ML now.... and they take all the blame for the inaction.
But to read ML's releases on social media and to the press - we are celebrating victory.
Ha.
- Paul
As for Guelph, the trackage is owned by ML now.... and they take all the blame for the inaction.
But to read ML's releases on social media and to the press - we are celebrating victory.
Ha.
- Paul
reaperexpress
Senior Member
Yeah my primary complaint about Metrolinx is not that they took a long time to build the connection (we know that CN is also a limiting factor so some of the delay was out of Metrolinx's control).
My complaint is that Metrolinx was lying about construction on the connection. They claimed in 2019 that work was underway on the connection, when in fact that work wouldn't begin until three years later.
turbanplanner
Senior Member
Whenever I think of housing by the go the failure that is “mixed use” Burlington with only a Walmart next door comes to mind
just east of the creek
Active Member
And yet, there are existing towers next to the Fairview station, with additional towers underway. Plus plans to redevelop the old nursery site of Garden Gallery in easy walking distance to the east with further towers. And further east surrounding the Appleby Station you have major development proposals for mult-tower sites west of Appelby, and to the east of the station, another multi tower site. All of these have been covered on UT threads. And yes, legitimate questions about the pace of these developments could be asked, but economic circumstances may be playing a role there as well. All things being equal, the Fairview Street corridor will continue to densify over the next x number of years.
Chris R.
Senior Member
To be fair, Burlington didn't want the Walmart and fought it at the OMB from my recollection.
I think my biggest criticism is that the government isn't having Metrolinx redevelop their parking lots into mixed use rental and condo towers with affordable housing mix and market housing.
It's the way many transit agencies fund their service to be better is to have a real estate arm that benefits off residential, commercial and office space while providing residents of other TOC to access the other quickly in both directions on the regional rail service.
They could easily put parking underground and charge a small fee to park in the covered parking to pay for the cost of building parking and to reduce the reliance of automobiles to transit slowly.
This would not only stop Metrolinx from having one of North America's best regional rail services despite being surrounded by seas of empty parking lots, to be a profitable organization that operated the best regional rail service and offers market and affordable social housing options close to central transit connections.
The private TOD is great, and I owned a condo in the Fairview towers at one point and they were cool, with awesome connections to GO, but without office space, good retail (not Walmart) and connections across the tracks to the eventual north community on the parking lot, GO transit won't reach it's full ridership potential.
DirectionNorth
Active Member
I don't know if it's plausible for Metrolinx to get the shovels in the ground today. But I would like to see an accounting of parking at each station, and a plan for future use to, say, the 2050s.
The plans should include timeframes for developing, or not developing, Metrolinx-owned lots near GO stations, as well as a commitment to improve the pedestrian and cycling access in the immediate approaches at all stations. For example, here's what I drew up for Rouge Hill GO in about 2 minutes:
I would like to see this exercise (with slightly more detail) repeated at all current and future GO stations, minus the few that don't have park and rides.
just east of the creek
Active Member
Re Walmart and Burlington. I asked around and you are quite correct. This project and project location were fought by the city and I gather with pretty mixed opinions from the general populace related to traffic (which is an issue in the area, and growing, and to be fair, also around the COSTCO outlet on Brant, just north of the QEW)
Last edited:
turbanplanner
Senior Member
Fair point about the city blocking things. Fairview isn't amazing but it does have the 3 keys (somewhere to go/shop, somewhere to work, and FREQUENT transit!)
I get crap here for supporting cars (gasp) but I'm ok with GO charging for parking, it just seems that you need A LOT of agencies to work together and a master plan to have a successful TOC! Even places like city place or liberty villege suck. It took almost 20 years for CP to get a school, and you still need to trek out for a job that isn't the in building retail
Chris R.
Senior Member
It's my opinion that cities/province should be doing more to incentivize things they want. If they want an office tower beside GO then they should offer a 10 year discount or waiving of property taxes for the areas they want them if an building starts within the next 5 years.
As it is, we kind of just say "we want this, or not that" and then just expect the market to make bad/risky decisions based on visioning exercises. Cities especially need to do more to design planned communities with policies and tax increment schemes that actually encourage said vision, with realistic expectations, (ie, not expecting 4 storey mid-rises beside transit stations). It's fine to get input from the community, but the city should also study the profit margin for parcels before zoning them for unprofitable development only to fight developers at OLT because a proposal for taller than the zoning regs keep coming in.
drum118
Superstar
July 07
Had a look at the Lakeshore East expansion at Queen and Eastern with more photos up on my site.
As it stands today, safety barriers and fencing are sitting where track 3 used to be for the expansion of the corridor for 4 tracks as well the OL line. As it been asked in the pasted when will express service return, I and others have said 2025, but 2026 is looking like when it will return as posted by earlier by someone.
Looking closely at these 2 area today and planning now now to look at a few other, I can say for sure that the existing 2 lines will be rebuilt, especially the existing bridges.
Queen St will see a wider span as well height increase. Eastern Av is also seeing the same thing, but been built for 6 lanes and wider sidewalk.
New retaining crash walls are being built to allow the area between the wall and the existing tracks to be backfill to allow the building of tracks for GO and what is plan for the OL with the OL taking over the exist 2 tracks. Could be wrong on a few things as I have not follow the OL process to date.
Eastern
Queen
Had a look at the Lakeshore East expansion at Queen and Eastern with more photos up on my site.
As it stands today, safety barriers and fencing are sitting where track 3 used to be for the expansion of the corridor for 4 tracks as well the OL line. As it been asked in the pasted when will express service return, I and others have said 2025, but 2026 is looking like when it will return as posted by earlier by someone.
Looking closely at these 2 area today and planning now now to look at a few other, I can say for sure that the existing 2 lines will be rebuilt, especially the existing bridges.
Queen St will see a wider span as well height increase. Eastern Av is also seeing the same thing, but been built for 6 lanes and wider sidewalk.
New retaining crash walls are being built to allow the area between the wall and the existing tracks to be backfill to allow the building of tracks for GO and what is plan for the OL with the OL taking over the exist 2 tracks. Could be wrong on a few things as I have not follow the OL process to date.
Eastern
Queen
Bojaxs
Active Member
The issue isn't the lack of employment located close to GO stations. I imagine most people who live within walking distance of a GO station work in DT Toronto.
My issue with all the GO station residential developments is the lack of restaurants, bars, community/ park areas, grocery stores.
Metrolinx should focus on making a few stations as "employment hubs". Union, West Harbour, Brampton. The rest should be focus on lifestyle.
Doesn't make sense to try to build office towers at every station when DT Toronto towers are already seeing a dearth of office tenants.
My issue with all the GO station residential developments is the lack of restaurants, bars, community/ park areas, grocery stores.
Metrolinx should focus on making a few stations as "employment hubs". Union, West Harbour, Brampton. The rest should be focus on lifestyle.
Doesn't make sense to try to build office towers at every station when DT Toronto towers are already seeing a dearth of office tenants.
Last edited:
lead82
Senior Member
There is no need for any office buildings by GO stations for a long time. What js needed is housing and commercial retail near GO like Grocers, or daycares or heck even a dry cleaner and a cafe that’s not a Tim’s. Many European cities with good regional rail have many stores in their stations so people can do some errands to/from the station. The era of driving to the GO station should be over. Start with key stations like Rouge and Mimico, Long Branch and others like Aurora and expand from there.
Bojaxs
Active Member
Why don't hotel chains look at constructing properties near GO stations?
Take the UP express to Union and then the GO train to your hotel.
Easy access to downtown without staying in downtown.
just east of the creek
Active Member
I would slightly disagree with you on the parking aspect. Often, accessing the Fairview GO station requires a car, there is no public transit north of the 407 in Burlington. Yes I could drive to the nearest bus stop, but where to park? I could ride my bike but that is a longish ride -although downhill going to the station. Even the GO Bus stops along the 407 include a parking function. My view would be that depending on location, there may be a higher of lower need for a parking. Garage parking, as opposed to acres of only surface parking lots. Fairview or Bloomington, or Oshawa would differ from Long Branch, Mimico, certainly a Parkside Station ( if built) ,
But I would also agree that many GO stations could be more cleverly integrated into their communities. Again, Fairview station on the south side , although with a Walmart next door, and good transit outside, and housing there and coming, could be a developing example, but sense of community or neighborhoods is probably not there yet. Fairview is still, in the main, a commercial core. But eliminate the surface parking on the Fairview side of the line, the south side, redevelop that portion of the property, and restrict parking to the northern side, which is comprised of an existing enormous surface lot, plus a parking garage, and flanked by employment lands. Also add the redevelopment of the neighbouring GM dealer on Fairview ( this can only be a matter of time) and you have more opportunities to create, plus you then link to the Garden Gallery development etc. etc.
Oakville station would also be a good test case. With all the development to come for ‘mid-town’ Oakville, almost surrounding the site. What vision will be employed to redevelop the very large parking landscape of this GO/VIA station?
I have a good friend in the planning industry and we argue about planning concepts all the time, usually a beer and dinner are involved, but it is all good.