crs1026
Superstar
It's a service yard for one of the key maintenance of way contractors.
- Paul
- Paul
|
|
|
- Thread starter drum118
- Start date
Metroscapes
Active Member
Okay I recall that now.
blaixx
Active Member
Since there's already hourly trains crossing the Bayview Jct into Hamilton, you may as well extend those same trains to St. Catharines rather than forcing a transfer at West Harbour.
Sunnyside
Senior Member
In an ideal world, you’re doing both (unless you get tracks through Bayview). The problem is if you just do through services, all of Hamilton-Niagara GO service revolves around this one chokepoint.
Or, you can isolate what is a much more workable section of track and population, which GO’s model has so far failed to capture. A new service can be tailored more closely to its needs, not merely what’s doable with LSW.
For being a distinct travel pattern, keeping this entirely tied to TO and the complexities therein just kills an otherwise easy win. Only ~5% here even work in TO. The Guelph-Cambridge Corridor came to the same conclusion, I’d say; Simple is better. The money can go further.
Metroscapes
Active Member
Even ignoring Metrolinx's Toronto-centric upbringing and habits, it'd be logical and practical to at least extent it to St Catharines. But the political griping that would ensue is not logical or practical.
Sunnyside
Senior Member
St. Catharines is admittedly an awkward cutoff point, but I think you can communicate to the public (and cities/councillors) of Niagara that this is the easiest way to get more train service in overall, and not a picky-choosy thing.
Unless you mean the political fallout of pursuing something that isn’t Toronto-centric. In which case, I’ll play my smallest violin. There are not a lot of easy wins to go around these parts and this service concept is one of them.
crs1026
Superstar
As much as I have my own active stream of Metrolinx bashing, I think we need to not be divisive or cavalier in throwing around Toronto bashing remarks.
So, just to be pedantic, here's a link to the Metrolinx Act which sets out its regional mandate
To quote the Act:
On a percentage basis, I would say ML is definitely concerning itself with many, but possibly not all of its mandated constituents....and some that we are eager to see don't fall within this list. And there are those who would argue that ML has actually not put a priority in intra-Toronto matters (cough Smarttrack cough)
And yeah, as a matter of expediency, I would get 2WAD built to St Catharines as a priority - a very straightforward and doable fast trackable project - and leave the connections onward for more intensive planning, with bus links for the moment.
- Paul
Metroscapes
Active Member
I get where you're coming from, but respectfully (to you and MX), I reserve the right to bash all I want as a Guelph resident. It took 14 years between the cancellation of Coach Canada service between Guelph and Hamilton (and the rest of Niagara), and the introduction of the 17 bus. And they still didn't get it right; it's extremely limited on weekends, and it stops at Victoria St. @ Frederick St in Kitchener, instead connecting Kitchener and Guelph Central Stations directly. It's also been 14 years since service was extended to Kitchener, and there's no weekend service (again, not a big deal for Kitchener <> Guelph travel if the direct bus connection was there). Nor is there any service between Guelph / KW and downtown Galt (or Hespeler Village), or direct between Cambridge and Hamilton/Niagara.
Big rant, but my point is intercity connections in Wellington/Waterloo are poor, and you could probably get similar perspectives from locals in other towns with limited GO trains.
nfitz
Superstar
And why aren't county/regions like Wellington/Waterloo not using their own transit agencies to provide such connections?
What next, a GO service from London to St. Thomas?
Normally I rant that Metrolinx is the opposite of Toronto-centric, given that so many bus routes just skip over Toronto, and then stop only in 905. And the lack of GO stations in Toronto (which they seem to slowly be rectifying).
crs1026
Superstar
We are completely on the same page about ML not managing three-car funeral processions, with Waterloo/Guelph being a clear case in point.
But that's because they are a failed, underperforming organization. Nothing to do with Torontocentricity.
- Paul
Sunnyside
Senior Member
As someone with localized gripes as you have, but also understanding Metrolinx’s mandate and reasoning for being Toronto-centric…
… We’ve given them the proverbial keys. While integration is good, communities will not pursue big things— that they otherwise may have— if it’s supposed to be Mx’s job. However, Mx then starts prioritizing “more important projects” (they may be, but that’s the flaw of the regional premise!)
Take the Waterloo iON vs. Hamilton LRT. ION was devised locally; cost-efficiency mattered, the Region owns it, and no one was comparing it to 5 other viable GTA LRTs. The Hamilton LRT is the complete opposite and a disaster, despite being so transit supportive.
Our communities aren’t signing up for less transit. When you start treating this region as more integrated than it really is, we get tunnel vision and make tradeoffs that are otherwise irrelevant if there was more than 1 capable entity.
Some will say this centralization is inevitable with an integrated metro-region or reg. governance, but that isn’t yet the GGH, and it won’t be if we work backwards from that ideal. It keeps easy wins, like 4tph from KIT to Guelph, a fantasy. Instead, we hinge any Kitchener service upon years and billions for the 5% of TO-bound trips. Now, that’s a very important project… but it’s a costly ‘perfect’ at the expense of the good. Metrolinx cannot think ‘small’ enough for its own sake.
Edit: I think my post blurs the lines, but I agree with @crs1026 that this is a Metrolinx/Govt problem and not one endemic to the local planning culture…
Last edited:
Sunnyside
Senior Member
As I say in my post above…. It’s not that Metrolinx doesn’t spend in these areas, or that they should spend more per se. it’s that many easy (sometimes even best) solutions go completely under the radar because we’d rather package work into a super-project (that usually is not targeting the easier, local use cases).
Cities could maybe do these things, but (esp with rail) it’s either explicitly or implicitly Mx jurisdiction. The entire problem is they now hold the keys to a lot of low hanging fruit. Where they don’t, the cities can do whatever they want.
Metroscapes
Active Member
This is 'to-may-to / to-mah-to' in my books. I think we're in agreement.
I had a discussion with a local councillor a couple weeks ago and this is the sentiment they conveyed to me: providing a service that crosses municipal borders is outside of their jurisdiction, in principled and legal / administrative practice, and should be done by the province. In absence of that, if the Province is not making a local intercity service a priority, what are cities left with?
Northern Light
Superstar
While I'm not unsympathetic to this argument......I will note that the TTC has long supplied service to York Region on contract.
It would certainly be plausible to work out a similar arrangement between Grand River (K-W) and Guelph.
While the province should likely be the provider here, using that as a crutch/excuse doesn't fly.
Even the right-leaning Muskokas managed to stand up limited inter-City bus service that not only cross that region, but also reaches into Orilllia.
Last edited:
Metroscapes
Active Member
Agreed, but it's enough that a) bureaucrats get nervous and communicate 'We are uncertain, tricky, risk!' and b) without any offers of funding, local politicians don't want to go to bat and budget local tax dollars. And you double it, triple it when it crosses municipal boundaries. Not everyone is as brave as the Muskokas.
That's the barrier that a provincial agency should be breaking through, and I think we're all in agreement on that.
Good convo all.