News   Jul 12, 2024
199 Church Showcases Heritage Facade and Artwork at Street Level
 940     0 
News   Jul 12, 2024
Six Points Plaza Redevelopment Advances With 36-Storey First Phase
 831     0 
News   Jul 12, 2024
Trading Spaces: Can Real Estate Conversion Help Boost Housing Supply?
 336     0 

GO Transit: Service thread (including extensions)

crs1026 said:
^One has to play the ball where it lies. As of today, a great many jobs in Guelph, K-W, Stratford, and Goderich depend on the freight rail service. And CN retains certain contractual rights (which are not discoverable, but I'm told they include rights to through operation) to operate over the territory.

I'm quite certain that the cost of modifying the infrastructure to harmonise freight and more intensive passenger would be less than the cost of buying out the freight operation - that could involve not only compensation to the railways for present and future opportunity, but to municipalities for tax base if the industries involved elect to move, for road work based on added volume, and to workers themselves if shippers close up shop or move out of province.

If we ever get to HSR west of Toronto, then sure, all bets are off.... but finding a new alignment might be desired anyways.

I would see any proposal that deprives Waterloo Region or Perth County of freight service as totally unacceptable.We should b e growing that business, not eliminating it.

- Paul
Click to expand...

There also is a "you scratch my back and ill scratch yours" thing going on here too. GO still uses some CN owned tracks at various parts of their service, and so if they operate in bad faith towards CN, you can expect the same in return.
 
Sunnyside said:
It is in the RTP. By 2041, Milton is supposed to be part of the 15-minute GO network, ie the electrified portions, which will now see better than 15-minute service. So are ‘extensions’ to Hamilton Centre, Mount Pleasant and Mt. Joy (I think). We just can’t build it all at once.
Click to expand...

afransen said:
Perhaps in the 2018 document from the Liberal government. In the 2022 update, there is no specific commitment on this, only to "Continue to work with freight rail partners to seek options to explore GO Rail service enhancements to[...]Milton". That could be as little as adding peak trains.

Click to expand...

Allandale25 said:
Speaking of the RTP, there is a reference to it in the planning report for the upcoming board meeting.
Click to expand...

Please overvalue the RTP. We've played this game before. The Big Move was the original RTP, and it marked the Milton Line as having 2WAD service in 15 years (which considering it was published in 2008, would make that this year).

Not totally dumping on it, we have seen some of this achieved.

Big Move 15.png
 
Metroscapes said:
Please overvalue the RTP. We've played this game before. The Big Move was the original RTP, and it marked the Milton Line as having 2WAD service in 15 years (which considering it was published in 2008, would make that this year).

Not totally dumping on it, we have seen some of this achieved.

View attachment 487658
Click to expand...
I think this is a matter of interpretation... every timeline in almost every RTP has been innacurate, with projects being cancelled, moved around, changed, pushed off, etc. BUT, the RTP is as clear a document for what we, and specifically Metrolinx and the province, are working towards.

In your example, Milton being a 15-year commitment each time really just indicates it is recognized as important, but for one reason or another is not/cannot be pursued immediately. In this case, Milton made as much sense on paper as the rest of the GO Network until we determined what 'express rail' entailed; the scope of work necessary made it easier/necessary to disentangle it from the rest of GO Expansion since the Big Move.

Anywho, we cannot expect what RTPs say will come to fruition when it says it will, but dropping Milton from RTPs would indicate its no longer a priority at all. The Big Move was made at a time when we had completed no new transit projects and it was essentially how Metrolinx hoped to spend its money (before realizing how much things actually cost, and how long they would take). There has been a lot of new transit built and under construction since then, and our expectations have been tempered as we accumulate that knowledge. I would place more faith in the 2041 RTP today than The Big Move in 2008 for this reason; despite Metrolinx's shortcomings, we are starting to know what we are actually doing.

I’ll end with this; other jurisdictions have seen great success adopting a regional plan, because the more legitimate that plan is, the less external stakeholders can influence what gets built or prioritized. Sure politics gets involved, but ideally at minimum the RTP is a list of projects for people in power to choose from (as it often is elsewhere). Although it might not seem like it, the RTP has at least slightly taken away the absolute power politics has traditionally had over transit planning priorities by creating a pre-existing framework they need to acknowledge exists before screwing with it.
 
robmausser said:
Need this badboy on the Kitchener line stat!

6292044602_277cf04061_b.jpg


btw, I must say this is an incredibly inefficent use of space for bikes

Should be this way

SFD_SEO_content_April_-_Semi_Vertical_Cycle_Stands-image_1.png
Click to expand...
Doing the vertical route as your photo will see the rack on one side only as there isn't enough room on the coach to do it on both sides. If it was 100% vertical, then you can have racks on both sides.

To have a bike only car will require GO to convert a number of car for the KW line, but what impact will it have on GO existing fleet.

I assuming the extra NF trains have bike cars on top of the other trains. Between NF and KW lines, what other line will require bike cars and what impact will it have on the existing fleet??
 
drum118 said:
Doing the vertical route as your photo will see the rack on one side only as there isn't enough room on the coach to do it on both sides. If it was 100% vertical, then you can have racks on both sides.

To have a bike only car will require GO to convert a number of car for the KW line, but what impact will it have on GO existing fleet.

I assuming the extra NF trains have bike cars on top of the other trains. Between NF and KW lines, what other line will require bike cars and what impact will it have on the existing fleet??
Click to expand...

I mean I would like a bike car on every go train that's not 12 car, but I know that's a lot to ask for.

You could put a 13th bike car train on trains with the new MPI locomotives since they can pull 14 cars.

I really think bikes on GO would benefit ridership, it solves the last mile problem of a lot of stations and once you get downtown.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top