[Bojaxs]

If you use only a highway as a reference point

Who says I am? And even if I were, so what? Everyone is talking about improving transit in order to take more cars off the 401. It's not just me. Politicians are talking about it as well.

Does improving the Kitchener line not serve a purpose? I think it does. Easy access to DT Kitchener without a car.

Does improving the Kitchener line take cars off the 401? Yes.
Does it make it easier for people, who don't own a car, to move across the GTA and allow them to sustain a "car free" lifestyle? Yes.

Does Lakeshore West take cars off the QEW? Yes.
Should that be used as a barometer for the LSW success? I would think so. You disagree?

 

[jje1000]

Given that Doug Ford was the one who cancelled the Missing Link in the first place, this is presumably pre-election empty promises, similarly to how he promised to upgrade the tracks between Kitchener and London during the last election.

I'm concerned that this announcement will put the brakes on the current plans for all-day two-way service to Kitchener. Reading between the lines of the Kitchener expansion business case, CN's approval for that service is dependent on upgrades to the CN Halton sub between Georgetown and Bramalea, including expensive items such as triple tracking Brampton station, quad-tracking Mt Pleasant and building a rail-to-rail grade separation west of Mount Pleasant. If a Missing Link were going to be built, all those upgrades would become redundant and would presumably be cancelled.

Yes, put me in the skeptic column, but on the other hand, Doug Ford is one to spin on a dime depending on the direction the political winds are blowing.

Still, I think any new rail bypasses will be far off into the future.

 

[crs1026]

Sorry, when I was thinking GO in the Hydro corridor, I was thinking heavy rail GO as we currently know it.

I'm not smart enough to know the interplay between electric rail running in close proximity to six 230Kv circuits. I would imagine linear induction, which was the 'tech du jour' back then, would have been 'interesting'.

I grew up in a house that backed on to the corridor; over our backyard fence was the corridor. The ROW varies in width, but at that stretch, the distance between the private property boundaries and the nearest circuit is about 12-15 metres; in a couple of spots it is around five.

There are already plenty of places where high voltage lines and rail lines run very close to each other. I don't think there is a technical reason why the two are incompatible.

As I understand it, Hydro wants control of what goes on in their space.... all it takes is one construction crane or dump truck with its bed raised to contact a sagging conductor, and bad things will happen. Or a work vehicle snagging a pylon. And the added complexity of coordinating work between agencies, ensuring and trusting the other agency is applying the necessary training and safe work practices, policing sub contractors, etc....their concern is well placed. And their own protection of future capacity is material

All the same, before taking on the land acquisition costs and burden of squeezing a new transit line alongside a freight rail line, I wouldn't dismiss the idea out of hand. It's worth a look.

- Paul

 

[Metroscapes]

A couple things to note about hydro corridors:

• The corridor along the 407 is mostly 500kV lines. This is the backbone of Ontario's whole transmission system. As difficult as Hydro One are to work with, some of their stubbornness in this corridor is warranted. This is the highest voltages and the most critical to the whole grid.
• Pipelines often share the corridor as well. I don't have a good grasp of what, if any, are in the 407 corridor but would not be surprised if there were some.

 

[catcher_of_cats]

A couple things to note about hydro corridors:

• The corridor along the 407 is mostly 500kV lines. This is the backbone of Ontario's whole transmission system. As difficult as Hydro One are to work with, some of their stubbornness in this corridor is warranted. This is the highest voltages and the most critical to the whole grid.
• Pipelines often share the corridor as well. I don't have a good grasp of what, if any, are in the 407 corridor but would not be surprised if there were some.

There is at least one pipeline buried on the south side of the 407 near the Credit River

 

[guavadelic]

Constructing the 407 freight bypass and allowing more frequent and better service on the Kitchener line would do a lot to take cars off the 401.

I would like to think that once the other lines get up to the same service levels as the Lakeshore line, then Union station will be used more as a transfer point to get from one side of the GTA to the other.

I'm certain there's a lot of people who live west of Toronto who ride the Kitchener, Milton, LSW lines into Union, and then transfer onto the Lakeshore East to go into Durham.

The bypass would also facilitate building the much talked about multi-modal transit hub at Pearson, with intercity connections to points in Southern Ontario. While freight is constricting capacity on that line, "Union Station West" wouldn't really make sense.

That would provide further congestion relief, especially around that busy 401/427 interchange.

 

[guavadelic]

Yes, put me in the skeptic column, but on the other hand, Doug Ford is one to spin on a dime depending on the direction the political winds are blowing.

Still, I think any new rail bypasses will be far off into the future.

If Bonnie makes the Missing Link a big part of her transit platform, I could see Ford making a stronger commitment in order to box her out.

 

[JJTheJetPln]

Given that Doug Ford was the one who cancelled the Missing Link in the first place, this is presumably pre-election empty promises, similarly to how he promised to upgrade the tracks between Kitchener and London during the last election.

Exactly how I feel about it. There are a lot of promises made, but not kept. It's easy to say you're going to do something, but when you've been sitting on government for 8 years and blame the previous government for shortfalls while doing almost nothing to fix those shortfalls, it starts to feel like the boy who cried wolf.

I share the concern that ML may be walking the plan back.... or at least using the GO 2.0 as an excuse to rest on their oars.

A key is, the public stakeholders (ie we observers, plus the public and municipal officials in affected communities) needs to know what firm commitment ML has with CN re upgrading the Bramalea-Silver section.... and what limits does it contain for the service plan (ie how many trains will CN allow when it is complete)..... and is the funding committed and released?

I can sort of (gritting my teeth) understand that ML has not rushed to finish construction west of Silver, given that the upgrading of the CN owned segment may be critical path, and so the remaining elements are not affecting service offerings.. (I'm being charitable, sure seems more likely that ML simply hasn't managed this work properly). But it's really needed to know the plan going forward from today, and are promises being kept.

- Paul

100%. There are a lot of promises made or a lot of pressers released... It feels as though we have a government without a spine sometimes. Some communication from ML or the government is welcome, but when we're waiting months with no info, I can't help but go back to the pre-election empty promises thought.

If Bonnie makes the Missing Link a big part of her transit platform, I could see Ford making a stronger commitment in order to box her out.

100% agreed. If we actually had MPP's throwing support behind Ford, would it cause him to actually do something, or would it cause him to use that as an empty promise to get elected, and then shelve it?

 

[Bordercollie]

Wouldn't you need to build a flyover where the York Sub meets the Weston sub near Bramalea?

 

[crs1026]

Exactly how I feel about it. There are a lot of promises made, but not kept. It's easy to say you're going to do something, but when you've been sitting on government for 8 years and blame the previous government for shortfalls while doing almost nothing to fix those shortfalls, it starts to feel like the boy who cried wolf.

This is why the ultimate test is, has the funding been released. The Wynne government launched GO RER, with a business case that documented the cash flow over the coming decade (ie 2015-2025j. It became abundantly clear that the money did not actually flow... and in fact when one looks back at the provincial budgets year over year, the money simply wasn't there (at least not without more borrowing, at a time when Ontario's credit rating might have been affected). Wynne's party just maintained the pretense that it was moving along.

Ford's government was the one that actually started releasing funds, to their credit. However over time the amounts have gotten fuzzy, and it's not clear how much of GO Expansion has been funded and how much remains to be released. As well, there is no real data on how coats have matched that envelope. If specific tasks have run over budget, it's to be expected that later tasks will be cancelled or deferred..... Ontario is not simply going to top up the envelope every time ML has an "oops".
Add to that ML's constant fickle rethinking of its own plans, and loss of interest in tasks that last year were considered "mission critical". Scope creep (or erosion) and their internal poor performance means they may not be held to finishing what they started.

100%. There are a lot of promises made or a lot of pressers released... It feels as though we have a government without a spine sometimes. Some communication from ML or the government is welcome, but when we're waiting months with no info, I can't help but go back to the pre-election empty promises thought.

I think it's more than backbone. Ford has released all sorts of vanity programs and tax relief that arguably are very low priority compared to building transit. It's quite likely that these programs were funded by stealing from the GO Expansion envelope. I suspect ML has quietly had budgets cut or funding withheld, even where they want to get on with things.

And, there is probably a lot of fatigue over the political value of projects that wont have political payback for a decade. My biggest fear is that politicians simply tire of transit projects (which pose political risks, since government really can't control much of the execution of these) and start prioritising other things. #tunnels

100% agreed. If we actually had MPP's throwing support behind Ford, would it cause him to actually do something, or would it cause him to use that as an empty promise to get elected, and then shelve it?

There are plenty of seats up for grab along our transit corridors. The government must feel that these are so secure, or so unattainable, that completing transit in those ridings is not mission critical. Even if current MPPs don't care, there are riding associations and potential next-election candidates in those ridings, who are interested in what the platform ought to be.

At the end of the day, promising nice things and then letting those promises slide, sure seems to work, for every party.

- Paul

 

[crs1026]

With so many people posting ideas for bypasses and new lines, I think we need to revisit the core issues. I am a lot more interested in spectating what Ford and ML may actually be up to (and eventually moving towards) than just exchanging fantasy ideas. Call it Monday morning quarterbacking, but based on standing in the door of the locker room as opposed to sitting in front of the TV at home.

There is no longer any value in putting CN on a bypass, as (supposedly) ML and CN have reached agreement on how to share the Halton Sub. Whether that's a good idea or not, we are led to believe the agreement is in place and being procured (I'm skeptical) and it gives Ontario enough track capacity to meet all GO and VIA needs for a couple of decades (I'm doubly skeptical). Regardless, the water is clearly under the bridge on this one in government's eyes - so let's not over/rethink it..

There may be value in putting CPKC in a bypass, to secure the Galt Sub for Milton expansion. The test would be, can one build the bypass for less money than widening the Galt Sub as a shared route..... and can one do so in a way that is commercially favourable to CPKC, and to CN. (Without the latter, allow ten years delay for court challenges.)

There may be value in putting CPKC in a bypass, to secure the North Toronto line for transit. Again, the same cost and commercial tests apply...and does one actually need to move CPKC off this route as opposed to simply squeezing a transit line in alongside. And is this idea really in the transit planners' future vision. And how does the public in Vaughan and Markham feel about more freight trains coming their way.

Lastly, There may be value in building a GO Regional route along the corridor that we call a bypass, without changing any CN or CPKC routing, because it is a useful way to build transit connections and reduce highway use. Again, is there money and is this in the official vision.

At the end of the day, to keep focussed on what may come out of ML/MOT in response to the Ford direction, as opposed to generating fantasy ideas
- Ford (and Ottawa) has made a promise to put 2WAD transit on the Milton line, and with his current political opponent coming from that patch, he will not be able to walk back that commitment
- The current go-to plan is to quad track the Galt Sub, and the huge price tag for that creates sticker shock for the government
- As did the previous government, the bypass sounds like a silver bullet solution that in theory might soften the cost
- More freight trains in Markham/Vaughan is politically dicey even if some ridings are irrevocably Liberal
- The professionals who do the long term strategy may have a few data based thoughts of their own - a higher grade plan than our fantasy ideas

My take? It's Ford being Ford. The likely reality is, the bypass is just a sexy idea that captivates his simpleton imagination, sounds plausible, gives him talking points, and (by requiring study) removes the need to make a decision or cut a cheque for a while. When has the guy ever worked from real issues and needs and data? I predict he will chase a bypass for a while, as Wynne did, and then abandon the idea in the face of CN/CPKC opposition, plus some more realistic examination and costing around the Galt Sub.

The glass half full is: whoever wrote that memo has a good understanding of the overall lay of the land, especially the relationship with the railways and the competing needs for investment. That's a good place to start educating Cabinet.

- Paul

 

[Sunnyside]

Who says I am? And even if I were, so what? Everyone is talking about improving transit in order to take more cars off the 401. It's not just me. Politicians are talking about it as well.

Does improving the Kitchener line not serve a purpose? I think it does. Easy access to DT Kitchener without a car.

Does improving the Kitchener line take cars off the 401? Yes.
Does it make it easier for people, who don't own a car, to move across the GTA and allow them to sustain a "car free" lifestyle? Yes.

Does Lakeshore West take cars off the QEW? Yes.
Should that be used as a barometer for the LSW success? I would think so. You disagree?

Don’t disagree at all. You might be misinterpreting me… I’m merely pointing out this is not the only metric, and should not be the chief metric in gauging utilization and uptake, because it can paint an overly pessimistic picture when in reality a case isn’t that bad- it’s just multi-faceted. It’s ok to recognize the 401 will still be busy after a transit line, but also that the transit line made a gigantic dent in regional flows on and off the 401.

I was getting the impression from some that if the benefit to relieving highway congestion is not enough, it’s not worthwhile. Which I find silly, only because success is made across many different inputs/outputs of people and their trips. The Elizabeth line does hundreds of things at once for greater London- any crosstown line here will/ought do the same.

 

[Bojaxs]

I predict he will chase a bypass for a while, as Wynne did, and then abandon the idea in the face of CN/CPKC opposition, plus some more realistic examination and costing around the Galt Sub.

Back in 2015, the Liberals, under Wynne, came to an agreement with CN regarding constructing of the 407 bypass. Then Doug Ford cancelled the plan after becoming Premier.

I am a lot more interested in spectating what Ford and ML may actually be up to (and eventually moving towards) than just exchanging fantasy ideas.

Well this thread exists for the sole purpose of speculating about the freight bypasses.

There is no longer any value in putting CN on a bypass, as (supposedly) ML and CN have reached agreement on how to share the Halton Sub.

Respectfully disagree. The bypass isn't just about improving GO service on the Kitchener line, but also improving VIA service to & from southern Ontario. Also potential future Amtrak service from Detroit and Chicago.

The Elizabeth line does hundreds of things at once for greater London- any crosstown line here will/ought do the same.

I'm fairly confident a line stretching from Milton to Pickering will achieve many things for Toronto and the wider GTA. Similar to what the Elizabeth line has achieved for the greater London area.

 

[crs1026]

Back in 2015, the Liberals, under Wynne, came to an agreement with CN regarding constructing of the 407 bypass. Then Doug Ford cancelled the plan after becoming Premier.

Not true. ML negotiated for years, reached an impasse with CN. The original CN bypass grew in some folks' minds (and published information) to include CP and even GO. CN would not budge. ML switched gears towards sharing and CN was more receptive. There is a ML Town Hall video on Youtube somewhere that documents that.

Well this thread exists for the sole purpose of speculating about the freight bypasses.

Fair enough, all opinions are welcome and valued. But there is a difference between three guys watching hockey in a bar and debating whether Leafs should trade Marner, and Elliott Friedman saying on air "Leafs are considering trading Marner". The difference is, someone is going to ask Friedman, "What's your source?" and the points Friedman makes may have linkage to published reports and research, possibly even alluding to an actual business conversation.
The two discussions are not on the same level.

Respectfully disagree. The bypass isn't just about improving GO service on the Kitchener line, but also improving VIA service to & from southern Ontario. Also potential future Amtrak service from Detroit and Chicago.

We are on the same wavelength here, I thought I had implied this but may not have expressed this well. The Kitchener line needs to serve all those needs. But tell me, what value would a bypass now deliver that isn't being delivered by the decision to share the line, assuming the decision is now going to happen and capacity will be added to the Halton line?

- Paul

 

[Bojaxs]

We are on the same wavelength here, I thought I had implied this but may not have expressed this well. The Kitchener line needs to serve all those needs. But tell me, what value would a bypass now deliver that isn't being delivered by the decision to share the line, assuming the decision is now going to happen and capacity will be added to the Halton line?

The value is having full ownership of the entire line and taking CN out of the equation.