GO Transit: Service thread (including extensions)

[urbancog]

A key driver for the 407 Freight Bypass was to support construction of a high-speed line from Toronto to Kitchener and London that would have needed two tracks in the current Halton Sub between Bramalea and Georgetown. Once the HSR project was dropped, by DF, the requirements for additional track became more manageable and an IBC was generated specifically to drop the bypass.

https://assets.metrolinx.com/image/upload/v1663237677/Documents/Metrolinx/20191122_BoardMtg_Kitchener_IBC.pdf

 

[Allandale25]

I'm assuming you're referring to the 407 freight bypass? I remember the Ontario Liberals making the announcement, but no one from CN was at the announcement. I don't think anything was agreed on yet either. They just announced that CN and the government had an "understanding".

I'm wondering if the flyover they recently announced west of Georgetown would still be necessary if the 407 freight bypass had been constructed. The bypass would eliminate the conflict point between CN and GO west of Georgetown, probably making the flyover no longer necessary.

I'm pretty sure someone from CN was at the announcement. I could try to find the video later.

Update: CN tweeted it out the June 14, 2016 press conference.

407 Rail Freight Bypass/The Missing Link

"News" is not a contract. So would announcing your marriage by Twitter make it legal? How about announcing you're going to buy someone's house? Announcing a death? Look, when I see an MOU in writing, then I'll start to believe Wynne et al. Here's what "Agreement in Principle" means...

urbantoronto.ca

Further update: Here's the press release and I believe the CN executive quarter is the one who spoke at the announcement.

Ontario Newsroom

news.ontario.ca

Final update: Luc Jubin from CN was at the announcement (see the red arrow) addition to being quoted in the press release. I believe he spoke as well. For cross-referencing, other pictures of Luc here.

(Note: the Brampton Board of Trade CEO at the time was Todd Letts but they transferred the account to the present CEO which is why it says Jaipaul Singh Massey).

Addendum: video news report from CTV Kitchener showing the above-noted CN exec.

Kitchener one step closer to all-day, two-way GO trains to Toronto

It will still be several years before Waterloo Region sees the long-promised ‘all-day, two-way’ GO train service to Toronto – but a positive sign and a number of interim steps were laid out Tuesday.

kitchener.ctvnews.ca

 

[SkylineHorizons]

I didn't realize that proposal existed! if a bus loop is there, I don't see why they can't squeeze a fourth track in there.

Could be that there wouldn't be any room for Railroad street with two extra tracks on the south side.

 

[crs1026]

I didn't realize that proposal existed! if a bus loop is there, I don't see why they can't squeeze a fourth track in there.

The fourth track has been planned on paper. The challenge is, it is better placed on the north side, and that would mean additional impacts and cost (moving the heritage station is one, but not the biggest from a technical perspective).

I suspect it would sink the price tag if done at the same time as the third track..... but it may be needed sooner than we think. I would have been happier if they had just bit the bullet and committed to it as well.

For that matter, I wonder if the current expansion really provides enough capacity for what ought to be coming on that route and beyond. Collenette's High Speed Rail study hinted at a new alignment. Perhaps that was just wishful thinking - but someone really ought to be planning rail capacity across Southern Ontario. That's an urban planning/ land use question as much as a transit/transportation question. ML's (eventual) extension of 2WAD to Kitchener is a start, but between the opportunity to expand connectivity to Pearson Airport and the potential for express rail that may be incompatible with the ML 2WAD infrastructure, there is a lot more to be worked on here. And the pressure on the 401 speaks to how badly this is needed.

- Paul

 

[guavadelic]

A key driver for the 407 Freight Bypass was to support construction of a high-speed line from Toronto to Kitchener and London that would have needed two tracks in the current Halton Sub between Bramalea and Georgetown. Once the HSR project was dropped, by DF, the requirements for additional track became more manageable and an IBC was generated specifically to drop the bypass.

https://assets.metrolinx.com/image/upload/v1663237677/Documents/Metrolinx/20191122_BoardMtg_Kitchener_IBC.pdf

Thanks for this. So it sounds like the bypass will be needed eventually when Southwestern Ontario intercity rail service is beefed up on this corridor (whether HFR/HSR). And as @crs1026 noted, its likely sooner than we think if the pressure on the 401 is any indication.

​

 

[nfitz]

A key driver for the 407 Freight Bypass was to support construction of a high-speed line from Toronto to Kitchener and London that would have needed two tracks in the current Halton Sub between Bramalea and Georgetown. Once the HSR project was dropped, by DF, the requirements for additional track became more manageable and an IBC was generated specifically to drop the bypass.

https://assets.metrolinx.com/image/upload/v1663237677/Documents/Metrolinx/20191122_BoardMtg_Kitchener_IBC.pdf

Ah! That's excellent perspective - and explains what were they thinking! Because otherwise, it seems very, very odd. And presumably pushed out of the HST budget to make that look cheaper.

 

[urbancog]

Metrolinx's defense at the expropriation hearing (referenced above) indicated that the grade separation would be needed to support 30-minute or 15-minute service beyond Mt Pleasant. GO Transit / Metrolinx will have paid for 2 of the 3 tracks at Brampton Station, so could reasonably expect to occupy 2 out or 3 tracks at the same time.

You could imagine an eventual Toronto - Kitchener service plan with:

• 30-minute express service {Kitchener, Guelph, Brampton, Bramalea, Mount Dennis, for example} and
• 30-minute limited stop {Kitchener, Guelph, Acton, Georgetown, Mt Pleasant, Brampton, Woodbine, Bramalea, Mount Dennis, Bloor, for example}.

 

[Bojaxs]

I'm pretty sure someone from CN was at the announcement. I could try to find the video later.

Update: CN tweeted it out the June 14, 2016 press conference.

407 Rail Freight Bypass/The Missing Link

"News" is not a contract. So would announcing your marriage by Twitter make it legal? How about announcing you're going to buy someone's house? Announcing a death? Look, when I see an MOU in writing, then I'll start to believe Wynne et al. Here's what "Agreement in Principle" means...

urbantoronto.ca

Further update: Here's the press release and I believe the CN executive quarter is the one who spoke at the announcement.

Ontario Newsroom

news.ontario.ca

Final update: Luc Jubin from CN was at the announcement (see the red arrow) addition to being quoted in the press release. I believe he spoke as well. For cross-referencing, other pictures of Luc here.

(Note: the Brampton Board of Trade CEO at the time was Todd Letts but they transferred the account to the present CEO which is why it says Jaipaul Singh Massey).

View attachment 595975

Addendum: video news report from CTV Kitchener showing the above-noted CN exec.

Kitchener one step closer to all-day, two-way GO trains to Toronto

It will still be several years before Waterloo Region sees the long-promised ‘all-day, two-way’ GO train service to Toronto – but a positive sign and a number of interim steps were laid out Tuesday.

kitchener.ctvnews.ca

Just did some research. Jubin was the CEO of CN from 2016-2018. Unfortunately it seems CN's board of directors fired him due to CN's poor performance during his tenure. They replaced him with J.J. Ruest who was infamous for going into a bidding war with CP for KCS.

I wonder what the current CEO of CN (Tracy Robinson) and the board of directors think of the 407 freight bypass today? I don't think Tracy has ever made any mention of it. I don't think she is even aware of the proposal.

 

[Allandale25]

Just did some research. Jubin was the CEO of CN from 2016-2018. Unfortunately it seems CN's board of directors fired him due to CN's poor performance during his tenure. They replaced him with J.J. Ruest who was infamous for going into a bidding war with CP for KCS.

I wonder what the current CEO of CN (Tracy Robinson) and the board of directors think of the 407 freight bypass today? I don't think Tracy has ever made any mention of it. I don't think she is even aware of the proposal.

I would have to imagine it's not on their radar because Metrolinx isn't pursuing it. They are working with CN (per multiple updates posted to UT) on adding track capacity to the existing CN Halton Sub.

 

[Bureaucromancer]

The fourth track has been planned on paper. The challenge is, it is better placed on the north side, and that would mean additional impacts and cost (moving the heritage station is one, but not the biggest from a technical perspective).

I suspect it would sink the price tag if done at the same time as the third track..... but it may be needed sooner than we think. I would have been happier if they had just bit the bullet and committed to it as well.

For that matter, I wonder if the current expansion really provides enough capacity for what ought to be coming on that route and beyond. Collenette's High Speed Rail study hinted at a new alignment. Perhaps that was just wishful thinking - but someone really ought to be planning rail capacity across Southern Ontario. That's an urban planning/ land use question as much as a transit/transportation question. ML's (eventual) extension of 2WAD to Kitchener is a start, but between the opportunity to expand connectivity to Pearson Airport and the potential for express rail that may be incompatible with the ML 2WAD infrastructure, there is a lot more to be worked on here. And the pressure on the 401 speaks to how badly this is needed.

- Paul

I’m inclined to guess that with the bypass out of the picture the next “transformational” piece of rail infrastructure will be dealing with Bayview Junction in some way that allows genuinely frequent Via service west and electrification to reach Hamilton.

 

[Bojaxs]

I’m inclined to guess that with the bypass out of the picture the next “transformational” piece of rail infrastructure will be dealing with Bayview Junction in some way that allows genuinely frequent Via service west and electrification to reach Hamilton.

Has Metrolinx done any assessments or reports on improving the Bayview Junction? Why do the trains travel so slow through that area? Lots of switches?

 

[crs1026]

Has Metrolinx done any assessments or reports on improving the Bayview Junction? Why do the trains travel so slow through that area? Lots of switches?

Internal studies, yes. If you can find a Hatch report titled "Hamilton Junction Feasibility Study", which was produced back around 2017, you may see what the thinking was at that time.

ML has (of course) removed this document from its original link http://www.gotransit.com/public/en/improve/wtd/Niagara Rail Expansion ESR Appendix E.pdf

The topic has been discussed in this thread back around message # 7500 onwards (It's a cringeworthy discussion, mostly because nothing much has really progressed since that time - i.e. 2019)

I'm not aware of any recent documents made public on the topic. It's not currently on the agenda from what I can tell, but it's there in the background as a potential future priority. The rumour mill has said CN has favoured/insisted on it as a condition of further service expansion.

PS - the slow speeds are attributable to the track configuration - given the location of underpasses, culverts etc ML had to accept slow speed turnouts because there simply wasn't room for faster turnouts which demand more linear space. This is compounded by the signalling - because the combination of curvature and the design of the signal progressions requires crews to control their speed and watch carefully until each signal comes into view.

- Paul

 

[dowlingm]

The fourth track has been planned on paper. The challenge is, it is better placed on the north side, and that would mean additional impacts and cost (moving the heritage station is one, but not the biggest from a technical perspective).

Or the “heritage” station could simply be demolished and the north track expedited by all means necessary. In the rapidly transforming Brampton centre it will surely be an afterthought where the same building in a village flag stop would be notable.

But then, who could trust Metrolinx to build anything other than a value engineered fish tank to replace it.

 

[nfitz]

I don't know if there's any value to the building - but there's more than one station building that's simply been moved before! And gosh - look what Metrolinx did to the Kodak building at Mount Dennis!

 

[crs1026]

I don't know if there's any value to the building - but there's more than one station building that's simply been moved before! And gosh - look what Metrolinx did to the Kodak building at Mount Dennis!

The restoration on the Kodak building is a really well done project, but nobody has seen the end product in operation... the problem being, until the LRT opens, it cannot be properly offered to the pubic. So it sits unused..... but when it eventuallly opens, it's a lovely public venue that will be valued, especially with all the density coming to Mount Dennis.

Suggesting the Brampton station be demolished is pretty bush league in my view, It's a valid heritage structure, and managing heritage structures of this scope constructively is not unreasonable or unaffordable within the scope of a larger infrastructure project. But I'm a heritage guy at heart.

- Paul