GO Transit: Service thread (including extensions)

[ShonTron]

I hate when people use the term "urban elite", because it sounds like the kind of narrowminded polarised judgement that someone like Rob Ford would make. But when we take downtown city mindset and apply them to the 905, we earn the backlash. What applies in the denser city may not apply way out in the 519.

So long as the roads in Niagara Region are not full, there is nothing inherently wrong with people using their cars. The question only matters when the roads (or the GO parking lot) fill up and someone suggests spending a lot of capital to expand them. The Grimsby area still has a lot of 2-lane arterials. With development proceeding, it won't be long before someone proposes making them wider. At that point, it's fair to point out that investment in transit will solve the problem cheaper, better, and with less community impact, than widening the streets.

The QEW is full, and that auto use can be shown to be disfunctional. So investing in GO as an alternative is the obvious answer. But the case may not be there (yet) in the extremities.

- Paul

The assumption, though, is that everyone can drive and is happy to drive to the GO Station. That's not at all true.

 

[amnesiajune]

Having a station located more central to a downtown area encourages new denser development for more people to walk, bike, or take transit. Flinging GO stations to outer areas just perpetuates GO service that's catered to people dwelling in low-density fringes of a city, does nothing to solve the existing issue of jam-packed car traffic in and out of a GO station at rush hour, and takes away the incentive to build denser and more sustainable city centres.

The point of Go Transit is to maximize use of existing railway ROWs. Go Transit doesn't "fling stations" to wherever they feel like putting them - they find the best place to put them along existing infrastructure, and a lot of the time building close to central areas isn't going to be an option.

 

[crs1026]

The assumption, though, is that everyone can drive and is happy to drive to the GO Station. That's not at all true.

It's changing, definitely, especially as demographics change. More younger people out there who would prefer to bike, and more aging seniors who no longer are comfortable behind the wheel. But don't underestimate where we are starting from. It's still all-cars out there today. They are not planning density at a level where the economics tilt in favour of intensive transit. We will be at hourly or half-hourly bus service at best out there, for many years.

I'm vehemently opposed to $40M parking garages at GO stations, especially further in where we can address the "last mile" effectively. I'm not sure that will be true in Niagara. Hopefully we protect the agricultural lands out there, and urbanization is limited to the areas close to the QEW. (Why building residential areas next to a freeway is good planning, I'm not sure....and the Lakefront is precious. But there is developable land available, even so). The real "enemy" is the solid traffic on the QEW, and that may require parking lots to solve.

- Paul

 

[DonValleyRainbow]

The point of Go Transit is to maximize use of existing railway ROWs. Go Transit doesn't "fling stations" to wherever they feel like putting them - they find the best place to put them along existing infrastructure, and a lot of the time building close to central areas isn't going to be an option.

Let me rephase then: GO Transit flings them to less dense areas along the existing infrastructure.

And specific to Grimsby, the ESR does state that a station at the existing VIA station is feasible. Lack of space for parking was a factor against it during the evaluation. To your credit, it does also cite space for a station building and servicing.

But my argument is that this should be weighted less than community building. Especially since the province has a useful tool for dealing with this constraint: property acquisition and expropriation.

 

[amnesiajune]

GO Transit flings them to less dense areas along the existing infrastructure.

Which stations would you have built elsewhere? Would the alternate locations be sacrificing service speed (i.e. putting stations too close to each other) or connections to local transit just for the sake of walkability?

Especially since the province has a useful tool for dealing with this constraint: property acquisition and expropriation.

Those tools aren't just a magic wand that lets the government say "zap, this is ours now". They require years of expensive legal proceedings and compensation, and end up costing the government way more than the land is actually worth.

 

[mdrejhon]

Yes, it is amazing how quietly the Hamilton GO expansions are occuring.
It is likely both the freight negotiations and also local/provincial politics.

But I see things are so far along, I don't think even the Conservatives would roll back Hamilton.
Slow it down, yes, but not like the 1991 rollback from the early all day GO talk back then. More monies and more construction today, and by 2017 the West Harbour corridor becomes all-day capable. And they plan to build parallel track all the way to the Lewis layover yard -- as part of Stoney Creek GO build -- as part of the 150-200M budget spend that begins in 2017.

By 2018 election, thr AD2W capability becomes already there according to the 2011 Niagara ESR. It then just becomes a political decision and payments to CN to begin running the trains all day.

The GO infrastructure will be there (and complete, unlike 1991!) ... what is missing is good transit connections like the Hamilton LRT.

 

[gweed123]

My preference would be for the "suburban" station to be located at Fifty Rd instead of Casablanca, with a more village-like station (see: Streetsville, Markham) in the core of Grimsby at an upgraded VIA/GO station. Moving the parking-oriented station a few concessions (it's still on Hamilton grid spacing, so they're only ~800m apart) further west leaves enough room between the two for reasonable GO operations, since it would be roughly the same distance between Confederation and Winona (Fifty Rd) as it would be between Winona and Grimsby.

 

[Northern Light]

On Grimsby; I would prefer to see an urban station, roughly @ the current Via Stn site.

However, I could live w/the alternative, provided that a transit link was mandated that operates at or close to the same service span as the trains, was either train-meet-bus or
semi-frequent (30m or better service).

The thought in going car-oriented is invariably looking at the commuter base heading into town, it fails to consider reverse-commute or tourists who arrive by train, and don't have access to a car
at the other end.

While those numbers might not be high in Grimsby, It wouldn't surprise me if there were 15 or more people per train disembarking of that type, upon service being in place.

That should be enough to justify bus service.

Though, a central location might reduce the need/cost/frequency of such a service.

 

[kEiThZ]

Except you can't get to the station, really, without a car. That's not transit.

Sure it is. Commuter transit.

Besides, would we rather have all these people clogging up roads and highways to and in the core?

 

[rbt]

Sure it is. Commuter transit.

Besides, would we rather have all these people clogging up roads and highways to and in the core?

Yeah, there's nothing inherently wrong with a car as a last-mile solution to low/mid density housing. I'm not sure why they haven't setup cameras to bill plates on entry/exit and allow linking a plate to your Presto card.

 

[steveintoronto]

Transit as a way to daytrip to Niagara to cycle is an untapped leisure market but probably small potatoes in the scheme of things.

Cyclists arriving on the train from Toronto for the day - well, they have caught on to busloads of gamblers making a pit stop at the fast food outlets at Casablanca, but even that took a while.

As a distance cyclist, constantly on the lookout for interesting trips, and it's been years since I last did the Niagara Peninsula (it was back in the days of the RDCs via Welland)(when they let you load your own bike on the train, VIA changed policy shortly thereafter so a gorilla did it, all machines stacked horizontally on cart and they charged you $20 extra for the honour of crunching them all together)

I've looked at the weekend "bike trains" running to Niagara Falls more than a few times, even to St Kitts to cycle back to Hamilton or on to Guelph or Brantford, or K/W...but the roads in the Peninsula are like traps for distance cyclists. They go in odd little diversionary circles like the the Waterfront Trails do for the rest of Lake Ontario, at least the western end. And I looked at that too from St Kitt's to Hamilton. If you're a tourist cyclist who gets winded after 30 kms, those 'tracks' are great, but I've spent hours on Google Street View checking the roads to make sense of the Niagara "Bike Train". Hamilton offers vastly greater gateways to escape on to the North and West, and you don't go in circles. They actually take you to other places of interest without vehicle traffic, most of them are railtrails.

I still have visions of the bleak cycle from the Falls back to Hamilton on top of the Mountain decades ago. And the road under the Escarpment that used to be a Hwy way back when (the Wine Route, IIRC) to Hamilton from St Kitt's, that stretch is not bad, interesting history as well as sights but other than static sight-seeing, I just don't quite get the 'attraction' for cyclists other than those wearing Dockers and plaid shirts taking pics of every cliche for most of Niagara.

It's a shame...on the upside, much of Southern Ontario has some exquisite cycling. Just not Niagara. Perhaps sour grapes on my part...leave it to the casinos...

 

[crs1026]

I still have visions of the bleak cycle from the Falls back to Hamilton on top of the Mountain decades ago. And the road under the Escarpment that used to be a Hwy way back when (the Wine Route, IIRC) to Hamilton from St Kitt's, that stretch is not bad, interesting history as well as sights but other than static sight-seeing, I just don't quite get the 'attraction' for cyclists other than those wearing Dockers and plaid shirts taking pics of every cliche for most of Niagara.

Hey, a little respect please.....all cyclists are equal, and not all ride marathons..... no sneering at my Dockers ;-)

The Wine and fruit trails were what I had in mind for daytrip potential. Niagara roads can be intimidating for casual cycling. There are some nice pathways - the Welland Canal has put money into bike paths - but the paths don't link up that well.

The distances, too, are sometimes just a little bit further than urban active commuting will really allow. That's the dilemma for GO....it's not a Last Mile, but a Last 2.5 Miles in some places. Hopefully not over the Escarpment !

- Paul

 

[steveintoronto]

Hey, a little respect please.....all cyclists are equal, and not all ride marathons..... no sneering at my Dockers ;-)

The Wine and fruit trails were what I had in mind for daytrip potential. Niagara roads can be intimidating for casual cycling. There are some nice pathways - the Welland Canal has put money into bike paths - but the paths don't link up that well.

lol....thanks for taking that well. I'm not sneering, just pointing out that the Niagara Region could be a lot more accommodating to persons like myself who would utilize the trains and GO buses as a link to start a trip from there if there was some safe way of doing miles and ending up fifty to a hundred clicks away. Maybe more if the weather permits. (A healthy cyclist with the right machine and trail can do 150 kms in a day, it's time rather than effort)

You have it exactly right on what I've realized Street-Viewing the roads, even the 'off-the-beaten path' ones. They're too busy. And the asphalt is pretty broken on many, not safe with cars whizzing past. And the cycleways that do exist don't string together to make a cogent day's cycle trip. Not all cyclists, but a good number of serious ones want to end-up at a different spot from where they started, and then get back on some form of regional transit.

RE: the "wine and fruit trails" can be nice, there's some lovely locales down there, don't get me wrong, and hiking the Escarpment looks great as per Marshall's musings, but the feeling of 'connective claustrophobia' really defeats the sense of escape that drives many cyclists. I'm spoiled by the railtrails into/out of Hamilton, for instance. The railtrail from Port Dover is exquisite, and in a county that is hardly brimming with cash. I have my eye on some of the abandoned rail RoWs in the Niagara region to see if they are turned into trails. They might be discontinuous due to waterways cutting their length, but as long as they're stringed together, it makes it much easier for a day's jaunt without being forced to put your life in danger on overly busy roads.

Under the Escarpment used to be lovely first time I did it some three decades ago. Last time I did it, it was seething with traffic.

I was a little miffed when GO buses were doing special runs for the Pan Am Games to boating events down there, and not advertising the routes and availability. How ironic, in the name of athleticism and health, they ran those buses, almost empty in many cases, but not for the active hoi polloi. I even called GO to get info. There was none. Wasted bike racks...

 

[mdrejhon]

lol....thanks for taking that well. I'm not sneering, just pointing out that the Niagara Region could be a lot more accommodating to persons like myself who would utilize the trains and GO buses as a link to start a trip from there if there was some safe way of doing miles and ending up fifty to a hundred clicks away. Maybe more if the weather permits. (A healthy cyclist with the right machine and trail can do 150 kms in a day, it's time rather than effort)

You have it exactly right on what I've realized Street-Viewing the roads, even the 'off-the-beaten path' ones. They're too busy. And the asphalt is pretty broken on many, not safe with cars whizzing past. And the cycleways that do exist don't string together to make a cogent day's cycle trip. Not all cyclists, but a good number of serious ones want to end-up at a different spot from where they started, and then get back on some form of regional transit.

RE: the "wine and fruit trails" can be nice, there's some lovely locales down there, don't get me wrong, and hiking the Escarpment looks great as per Marshall's musings, but the feeling of 'connective claustrophobia' really defeats the sense of escape that drives many cyclists. I'm spoiled by the railtrails into/out of Hamilton, for instance. The railtrail from Port Dover is exquisite, and in a county that is hardly brimming with cash. I have my eye on some of the abandoned rail RoWs in the Niagara region to see if they are turned into trails. They might be discontinuous due to waterways cutting their length, but as long as they're stringed together, it makes it much easier for a day's jaunt without being forced to put your life in danger on overly busy roads.

Under the Escarpment used to be lovely first time I did it some three decades ago. Last time I did it, it was seething with traffic.

I was a little miffed when GO buses were doing special runs for the Pan Am Games to boating events down there, and not advertising the routes and availability. How ironic, in the name of athleticism and health, they ran those buses, almost empty in many cases, but not for the active hoi polloi. I even called GO to get info. There was none. Wasted bike racks...

I'll have to say the rail trails around Hamiton are such a pleasure to cycle on compared to anything nearby.

Now if only the Niagara Bike Train (that already passes inches by Hamilton West Harbour GO) can stop at West Harbour in 2017 instead of 2018 or 2019... that reconnecting rail stub east of the platforms, is all that is needed, to continue the Niagara trains on their merry way.

The upcoming new Bay Street cycle track will also connect to West Harbour too, and connects to pre-existing Cannon, so I'll be on a cycle track 90 percent of the way from my home to West Harbour. As car-friendly Hamilton is, and how patchwork/flawed Hamilton's cycle network is, I'm still amazed we are now so far ahead of City of Niagara Falls in cycling. Especially when Claremont Cycle Track arrives in a couple years.

 

[mdrejhon]

I was at the final GO Electrification Open House last night.

Greg Percy mentioned to the room, some phrase similar to "over their dead bodies" alluding to CN/CP letting electrification go all the way to Hamilton. (I'm not sure of the exact phrase, but it sounded like that. It was very, very discouraging in respect to Hamilton electrification, it sounded like it wouldn't happen in our lifetimes).

In addition, everyone I asked said the electrification EA ends at Burlington.

So, this implies this is what happens in about ten years for all-day 2-way:
-- Electrified 15-Minute service to Burlington
-- Hourly Diesel to Aldershot & Hamilton

So Hamilton gets an upgrade, and Aldershot gets a downgrade.
Unless something changes (new EA stage, etc).

This was discussed before, but it was reconfirmed last night that electrification ends in Burlington (the plan at the moment).