Towered
Senior Member
Tunnelled, because Brampton "deserves" a subway, while surface LRT is good enough for Mississauga.
Tunnelled, because Brampton "deserves" a subway, while surface LRT is good enough for Mississauga.
robmausser
Senior Member
Looking at downtown Brampton, and what a mickie mouse hicksville of a place it is, its such a complete joke that tunneling is even being proposed.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
Because of NIMBYs in Brampton are worried light rail vehicles would not mix well with Brampton's historic downtown. (Brampton and historic don't really show up in my tour book.)
From link.
drum118
Superstar
They should talk to towns and cities that run Freight Trains down the centre street. We watched EMU's trains run down streets in Michigan City that stop to pickup riders on them. Its a 4 lane road with parking in the curb lane.Because of NIMBYs in Brampton are worried light rail vehicles would not mix well with Brampton's historic downtown. (Brampton and historic don't really show up in my tour book.)
From link.
Too many place in Europe where trams run by buildings 2-3 times older than the ones in Brampton. Hell we saw a number of small downtown's with a better one than Brampton one this month on our trip.
doady
Senior Member
That corridor looks wider than Main Street in Downtown Brampton.
I never had a problem with original proposed loop in Brampton. Maybe Metrolinx wanted to make it easier to extend LRT north of downtown, but the density and ridership along Main Street never warranted LRT anyways (let alone underground LRT). The Main Street corridor is a joke. LRT along Main is simply to connect to Downtown Brampton and the GO train. So I think Metrolinx are the ones ultimately to blame this stupidity for prioritizing serving Main Street and changing it to a more disruptive two-way configuration.
But then again Brampton is a strange place, even by 905 standards. Maybe there would be controversy no matter what Metrolinx did.
I never had a problem with original proposed loop in Brampton. Maybe Metrolinx wanted to make it easier to extend LRT north of downtown, but the density and ridership along Main Street never warranted LRT anyways (let alone underground LRT). The Main Street corridor is a joke. LRT along Main is simply to connect to Downtown Brampton and the GO train. So I think Metrolinx are the ones ultimately to blame this stupidity for prioritizing serving Main Street and changing it to a more disruptive two-way configuration.
But then again Brampton is a strange place, even by 905 standards. Maybe there would be controversy no matter what Metrolinx did.
Hopkins123
Senior Member
I'm fairly certain that the tunnel proposal has more to do with the roadway width through downtown Brampton than heritage designation. It's not like Hurontario (Main) is 6 lanes across like it is though most of Mississauga.
Allandale25
Senior Member
The history is a little more complex than that. My understanding is that Brampton staff expressed concerns with the loop because of where the stations would be located and were particularly concerned with the entrance to the City Hall parking garage. I think they were also concerned with the Wellington/George corner. Also, it would require a new grade separation under the CN Halton Sub. They may have also said it could make extending the line further north more complicated. I'm going by memory here. I can post later the pro/con chart from a staff report for what it said about the loop.
Either way, it's being studied again so we'll see if there are new ways to mitigate this for the loop option.
In case anyone here is new and hasn't seen what the loop looked like back in 2014/2015 see here:
George St Loop Track Plan - Rotated - 17Sept15.pdf
drive.google.com
W. K. Lis
Superstar
I guess they would never redevelop Brampton's Main Street (or within a couple of blocks) with mid-rise or high-rise buildings (keeping the "historic" facades), which may increase the ridership.
doady
Senior Member
Downtown Brampton is a very small place, smaller than even Port Credit. From Wellington to Church is only around 500m. There are some opportunities there, but how much redevelopment can you expect? The Shopper's World area probably has more potential.
Connecting to the LRT to the GO train is probably the most important thing. Brampton can do as much or little as they want with their so-called "downtown". Their so-called "Main Street" matters even less. That's why Metrolinx should just forget about any potential extension north of the GO station just build a loop. Light rail one-way on the street is already too much, a subway tunnel would just be ridiculous.
And I know Metrolinx cares about LRT north of downtown. You can also see Dundas from Kipling all the way into Burlington they are obsessed with one line, one mode. Dundas east of Hurontario should be LRT or subway, but Metrolinx instead decided on a 37km-long on-street BRT.
Bureaucromancer
Active Member
Because the public is utterly obsessed with it. See the outcry on Sheppard, the disaster that is the SRT replacement and even the complaints around both Ottawa and Waterloo's phase 1. This is an INHERENTLY political process, and for better or worse the public at large do not accept linear transfers within a corridor. Even where it actually means a net increase in transfers, the aesthetics of the thing just aren't accepted. Metrolinx recognizing such is one less losing fight for them.
Last edited:
Rainforest
Senior Member
I don't see it as a huge problem if they build a 2-km tunnel under Main St. Locals are happier, trip to the GO station from the south is a bit faster, northern extension is easier.
Cost? Well, transit advocates shouldn't always aim at the cheapest option that can work, if they want the cause to be popular with the broader public.
Cost? Well, transit advocates shouldn't always aim at the cheapest option that can work, if they want the cause to be popular with the broader public.
sixrings
Senior Member
Except the broader public doesn't want to pay more taxes for these upgrades.
Hopkins123
Senior Member
Taxes are going to go up no matter what we do or do not do!
This illusion... delusion?, that somehow if we cut corners on rapid transit expansion, we can save a couple of cents on the dollar on our tax bills is both harmful and detrimental to the long term growth and development of the region as a whole.
Rainforest
Senior Member
True, it is always hard to get the taxpayer fund transit. However, the dependence between the cost of a new line and the level of tax push-backs is very non-linear; sometimes, getting a cheaper line funded is as hard or harder than getting a more expensive version funded.
I don't have a strong opinion on the Brampton transit options, as either solution won't affect me. It just seems to be that, should the tunnel proponents prevail, transit advocates should't go ballistic. Even if the tunnel solution is not optiomal on the cost-benefit scale, it would still increase the transit coverage and improve the connectivity, versus being locked in the debates and having the line terminated at Steeles.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
Should be remembered that for the private sector, they are looking for a profit. The higher the return the better.
See this link for an example where the government "gave away" a project for "lower taxes", but ended up costing the taxpayer user big time, to make sure the private sector has a big profit.
Birth of a fiasco: How the Ontario Tories completely botched the sale of Highway 407