News   Dec 03, 2020
 408     0 
News   Dec 03, 2020
 339     0 
News   Dec 03, 2020
 444     1 

Peterborough Commuter Rail

crs1026

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Oct 16, 2014
Messages
6,407
Reaction score
8,136
^I would be curious about the potential demand along the CP Belleville Sub, at least as far as Whitby. It has the potential to syphon off a lot of demand from LSE, in the same way that the Milton line is popular despite LSW being not so far away. Even as a peak only line, it would probably have a lot better business case than the Peterborough line, for similar cost. On a gut level, that's a better use of money than GO to Peterborough.

Taunton is already a very congested street, but a GO line terminating with a station near Brock or Church might convince a lot of people to drive west to get on there, as opposed to south to LSE.

Stations in Scarborough on the south side of the CP yard might be useful also.

- Paul
 

lenaitch

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 5, 2017
Messages
2,339
Reaction score
1,866
^I would be curious about the potential demand along the CP Belleville Sub, at least as far as Whitby. It has the potential to syphon off a lot of demand from LSE, in the same way that the Milton line is popular despite LSW being not so far away. Even as a peak only line, it would probably have a lot better business case than the Peterborough line, for similar cost. On a gut level, that's a better use of money than GO to Peterborough.

Taunton is already a very congested street, but a GO line terminating with a station near Brock or Church might convince a lot of people to drive west to get on there, as opposed to south to LSE.

Stations in Scarborough on the south side of the CP yard might be useful also.

- Paul
Good point. I forgot how far north it swings through Pickering, Ajax and Whitby (not so much in Oshawa).
 

NotAToy

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Aug 30, 2019
Messages
54
Reaction score
29
Run a few shorter trains each day, kinda like Niagara falls. Add stops


So, how could this work?

Right now there are 10 trains each way a day with 12 cars.
Take half of the trains and have them go Milton-Peterborough. The other half go between Milton and Union.
That area, like stated by other members, is way too far north to be useful to existing communities. In addition, it will facilitate sprawl in the area.
 

micheal_can

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 24, 2016
Messages
2,142
Reaction score
1,336
That area, like stated by other members, is way too far north to be useful to existing communities. In addition, it will facilitate sprawl in the area.
Sprawl is already moving northward. Why not put in the infrastructure for it instead of thinking it won't happen?
 

NotAToy

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Aug 30, 2019
Messages
54
Reaction score
29
Sprawl is already moving northward. Why not put in the infrastructure for it instead of thinking it won't happen?
Fair point. I think that the line would accelerate the development.
The other solution is to plan local transit and mid-high rise development in the area. But that's going to make for some very unhappy residents and politicians.
 

micheal_can

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 24, 2016
Messages
2,142
Reaction score
1,336
Fair point. I think that the line would accelerate the development.
The other solution is to plan local transit and mid-high rise development in the area. But that's going to make for some very unhappy residents and politicians.
The municipalities should plan for the sprawl so that it is done better than it is being done now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DSC

crs1026

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Oct 16, 2014
Messages
6,407
Reaction score
8,136
^Given the low density of Durham Region south of Taunton, there is little or no excuse for development creeping northwards. Preserving farm land and green belt is mission critical for the GTA.

Pretty pathetic that someone would encourage sprawl just so they can justify their favourite fantasy railroad.

- Paul
 

micheal_can

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 24, 2016
Messages
2,142
Reaction score
1,336
^Given the low density of Durham Region south of Taunton, there is little or no excuse for development creeping northwards. Preserving farm land and green belt is mission critical for the GTA.

Pretty pathetic that someone would encourage sprawl just so they can justify their favourite fantasy railroad.

- Paul
How has sprawl been stopped in the last 20 years.
The Green Belt didn't stop it.

In fact, with the current government, it's more than likely a dead thing.

So, why not plan for it and prepare for it instead of sticking your head in the sand and thinking it won't happen.
 

44 North

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 8, 2010
Messages
3,398
Reaction score
1,763
Location
Ward 28
There are almost 500 Peterboro residents who work in Toronto, plus another 400 working in Whitby and Oshawa. To put that in perspective, there are only 400 Niagara Falls residents working in TO.

Not arguing either way, rather making a comparison to another far flung area that did receive a GO rail connection. What I do think a priority should be going east is a GO service along the CP line to about Brock in Whitby (as mentioned at the top of the page). Makes sense. Three lines in Peel, three in York, but in Durham just one? That's insufficient.
 

MisterF

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
3,267
Reaction score
1,708
^I always found it odd how the business case for rail is so often reduced to commuters. That's only one aspect of the demand, especially for Niagara Region.

How has sprawl been stopped in the last 20 years.
The Green Belt didn't stop it.

In fact, with the current government, it's more than likely a dead thing.

So, why not plan for it and prepare for it instead of sticking your head in the sand and thinking it won't happen.
The Greenbelt, in conjunction with the Growth Plan, has significantly reduced sprawl. Growth is now more compact and while single detached houses are still being built, multi unit housing is now the norm. Less rural land is being developed for urban uses and the Greenbelt is intact. Doug Ford has backed off on most of his more destructive amendments to the Greenbelt and Growth Plan after near unanimous condemnation.

As for the CP line through Durham Region, it's almost entirely within the Greenbelt.
 

Steve X

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 16, 2016
Messages
1,907
Reaction score
1,249
How has sprawl been stopped in the last 20 years.
The Green Belt didn't stop it.

In fact, with the current government, it's more than likely a dead thing.

So, why not plan for it and prepare for it instead of sticking your head in the sand and thinking it won't happen.
Markham has gone smarter and is targeting higher density development to track land usage and congestion. It's really time for cities to stop building houses everywhere as there will be no end to traffic and terrible rapid transit opportunity.
 

crs1026

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Oct 16, 2014
Messages
6,407
Reaction score
8,136
There are almost 500 Peterboro residents who work in Toronto, plus another 400 working in Whitby and Oshawa. To put that in perspective, there are only 400 Niagara Falls residents working in TO.

Not arguing either way, rather making a comparison to another far flung area that did receive a GO rail connection. What I do think a priority should be going east is a GO service along the CP line to about Brock in Whitby (as mentioned at the top of the page). Makes sense. Three lines in Peel, three in York, but in Durham just one? That's insufficient.
A connection to Peterboro makes total sense, but I don’t think the comparison to Niagara is all that helpful. Niagara has developed (and growing) communities all along its length, and there is potential to grow ridership in both directions all along its route, with more mid-route trips and commuting from those midpoints adding to Niagara riders.. QEW is at saturation, whereas 35/115 is not. (Actually the wall of tall buildings going in between the QEW and the lake troubles me, it’s a wall where one would want something else, but I don’t live there).
The challenge for Peterborough as with Kitchener and Niagara is that a slow, stop-everywhere service isn’t going to serve the market. A 80 mile 5day/week commute to work isn’t necessarily the ridership we want to grow, but an accumulated ridership of once or twice a week (or month) ridership comprising medical visits, business in Toronto, student (and academic) travel, shopping, sporting events, shows, family visits.... all the things people do today by auto. That may not imply a peak in-out timing either... no need to be on GO at 06:30 to get to work on time if the Eaton Centre doesn’t open that early.
The issue for Peterboro is that the current rail connection is little more than rust streaks in the weeds. The numerator in the benefit/cost ratio may be favourable but the denominator is bigger. We can build Niagara much more cheaply.


- Paul
 

lenaitch

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 5, 2017
Messages
2,339
Reaction score
1,866
^I always found it odd how the business case for rail is so often reduced to commuters. That's only one aspect of the demand, especially for Niagara Region.


The Greenbelt, in conjunction with the Growth Plan, has significantly reduced sprawl. Growth is now more compact and while single detached houses are still being built, multi unit housing is now the norm. Less rural land is being developed for urban uses and the Greenbelt is intact. Doug Ford has backed off on most of his more destructive amendments to the Greenbelt and Growth Plan after near unanimous condemnation.

As for the CP line through Durham Region, it's almost entirely within the Greenbelt.
Well, it is primarily a commuter network.
 

gweed123

Moderator
Staff member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 10, 2009
Messages
7,695
Reaction score
1,237
Location
Burlington
I say wait for VIA HFR and then have a few trains (concentrated in the peak periods) stop in Peterborough on their way. Much better use of resources than running a separate commuter service for what is and what will likely continue to be a pretty small commuter base.
 

MisterF

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
3,267
Reaction score
1,708
Well, it is primarily a commuter network.
GO is moving further from being primarily a commuter network and towards being a transportation network. That's a big part of what GO expansion is about. That being said, I agree with gweed. It's more likely that commuter services to Peterborough will be provided by Via Rail rather than GO since its trains will be going through the city anyway. Via already serves the commuter market in towns and cities beyond the GO network so it's nothing new for them. A separate train exclusively for commuter purposes would be redundant.

I say wait for VIA HFR and then have a few trains (concentrated in the peak periods) stop in Peterborough on their way. Much better use of resources than running a separate commuter service for what is and what will likely continue to be a pretty small commuter base.
I'd hazard a guess that most of Via's HFR trains will stop in Peterborough. With 18 at grade crossings within its boundaries, trains will have to slow down significantly through Peterborough anyway. Through much of the city there's a crossing every block as the line crosses through a tight street grid. So stopping will add very little time to the trip.
 

Top