Allandale25
Senior Member
Your memory is correct. It was a presentation given recently about the integrated downtown plan.
Item 10.1: https://pub-brampton.escribemeeting...Minutes&lang=English&Item=111&Tab=attachments
Last edited:
|
|
|
GO Transit: Service thread (including extensions)
- Thread starter drum118
- Start date
Your memory is correct. It was a presentation given recently about the integrated downtown plan.
Item 10.1: https://pub-brampton.escribemeeting...Minutes&lang=English&Item=111&Tab=attachments
nfitz
Superstar
We were discussing the Milton GO service (which I explicitly noted in the previous sentence). You had responded by saying "You are forgetting about the costs of accommodating AD2D RER service with CN's longhaul freights still on CN's Halton Sub."
Tell me - if they go to 2-way all-day service on the Milton line - what has this got to do with anything on the CN Halton sub - and why are there any costs for the CN Halton sub? You seems to be focussing on a long-dead fantasy plan about rerouting CP's rail service around Toronto, including a relatively short-bypass for CN around Brampton - ignoring that there's plenty of space along the Milton line for additional tracks.
crs1026
Senior Member
Your argument makes sense, but only so long as it is viewed in a narrow sense that strips away the context.
A decision to twin the Galt Sub is not an engineered solution…it’s a negotiated solution. You can be sure that CP will use its full negotiating leverage, meaning they will impose every tool and objection they can mount…. not because it improves the design of the solution, but just because it extracts a more favourable outcome for CP and its shareholders. In money, and in their capacity and effectiveness.
The best strategy when faced with a tough negotiation is to consider the best alternative solution… if Honda won’t sell me the car I want at the price I want, will I try Toyota? In this case, the alternative to getting a deal with CP to twin the Galt Sub is to persuade CN to move to a new corridor, and to convince both railways to share that corridor and the existing CN corridor - despite being fierce competitors to each other. (Which are negotiated solutions in their own right). So yes, we immediately have to include CN in the debate.
Even without turning our minds to relative cost, it strikes me that the bypass alternative is just too complicated a proposition to negotiate under our legal, regulatory, and political regimes.
The Bypass began as a simpler proposition - move CN off the Halton Sub between Bramalea and Milton, because that option might be a cheaper way of building Kitchener GO than twinning the Halton Sub. A previous government did a fair bit of diligence, and (for a time) seemed to believe that bypass was the cheaper alternative. The plan quickly morphed (conceptually) into get CP off the Galt Sub as well, facilitating GO lines to Milton and across North Toronto plus the original Kitchener piece.
On a technocratic level I prefer the bypass to the twin-the-Galt alternative, because it solves multiple agendas. But it seems like a deck of cards to negotiate/legislate/regulate/sell to taxpayers.
So we are back to twinning the Galt, when we can afford it….and until the base RER and four subways are built and paid for, I doubt anyone has the cash to meet CP’s asking price
- Paul
Last edited:
nfitz
Superstar
Absolutely!
But surely a scheme to add more tracks to the Milton line (which was anticipated the century before last) is going to be easier (and cheaper) to negotiate, than getting CP to move 60 kilometres of their entire mainline corridor to north of the city.
Urban Sky
Senior Member
It certainly is going to be "cheaper and easier" if you have a credible alternative proposal at hand, regardless or whether that is your preferred outcome or not...
crs1026
Senior Member
Cheaper to build, certainly. But CP is not required to only charge at cost. They will have many arguments about the current and potential market value of the land, and how much of the corridor must be reserved to future proof their freight capability, etc etc.
The cost of building those 60 kms of new mainline may help set the limit on what CP will ask for the twinning.
(And that in turn likely has to assess the cost of getting CN to yes, not just the cost of the civil works and new track and signals up on the CN corridor…..because CN isn’t obliged to charge at cost either…...)
- Paul
Krypto98
Active Member
I just checked. The ROW at Mill St is 22 meters wide(72 feet), but further west it looks to be 30 meters (100 feet). The south track looks 100% possible but a north track would require the heritage building to be moved a couple of meters north. As well the reconstruction of a few bridges at Main Street, Queen Street, Etobicoke Creek, Center Street,
Urban Sky
Senior Member
It's not just about the space (and capital costs!) for adding additional tracks: for AD2D with headways of 15 minutes and better, you'd presumably also need to place somewhere a grade separation (flyover over CPs tracks) - and preferably already East of Kipling, since all of GOs platforms are currently on the North side of Galt Subdivision...
nfitz
Superstar
Mill Street in Streetsville? I don't think it's near the tracks.
It does look narrower through Streetsville though. Looks about 88 feet (4 chains, 27-metres) at Thomas to me. Though only 20 metres at Princess. Now I'm looking at PIN mapping, I'm surprised by how variable it is - and what I thought was 37-metres, seems to include a 10-metres city buffer.
Last edited:
Krypto98
Active Member
Mill street in downtown brampton
Krypto98
Active Member
I was talking about the CN halton subdivision on the kitchener line
Urban Sky
Senior Member
Okay, I didn't catch this since you were directly responding to someone who just wants to talk about the Milton Corridor in isolation of anything else. Anyways, you also have to somehow cross CN's transcontinental line, but given that you probably can avoid having minimum headways of 15 minutes beyond Mount Pleasant, you might be able to avoid a flyover. Nevertheless, that might mean that you have to bunch up any intercity trains with RER trains (assuming both run at a minimum headway of 30 minutes), to maintain 20 minute windows for freight...
Allandale25
Senior Member
Northern Light
Superstar
For those who don't see previews:
For everyone, from the article:
Direct link to article:
GO train plan that will help tens of thousands of Mississauga and Milton residents a priority, says transport minister | inSauga
A plan to expand the Milton GO train line that would benefit tens of thousands of Mississauga residents and workers is near the top of the priority list for Mississauga Centre MP and federal Minister of Transport Omar Alghabra, who retained his post in Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s latest...
www.insauga.com
innsertnamehere
Superstar
This is a very odd approach to me, the provincial and municipal governments were not pushing for this service at all as far as I know. It's very unusual for the Federal Government to be the one to push for a project instead of just doling out the federal infrastructure dollars as the province wishes. It's gotta be a pet project of Alghabras.