News   Dec 20, 2024
UrbanToronto Year-End Poll: Vote on the Best Buildings of 2024, presented by Sapphire Balconies
 1.3K     7 
News   Dec 20, 2024
UrbanToronto's Social Media Presence Skyrocketed in 2024
 938     2 
News   Dec 20, 2024
Mattamy Homes Records A Year of Accomplishments
 1.8K     0 

Peterborough Commuter Rail

dowlingm said:
It seems to me that a lot of the hassle associated with Peterborough rail (starting with Don Branch rehab and Agincourt Yard bypass) would be sidestepped by using the upgraded Stouffville line to get as far as Mount Joy, and then split off east (7-9km depending on routing) to join the CP west of Claremont. That does put even more pressure on the Union-Scarborough Junction LSE section, of course.
Click to expand...

Or better yet, re-build the CN Uxbridge Sub to Lindsay, and the CN Campbellford Sub to Peterborough. Lindsay has been building things on top of the old railway rights-of-way, but the rural sections are completely intact!
 
dowlingm said:
It seems to me that a lot of the hassle associated with Peterborough rail (starting with Don Branch rehab and Agincourt Yard bypass) would be sidestepped by using the upgraded Stouffville line to get as far as Mount Joy, and then split off east (7-9km depending on routing) to join the CP west of Claremont. That does put even more pressure on the Union-Scarborough Junction LSE section, of course.
Click to expand...

That one doesn't make much sense to me. Instead of rehabbing and improving existing lines, we'd build an entirely new 7-9km route NE of Mt Joy? I'm sure it could work, the area seems flat enough. But I think it'd make more sense to plan the former instead of undertake the latter. IIRC a UT poster had some inside knowledge that a Don Branch upgrade has been eyed as a *potential* route for a future air-rail link to the proposed Pickering North Airport, so I wouldn't write off the corridor completely. With the corridor improved it could make an excellent route for GO and Via to the burgeoning/future development sites between TO and Peterboro.
 
44 North said:
That one doesn't make much sense to me. Instead of rehabbing and improving existing lines, we'd build an entirely new 7-9km route NE of Mt Joy? I'm sure it could work, the area seems flat enough. But I think it'd make more sense to plan the former instead of undertake the latter. IIRC a UT poster had some inside knowledge that a Don Branch upgrade has been eyed as a *potential* route for a future air-rail link to the proposed Pickering North Airport, so I wouldn't write off the corridor completely. With the corridor improved it could make an excellent route for GO and Via to the burgeoning/future development sites between TO and Peterboro.
Click to expand...
If the feds finally pull the trigger on Peterborough, why not let them pay for the upgrades? But they haven't in all this time. And if they do, the Stouffville route can serve the east end access to the airport while the CP route would serve midtown.

This option was actually studied in the Peterborough Rail Study as "route C"
The connection would run for approximately 4.9 miles in a generally east-west orientation approximately ¼ mile north of and parallel to Major MacKenzie Drive. The connection to the GO Uxbridge Subdivision would be just north of Major MacKenzie Drive at Mile 49.95
Click to expand...
 
Maybe after Missing Link is enabled, just re-open Toronto North station on the now unused CP line through Toronto.

Use PRESTO on the Peterborough Train, and give people a discount or even "free" transfer (just cover it in the price of the original train ticket) on the Yonge Line downtown.

If Yonge Line 1 too overcrowded, build a station at Spadina with a connection to Dupont station on Spadina Line.

We don't need any more trains at Union.
 
dowlingm said:
4-8 Peterborough-Stouffville or Peterborough-Don Branch trains a day would be a drop in the bucket compared to what is proposed to be shoved into Union.
Click to expand...

That really depends on the time of day. In a best case scenario, Union can handle 24 trains per hour per pair of tracks. So after a multi-billion dollar expansion for a 4th track in the east, that's 48 trains per hour. That assumes all other constraints like platform access, braking tests, etc. have been eliminated.

So, 96 trains per rush; 4 tracks at 2.5 minute headways which is in line with Paris/Munich and other very high-frequency commuter rail. 8 trains is roughly 8% of Union rush capacity. That sounds like a lot if LakeShore east is running at capacity and looking for better than 5 minute rush frequencies; keep in mind Lake Shore West runs 6 minute frequencies into Union today.

I'm not saying we shouldn't do it; I'm saying it better have butts in the seats because in 20 years when most RER lines are standing room only we won't think twice about gutting service that isn't mostly full. Based on the DRL time-line I assume it'll be many decades before we fund a 3rd pair of commuter rail through downtown.
 
denfromoakvillemilton said:
Reopen Summerhill.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Summerhill would be fine for routes with low ridership. There are serious constraints if any crowds show up though; there won't be 2 new tracks going from Summerhill to our stadiums or financial district.

That said, if we're using that corridor for low-traffic trains (Via operations too?) I think I'd prefer a new station at Dupont & Spadina.
 
Before Peterborough, why don't we march en masse down to Union Station and occupy it until Metrolinx can make a coherent plan to finish the jillion plans already underway? I am all for all of the RER plan. I'd just like a quarter by quarter plan to see what is to be delivered each quarter. Instead I have pictures from drum showing tracks that end at bollards and ballast.
 
rbt said:
Yeah, Summerhill would be fine for routes with low ridership. There are serious constraints if any crowds show up though; there won't be 2 new tracks going from Summerhill to our stadiums or financial district.

That said, if we're using that corridor for low-traffic trains (Via operations too?) I think I'd prefer a new station at Dupont & Spadina.
Click to expand...
If the DRL goes to Fairview Mall or even Don Mills/Steeles the capacity should be fine. But Dupont and Spadina should be better if we're going to dump them on a subway line. A station can be opened at Don Mills and Eglinton as well if it comes to that.

What lines would go to Summerhill/Dupont? Just Peterborough and Richmond Hill?
TransitBart said:
Before Peterborough, why don't we march en masse down to Union Station and occupy it until Metrolinx can make a coherent plan to finish the jillion plans already underway? I am all for all of the RER plan. I'd just like a quarter by quarter plan to see what is to be delivered each quarter. Instead I have pictures from drum showing tracks that end at bollards and ballast.
Click to expand...
I so agree. I would just like to see hourly service on the other lines, but instead they are wasting money on parking garages. Great post Bart.
 
TransitBart said:
Before Peterborough, why don't we march en masse down to Union Station and occupy it until Metrolinx can make a coherent plan to finish the jillion plans already underway? I am all for all of the RER plan. I'd just like a quarter by quarter plan to see what is to be delivered each quarter. Instead I have pictures from drum showing tracks that end at bollards and ballast.
Click to expand...

Amen. Three things wrong with the Peterboro proposal:

- until RER is complete, we don't need to add new priorities and dilute the spend by adding new things needing funding
- you won't get Summerhill until the Missing Link is complete for CN and CP, so this is a "later" proposal
- we don't need to add momentum to the sprawl of development in north Durham and beyond. The greenbelt is eroding as it is.

Let's revisit in 2021 and see what the 10-year picture looks like

- Paul
 
crs1026 said:
Amen. Three things wrong with the Peterboro proposal:

- until RER is complete, we don't need to add new priorities and dilute the spend by adding new things needing funding
- you won't get Summerhill until the Missing Link is complete for CN and CP, so this is a "later" proposal
- we don't need to add momentum to the sprawl of development in north Durham and beyond. The greenbelt is eroding as it is.

Let's revisit in 2021 and see what the 10-year picture looks like

- Paul
Click to expand...
if you really believe the 3rd point is a factor....why would you revisit this in 2021? Is there a chance we will need less greenbelt then?
 
The reality is that Peterborough is way down the agenda of what rail service is needed in Ontario, on a passengers/m$ invested basis. It's only because the local politicians won't let it go that we're talking about it. But Northlander was too expensive to keep...
 
dowlingm said:
The reality is that Peterborough is way down the agenda of what rail service is needed in Ontario, on a passengers/m$ invested basis. It's only because the local politicians won't let it go that we're talking about it. But Northlander was too expensive to keep...
Click to expand...

What was the saving on an annual,basis from killing off the train?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top