[Sunnyside]

I won’t try to respond individually at this point, but I appreciate the information everyone is providing on what often feels an under-discussed topic, that I’ve mulled over plenty. @smallspy , I appreciate the clarification of what is achieved with “only” a 4th track; I am glad there remains an immediate, achievable path for service gains.

However, there remains the proverbial question of, “what level of service are we trying to provide?” Ie, what is our endgame?

Is leaving grade crossings a long term solution, given how many users do and could make use of more capacity/ easier throughput? I think it’s also important to work backwards from what levels of service we expect/want for much of the GO, passenger and freight networks at large, as the potential goes beyond only GO.

This is a different question, certainly, but let’s say that entails either an MOU for a robust signalling solution, or a continuous 2+ track corridor, not crossing or sharing tracks with freight, to at least one existing Hamilton Station via Aldershot. Electrification possible.

I am spitballing, but a complex 4th track may not actually maximize ROI. anything further may mean 1-2 flyovers, or indeed a new corridor. But it’s still worth asking how far such options get us service-wise, and whether we should plan/pivot accordingly.

 

[crs1026]

I won’t try to respond individually at this point, but I appreciate the information everyone is providing on what often feels an under-discussed topic, that I’ve mulled over plenty. @smallspy , I appreciate the clarification of what is achieved with “only” a 4th track; I am glad there remains an immediate, achievable path for service gains.

However, there remains the proverbial question of, “what level of service are we trying to provide?” Ie, what is our endgame?

Is leaving grade crossings a long term solution, given how many users do and could make use of more capacity/ easier throughput? I think it’s also important to work backwards from what levels of service we expect/want for much of the GO, passenger and freight networks at large, as the potential goes beyond only GO.

This is a different question, certainly, but let’s say that entails either an MOU for a robust signalling solution, or a continuous 2+ track corridor, not crossing or sharing tracks with freight, to at least one existing Hamilton Station via Aldershot. Electrification possible.

I am spitballing, but a complex 4th track may not actually maximize ROI. anything further may mean 1-2 flyovers, or indeed a new corridor. But it’s still worth asking how far such options get us service-wise, and whether we should plan/pivot accordingly.

You are definitely asking the right question. We won’t reach a good answer by grabbing our pens and offering personal visions of the answer.

Since 2008 we have had various iterations of a Regional Transportation Plan that was the product of “serious people” who gave the question a lot of thought, supported by serious data. One would think that anything we build should align to and reflect the wisdom of that plan.

GO RER, er, Expansion was a 2014 offshoot of that planning. It produced much more granular specifications for certain routes and services, but it has been updated in very material aspects. Today’s version of the RTP needs to reflect all of that. And it needs to add in the needs for intercity transport, perhaps reflecting how we want to proceed with Alto west of Toronto as well as more mundane regional intercity services.

And now our Planning horizon is 2051 - which reflects an entirely new set of data re population, GDP, and mobility. And we have to build in the needs for freight transportation becuase inevitably there will be more pressure to coexist with freight rail movements.

Getting back to Bayview, the question ought to be, is four tracks enough? I suspect not, but we can’t foresee 2051 nor should we build everything 2051 will need right away.

Looking at things at this level, it sure feels like we would not go wrong by building grade separations and widened corridors. But it would be helpful to have a clearer view of first steps - how many trains per hour to Hunter, how many to and beyond West Harbour, how many being express and how many local trains to where. Without that, none of our individual visions will help much.

- Paul