News   Apr 19, 2024
45 and 61-Storey Towers Proposed near Oakville GO
 241     0 
News   Apr 19, 2024
DRP Reviews Innovative Affordable Housing at Kennedy Station
 518     2 
News   Apr 19, 2024
Lifetime Helping Craft the Future of Toronto's Neighbourhoods
 875     3 

Metrolinx: Other Items (catch all)

SaugeenJunction said:
My ideal scenario is that GO runs the bulk of the service on the Guelph Sub, with VIA focusing on the southern route. I wouldn’t get rid of all VIA service however. A few Windsor-Kitchener-Toronto and London-Kitchener-Ottawa VIA runs would be great for connecting the southwest to the rest of the province.
Click to expand...
The ideal scenario would be that service via Kitchener is accelerated to the point that nobody feels the need to travel on the Southern Route when going from London to Toronto. The Dundas Sub is the Kingston Sub of Southwestern Ontario: you will never have frequent, reliable and reasonably fast service unless you invest in alternative routes…
 
robmausser said:
I'd like to see it be a purchase by both VIA and Metrolinx (although I dont know the logistics of those two organizations working together) VIA benefits too and should pay into the purchase and upgrades of the track as well.

Although another option is just to remove VIA entirely from the line, and only operate them on the CN mainline to the south.

However the issue with that is that I think the GEXR sub would be a great way to get dedicated HFR with Via in the south of Ontario. Perhaps VIA would only operate on the line as an express/high speed service, with stops at London, Kitchener and Guelph only.
Click to expand...
I disagree. I want to see multiple services on the same line to encourage competition.

Further on I’d like to see Go follow the transport for transport for NSW model and offer better quality seats in coaches for the long distance (2+ Hours) routes.
 
With improvements, the Kitchener line can be as fast as the Brantford line for through services.

VIA needs enough priority on the Kitchener line to tap as much through market as there may be between Windsor-Chatham and Stratford-Kitchener-Guelph.-Brampton. And perhaps Malton. The objective should be to minimise the need to change trains at London. I do suspect that the Windsor-Chatham to North Line stations market is bigger than the Windsor-Chatham to Dundas Sub stations, based mostly on relative populations.

Ideally we would have hourly VIA service Toronto-Windsor, ie HFR Phase II... but I'm going to be realistic/short term centric and propose a mere bi-hourly service, or nominally seven T-W trains a day. That's effectively bi-hourly. Add in two runs to Sarnia, and we have to schedule nine trains each way through London. I would balance them with no more than 4 through Brantford: three Windsor and one Sarnia. The rest (a better service offering) via Kitchener. Plan the service treating these runs as the highest priority and then fill in any remaining service needs on either route as turnarounds to London, thereby retaining the same service through Brantford as today, and maybe squeezing one or two additional runs out of CN on the Dundas Sub, but using Kitchener as the backbone, and using GO for these secondary needs.

There will be a fare differential between VIA and GO. Depending on which service uses which slot, that may work just fine, if VIA is planned around the priority travel times and especially if GO does add additional stops and VIA offers less of a stop-everywhere format.

- Paul
 
generalcanada said:
i read this awhile back on his blog.
its awesome someone at metrolinx saw it
blog.metrolinx.com

Metrolinx Press Room

Find the latest Metrolinx news, project updates and more.
blog.metrolinx.com
Click to expand...


"Travel times in most cases will be reduced, as the new electric locomotives will accelerate faster and pull fewer cars, all across upgraded infrastructure."

This pretty much confirms what we all were hypothesising. Soon we may say bye bye to the behemoth 10-12 car trains
 
cplchanb said:
"Travel times in most cases will be reduced, as the new electric locomotives will accelerate faster and pull fewer cars, all across upgraded infrastructure."

This pretty much confirms what we all were hypothesising. Soon we may say bye bye to the behemoth 10-12 car trains
Click to expand...
It was confirmed back when the news first broke out.

1652226741254.png

From what I can tell, electric loco's can accelerate faster if they pull fewer train cars. This train here in Dresden leaves the station pretty quickly with an electric loco carrying 2 passenger cars.

 
Area-Specific Amendments to the Sign By-law: Six locations within the Bala Subdivision, the Oakville Subdivision and the Kingston Subdivision 2022.PH34.16 Planning and Housing Committee 2022-05-31

Agenda Item History 2022.PH34.16

Agenda Item History 2022.PH34.16
app.toronto.ca

Area-Specific Amendments to the Sign By-law: Six Separate Locations within the Galt Subdivision Rail Corridor 2022.PH34.17 Planning and Housing Committee 2022-05-31

Agenda Item History 2022.PH34.17

Agenda Item History 2022.PH34.17
app.toronto.ca
 
Allandale25 said:
Area-Specific Amendments to the Sign By-law: Six locations within the Bala Subdivision, the Oakville Subdivision and the Kingston Subdivision 2022.PH34.16 Planning and Housing Committee 2022-05-31

Agenda Item History 2022.PH34.16

Agenda Item History 2022.PH34.16
app.toronto.ca

Area-Specific Amendments to the Sign By-law: Six Separate Locations within the Galt Subdivision Rail Corridor 2022.PH34.17 Planning and Housing Committee 2022-05-31

Agenda Item History 2022.PH34.17

Agenda Item History 2022.PH34.17
app.toronto.ca
Click to expand...

Revised application adopted 3-2 today. Off to Council.

Agenda Item History 2022.PH34.16

Agenda Item History 2022.PH34.16
app.toronto.ca

Interesting to note one sign came down and the City wasn't notified.
(May 25, 2022) Report from the Chief Building Official and Executive Director, Toronto Building on Supplementary Report - Area-Specific Amendments to the Sign By-law: Six locations within the Bala Subdivision, the Oakville Subdivision and the Kingston Subdivision
(http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2022/ph/bgrd/backgroundfile-226551.pdf)

New communication from the company that operates the signs.

(May 23, 2022) Submission from Christopher Bentler, President, Allvision Development ULC (PH.New)
(http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2022/ph/comm/communicationfile-150404.pdf)

cc @Northern Light
 
Undead said:
The 407 transitway getting on the radar a bit more:

View attachment 427432View attachment 427433
Click to expand...
Replacing the Stouffville line (and presumably UPX) with an LRT is an... interesting idea. Although I'm guessing he means more of a Light Metro than a traditional LRT. But you'd think people would have learned from Ottawa you don't wanna run a metro system with LRT trains.

Also like, nevermind that this is something only the province can do and Markham City Council has very little control over, beyond lobbying for it.
 
Mr Finish Line said:
Has this guy not heard of GO Expansion???

At the risk of getting off topic, Milliken is not in Markham Centre and Hollywood North is Vancouver...

Regarding the 407 Transitway. Why does a highway that's never busy need a Transitway?
Click to expand...
It's less about avoiding traffic and more about having direct access to station facilities. With the status quo, busses have to leave the highway and do a detour to reach a bus terminal in order to service a station. This detour can easily add an extra 5+ minutes to the travel time of a route. When you have a dedicated transitway that allows busses to reach terminals full steam ahead, whilst it will be slower than just zooming down the freeway, it still not only significantly shortens the time cost of leaving the highway, but also theoretically allows you to build far more stations and could allow us to build a proper orbital rapid transit route.

The big problem with the transitway of course is whether or not building a full transitway is worth the cost. Something similar could be done to what Vancouver does where they have these shoulders that busses can use to quickly get off the highway and make a stop:
1663519995814.png


While this wouldn't be an ideal solution for larger transfer stations like Bramalea, Hwy 407, or RHC, this could be a good solution for all of the infill stations that Metrolinx wants to build along the 407, say at Leslie or Bathurst.

That being said, I'm not completely against fully grade separating it either. Even if traffic levels don't slow down, it allows us to get a head start on building a massive suburban/orbital network that can one day be converted to a light metro for not much additional cost (due to the ROW already existing), and could be used to jump ahead any possible future developments that cause problems.
 
ARG1 said:
It's less about avoiding traffic and more about having direct access to station facilities. With the status quo, busses have to leave the highway and do a detour to reach a bus terminal in order to service a station. This detour can easily add an extra 5+ minutes to the travel time of a route. When you have a dedicated transitway that allows busses to reach terminals full steam ahead, whilst it will be slower than just zooming down the freeway, it still not only significantly shortens the time cost of leaving the highway, but also theoretically allows you to build far more stations and could allow us to build a proper orbital rapid transit route.

The big problem with the transitway of course is whether or not building a full transitway is worth the cost. Something similar could be done to what Vancouver does where they have these shoulders that busses can use to quickly get off the highway and make a stop:
View attachment 427531

While this wouldn't be an ideal solution for larger transfer stations like Bramalea, Hwy 407, or RHC, this could be a good solution for all of the infill stations that Metrolinx wants to build along the 407, say at Leslie or Bathurst.

That being said, I'm not completely against fully grade separating it either. Even if traffic levels don't slow down, it allows us to get a head start on building a massive suburban/orbital network that can one day be converted to a light metro for not much additional cost (due to the ROW already existing), and could be used to jump ahead any possible future developments that cause problems.
Click to expand...
Maybe great for buses, but suck for riders
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top