Allandale25
Senior Member
Province indicated that in January 2024 and then in this new release in February 2024.
Ontario Newsroom
news.ontario.ca
Province indicated that in January 2024 and then in this new release in February 2024.
news.ontario.ca
sixrings
Senior Member
Where is this burnamthorpe lrt going to go? And where is the row? You mean there’s enough space? I’m all for it.
I think the loop has advantages depending where you’re going and there’s no reason we couldn’t have some trains by pass the loop.
drum118
Superstar
As I have stated in the past, late 2026 or early 2027 would be the earliest the line could opening subject to the loop issue. Since May, late 2027 opening subject to the loop. Looking that the corridor today, it becoming an 2028-2029 timeframe subject to the loop.
We are well into the 4th month of good construction period with no work taking place for finishing the trackwork for the test bed as well for the guideway that is ready for trackwork south of Eglinton.
Based on the amount of surveying taking place this year up to June, some serious engineering design work has taken place that a full review of the design plans are being looked at and being revised to deal with what we see. Trackwork is a real issue and more so than line 5 & 6 along with Alstom cars issues based on Ottawa issues. Trackwork was to have started in April and here we are at the beginning of July with no work taking place for it. Who maybe doing the trackwork is unknown at this time as it will no be the one that has done the work in the past.
Based on Mobilinx financial position and credit rating as well lack of work taking place this year, ML may or could remove Mobilinx from the project anytime and go to general tenders to finish the project even if it means missing the opening date 3-5 years late considering its already 7 months late now. It is also why ML has not release the go ahead for building the loop nor the extension to Brampton GO Station.
I have been on recorder since day one EA proposal for the loop as I opposed it on many level as its an impact on the line service level, longer travel time. The loop is an city requirement, not ML and the ones pushing it to Confederation.. Those who live at Parkside Village and M City are far off driving or take the 28 bus to Cooksville GO station or Dundas BRT as its faster than taking the LRT. Same for all the new towers plan for the Eglinton Area and totally defeat getting people out of the car.
One way or another, rebuilding Burnhamthorpe intersection for the loop will be a 6 months nightmare for everyone, especially transit riders. When will it happen is a guessing game at this time to the point it could delay the opening by 6 months unless ML calls the tender for it this year or early 2026 with an opening date in 2027 at this time. Full testing and scheduling cannot happen until that intersection is rebuilt, let along having the loop in place.
doady
Senior Member
A loop is kinda pointless if it only goes as far as Duke of York. A bit further to Living Arts makes more sense. At the same time, better to save the money to build the Transitway in the City Centre. Yes, there is still no Transitway or any Transitway stations in the City Centre.
As for a Burnhamthorpe LRT: low ridership, low redevelopment potential, protests in Etobicoke. Burnhamthorpe is not fit even for BRT, let alone LRT. It will be Derry LRT first, Eglinton LRT second. Even Britannia is likely to surpass Burnhamthorpe in transit ridership one day. And of course there is already BRT being planned along Dundas which could also be converted to LRT.
As for a Burnhamthorpe LRT: low ridership, low redevelopment potential, protests in Etobicoke. Burnhamthorpe is not fit even for BRT, let alone LRT. It will be Derry LRT first, Eglinton LRT second. Even Britannia is likely to surpass Burnhamthorpe in transit ridership one day. And of course there is already BRT being planned along Dundas which could also be converted to LRT.
drum118
Superstar
It only can only go to Erindale GO Station and the Etobicoke Creek forcing riders to transfer to either TTC at Mills Rd or a bus at Erindale Station to continue their trip. Totally inconvenient transit riders travel time with longer trips. To go west of Erindale Station will require the rebuilding of the bridges to the west of it and stay on Burnhamorpe to South Common Mall along with a new setup at the mall for it.
Ridership for Burnhamorpe has been east of Sq One and poor to South Common Mall with no improvement in your life time to justify an LRT line in the first place..
Transportfan
Senior Member
Burnhamthorpe is greatly overhyped as Mississauga's main east-west artery. It's only popularly seen as such because Square One and the city centre were built along it. Ever notice what it looks like near Winston Churchill? The wimpiest artery in the city by far when it crosses it.
Last edited:
Allandale25
Senior Member
What do you mean by this "It is also why ML has not release the go ahead for building the loop nor the extension to Brampton GO Station."?
The Province has provided direction already and it's my understanding Metrolinx is reviewing the design work the City of Brampton did.
Dan416
Senior Member
Well, people complain about how the ROW along Eglinton was sold off and not usable for the LRT there, so why not use the ROW on Burnhamthorpe for an LRT? Wouldn't the ridership come? I do kinda agree that Burnhamthorpe isn't really a major corridor. And clearly the city has prioritized other corridors. But it just seems like a waste to have that ROW unused for decades.
drum118
Superstar
What is to be review for the loop when it is only a 2 block extension?? Same for the Brampton the Brampton extension considering both projects were given the green light in January 2024 and 2025 by Ford. The plan back in 2020 call for the wye to be built at Burnhamthorpe for the loop so not to cause disruptions at a later date when the loop was to be built that was originally part of Mobilinx contract, but was removed by ML when deferred the loop extension happen. Up to late 2023, the wye was still to happen by Mobilinx. Brampton caused the delay for its section along helping the PC buy the ridding seat.
With the project running behind schedule, ML having issues with the quality of the work and other things, ML delay adding the loop back into Mobilinx contract as well refusing to cover the cost of the wye. Word on the street in early 2024 that Mobilinx was working strictly to the current contract and would not be building the wye as plan along with a few other things. It was also heard that Mobilinx would play no part in the building of the loop nor the extension to Brampton GO Station.
Given that the Brampton extension is going to cost an extra $2 billion to build it as well ML cash flow issues these days, delaying the awarding both contracts would help ML cash flow. This included not to fund the relocation of the Steeles Station from the southside to the northside to where the station was originally plan to go at the beginning of the EA. Its only trackwork cost to relocate the Steeles Station that should only cost no less than $200,000.
The Mississauga has been requesting that ML appeared before council since 2023 to give them a timeline and update on both the loop and the line with no luck so far. In the fall, ML will finally appear before council;, but no date or timeframe for the loop and the line will be provided to then from what I have heard and not surprised to hear it.
The earliest Brampton will see the extension in service is 2030-35, thou the surface section could happen sooner than later in phases if ML was smart in setting a phase approach to the extension.
drum118
Superstar
Cannot recall when an EA was done to widen Burnhamthorpe from 5 lanes to 7 lanes east of Hurontario to Dixie, but when it went before council for final approval and funds to to do the work, council cancelled the project. Not only they canceled the project, they call for all of Burnhamorpe reduced to 5 lanes and before the LRT approval. The section east of Hurontario has a wider ROW as it was to support the plan RT from Kipling that was to be built free to MCC in the 1980's by the province until Hazel said no thank you.
Look at Burnhamthorpe in Mississauga and you can see clearly there is no real density along it as well within 600 meters of it on both side of it. As I pointed out above, any LRT can only run from Etobicoke Creek to Erindale Station without rebuilding bridges to the west and widening the road. Taking the line into Toronto will have to be in mix traffic and will be totally oppose by the locals like they due today to get rid of miWay off their road. A short LRT does nothing for riders who want to go beyond the ends of the the line like the current 26 does today. the 126 is still a joke like I stated when first announce and waste of resources tha could be used elsewhere in the system.
The city has kill a number of development west of Hurontario to the point that the plaza at Creditview that was to become a mixed development area was shot down as the city wanted it to remain an employment area. A huge mistake.
When the old 86 express bus that ran from Islington to South Common Mall by CCTT, it was very rare to see 15 riders on the bus west of CCTT. My recommendation was to cancelled the 86 west of CCTT and beef up the 26 until the 86 was cancelled in the end. The 74 was added years later due to the ridership demand,
Long before the LRT plan loop surface, the city try a shuttle bus loop with fare being $1 to the point it was a failure and scrap. That was before M City and Parkside enter the picture.
As a note, I call for an LRT on Burnhamorpe in my 2005 presentation based on redevelopment of that corridor within in 20 years, but redevelopment has happen nor will happen for at least another 30 years with the current thinking at council.
doady
Senior Member
The ROW just an example how bad Burnhamthorpe is as a transit corridor. Queensway is the same.
At least Eglinton's ROW was wide enough for development. Not much development going to happen along Burnhamthorpe.
Considering opposition from the City of Toronto and protests in Etobicoke, extending existing light rail to serve Derry, Eglinton, Lakeshore would be much easier, regardless of any ROW. Derry and Eglinton have already surpassed Burnhamthorpe in ridership, and only a matter of time for Lakeshore too.
Allandale25
Senior Member
I'm still confused on why you originally wrote "ML has to release the go ahead" as you then indicated the Provincial direction. But I'll move on.
As for the design review, this was mentioned in a stakeholder meeting with Metrolinx staff and maybe in a staff report or verbally at at Brampton Council.
As for the $200k cost, @ShonTron in his Gateway FOI article had a reference to it being higher than that at $15-20M.
How Brampton commuters are caught in the middle at Steeles
Frustrated by Metrolinx’s responses to my questions about pedestrian safety at the northern terminus of the Hurontario LRT, I submitted an Access to Information request to the provincial agen…
seanmarshall.ca
While it's not in article, my understanding is that there is a major water/sanitary pipe under Steeles that would require moving. Presumably this was part of the original cost in the 2014 TPAP for the full route into downtown Brampton.
drum118
Superstar
Though Ford has green light the two extension, ML and IO will be responsible for the contracts as will awarded them and when. ML is holding everything close to their chest and tight lip these days on dates, timeframe, who is doing what and other info.I'm still confused on why you originally wrote "ML has to release the go ahead" as you then indicated the Provincial direction. But I'll move on.
As for the design review, this was mentioned in a stakeholder meeting with Metrolinx staff and maybe in a staff report or verbally at at Brampton Council.
As for the $200k cost, @ShonTron in his Gateway FOI article had a reference to it being higher than that at $15-20M.
How Brampton commuters are caught in the middle at Steeles
Frustrated by Metrolinx’s responses to my questions about pedestrian safety at the northern terminus of the Hurontario LRT, I submitted an Access to Information request to the provincial agen…
While it's not in article, my understanding is that there is a major water/sanitary pipe under Steeles that would require moving. Presumably this was part of the original cost in the 2014 TPAP for the full route into downtown Brampton.
As to cost, will leave it to @ShonTron since that is neck of the wood and haven't follow Brampton work that much, but the cost seems out of line for what has to be done for trackwork only.
As for design review, that is a different story depending on what stage of detail design was done when cost surface for the extension and where it is now. There is a big different been 30% and 100% design and only have to look at QQE to see it. Given there were a lot of changes after design reached 80% when construction was started only to see things ripped out at 100% on the surface section, More time is needed to get things right for 100% to do the tunnelling and building the underground.
I will leave it to the Brampton folks to provide more detail info, but the track recorder for the corridor are not great to say when the go ahead will happen and why I am using 2030-35 as the current timeframe for opening. The city doesn't what an extraction hole in the now so call downtown that is being torn down that it will have to be done sideway or the TBM bury under an area that will not require deep foundations down the road. In place of TBM, you can dig it out. The existing underground flood channel is to be remove to allow the redevelopment of the downtown area from what I been told and works in favour of of an side extraction of the TBM.
Allandale25
Senior Member
^ In 2018 or 2019, Brampton staff at the time said the tunnel would be done via sequential mining and not a TBM, but maybe that has changed.
doady
Senior Member
I don't like the idea of trains crossing Steeles in both directions and disrupting cars, buses, and pedestrians just for one station. No matter where they put the station, pedestrians are going to take over that intersection. That's part of why we build LRT, yes? "Safety in numbers" is well documented when it comes to pedestrian traffic, and that is a municipal responsibility to begin with. So the province should not be at all concerned about pedestrian safety at Hurontario/Steeles, the same way they should not be concerned about the bike lanes Brampton has been implementing.