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

nfitz said:
I missed something somewhere - wouldn't people prefer traditional rail service to subway? It's faster (because less stations). Which is why the Paris RER works so well (though I'd hardly call the East London Overground line RER - station spacing is quite close). Though if anyone had any sense, they'd prefer the SRT technology to subway, simply because it is quicker than the subway (completely ignoring capacity issues - but a decent choice for lesser used lines, such as Sheppard and Eglinton).
Click to expand...

That doesn't negate the fact that the SRT uses toy trains.
 
If they can handle the capacity, are cheaper, and are faster than a subway, then what's wrong with "toy trains".
 
At one stage project team and support staff outnumber the public. I would say about 100 pass through the event.

One person said he only see a few riders on buses north of Eglinton at which time the Commissioner stood up and said he was wrong. I was going to tell him it could be the 25, 67 or 202, but not a 19, but disappear after the presentation. Maybe a 19A since it gets short turn and rarely carries a full load north of Sq One and that an issues.

Had some good conversation with staff and most know my position on Hurontario in the first place.

I love to see what the ridership numbers were for 2 north of Queen St in Brampton as the numbers south of Queen are no surprise to me.

It going to be a hard sell to get LRT north of the 407 based on current ridership numbers as well redeveloping the corridor north of queen in the first place. Very little can be done for the south section.

Very few questions were asked and detail response.

Hard to say what was prefer, but from what I heard, LRT was the way to go. Some of staff non believer's that LRT is the prefer way to go are climbing onto the train.

I was told that council decided not to widen Burnhamthorpe to 6 lanes last week and don't remember being it being on council agenda in the first place. Nice to hear since I didn't support it in the first place. There is supposed to be no more 6 lanes road being built in Mississauga now.

Council also did this today and no 3P's:
15. Regulation of Transit Services within the City of Mississauga
Corporate Report dated June 4, 2008 from the Commissioner of Transportation and Works with respect to the regulation of Transit Services within the City of Mississauga.
General Committee - 7 - June 25, 2008
(15) RECOMMENDATION
That a by-law be enacted to amend the Transit By-law 0425-2003, as amended, to grant Mississauga Transit the exclusive right to operate public transit services within the municipality of the City of Mississauga, with special consideration given to other public transit agencies (the Toronto Transit Commission (TTC), Brampton Transit and Oakville Transit) that presently operate services within the City of Mississauga boundaries. GO Transit and the Region of Peel TransHelp services are exempted from this by-law.
RECOMMEND APPROVAL
BL.08.Tra
 
drum118 said:
One person said he only see a few riders on buses north of Eglinton at which time the Commissioner stood up and said he was wrong. I was going to tell him it could be the 25, 67 or 202, but not a 19, but disappear after the presentation. Maybe a 19A since it gets short turn and rarely carries a full load north of Sq One and that an issues.
Click to expand...

I wanted to hit that guy. Some people are just amazingly dense. Because one man's anecdotal evidence should trump official ridership numbers. :rolleyes:
 
I'm not a lawyer, but I don't see anything in that bylaw that bans 3P or AFP projects.

It bans Greyhound from setting up a local transit service in Mississauga, but that isn't a 3P anyway.

Does it ban a private contractor from operating services in the name of Mississauga Transit or GO Transit? I don't see anything in there that does - and those are the kind of P3 projects that are most likely to occur.
 
nfitz said:
If we wanted to be consistent, if it uses Skytrain technology we'd call it a skytrain ... but we don't.

We've never used the subway terminology for anything other than a railway that is mostly below ground surface - either in a tunnel or a cut of some kind. If we start building elevated railways, are we really going to call them subways?
Click to expand...

"We" does not include both Vancouver and Toronto. Each city calls their systems/lines something different. "Subway" has a very clearly defined meaning in Toronto because it is what the Yonge, etc., lines are called...it's their name.
 
scarberiankhatru said:
"We" does not include both Vancouver and Toronto. Each city calls their systems/lines something different. "Subway" has a very clearly defined meaning in Toronto because it is what the Yonge, etc., lines are called...it's their name.
Click to expand...

Yeah its the technology people are thinking about, not whether it happens to go underground or not.
 
Provision should be made for a northern extension of the Hurontario LRT from Brampton, so that at some future date the LRT could extended along the railway right-of-ways which runs midway between Hurontario and McLaughlin to serve the communities of Snelgove, Cheltenham, Inglewood, Belfountain, and Alton.

That is, if the communities follow the Jane Jacobs ideas and be transit and pedestrian friendly, and don't follow the school of Robert Moses with his urban sprawl.
 
I've always thought of the line to Orangeville as more suited to a commuter rail line, possibly as an extension of the "Brampton Centre" branch from CDL.TO's map:
CDL.TO said:
mississaugasubwaygif1vj7.gif
Click to expand...

We definitely need the LRT to continue north of Queen Street, possibly with one branch going to Sandalwood Terminal to serve a controversial but hopefully-will-go-ahead development, and another branch going north to Mayfield Road, where a town centre is starting to develop along with 32,000 homes planned for Caledon's Mayfield West planning district. Between Bovaird Drive & Wanless Drive there is a large amount of re-developable land.

I've got no problem with the LRT using the rail line to get into Caledon and into Orangeville, but I think a service direct to MCC and on to downtown via the railway line is better suited to compete with the 410 extension for people coming down from the hills.

EDIT:
We must remember that most of Caledon is Greenbelted, but a line along the railway could really advance the cause of transit in Caledon, and it could boost land values (which the residents would like) and possibly even give them the ability to access the equity to make green retrofits.

FULL DISCLOSURE
I live in the Mayfield West planning district, as I'm sure you all know. Me advocating for two rapid transit lines should be put into that context.:)
 
I would imagine that running REX along that rail line as a spur from the Georgetown line up to Organville/beyond would provide a more convenient connection. Making a line that long work properly, especially avoiding bunching, would be impressive to the say the least. I think it'd be comparable to the 501 and I think that speaks for itself...
 
jeicow said:
I would imagine that running REX along that rail line as a spur from the Georgetown line up to Organville/beyond would provide a more convenient connection. Making a line that long work properly, especially avoiding bunching, would be impressive to the say the least. I think it'd be comparable to the 501 and I think that speaks for itself...
Click to expand...

It's a sad sign of the state of affairs when it comes to transit operations in this city that people don't think a independent from roadways rail line could be operated reliably.
 
Had to be in Brampton Tuesday and shot these video's. I shot some GO stuff as well some urban up there also. Look under transitdrum118 on youtube as they change how to link to the video's I have posted these past few weeks.

Nelison Intersection
Queen Intersection
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top