News   Jun 25, 2024
10 Storeys Proposed to Float Over Annex Heritage Building
 621     0 
News   Jun 25, 2024
Madison's Alias Ascending with Height Bump into Downtown Skies
 678     0 
News   Jun 25, 2024
How Toronto Is Responding as the Fastest Growing City in North America
 1.2K     3 

GO Transit: Service thread (including extensions)

gweed123 said:
It also wouldn't exactly help with the whole "Yonge line is already a sardine can south of Eglinton" thing…
Click to expand...

Theoretically it could connect to Dupont station on the Spadina line as well.

Anyways any crosstown line will connect with Yonge at some point, you can't really avoid that situation.
 
drum118 said:
Don't see CP & CN running joint service in the same corridor especially the Halton Sub that can only support 3 tracks period. More important, you created a nightmare for tank train derailment 3 fold and cutting the network now if such a derailment took place. But most of all, you put are putting people lives at a higher risking of being kill or injure if such derailment took place.

The only way dangerous goods cannot be ship by rail is not shipping them and giving up the good life style we enjoy today.

You will almost triple the number of trains on the Halton Sub and this along raise the back of the residents along that corridor base on future growth.

It make No matter if you relocate both lines to another area, it will have an impact on people living along the line.

GO will run one day on the CP line, but way down the road at this time as there are far more important work to be done first.
Click to expand...

I think the key difference between CP's line and CN's line (within City of Toronto) is that if you look at satellite view, there are more residential neighbourhoods along CP. The densities along CP are increasing as well. There are some subdivisions along CN (which shouldn't have been permitted to be built so close), but I think if you broke it down into a formulated index based on distance from the line, amount of people, and density, the index would be much higher along CP. That's just an uneducated guess, but take a look guys and see if you would agree. CN seems to be surrounded by much more commercial land

The flip side of this is potential ridership, and how it would be much more appropriate to have passenger trains utilizing the CP line. It is also earmarked in The Big Move. I agree with Drum that it is only a matter of time.

I think if everyone (CN, CP, Metrolinx and all three levels of government) got their heads together and acted in good faith, a relocation of CP's mainline would be possible. It could improve transit in midtown, and reduce the risks associated with derailment. If it were to run along CN's line, it would be an increasing burden and risk to residents there, but it could be mitigated by expropriating those homes that are waaayyy too close. But I also don't want to accept that it's the only alternative.
 
robmausser said:
Also Metrolinx is interested in doing this line, but its not in any of the current "waves" of projects.

http://www.blogto.com/upload/2012/11/20121129-Metrolinx-Map.jpg

Green is the GO train network and you can clearly see a line across the CP corridor.
Click to expand...

It's listed in the Big Move (you know, that plan that's 6 years old and politicians keep trying to mess with) as a 15-year project. This puts a midtown train in service for 2023. See items 8, 13 and 14:

Untitled.jpg


The project rides on a completed EA, CP's cooperation and money from new revenue tools. The Liberals have their mandate, they just need to implement said tools already and that's 1/3 issues addressed.
 

Attachments

  • Untitled.jpg
    Untitled.jpg
    20.2 KB · Views: 449
DonValleyRainbow said:
It's listed in the Big Move (you know, that plan that's 6 years old and politicians keep trying to mess with) as a 15-year project. This puts a midtown train in service for 2023. See items 8, 13 and 14:
Click to expand...
That's the 2008 Big Move though. Look in the 2013 approved changes - http://www.metrolinx.com/en/regionalplanning/bigmove/The_Big_Move_Approved_Changes_EN.pdf

8 and 13 are still in the 15-year plan, but it reboots, so it's not due to 2028. While 14 was moved to the 25-year plan, setting the target for that to 2038.

Now you know why it's called the Big Move. It's a big moving target.
 
nfitz said:
That's the 2008 Big Move though. Look in the 2013 approved changes - http://www.metrolinx.com/en/regionalplanning/bigmove/The_Big_Move_Approved_Changes_EN.pdf

8 and 13 are still in the 15-year plan, but it reboots, so it's not due to 2028. While 14 was moved to the 25-year plan, setting the target for that to 2038.

Now you know why it's called the Big Move. It's a big moving target.
Click to expand...

They rejected my suggestion for a sub-heading "We can't move people....so we move projects" ;)
 
CDL.TO said:
No one at Metrolinx has ever claimed that the Technical Update was a reboot.
Click to expand...
They've been very vague. No one at Metrolinx has ever claimed that the it wasn't either. Nor have they claimed that they would finish what's in the 15-year plan (they have 9 years left) by 2023.
 
nfitz said:
They've been very vague. No one at Metrolinx has ever claimed that the it wasn't either. Nor have they claimed that they would finish what's in the 15-year plan (they have 9 years left) by 2023.
Click to expand...

I believe that they have said that they could have finished what's in the 15 year plan if sufficient funding had been provided.

And seriously, "no one claimed that it wasn't". That's the level of evidence you're working with these days nfitz? Also, no one has claimed that the plan won't require the demolition of your house.
 
CDL.TO said:
I believe that they have said that they could have finished what's in the 15 year plan if sufficient funding had been provided.

And seriously, "no one claimed that it wasn't". That's the level of evidence you're working with these days nfitz? Also, no one has claimed that the plan won't require the demolition of your house.
Click to expand...

Irrespective of "why", is it not fairly clear that if something was in the 15 year plan in 2008 and is still in the 15 year plan in 2013 that it is gonna be 5 years later than you would have planned in 2008? Or am I missing something?
 
TOareaFan said:
Irrespective of "why", is it not fairly clear that if something was in the 15 year plan in 2008 and is still in the 15 year plan in 2013 that it is gonna be 5 years later than you would have planned in 2008? Or am I missing something?
Click to expand...

That's not how Metrolinx describes their own plan. The map might say "15-year plan", but the document text specifically says 2021.

Realistically, we're going to see a new version of the plan come out in a couple of years and perhaps that will include a whole new "15-year plan" pointing to 2031.
 
TOareaFan said:
Irrespective of "why", is it not fairly clear that if something was in the 15 year plan in 2008 and is still in the 15 year plan in 2013 that it is gonna be 5 years later than you would have planned in 2008? Or am I missing something?
Click to expand...
Read what was said when the update was released in 2013. My recollection is that it was pretty clear they had until 2028 for the 15-year plan. My recollection is we even discussed that here in one of the threads.
 
Last edited:
nfitz said:
Read what was said when the plan was released in 2013. My recollection is that it was pretty clear they had until 2028 for the 15-year plan. My recollection is we even discussed that here in one of the threads.
Click to expand...

The plan was released in 2008. A technical update to the plan was released in 2013.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top