[crs1026]

There is certainly room for a platform if the Milton line is kept to one track. But if the line is restored to two tracks east of Dupont - pretty much essential for 2WAD - that empty bridge will be needed for the second track. And an island platform would be needed.

- Paul

 

[bearcat]

Unless plans have change from the day one plans, there is to be 6 tracks and no platform(s) for the Milton line.

The goal then was use Kipling as the connection with the subway.

One could go in there that It would be a narrow platform for the west side as well a safety issue. Then you will have an operation issue where both direction trains will be using that only platform as well extra switches to do so.

If and went the Crosstown Line bare fruit, there will be no station to connect to the KW line nor the UPX to the airport just like the Milton Line at Bloor.

Yes the actual.plans are 6 tracks and no Milton platform(s). We are talking about hypothetical ways to service Bloor GO by Milton trains. That would nee 6 tracks with platforms for each ideally.

 

[crs1026]

Now I'm really confused. Isn't there already an empty spot for a track on that bridge? I thought that was reserved for a second Milton track? Why would you really need to expand the bridge? I was asking why you couldn't put a side platform south of Bloor on the southwest side of the corridor, not an island platform. I was thinking a new side platform could access the North side of Bloor, but if there isn't space for that, it isn't really needed.

The south of Bloor idea is complicated, because the pedestrian route to the Subway has to be above ground to cross Bloor - with an island platform it would have to be squeezed in between the two tracks across the bridge - and there would be the same need for a stairwell and elevator north of the bridge.

- Paul

 

[bearcat]

The south of Bloor idea is complicated, because the pedestrian route to the Subway has to be above ground to cross Bloor - with an island platform it would have to be squeezed in between the two tracks across the bridge - and there would be the same need for a stairwell and elevator north of the bridge.

- Paul

Just so I am sure we are on the same page. The discussion is to use the space that was previously, the old west (second) Milton track for an island platform, and shift the location of the new west (second) Milton track west of the island platform (along with the currently empty bridge span). However that would result in a platform too narrow to allow for proper vertical circulation most likely? If there is even enough space at.all.

 

[bearcat]

If and went the Crosstown Line bare fruit, there will be no station to connect to the KW line nor the UPX to the airport just like the Milton Line at Bloor.

Sorry I am not sure what you mean about Crosstown? Can you clarify?

 

[drum118]

Yes the actual.plans are 6 tracks and no Milton platform(s). We are talking about hypothetical ways to service Bloor GO by Milton trains. That would need.6 tracks with platforms for each ideally.

No way to do it without major rebuilt of the existing station and major expropriating land to do so. Basely all the buildings north of the plaza as well part of the school and the existing building. The idea of a drop off loop is out of the window as well as everything that exist for the station on the west side will have to be shifted west and rebuilt.

There used to be 2 tracks on the bridge as well in the corridor for the original Galt Sub before the expansion of the Weston Sub and up to around 2014.

Impossible to have an centre island unless the TTC tunnel connection is design to support trains as well lack of space to do so. ML will require a crash wall next to the existing building that is 2 feet thick and is there room to do so next to the TTC tunnel??

It great to think how you may do it, but the end of the day something has to disappear from the pathway to expropriating land to do so along with a decade to rebuild the station with 3 Island platforms

 

[Sauga89]

The south of Bloor idea is complicated, because the pedestrian route to the Subway has to be above ground to cross Bloor - with an island platform it would have to be squeezed in between the two tracks across the bridge - and there would be the same need for a stairwell and elevator north of the bridge.

I think you're misunderstanding me (though I thank you for taking the time to answer). Why can't a side platform be added south of Bloor St, either just for eastbound trips, or perhaps for the peak direction, alternating AM and PM. It would only serve one direction at a time, with Milton trains in the other direction bypassing Bloor GO on the second Milton track. I'm not talking about an island platform at all, because I'm asking if you can have two Milton tracks, with only one having a side platform. I'd rather have a side platform in one direction than none in either, particularly if you could switch left- and right-hand running between the AM and PM peaks.

Just so I am sure we are on the same page. The discussion is to use the space that was previously, the old west (second) Milton track for an island platform, and shift the location of the new west (second) Milton track west of the island platform (along with the currently empty bridge span). However that would result in a platform too narrow to allow for proper vertical circulation most likely?

No, that is not what I mean.

 

[Sauga89]

could you build a short (EDIT: side) platform south of Bloor? There is a 130 metre stretch with no buildings on the south side of the track. That would only give you one Milton platform, but even if it was just an eastbound stop, it would still save 13 minutes in the AM peak. Also, maybe trains could use different tracks for AM and PM? That would make it a peak direction stop, even if the rest of the Milton Line became 2WAD.

I edited my earlier post to add the word side.

 

[drum118]

Sorry I am not sure what you mean about Crosstown? Can you clarify?

GO Crosstown Line that been around on the book since the 80's using CP corridor across Toronto. Service running from Milton to Agincourt and beyond.

 

[drum118]

I think you're misunderstanding me (though I thank you for taking the time to answer). Why can't a side platform be added south of Bloor St, either just for eastbound trips, or perhaps for the peak direction, alternating AM and PM. It would only serve one direction at a time, with Milton trains in the other direction bypassing Bloor GO on the second Milton track. I'm not talking about an island platform at all, because I'm asking if you can have two Milton tracks, with only one having a side platform. I'd rather have a side platform in one direction than none in either, particularly if you could switch left- and right-hand running between the AM and PM peaks.


No, that is not what I mean.

Have you looked at the area from all angles to see why its a no Go???

 

[crs1026]

I think you're misunderstanding me (though I thank you for taking the time to answer). Why can't a side platform be added south of Bloor St, either just for eastbound trips, or perhaps for the peak direction, alternating AM and PM. It would only serve one direction at a time, with Milton trains in the other direction bypassing Bloor GO on the second Milton track. I'm not talking about an island platform at all, because I'm asking if you can have two Milton tracks, with only one having a side platform. I'd rather have a side platform in one direction than none in either, particularly if you could switch left- and right-hand running between the AM and PM peaks.

That is possibly physically buildable - the question becomes whether that is a desirable service plan. Adds travel time for the many peak riders who want to get to Union while adding convenience for an undefined number of riders who don't. And creating frustration for those who will then want the stop to operate at other times.
I could imgine a complicated service plan where every second or third train in each direction makes the stop.... would need some fancy crossovers and dispatching to flip track routing and occupancy back and forth. But that's a house of cards operationally.

- Paul

 

[Sauga89]

That is possibly physically buildable - the question becomes whether that is a desirable service plan. Adds travel time for the many peak riders who want to get to Union while adding convenience for an undefined number of riders who don't.

That would make it a question of whether the ridership warrants a stop, not whether there is space for one, which was the initial question @Jaye101 asked yesterday.

As for potential ridership, you might be right, but how many people get off at Kipling? Most of them continue on Line 2 past Bloor today I think. And how many more would use a Bloor stop if Milton was 2WAD and travel times were shortened by 13 minutes? I'd love to see Metrolinx's numbers on this.

(EDIT: Remember too that Google actually advises Milton Line riders today to go to Union, and take Line 1 north to get to Yonge-Bloor, so add anyone who does that to those who get off at Kipling when estimating ridership. One must consider future population growth and the LRT too.)

And creating frustration for those who will then want the stop to operate at other times.
I could imgine a complicated service plan where every second or third train in each direction makes the stop.... would need some fancy crossovers and dispatching to flip track routing and occupancy back and forth. But that's a house of cards operationally.

If Milton had 2WAD service, I can't imagine counter peak flows would be that strong to really need counter peak service at Bloor. It's only 13 extra minutes to Kipling on Line 2. I'd like to have it, sure, but if the alternative was no service at all, I'd ask for peak direction service instead. Metrolinx has been resisting the frustrations of Milton line riders who have wanted 2WAD for decades , so it should be able to resist frustration over a single stop after the rest of the line goes 2WAD.

 

[Metroscapes]

I think your rendering is clear enough that a track goes on the east side......... but I do want to show you what I was looking at, misleading as it is, obviously.

View attachment 641097

Pink Lines are property lines.

Its important to note here that at various points along the station, the measure from various property lines to other points such as the rail path or adjacent buildings varies. I can't illustrate them all, but I'll show a couple again, just so you can see what I was seeing:

West side:

View attachment 641099

That blue line above is 7.8M in length

Just piping up to highlight that there may be an optical illusion at play. The roof is likely overhanging the property line because the satellite took an off nadir angle.

 

[dullturtle06]

Yes the actual.plans are 6 tracks and no Milton platform(s). We are talking about hypothetical ways to service Bloor GO by Milton trains. That would nee 6 tracks with platforms for each ideally.

wouldn't signal upgrades be less expensive and allow for more frequent train departures. The TTC subway can handle 120 sec, so if eventually the rolling stock is EMU and signal are upgraded more platforms would not be required. Switches or overpass would be required to the north to allow for the additional train movements.

I think Metrolinx is already utilizing the land as best that can for the constrains. Maybe a bypass track can be fit in for Kitchener express service.

Also think because of the connection to the subway and local services once Milton is 2WAD trains should stop at Bloor, increasing connectivity.

 

[Dan416]

As a regular Milton rider, I really have zero desire for this connection, and I don't really understand the obsession with it. It's okay for Milton to skip it.