News   Nov 01, 2024
Toronto’s Bike Lane Feud at an All-Time High
 2.2K     14 
News   Nov 01, 2024
Bayview Village Resubmission More Than Doubles Height Near Bessarion Station
 2.6K     3 
News   Nov 01, 2024
Drone Flight Captures Cladding Progress at Menkes' Maison 77 Clarendon
 774     0 

Metrolinx: Mobility Hubs Report

Not bad for the GTTA (I'm still in a SkyDome state of mind, as I am on record as trashing the new name).

The challenges are obvious, but it is pleasing to see them in print:
3.1 Inadequate Transit Service Level (PDF page 27) - taking about GO service - perhaps we could see the push towards regional rail?
3.2 The Pre-Eminence of Parking - Amen!
3.3 Awkward Land Ownership Patterns (fractured and/or incompatable land holdings)
3.4 Lack of Alignment Between Transit Facilities and Urban Development - where places like Oshawa and Burlington, the GO stations are not near the growth nodes.

Some decent examples and identification of the transit nodes and stations. Not too bad at all.

The report shows real GTA environments, not funny towns in England. Perhaps they're getting better.
 
Sean...

Would you consider it regional rail if GO could use the existing stock to achieve 15 minute peak / 30 minute off-peak frequencies with additional stops along the way?

I ask this because while electrification should be our end goal, adding more trains to bring up the frequencies is much less expensive and much quicker in the short term (please kindly ignore the technical limitations of this hypothetical).

We need more trains now, and I fear that winning electrification on all lines will cause GO to defer needed expansion (think of the acceleride/77 situation).
 
Yes. All day, two way service at 30 minute off-peak service (including evenings and weekends), would be the minimum I would define as regional rail.

With existing GO stock, I wouldn't really call for too many more stops, given the poor acceleration/deceleration times of 7-12 car double deck trains with conventional locomotives, but a few extra stops per line, like Woodbine for the airport, and maybe Mount Dennis on the Georgetown line, could be fit in. (And I wouldn't go anything more than that before regional rail equipment is used).

With DMUs/EMUs, smaller trains with better deceleration and acceleration, then you can have stops closer together, but not subway spacing, of course.
 
Thanks

We're on the same page about this issue - A tomato/tomato thing (i guess that doesn't work when you type it).
 
That is pretty bizarre report. According to their density maps, the Dixie corridor will be the densest area in Mississauga by 2021, not MCC. In fact, they are projecting that MCC will have less than 1/10th of the density of Downtown Oakville, Burlington, Milton, Oshawa, etc. by 2031.

Markham Centre is nowhere to be seen on that map as well, it might as well not exist.

And also they claim that Mississauga only has BRT planned and no LRT, even though they list LRT for Etobicoke and Brampton.
 
SeanTrans said:
and maybe Mount Dennis on the Georgetown line, could be fit in.
Click to expand...

Where would a proposed Mount Dennis Go station be located?

It strikes me that Weston is not very far away, and I would venture to say that depending on location, it would be a very closely (for regional rail-type operations) spaced Weston-Mount Dennis section.
 
Earlscourt_Lad said:
Where would a proposed Mount Dennis Go station be located?

It strikes me that Weston is not very far away, and I would venture to say that depending on location, it would be a very closely (for regional rail-type operations) spaced Weston-Mount Dennis section.
Click to expand...

It would be at Eglinton, which isn't ideal, but the connection to the Eglinton-Crosstown line will help uptown commuters.
 
doady said:
That is pretty bizarre report. According to their density maps, the Dixie corridor will be the densest area in Mississauga by 2021, not MCC. In fact, they are projecting that MCC will have less than 1/10th of the density of Downtown Oakville, Burlington, Milton, Oshawa, etc. by 2031.

Markham Centre is nowhere to be seen on that map as well, it might as well not exist.
Click to expand...

Yeah, those density maps are pure rubbish...not at all based on real residential/employment figures.
 
adma said:
And it might become more "ideal" depending on whatever comes up on the Kodak site...
Click to expand...

I've got very high hopes for that site. I've been commuting past the demolition for five years, and I'd like to see something great show up over the next five.
 
The mega-No Frills is more unfortunate. However, I tend to view such things as impermanent "taxpayers" marking time until intensification's called for...
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top