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

DENTROBATE54 said:
(this would still be an AM/PM peak-only service still dependant on filtering bus routes to connect outwards to nodes). ... not just a limited service during peak.
Click to expand...

Sez who? No one would be advocating a dream of spending millions on diverting the Milton line through MCC for 6 round trips a day. The whole point would be to bring frequencies to every 20 minutes all day or better.

With a proper fare agreement, Mississauga Transit routes could rearrange to a hub-and-spoke system based around the GO line. Don't you find it absurd how many MT routes filter in to MCC terminal? Or how many filter into the subway at Islington/Kipling? Replacing all these trips with a high-capacity train could save Mississauga money on operating costs. Isn't it less than optimal that buses make long cross-city trips stopping at every local stop just to get people to the subway, for another slow local trip to their destinations? It's time for economies of scale for MT... and that means rail. If Mississauga really wants MCC to be a centre of high-density office activity it needs to be able to draw quality workers efficiently from a large field... and that means rail.

If you want another way of thinking about it, I'm saying that Mississauga deserves a cross-city subway line providing access to its biggest destinations (MCC, Meadowvale office park, Erin Mills mall and hospital). Only the subway should run express to downtown Toronto from Kipling (because the BD is both slow and already crowded and couldn't handle the extra demand).
 
The whole point would be to bring frequencies to every 20 minutes all day or better.
Click to expand...

How would it be possible to have 20 minute frequencies on the Milton Line? I thought CN/CP ran freight cars along it, last I checked. Several MT routes already serve both GO stations and Square One so indeed a S-Bahn would definitely be overkill.

About a Mississauga subway, this would work best if independent from the Bloor Danforth Line as most of the nodes you listed are west of Hurontario translating to miles of underutilized and wasted track inbetwix. It's hard to determine where to route it as the nodes vary from area to area, but likely an upside down-L line running from Port Credit through the MCC then continuing westward along Eglinton to 9th Line would suffice.
 
If a subway were built in Mississauga, I'd like to see it go from Kipling along Dundas to Hurontario, then turn north and go Hurontario/Eglinton with a couple of stops in the MCC.
 
You increase frequencies by building new tracks. Just ask yourself how they do it in major cities in Europe, Asia, and Australia. The ROW is reasonably wide and could fit 4 tracks fairly easily.

You really think a frequent service between Toronto and Mississauga would be underused? Have you ever looked at a GO schedule or been at Islington station? GO has 78 bus trips between Toronto and Mississauga each day! For the hour after 9:15am GO has 19 buses travelling down the Gardiner from Mississauga to Toronto... that's a bus every 3 minutes! MT has HUNDREDS of trips a day heading to the subway.

The demand is there and it's staring us in the face. With the congestion on the QEW, the 401, and now even stop-and-go traffic on the 403 along with the exponential growth of Milton dare I say that such a service isn't even something that would be nice to have but instead something that we NEED.
 
At a bare minimum, Milton needs to be upgraded to hourly train service, or at least equivalent frequency to Lakeshore West. I'm not sure a subway would work in Mississauga, but there certainly ARE a lot of buses headed for Islington every single day. And yeah, the congestion on the QEW/Gardiner/403 is a big whopping hint. When GO buses get stopped in heavy traffic, that's a hint to run a train instead.
 
Hmm? I thought I replied here already? what a waste of time, sigh...

CDL.TO said:
With a proper fare agreement, Mississauga Transit routes could rearrange to a hub-and-spoke system based around the GO line. Don't you find it absurd how many MT routes filter in to MCC terminal?
Click to expand...

This wouldn't change with a new GO station at Square One would it? If anything, it would be reinforced by such a station.

Overall overhauling MT just to serve GO would just make things worse and is not even necessary in the first place.

For example, if you reroute the Dundas buses into Cooksville or Dixie, it would just inconvenience everyone. Much better solution would be to add a GO station at Cawthra, which would not only serve the Dundas bus but also the Cawthra bus as well. And all of the buses would continue to stop on the street like the always do.

Similarly, a bare-bones station can be built at Britannia with convenient on-street connections to 5 different bus routes.
 
But doady, it wouldn't be just GO anymore. The Milton line would serve as a local-service rapid transit route for Mississauga. Local trips would be served by buses, while longer distance trips, including to Square One, would be served by the rail route. Buses would feed into the nearest Milton line station just as TTC routes feed into the subway. It would essentially operate as a Mississauga subway, except with an express continuation to downtown Toronto.
 
doady said:
For example, if you reroute the Dundas buses into Cooksville or Dixie, it would just inconvenience everyone. Much better solution would be to add a GO station at Cawthra, which would not only serve the Dundas bus but also the Cawthra bus as well. And all of the buses would continue to stop on the street like the always do.

Similarly, a bare-bones station can be built at Britannia with convenient on-street connections to 5 different bus routes.
Click to expand...

Indeed. With electrification you could add more stations and not add any more travel time. Cawthra would definately be something to consider, but I don't think Cooksville would be much of a diversion for Dundas buses. Britannia would call for a reassessment of Streetsville station. Redesigning a system around a rail-centred hub-and-spoke system would call for a complete reconsideration of the bus network. It wouldn't make sense to leave bus routes as they are already just with transfer opportunities tossed in.
 
unimaginative2 said:
Don't worry about it. That's a pretty good vision map! I agree with a lot of it. I especially like that you actually have been listening to me when it comes to the Downtown Relief Line and have located it along the actual recommended route! I also agree with most of your other ideas. That would certainly be quite a network!
Click to expand...

Cool thanks. :)

unimaginative2 said:
Whether it's relocated through the valley or up Hurontario doesn't really matter to me that much. The reason for the Hurontario routing is to preserve the Cooksville Station. I know the interurban used to run through the valley, so there's a precedent, but I don't know if the nearby residents would be too amenable to a railway line through their backyards. It would also require more tunnelling than a Hurontario route, so there's some added cost. There's a big catch with splitting the route as you propose: if the route east of the split runs at a 20 minute frequency, that would mean that Square One/MCC would see trains only every 40 minutes. That's hardly sufficient for what would likely be the busiest stop on the GO system after Union.
Click to expand...

Would they have to be the same frequency though? I was thinking the MCC becomes the main station while Cooksville and Erindale get less service.

Plus, if the Milton corridor had 4 tracks, I think there would be capacity for much higher frequencies than that.

Anyways perhaps you are right, it better to get rid that whole section. :(

unimaginative2 said:
With the Hurontario diversion, the Cooksville station relocation would be inconsequential, while the Erindale station would move closer to Eglinton, making it potentially accessible to two bus routes instead of one.
Click to expand...

Actually right now, Erindale station connects with 4 different bus routes: 6, 9, 26, and 38. The entrance is on Creditview but pedestrians can access it form Burnhamthorpe as well, and there as also a pedestrian bridge across Burnhamthorpe.
 
My proposed route under Hurontario and west on the 403 corridor would allow full frequency at Cooksville, Erindale and Square One. That's the big advantage. With four tracks, (two dedicated to CP and two to GO) you could have virtually unlimited frequency, you're right. But even so, it would seem best to keep maximum frequency at all points on the line rather than splitting it.
 
Do you think we're making inroads, unimaginative? Helping people break out of the public transit false dichotomy (err... false polychotomy) of (1) local bus, (2) on-street streetcar, (3) local subway line, or (4) 4-6 trains-a-day GO monster bilevels?

There's hundreds of different ways that you can combine technologies and network development. There's also a wide range of needs for travellers based upon their origins and (most importantly) their destinations and the urban forms of those locations. One technology is not better than another (ie. "We don't want a suburban rail line... we deserve a subway!" commentary), instead some technologies can serve the needs of travellers better than another. The job is to choose which system is most efficient, attractive, and logical for those travellers (while avoiding orphan technologies).

Now if we could only get the political and transit establishment to change their approach to these problems.
 
unimaginative2 said:
My proposed route under Hurontario and west on the 403 corridor would allow full frequency at Cooksville, Erindale and Square One. That's the big advantage. With four tracks, (two dedicated to CP and two to GO) you could have virtually unlimited frequency, you're right. But even so, it would seem best to keep maximum frequency at all points on the line rather than splitting it.
Click to expand...

Does the bell for expropriation ring a bell for your plan?

Have you looked at the ROW in the first place.

The current ROW will only support 3 tracks in the first place. To put in a 4th or 5th, will call for removal of existing business and residential houses that are next to the current ROW.

Expropriation is the last resort and in some places it will help the area to be redeveloped that will enhance the area compare to what there now.

Mother Parker will have to go.
 
I think so, cdl, but slowly! I'm looking forward to a time when we will have seen the last of "People are never going to use GO as an alternative to local transit - it only comes six times a day."

Drum, that's an interesting point. Of course, in any continent but ours, three tracks would be more than enough for an all-day transit service and at least 30 freights a day. We'll never have decent S-Bahn style service without ownership of the tracks. It's that simple. If a little expropriation is necessary, though, I think that's okay.
 
I really think that you could fit 4 tracks on the line with little or no expropriation. With sidings, it's already 3 tracks wide in many places and there's still room to spare.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top