Pickering Airport (Transport Canada/GTAA, Proposed)

[DonValleyRainbow]

That's very interesting indeed. There's a CP line that goes very close to, if not directly through, the Pickering lands. Do you know if this section was the part of the yard that leads to the southernmost line eastbound (CP Belleville Sub I believe), or the northernmost line? The southernmost goes through Seaton and eventually cuts through Downtown Oshawa, while the northernmost goes near the eastern edge or Cornell, through the Pickering Lands, and eventually on to Peterborough. Which portion of the yard they bought could provide a hint as to what type of service this purchase is for.

If this is for a rail link to the Pickering airport, I would believe it is for this more northern line (Havelock sub) which, as you said, intersects the Pickering lands. It directly intersects them as illustrated below.

The land use configuration would make it very convenient for a rail link. If they are planning to use the white areas for commercial, it would also make a great freight intermodal terminal.

Also wondering if Metrolinx would be planning on building a wye at the Stouffville line, or if they intend to basically create a Midtown line.

The Big Move calls for a new regional rail (GO) line along Midtown, from West Toronto to the yard. From there, there would be two 'spurs', with one going south to Seaton (Brock Rd/Taunton Rd area), and one going north to Locust Hill (Hwy 7/Rouge River area). A rail link to the airport would extend north of the latter.

Without a wye connecting to the Stouffville line, there isn't much use to having part of that yard. If they were to use the Belleville Sub for GO service, the next connection to any current GO service would be near Oshawa, for which a connection is already being planned as part of the subsequent phase of the new Whitby Yard & Lakeshore East extension (Lakeshore East being Phase II, with the yard being built now).

Not sure why we require a wye to the Stouffville line, that would be a challenge due to grade anyway.

Like the abandoned Don Branch, which doesn't currently have plans, nor will for a long time.

My source said Metrolinx is going to use the Don Branch as part of this rail link. Don't know how he knows this or how credible that information is, although it makes a lot of sense intuitively.

 

[gweed123]

Thanks for the map and info DonValleyRainbow. I knew the Havelock Sub came close to the Pickering lands, but I wasn't sure exactly what the boundaries were, so I didn't know if it actually passed through them or not. The map certainly helped clarify. And yes, the proximity would make a small spur to the airport very feasible.

As for the Stouffville wye, my worry was that CP wouldn't let Metrolinx use their line west of the Scarborough yard, which would then likely require Metrolinx to route all Pickering Airport-bound trains up the Stouffville corridor instead. However, you have mentioned that the Don Branch may come into play here, in which case you're right, the Stouffville wye would be redundant, as trains would likely use an upgraded/rerouted Richmond Hill line instead before connecting with the CP mainline.

 

[44 North]

Hmm. Midtown corridor, Don Branch, ARL 2.0? These latest discussions are very interesting! Thanks for the somewhat surreptitious info, DVR! I really hope things are planned wisely for the North Pickering area. And that any dollars spent can be stretched as much as possible to provide the most benefit.

 

[vegeta_skyline]

I talked to a source at Canadian Pacific this past weekend, and he told me that Metrolinx has apparently acquired a portion of their Toronto Yard in Scarborough. He says it was apparently related to their plans for a rail link to the Pickering airport, although I would also believe it is synergistic with providing GO service. Georgetown South 2.0.

He said it was for the 'A & B' portion of the yard. I didn't get to ask for more details on that, we got interrupted. Any UT'ers know where to sleuth in railfan forums about this?

A & B yard's are the north most section of the yard. The Havelock subdivision runs just north of them, though its currently nothing more than an additional yard track.

My source said Metrolinx is going to use the Don Branch as part of this rail link. Don't know how he knows this or how credible that information is, although it makes a lot of sense intuitively.

Makes sense. Its really the only feasible route for a connection to CP's Beleville sub. If they were planing on connecting the track to the Uxbridge sub(Stouffville line) there would be no need to purchase trackage this far south. There is no space for a wye track to the Uxbridge sub(Stouffville line) where the Beleville sub. crosses over it. Not only that, I doubt that line could handle an airport service plus RER and/or smart track running there with just the planned two tracks. Also, the grade change makes a direction connection to the Bala sub(Richmond Hill line) impossible from the west to south quadrant off the Beleville.

There is however space in the Belleville sub's right of way for two additional tracks. ML will of course have to build and pay for these new tracks as well as widen or rebuild at least 14 of the 19 existing bridges along the way. These would be GO's Stouffville line, Kennedy, Ellesmere, Warden, possibly Pharmacy & Vic Park, Lawrence, the Big bridge over the Don, widen the embankments of the DVP bridge, Don Mill's, Eglington, the Big bridge over the West Branch of the Don, grade separate or remove the Wicksteed level crossing and lastly build a flying-over/under to get from the north to the south side of the Belleville sub. All the other under and over passes are wide enough already for two additional tracks. Georgetown South version 2.0 indeed. Though in this case were talking about a 20 year building out.

 

[gweed123]

Makes sense. Its really the only feasible route for a connection to CP's Beleville sub. If they were planing on connecting the track to the Uxbridge sub(Stouffville line) there would be no need to purchase trackage this far south. There is no space for a wye track to the Uxbridge sub(Stouffville line) where the Beleville sub. crosses over it. Not only that, I doubt that line could handle an airport service plus RER and/or smart track running there with just the planned two tracks. Also, the grade change makes a direction connection to the Bala sub(Richmond Hill line) impossible from the west to south quadrant off the Beleville.

There is however space in the Belleville sub's right of way for two additional tracks. ML will of course have to build and pay for these new tracks as well as widen or rebuild at least 14 of the 19 existing bridges along the way. These would be GO's Stouffville line, Kennedy, Ellesmere, Warden, possibly Pharmacy & Vic Park, Lawrence, the Big bridge over the Don, widen the embankments of the DVP bridge, Don Mill's, Eglington, the Big bridge over the West Branch of the Don, grade separate or remove the Wicksteed level crossing and lastly build a flying-over/under to get from the north to the south side of the Belleville sub. All the other under and over passes are wide enough already for two additional tracks. Georgetown South version 2.0 indeed. Though in this case were talking about a 20 year building out.

That would be a massive undertaking, for sure. I would suppose an upgrade of the southern Richmond Hill corridor would be first, as both the RH Line and this future line would share that corridor. So I guess unlike GTS, this can be split into two distinct areas, instead of everything happening along nearly the entire corridor at the same time.

 

[DonValleyRainbow]

A & B yard's are the north most section of the yard. The Havelock subdivision runs just north of them, though its currently nothing more than an additional yard track.

Great snag, thanks for the map!

Makes sense. Its really the only feasible route for a connection to CP's Beleville sub. If they were planing on connecting the track to the Uxbridge sub(Stouffville line) there would be no need to purchase trackage this far south. There is no space for a wye track to the Uxbridge sub(Stouffville line) where the Beleville sub. crosses over it. Not only that, I doubt that line could handle an airport service plus RER and/or smart track running there with just the planned two tracks. Also, the grade change makes a direction connection to the Bala sub(Richmond Hill line) impossible from the west to south quadrant off the Beleville.

There is however space in the Belleville sub's right of way for two additional tracks. ML will of course have to build and pay for these new tracks as well as widen or rebuild at least 14 of the 19 existing bridges along the way. These would be GO's Stouffville line, Kennedy, Ellesmere, Warden, possibly Pharmacy & Vic Park, Lawrence, the Big bridge over the Don, widen the embankments of the DVP bridge, Don Mill's, Eglington, the Big bridge over the West Branch of the Don, grade separate or remove the Wicksteed level crossing and lastly build a flying-over/under to get from the north to the south side of the Belleville sub. All the other under and over passes are wide enough already for two additional tracks. Georgetown South version 2.0 indeed. Though in this case were talking about a 20 year building out.

That would be a massive undertaking, for sure. I would suppose an upgrade of the southern Richmond Hill corridor would be first, as both the RH Line and this future line would share that corridor. So I guess unlike GTS, this can be split into two distinct areas, instead of everything happening along nearly the entire corridor at the same time.

So here's an idea that has been floated before: Sending Richmond Hill GO and north Ontario/West Coast VIA trains up the Don Branch, and reactivating the Leaside Spur to get them back onto the Bala sub. I bet there are significant time benefits. Again, Georgetown South 2.0. A rail link to the airport is the driver, but accomodate 2WAD GO service on the Midtown and Richmond Hill GO lines as well as space for VIA. If those bridges need to be widened, we might as well create marginal benefits that well exceed the marginal costs.

As unhappy it will make some residents, I've always believed we make those trains faster, as well as get them to higher ground . We should not go through another Pottery Road incident, especially with the effects of climate change increasing the risk.

Vegeta, you rattled off the structure upgrades south of the yard (quite completely), but there will definitely be others to the north: Finch (widening), Markham (widening, maybe), Tapscott, McNiccoll, Steeles, 14th Ave, Reesor, Hwy 7, and York-Durham Line (grade separate). Also, Ninth Line and CN's York sub next to each other where they cross the Havelock sub. While the former requires grade separation, the latter is already but it will complicate things.

Definitely will be a big bill.

 

[44 North]

So here's an idea that has been floated before: Sending Richmond Hill GO and north Ontario/West Coast VIA trains up the Don Branch, and reactivating the Leaside Spur to get them back onto the Bala sub. I bet there are significant time benefits. Again, Georgetown South 2.0. A rail link to the airport is the driver, but accomodate 2WAD GO service on the Midtown and Richmond Hill GO lines as well as space for VIA. If those bridges need to be widened, we might as well create marginal benefits that well exceed the marginal costs.

I've been borderline OCD about this. Everything about it makes so much sense, that I'm dumbfounded as to why we haven't seen more studies done on it. The most in-depth study by the Prov is a quarter-century old - with seemingly very little resulting from it. As for costs, yes it might be a "big bill". But relative to all the astronomically-priced subway projects we've got going (TYSSE, Yonge North, Crosstown), it's peanuts IMO. This 1986 report provides a good ballpark of the costs involved, as well as the time savings and complexity.

https://swanboatsteve.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/rhstudyjune1986.pdf

 

[dowlingm]

Re: Agincourt Yard, isn't the issue that they need both the Havelock track but also get the trains from the north side of the CP trackage to the south side using a flyunder to access the Don Branch without impeding CP North Toronto operations? I remember a figure of $50m for that when the Del Mastro choochoo was still in play.

Reactivating the Leaside spur now for traffic to Richmond Hill would encounter significant local opposition from neighbours/trail users not to mention a significant reinstatement cost. Pity nobody at City Council had the heft to champion retention when there was a chance. Only half the VIA services use the Metrolinx Richmond Hill track right now anyway so there's only 3 trains per week total on that route - best chance would be electric GO services which could be tunnelled under the ROW but then that introduces a challenge in meeting the CP North Toronto track and getting to the south side of it given the area that would happen would be right beside Eglinton, Eglinton LRT and a valley rail crossing.

 

[vegeta_skyline]

but there will definitely be others to the north: Finch (widening), Markham (widening, maybe), Tapscott, McNiccoll, Steeles, 14th Ave, Reesor, Hwy 7, and York-Durham Line (grade separate). Also, Ninth Line and CN's York sub next to each other where they cross the Havelock sub. While the former requires grade separation, the latter is already but it will complicate things.

Definitely will be a big bill.

True, forgot to list all of those which will require new grade separations. Thankfully Finch & Markham should be alright. CP currently has four tracks running underneath both, one of which is the Havelock mainline and another is the A&B yard lead. If necessary one additional track wouldn't require much work, which is a blessing since they're both huge bridges by rail/road separation standards. I don't even know how they are going to deal with 9th line and the York sub. The rail lines aren't moving that's for sure and I don't think we'll be seeing a bridge built under the existing bridge. My guess is that 9th would be rerouted somehow. Also is Passmore still open? And they really should have just built an underpass when they extended McNicoll already.

 

[vegeta_skyline]

Re: Leaside connection
The hardest part about the Leaside connection isn't going to be money(though it could end up being quite pricy). It's the resistance we're going to get from the neighborhood.

Trying to reinstate a rail line through their back yards is going to make the Weston NIMBY's look like a bunch of pushovers. The Georgetown south corridor contained two fully active mainlines. Meanwhile the Leaside spur was a lightly used non mainline connecting track that was abandon and then sold off to the city and converted into a bike trail. The Weston NIMBY's were never going to be able to stop what technically amounted to a service increase. But it's still amazing what they got out of it - an unnecessary station stop for the UPX at Weston, though I can see that stop being eliminated in the future once the line gets RER service. And 215 million dollars spent on grade separating two minor streets that really should just have been closed with a second pedestrian bridge built at Church st for 1/100th of the cost.

While the Weston NIMBY's never had a leg to stand on, the folks at Leaside certainly do. Not to mention they'll likely have the backing of the highly regarded Bridle Path. I can only imagine the fight that ML is going to get if they try to reinstate the spur. That doesn't mean I don't agree with reinstalling it, GO/ML really should of bought the line from CN when they abandoned it but a lack of forward thinking and/or funding from the government at the time prevented that from happening. Even then it still would of been a big fight to convert it to a heavily used line, though somewhat easier.

About the only way I can see it getting local approval is if ML builds another Weston tunnel, for almost the entire length of the connection and then rebuilds the path on top of the tunnel. It would more than double the length of the Weston tunnel at 2km long but narrower since it would probably be only 2 maybe 3 tracks at most instead of 4. The roofed section would be close to 3 times as long though and that might require a ventilation system if the line hasn't been electrified(currently there are no plans to do so). Or they could use a tunnel boring machine instead of cut and cover, but it would have to have quite a large diameter for a single bore. Either way it would probably cost more than twice as much as the Weston tunnel, upwards of half a billion dollars. But even at that price it would still be worth it imo.

 

[dowlingm]

Here is the Metrolinx Peterborough study. Based on acquisition of Don Branch and A side of Agincourt it is shaping up for Metrolinx to offer some sort of service in the A-US-1 option http://www.metrolinx.com/en/regionalplanning/projectevaluation/studies/Peterborough_Rail_Study.pdf

 

[Edward Skira]

Are they seriously considering reopening Summerhill Station?

 

[DonValleyRainbow]

Are they seriously considering reopening Summerhill Station?

Any midtown or Peterborough rail service at Summerhill would be a no brainer. The street entrance to the Summerhill TTC station is at the north end of the subway platform. There is currently no south platform entrance, but if one was made, it would be right there at the rail corridor.

 

[Edward Skira]

I'm thinking less about the station's ability to handle crowds and more about the people who live in the area that would be against more trains using the line.

 

[gweed123]

I'm thinking less about the station's ability to handle crowds and more about the people who live in the area that would be against more trains using the line.

Not to mention exacerbating the crowding problem on the Yonge line southbound in the AM peak...