Mississauga Hurontario-Main Line 10 LRT | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx

[TOareaFan]

Anyone have a rough map to outline the two routes they have voted to study?

From Steeles, follow the blue line for the Kennedy route....follow red north then green for the Valley route.

 

[salsa]

What a complete gongshow.

Brampton city council = decision based evidence making, not evidence based decision making.

 

[salsa]

The other alignments that Bowman and other anti-LRT councillors are calling for are a ploy. Sure, they get the LRT out of the way of Bill Davis and other wealthy white people on Main Street, but they just transfer the route to be in the front yards of many more, and not so wealthy, people. The floodplain route can never be built. If you keep asking for infeasible routes because you don't like the feasible route, you get nothing.

In Brampton, money talks, bullshit walks.

 

[TOareaFan]

ShonTron said: ↑
The other alignments that Bowman and other anti-LRT councillors are calling for are a ploy. Sure, they get the LRT out of the way of Bill Davis and other wealthy white people on Main Street, but they just transfer the route to be in the front yards of many more, and not so wealthy, people. The floodplain route can never be built. If you keep asking for infeasible routes because you don't like the feasible route, you get nothing.

Can't think of many front yards on Kennedy TBH......as for the valley...they seem to pinning their hopes on elevating it and the supporters of that route (CFBB mainly) brought up (a few times) the Davenport issue as evidence that Metrolinx have shown a willingness to elevate transit to get it to where it wants it to get to.

 

[ShonTron]

Can't think of many front yards on Kennedy TBH......as for the valley...they seem to pinning their hopes on elevating it and the supporters of that route (CFBB mainly) brought up (a few times) the Davenport issue as evidence that Metrolinx have shown a willingness to elevate transit to get it to where it wants it to get to.

The Davenport Diamond will separate a railway line that's been there since 1853 over another railway that's been there since 1881. It will create new public space. The "valley" route will create a brand new rail corridor through a park and floodplain. The comparison isn't apt.

Yeah, your point about front yards on Kennedy Road is fair, but routes via McMurchy, McLaughlin would have passed by many more houses.

But Mississauga isn't diverting the LRT to Cawthra to avoid sensitive people's houses between the QEW and Port Credit, nor is it stopping the LRT at The Queensway despite vocal opposition in that area.

 

[TOareaFan]

The Davenport Diamond will separate a railway line that's been there since 1853 over another railway that's been there since 1881. It will create new public space. The "valley" route will create a brand new rail corridor through a park and floodplain. The comparison isn't apt.

I am just passing on parts of the discussion from last night and trying to convey the thinking of the people there.....not argue their points...I just don't feel like continually having to type my "not my thoughts, I never had a problem with the original routing" disclaimer

 

[cbrown2009]

Aren't there already credible reports that say these alignments council want to study have already been dismissed as unfeasible? It's not running up the river valley. Period. And Steeles needed to maintain a three lane per direction right of way thereby needing to be widened. And with backyards on one side and a neighbourhood street on the other, that couldn't be done without significant expropriation and/or invasive work being done.

 

[TOareaFan]

based on the discussion last night, if there are such studies/reports they have never been presented to council.....and given the feisty nature of the discourse with Joe Pitushka (executive director of planning and infrastructure), I am reasonably sure he would have reminded them if they had......he was not pulling any punches at all

 

[Allandale25]

based on the discussion last night, if there are such studies/reports they have never been presented to council.....and given the feisty nature of the discourse with Joe Pitushka (executive director of planning and infrastructure), I am reasonably sure he would have reminded them if they had......he was not pulling any punches at all

Yes, there have been reports and studies saying the other routes are not as good as Main. There was a staff report and presentation given on the June 22, 2015 planning committee meeting and then at the July 7, 2015 council meeting. Information included the additional costs compared to Main, travel time differences, and other commentary on the routes. A comparison chart was provided. Routes were reviewed in the TPAP and explanations were given.

Links can be posted if people haven't see these reports.

There was also a third-party review done. Now, some on Council and others disagree with those reports and findings but the notion that Council has "never" seen information on the alternative routes is not correct.

 

[DonValleyRainbow]

The thing about Steeles, however, is that it was already identified to have a BRT corridor in The Big Move, in addition to Main. So achieving rapid transit along there wouldn't be some big victory for Brampton council. At the end of the day, you're still left with a big gap in the network.

 

[TOareaFan]

Yes, there have been reports and studies saying the other routes are not as good as Main. There was a staff report and presentation given on the June 22, 2015 planning committee meeting and then at the July 7, 2015 council meeting. Information included the additional costs compared to Main, travel time differences, and other commentary on the routes. A comparison chart was provided. Routes were reviewed in the TPAP and explanations were given.

Links can be posted if people haven't see these reports.

There was also a third-party review done. Now, some on Council and others disagree with those reports and findings but the notion that Council has "never" seen information on the alternative routes is not correct.

Perhaps it is a semantics issue about what is considered a report...but neither side of the heated debate on Monday night disputed the statement that detailed studies/reports on the alternative routes had never been presented to council.

 

[Allandale25]

Perhaps it is a semantics issue about what is considered a report...but neither side of the heated debate on Monday night disputed the statement that detailed studies/reports on the alternative routes had never been presented to council.

Exactly my point. It's a debatable point and not as stark as "never".

There is not a consensus on Council or in the public discourse (professional planners and engineers may disagree) on the issue of the extent of the reporting on the alternatives. Also, some believe the TPAP process for Main Street worked well and others do not. What we haven't heard a lot of is the specific information or details that some feel are missing for the alternative routes. We've heard a lot of complaining, misgivings, frustrations, and political posturing by the Councillors against Main, but not a lot of specifics. A good comparison would be the work Councillors Gord Perks and Josh Matlow have done on criticizing the Scarborough Subway versus the LRT and then look at certain Brampton Councillors statements on what they don't like about the reporting for Main Street or the alleged lack of reporting for the alternatives.

Some Councillors have talked generally about "ridership" and "intensification" but they haven't said what they hope to see, or the level or extent of ridership they want to see in order to support a particular route. Or, were you noting that unlike the TPAP process, no track plan was prepared for the alternative routes? Some would argue a track plan for every single alternative route isn't necessary because they were discounted and it would be a waste of money and time to provide that level of detail if the route isn't supported by the other research.

Either way, it sounds like we will now get more information on the Creek Route and the Kennedy Road Route. That information can then be compared to what was found previously, and to Main Street. We'll see if and when a TPAP is launched for either the Creek Route or Kennedy Road.

 

[TOareaFan]

Just got back from the planning committee meeting in Brampton....and the tunnel option(s) were, well, buried.

Council voted 10-0 (one councillor on vacation) on a) further study of either tunnel option and b) setting aside the $2.5MM that staff had requested to study those options further.

Council then voted on a motion put forward by Councillor Spovieri to direct staff to, for the first time, engage "experts" to present cost benefit analysis on 3 of the alternative routes. It was then moved that, rather than collectively, each of those be separate votes.

1. Elevated through the park.....studying this received 8 yes votes and 2 nays....so it will be studied
2. Steeles to Kennedy to Queen to GO.....studying this received 8 yes votes and 2 nays....so it will be studied
3. Steeles to McLaughlin to Orangeville railway to GO...studying this received 4 yes votes and 6 nays....so will not be studied.

Long meeting (was the 8th agenda item)....and some predictable goings on...but that is the gist of it. Unless something strange happens, the route from Gateway to DT GO will not be up Main (either surface or tunnelled).

and, this morning, right after voting 8-2 in favour of a $500k/year 3 year bailout of a minor pro hockey club and just before a lunchtime recess..council squeezed in a very short discussion/vote on the motion from the other night's committee and approved an amendment

 

[Tuscani01]

Hurontario-McLaughlin LRT just doesn't roll off the tongue like Hurontario-Main, or simply Hurontario.

 

[ShonTron]

If any diversion was to be built, McLaughlin is probably the least-worst option, even though I still think the fastest and most direct route makes by far the most sense. At least it serves Sheridan (but only if it takes Steeles instead of Charolais). At least it serves the FCCC (former OPP Academy). At least it could spark interest in the Dixie Cup plant, which remains active, but probably not for too much longer. But it serves only Brampton interests, not regional interests.