Wrenkin
Active Member
In one of the comments on a Steve Munro blog on this issue someone suggested Reading Station gets over 500 diesels a day. I don't know how the Toronto people came up with their number.
Toronto Union Pearson Express | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx | MMM Group Limited
In one of the comments on a Steve Munro blog on this issue someone suggested Reading Station gets over 500 diesels a day. I don't know how the Toronto people came up with their number.
nfitz
Superstar
Of course it's not going to be the case. The number of bald-faced lies that this group has made is just shocking.
The claims of the Weston NIMBYs are completely beyond absurd. As was the basis for that court case that got dismissed. How can any lawyer ethically bring a case like that, which has so little basis that the court refuses to even hear it? Surely the lawyer bringing the case would have known it was that poor.
Woodbridge_Heights
Senior Member
Facts... Facts are useless if they don't help your cause.
ssiguy2
Senior Member
These are not stats taken from mid-air but come right from Metrolinx own website.
Currently the Weston area has 45 diesel trains running by every day and that figure includes GO, VIA, and CN. In just 3 short years that figure is going to soar to 206. According to Metrolinx in their GO 25 year plan, the line will potentially running at 464 diesels per day if GO brings in all day two way service on the Bolton, Barrie, Kitchener lines. Seeing GO seems to cater more to suburban riders than Torontonians the likelyhood of reaching that number seens feasible. Also these corridors serve the fast growing Milto/Brampton/Halton Hills/Barrie/Kitchener areas which are probably the fastest growing areas of the GTA and far faster growing than any of the Lakeshore Line areas east or west.
GO will be putting an expansion on the lines towards rolling stock to serve this growing population way before they even think about electrifying the corridor.
In general I have little empathy for people who choose to live along rail corridors or near airports or freeways and then complain about the noise or pollution but this is a matter of degree. According to Metrolinx there will be 10X more diesel trains running by than there are now and that really starts to effect general health. When you are starting to talk about the actual health of the citizens and not just the "I don't want the noise crowd" then you really have taken the conversation to a different level.
This is aking to someone living on a main 2 lane road carrying 15,000 passengers a day and then all of a sudden the government coming by and prutting a DVP in front of your house. Imagine the furor that would ensue if all of a sudden the province wanted to turn the Island Airport into Pearson #2 with jumbos and hundreds of international flights a day.............all hell would break loose and not just from the people who live on the Islands.
Like I said I ussually don't have a lot of empathy for people who choose to live along rail corridors but when it begins to put people's health at risk then that crosses the line. Note these people are not complaining at the rail traffic itself and they actually want better rail service but they just want to be able to breathe the air at the same time. If they were bitching about to many electric trains I would be the first to tell them to go to hell but this isn't the case.
Currently the Weston area has 45 diesel trains running by every day and that figure includes GO, VIA, and CN. In just 3 short years that figure is going to soar to 206. According to Metrolinx in their GO 25 year plan, the line will potentially running at 464 diesels per day if GO brings in all day two way service on the Bolton, Barrie, Kitchener lines. Seeing GO seems to cater more to suburban riders than Torontonians the likelyhood of reaching that number seens feasible. Also these corridors serve the fast growing Milto/Brampton/Halton Hills/Barrie/Kitchener areas which are probably the fastest growing areas of the GTA and far faster growing than any of the Lakeshore Line areas east or west.
GO will be putting an expansion on the lines towards rolling stock to serve this growing population way before they even think about electrifying the corridor.
In general I have little empathy for people who choose to live along rail corridors or near airports or freeways and then complain about the noise or pollution but this is a matter of degree. According to Metrolinx there will be 10X more diesel trains running by than there are now and that really starts to effect general health. When you are starting to talk about the actual health of the citizens and not just the "I don't want the noise crowd" then you really have taken the conversation to a different level.
This is aking to someone living on a main 2 lane road carrying 15,000 passengers a day and then all of a sudden the government coming by and prutting a DVP in front of your house. Imagine the furor that would ensue if all of a sudden the province wanted to turn the Island Airport into Pearson #2 with jumbos and hundreds of international flights a day.............all hell would break loose and not just from the people who live on the Islands.
Like I said I ussually don't have a lot of empathy for people who choose to live along rail corridors but when it begins to put people's health at risk then that crosses the line. Note these people are not complaining at the rail traffic itself and they actually want better rail service but they just want to be able to breathe the air at the same time. If they were bitching about to many electric trains I would be the first to tell them to go to hell but this isn't the case.
TOareaFan
Superstar
So we immediately jump to the 25 year potential (it will be no where close to that number for many years) in service and combine that with the assumption that there would be no eletrification in that 25 year period to get to the conclusion that this is becoming the busiest diesel corridor in the world? And that one component of that should not be allowed to open until it is electrified? That is a bit of a leap!
My problem with the opposition from the Weston community has always been the moving target approach to this. It really has given me the impression that this is all just an attempt to block progress.
Initially they were not complaining that it was diesel...it was all about the "cutting their community in half" because 3 roads were not going to cross the tracks. Then when the compromise was reached (having two roads cross and the third becoming a pedestrian crossing) that argument lost its legs.
then it was all about how this did not serve their community....about how they were being asked to bear the brunt of this service (as if these trains do not pass through any other communities) and how, at least, the trains should serve them. So another compromise is reached by having the trains stop in/at Weston.....so that "argument" lost steam.
It was only then that the whole notion of how awful these diesel trains are and how this line should be electrified before service is introduced came up.
It leaves you wondering, really, what would happen if tomorrow somone wrote a cheque to have it electrified. The cyinic in me thinks there would be another blocking "cause" arising.
Exactly. I think that a lot of the projected ridership on the Georgetown corridor is going to appear there BECAUSE of electrification, not in spite of it. And by the time that ridership appears as a result of the electrified service, the ARL will have been electrified as well as part of that.
nfitz
Superstar
Most of the increase (assuming you've got the numbers correct) are the low-emission airport trains. These will take significant numbers of taxis, buses, and cars off the road, which have significantly greater emissions.
I know that there's a good case that providing mass transit, merely empties the road, which then fills up again with other users, and there's no real cut to traffic - but that rule only applies at peak. Most of the airport trains are off-peak, when there is already excess capacity on the roads, so there would be little additional cars, buses, and taxis replacing the ones that switch to the trains.
The net effect is that there will be less emissions.
This then, is clearly not about this project, which will significantly reduce emissions over the current situation. But merely a case of people whining about it being there back yard.
Remember how long this group whined about other issues other than electrification, before they realised they might get traffic with that issue? Some of their complaints were very NIMBYish, such that cars would have to drive an extra short block to get to the station, because they were only building 3 vehicle bridges near the station and not 4 (the 4th only being for pedestrians).
BurlOak
Senior Member
Wrenkin
Active Member
Why will it have 3? There is the infield terminal, but I thought they were just going to build a new pier on Terminal 1 (pier G). Also, the terminals don't have the same passenger volume so I wouldn't assume 2/3 would switch, even if there are 3 terminals.
Dan416
Senior Member
Actually the plan is to ultimately only have one terminal, Terminal 1.
Terminal 3 is slated to be replaced with a Terminal 1 expansion. There are no plans for a third terminal.
BurlOak
Senior Member
I thought there were to be 3 stops (within the airport) for the People Mover. Maybe I was wrong.
rbt
Senior Member
Correct, 2 stops at Terminal 1.
Starting about 2050 the old Terminal 3 will likely be demolished, so there will be 2 Terminal stops only (both at T1).
jamincan
Active Member
In the grand scheme of things T1 will be extended to where T3 is now (and I expect there would be a stop on that end of the terminal). The truth is that by that point in time, they will probably want newer and shinier things and completely forget about the master plan from today and do something else entirely.
rbt
Senior Member
Piers G, H, and I are where T2 used to be (opposite direction from T3).
innsertnamehere
Superstar
if you use google earth historic imagery you can see the old terminal in 2002 when it still existed.