daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Continental Forums > North American Skyscrapers Forum > Metropolis & States > Toronto > Transit & Infrastructure



Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old May 26th, 2009, 05:20 AM   #61
TRZ
Welcome to the Rail World
 
TRZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,823
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by UD2 View Post
yeah you're right. The detour that the GO takes towards the east confuses me.

Why does it do that again?
Because it's CN track. There's also currently no connection from the CPR to Oriole and through to Richmond Hill, the CPR only connects to Union now (the track that used to connect to Oriole from CPR has been removed).

There was a plan from June 1993 called Transit2020 where it actually looked at building a new junction from the CPR just east of Don Mills to the CN line, as I have been advocating for. It's not a new idea but an old idea that has never been followed through - it never even got studied AFAIK.
__________________
Pssst... your balls are showing...

EXTREEEEEEEEEEEME transit geek
TRZ no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
 
Old July 27th, 2009, 10:02 PM   #62
TRZ
Welcome to the Rail World
 
TRZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,823
Likes (Received): 1

Although there are existing bad examples, GO stations ideally should never be put in locations where they are only serving one side of the corridor. Furthermore, one of the worst places to put a station is in front of a sewage treatment plant. We all know how popular the Midland station is on the SRT with its fashionable recycling plant on the north side and garbage truck maintenance facility on the south side.

Humber loop is a terrible place for a GO Station, however, a short distance west of there could be a good location for a relocated Mimico GO Station.

Mimico is a known problem station that is impossible to realistically fix in its current location. Some form of relocation of the station will have to take place. That said, Humber loop is not the best candidate.

Putting the new station on top of Mimico Creek, however, I think would make a great fit. The platform would span from the Gardiner underpass (including the underpass itself, although this requires a bit of an engineering feat), to Legion Road North. It has several advantages;

1. It connects to communities north and south of the rail corridor, potentially at both east and west ends of the station. In the west, it would connect to Legion Road North on the north side and Harbourview Crescent on the south side. In the east, a pedestrian path can connect to Brookers Lane on the south side, and the same can hopefully be done around High Street on the north side.

2. At Park Lawn Road, GO can drop a parking lot in the corner comprised of the Gardiner, the railway, and Park Lawn Road. This is an ideal parking lot location given its direct access to the highway.

3. Walking distance from the station would span from about Humber Bay Park in the east to about Superior Avenue in the west on the south side, and from about Wesley Street in the west south of the Gardiner. North of the Gardiner, some of the community from High Street to Park Lawn Road, south of Cannon Road, would be within walking distance.

4. The Prince Edward Bus could still connect to this station, as it would probably have the 66D become the main route to the new Park Lawn Loop for the 501 connection. Remember that Humber Loop is on the way out and will be redeveloped when Park Lawn Loop is in service. Something could be done for a Queensway connection and Royal York branch 76B would also connect. The 501 wouldn't stop right at the station, but would stop within 200m of the station.

5. It smells better farther away from the sewage treatment plant, and has a much more scenic view of both creek and lake, making for a far more attractive station and public realm. It's a tad close to the Ontario Food Terminal, but only the small corner under the Gardiner should be affected by that.

6. Availability of land is also better.

__________________
Pssst... your balls are showing...

EXTREEEEEEEEEEEME transit geek
TRZ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 28th, 2009, 04:25 AM   #63
TRZ
Welcome to the Rail World
 
TRZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,823
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Komiksulo View Post
Like this? (Linked google map.)
Precisely, just much, much longer.

I'm noticing a difference in scale between Bing and Google when it comes to maps... hmm. Looks like the station wouldn't need to go under the Gardiner at all. Bonus! (so much cheaper)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Komiksulo View Post
The more I think about this, the more interesting it seems.

Yeah, the D branch of the 66 bus would become more important, and it serves the condos as well. Perhaps the Queensway bus could drop down Park Lawn as well to serve the station.
Yeah, but only the 80B.
__________________
Pssst... your balls are showing...

EXTREEEEEEEEEEEME transit geek
TRZ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 14th, 2010, 05:37 AM   #64
ssiguy2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: White Rock BC
Posts: 5,218
Likes (Received): 165

Thought I wouls reingnite this thread.

I know that GO is under heavy expansion in terms of fleet size, system length, Union Station, track improvemewnts but what about electrification?
I know its being studied and will happen between Tor/Ham but even that I don't understand. Why does GO use such large trains? Even in rushour they could use slightly smaller trains with higher frequency and certainly during the day.
I think GO should have more frequent stops { but still atleast 3km apart} with smaller trains but more frequent service. This would also be a affordable Airport Connector to downtown.
Have another stop downtown like Queen or/and Dundasd or King.
I think GO would be more successful and actually relevant to Torontonians if they made it more like an Berlin-type S.Bahn than just a more or less rush hour commuter system.
ssiguy2 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 14th, 2010, 02:31 PM   #65
rbt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,629
Likes (Received): 9

Quote:
Originally Posted by ssiguy2 View Post
Why does GO use such large trains?
Striving to get 100% operating funding out of the farebox will do that. Staffing levels are determined by the number of trains, not their size. An 8 car train would have the same number of staff as a 12 car train; so they run 12 car trains.

Second issue is crowding at Union. Getting people off the platforms before the next train arrives is already challenging and removing tracks at union to widen the platforms probably isn't an option. The easiest way to get more people off the platform is additional stairwells and potentially even longer trains.

I wouldn't be surprised if one argument for electrification is the ability to run 16 to 20 car trains at 10 minute frequencies during rush-hour. High frequencies at Union would likely require platform edge doors simply due to platform space constraints.
__________________
Toronto Skyscraper Database
rbt no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 14th, 2010, 08:29 PM   #66
ssiguy2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: White Rock BC
Posts: 5,218
Likes (Received): 165

Well if there is ever a time to do the needed upgrade its now due to the feds are funding a huge Union station makeover.
Also I may have mad myself unclear. I mean that when electrified the system outside Toronto is standard commuter rail but as soon as it enters Toronto city limits is becomes part oif the TTC system, something like ground-level subway with fwer stops ex.Queen, Bloor, St,Clair, Eg, Law Shep, Finch with half nthe trains splitingg off to the Airport.
One of the benefits of electrification is that it can stop and resume speed far faster than reg diesel trains. The labour costs would be lower due to oonly needing the standard 3 workers at each stationj and fewer on the train itself. Also not all the trains have to leave the city but could short-turn at the last stop in Toronto itself. It would benefit the TTC by the fares tgoing to the TTC and not GO and be beneficial to Torontonians as it would create more subway/RT system with speed which TransitCity will not do. The stations don't even need personell as the TTC seems to be moving its transit over to P of P ie TransitCity. It seems like an easy and cheap way to provide rapid transit to all areas of the city.
ssiguy2 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 14th, 2010, 09:02 PM   #67
rbt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,629
Likes (Received): 9

Quote:
Originally Posted by ssiguy2 View Post
The labour costs would be lower due to oonly needing the standard 3 workers at each stationj and fewer on the train itself.
I had been lead to believe a GO train normally has 2 staff on it. One in the wheelchair compartment to manage special needs and monitor the platform, and the engineer. Ticket checks have more people but that seems to be pretty infrequent.

Is standard train staffing higher than that? It is unlikely to get below 2 persons.
__________________
Toronto Skyscraper Database
rbt no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 14th, 2010, 09:30 PM   #68
ssiguy2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: White Rock BC
Posts: 5,218
Likes (Received): 165

I certainly don't think that all of the train ROW should be used. Dewfinatly not the DVP route or Miss/Vaugn routes as they are/will be served by subway. I am thinking about the Oshawa line and the route to airport & Humber College. GO Trains even in rushour run only every 20 minutes so it would be easy. They could also meet at opposite sides of Queen and be connected toghether by a Queen DRL.
It would be a very affordable way to expand Toronto's small subway system. I'm probably dreaming due to Toronto's and the TTC mentality of community service and not subway/RT service.
Few cities make less use of already rail ROW than Toronto.
ssiguy2 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 15th, 2010, 12:55 AM   #69
TRZ
Welcome to the Rail World
 
TRZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,823
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by rbt View Post
I had been lead to believe a GO train normally has 2 staff on it. One in the wheelchair compartment to manage special needs and monitor the platform, and the engineer. Ticket checks have more people but that seems to be pretty infrequent.

Is standard train staffing higher than that? It is unlikely to get below 2 persons.
O-Train managed to score an exception to that somehow, and I believe temporal separation plays a major role in that, a luxury that is impossible in key parts of the GO system. The Milton line currently sees 2 staff per train as is the standard for CP's operating protocol, the other lines have 3 staff per train as per Bombardier's protocol that for some reason requires 2 people in the locomotive.

The guy in the accessible car also opens and closes the doors, which cannot be done from the locomotive. He also announces the stops.
__________________
Pssst... your balls are showing...

EXTREEEEEEEEEEEME transit geek
TRZ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 15th, 2010, 07:00 AM   #70
ssiguy2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: White Rock BC
Posts: 5,218
Likes (Received): 165

They could simply be like an LRT system but a REAL one not a TransitCity thing much like Calgary's CTrain. It doesn't have to be and probably shouldn't be a locomotive syatem whether that be diesel or electric.
Its about time Toronto started looking into all it's railways as rapid transit and not just GO trains for people outside the city. Another excellent possibility would be creating LRT [CTrain] along the unused railline between Yonge and St.Clair as opposed to letting the province using it for GO.
ssiguy2 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 15th, 2010, 01:54 PM   #71
TRZ
Welcome to the Rail World
 
TRZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,823
Likes (Received): 1

Unused rail line? What unused rail line? Surely you don't mean the line that runs by Summerhill, which is the busiest part of CP's network and can't accommodate other services very easily/readily. Unused? Hardly. Far from it.
__________________
Pssst... your balls are showing...

EXTREEEEEEEEEEEME transit geek
TRZ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 15th, 2010, 06:53 PM   #72
ssiguy2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: White Rock BC
Posts: 5,218
Likes (Received): 165

I meant for passenger rail. In terms of rail transit all the current lines are for suburbanites not Torontonians. This is much like the Gardiner...........its the city that has to maintain it, put up with the eyesore but very few Torontonians use it as most of the traffic starts outside Toronto starting with Miss and then parts west.
ssiguy2 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 15th, 2010, 10:15 PM   #73
TRZ
Welcome to the Rail World
 
TRZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,823
Likes (Received): 1

That's what you don't get though, it is still a heavily used line. If it wasn't heavily used already, GO would have been running service on that line since the 90s. Your statements suggest you live in a vaccuum where freight doesn't exist. Freight makes for a lot of traffic at Summerhill, and yes, that matters. There's only two tracks there, and CP is very protective of them as they have no alternative route (that they own).
__________________
Pssst... your balls are showing...

EXTREEEEEEEEEEEME transit geek
TRZ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 18th, 2010, 10:51 PM   #74
kettal
city
 
kettal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,078
Likes (Received): 0

Not a good line to put LRT, my friend... In a collision between a freight train and an LRT, it's RIP passengers.
kettal no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 19th, 2010, 02:50 AM   #75
The Mad Navigator
High Park Man!
 
The Mad Navigator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 60
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by TRZ View Post
That's what you don't get though, it is still a heavily used line. If it wasn't heavily used already, GO would have been running service on that line since the 90s. Your statements suggest you live in a vaccuum where freight doesn't exist. Freight makes for a lot of traffic at Summerhill, and yes, that matters. There's only two tracks there, and CP is very protective of them as they have no alternative route (that they own).
So my question to you is, do you ever see Summerhill station re-open for GO service in the future? And if so, where could CP divert this line's traffic? I'm very curious to know, because Metrolinx has plans to use the station for GO am/pm peak train service in it's 25 year plan.
The Mad Navigator no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 19th, 2010, 03:36 AM   #76
TRZ
Welcome to the Rail World
 
TRZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,823
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Mad Navigator View Post
So my question to you is, do you ever see Summerhill station re-open for GO service in the future? And if so, where could CP divert this line's traffic? I'm very curious to know, because Metrolinx has plans to use the station for GO am/pm peak train service in it's 25 year plan.
am/pm peak, mono-directional service may be possible to squeeze in, it depends on CP's conditions. Yes, I believe it is possible to re-route CP traffic, but it is a very expensive undertaking to do that. Metrolinx is supposedly looking at a new freight rail corridor through the GTA, although there's reportedly a lot of foot-dragging in that department. I would have to presume that that corridor is for CP's benefit because Metrolinx would like to open up North Toronto (aka Summerhill) Station to GO service.
__________________
Pssst... your balls are showing...

EXTREEEEEEEEEEEME transit geek
TRZ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 27th, 2010, 02:52 AM   #77
Steeltown
Registered User
 
Steeltown's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 3,546
Likes (Received): 142

Attended the Niagara Peninsula rail service expansion EA PIC this evening.

Summed up new GO Stations at Hamilton (James St N), Grimsby, St. Catharines, and Niagara Falls. They'll use the CN track.

8 GO Train service from Toronto-Hamilton-Niagara Falls, 4 in each direction during the weekday.

Hamilton's new James St N Station will get an additional 20 GO Train service. Therefore 28 additional GO Train service for Hamilton. Hamilton's current GO Station, TH&B will remain the same. Hamilton will get two GO Stations within the downtown area.
Steeltown no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 27th, 2010, 03:38 AM   #78
kettal
city
 
kettal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,078
Likes (Received): 0

I hope they run these trains express through Burlington, Oakville & Mississauga, or else that's one long train ride.
kettal no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 27th, 2010, 06:12 PM   #79
Sereno7
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 19
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steeltown View Post
Attended the Niagara Peninsula rail service expansion EA PIC this evening.

Summed up new GO Stations at Hamilton (James St N), Grimsby, St. Catharines, and Niagara Falls. They'll use the CN track.

8 GO Train service from Toronto-Hamilton-Niagara Falls, 4 in each direction during the weekday.

Hamilton's new James St N Station will get an additional 20 GO Train service. Therefore 28 additional GO Train service for Hamilton. Hamilton's current GO Station, TH&B will remain the same. Hamilton will get two GO Stations within the downtown area.
Is that peak direction service to Niagara Falls? or two way service through out the day?
Sereno7 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 28th, 2010, 12:11 AM   #80
Steeltown
Registered User
 
Steeltown's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 3,546
Likes (Received): 142

GO unveils all-day trains plan

January 27, 2010
Daniel Nolan
The Hamilton Spectator
http://www.thespec.com/News/Local/article/712517

Hamilton will see 20 additional commuter trains a day, and Niagara eight trains, if a proposal to bring expanded rail service to Niagara becomes reality.

GO Transit unveiled a plan last night at the Sheraton Hotel in which it aims to extend all-day train service -- that now goes to Aldershot -- to a proposed station on the Canadian National Rail line at James Street North.

That would involve 10 trains each way between the proposed new Hamilton station and Union Station in Toronto. Niagara would see four trains each way between Union Station and Niagara Falls.

Hamilton would keep its eight trains -- four each way -- that now run between Union Station and the former Toronto, Hamilton and Buffalo Railway station on Hunter Street.

The proposal is part of the GO Niagara Rail Service Expansion study that GO hopes to complete by the end of the year. If approved, and funded by the province, the new services could be on track within five years. Cost has not been determined.

GO officials showed off their proposal at a public open house. GO is looking at expanded rail service in line with Ontario projection's that the Hamilton-Niagara area will have a population of two million by 2031.

GO did study potential passenger rail service for the Canadian Pacific Railway line between Hamilton, Welland and Niagara Falls, but it had a lower evaluation compared with the CN line, considering travel time, state of the line and closeness to population centres.

The CN line is 72 kilometres between Aldershot and Niagara Falls, compared with 111 kilometres between Aldershot and Niagara Falls through Welland.

GO manager Greg Ashbee called the CN option "a slam dunk," but he said the CP line might be considered again one day.

"Never say never," he said.

The CP option was something explored by Ward 2 Councillor Bob Bratina and the City of Welland in 2008.

GO is proposing to have new stations on the CN line at James Street North and Centennial Parkway in Hamilton; Fruitland Road and Fifty Road in Stoney Creek; Casablanca Boulevard and Bartlett Avenue in Grimsby; and Ontario Street and Vineland Avenue in Lincoln. It is aiming to use the existing VIA stations in Grimsby, St. Catharines and Niagara Falls.

Layovers for trains are proposed for First Avenue, Vansickle Road and Glendale Avenue in St. Catharines. A layover is also being looked at for Centennial Parkway.

Ashbee stressed the site selections are just proposals and will likely get pared down as the process moves towards the end of 2010, including a second public meeting.

"We've recommended a route," he said. "We haven't selected stations and layovers."

Brothers Matt, 28, and Dan Thompson, 26, were among the people who came out to look over the plans. They liked what they saw, although they had their own ideas about station locations. Both believed GO should look at establishing a station near Ottawa Street North or the Centre Mall in east Hamilton.

"There's a ton of people who live in that area who might want to take the train to Toronto," said Dan Thompson, an environmental science student at McMaster.
Steeltown no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT +2. The time now is 04:59 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like v3.2.5 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu