GO Transit: Construction Projects (Metrolinx, various)

[TheHonestMaple]

I don't think Chris R or myself are suggesting what you're saying at all. We're just saying that Hamilton, a city of 800k, appears to be completely forgotten by Metrolinx with respect to the GO Transit network. The service level just doesn't match the demand, and it's strange and quite frustrating as two downtown Hamilton residents.

 

[Chris R.]

You're using Toronto-centric here is a form of bashing, and that's what I'm criticizing. I'm pro expanding transit to Hamilton, but to the extent I have influence you and @TheHonestMaple have me thinking about seeing if can nix it instead.

All I have done here is correct over-reach and erroneous statements. I've done so politely, while indicating I support the very projects you and Maple would like. But that doesn't stop you and he from going after me and others again and again.

I don't know where people get the idea that if you're asking for support the best way to achieve that is throwing Molotov cocktails.......... may I suggest, you're wrong.

"Mississauga and Brampton" aren't real cities is not a legitimate argument, its inflammatory. Incorrect statements about service levels are simply incorrect. Incorrect descriptions about investments are just that, incorrect.

That doesn't mean I and others don't support more service to Hamilton, it means we support making the case with evidence, rather than an erect middle finger pointed at everyone not from the Hamilton area.

At this point I will leave this conversation and decline further discussion, as I'm finding this more than a little off-putting, as the next thing I type might be a tad intemperate.

With all due respect. I've been trying to provide legitimate arguments for why Hamilton should be prioritized after decades of being ignored by the larger transit discussion.

And again, with all due respect because I want to be clear that I do appreciate your input and the input of others on this forum is respectful discussion, but I don't know who you think you are that you'll have any impact on transit investment in Hamilton, and saying you're planning to do all you can to stop investment in Hamilton because of two dudes on a forum is immature and amateurish. So much so that I think you should rescind the comment.

 

[TheHonestMaple]

Yeah what was that comment about? Suggesting that you’ll personally stop any expansion into Hamilton as if you have some connection to Metrolinx? If that’s true, you should seriously retract that comment. If you’re a Metrolinx employee, that’s a really really bad look…..

 

[TheHonestMaple]

We’re not treating anyone like enemies. We’re just pointing out that Hamilton is underserved considering its significant downtown population. I also pointed out there are other stations north of Toronto that make little financial sense, that seem to get priority. That’s a legitimate point to make, even if it offends your sensibilities.

Has there ever been a plan to construct a flyover at the Hamilton junction ? I’m curious if it’s ever even been floated as an idea, officially.

 

[Northern Light]

To avoid intemperateness, I will now employ the ignore function, and I will also temporarily suspend giving people from Hamilton a peak behind the curtain at what's coming since they can't manage to say thank you when you do.

 

[crs1026]

Has there ever been a plan to construct a flyover at the Hamilton junction ? I’m curious if it’s ever even been floated as an idea, officially.

Most definitely, more than once, to or beyond the 10% design stage..

If you look across the Metrolinx system, there are many cases where the current solution has been judged "good enough for a decade or two". I dissent from ML's apparent lack of urgency on some of these, but again, there are limits to how much money is available. I would not single out Hamilton as receiving more of this deferral mentality than other places.

- Paul

 

[TheHonestMaple]

Most definitely, more than once, to or beyond the 10% design stage..

If you look across the Metrolinx system, there are many cases where the current solution has been judged "good enough for a decade or two". I dissent from ML's apparent lack of urgency on some of these, but again, there are limits to how much money is available. I would not single out Hamilton as receiving more of this deferral mentality than other places.

- Paul

thanks for the info. Well it would be fantastic to see that, and I hope it somehow makes it into some budget someday...

 

[ARG1]

You seem to think the Hunter street tunnel is some sort of 10km long subway tunnel buried 50m below the surface. It's a 500m tunnel that is about 1.0m below the surface of Hunter Street. It was originally constructed using the open trench technique. Could easily be done again for less than the construction of all these Barrie and Stouffville line vanity project stations.

It would help if you actually read what people told you, because I think I quite clearly outlined the challenge of expanding the Hunter Street tunnel.

I'll expand it with this: I'm pretty sure that expanding a hypothetical 10km (ok maybe not 10 but 2km) long 50m deep tunnel would actually be cheaper and easier than what we currently have, since there you could hypothetically just plop a TBM down and have that dig whilst the existing tunnel is in service. WIth Hunter Street you're going to have to acquire all of the surface properties along the sides of the street, and build significant easements because you will have to disrupt traffic through the tunnel during construcion. There is no other way around it.

Also, calling the expansions to the Barrie and Stouffville Line "Vanity Projects" is kinda yikes. If double tracking a station to allow it to have service more often than every hour is a vanity project, I don't know what I'd call spending billions of dollars to shift a station over by 1.5km.

This is a very Toronto-centric point to make. In my opinion, you can have it both ways because Hamilton is a cultural and entertainment centre in its own right. So commenting that the Hamilton CMA deserves better Go transit service because of the 800,000 population is a sensible argument in my mind because as Hamilton grows and even in its current state people from Burlington at Appleby, Burlington and Aldershot will be taking the Go train toward Hamilton. I already know some people that do this to come to a workplace.

Its an interesting argument to look at, but its still a very arbitrary criterion, especially regarding the context of what TheHonestMaple is advocating for. There is a lot more to infrastructure construction than just "deserves" and "don't deserves", there's also feasibility and cost benefit ratios. Even ignoring the whole "Vanity Project" nonsense, why does a city like Vaughan or Markham get to have frequent electrified all day service, meanwhile Hamilton is stuck with 30m service? Well its because Metrolinx owns the Newmarket and Uxbridge Subs, and thus have the full freedom to do as they wish with the ROW, and don't have to deal CN or CP trains during service hours. You don't have to do stuff like widen an existing tunnel under a fully built up street, or try and build a flyover on extremely weak and flimsy soil, all you really need to is plop another track, and give stations a 2nd platform. You can tout all you want the Hamilton CMA having 800k residents or it being a "cultural center", but if the environment makes it too difficult to provide ultimate infrastructure, then perhaps (and maybe rightfully so) these projects aren't worth it despite the 800k population. In other words, using this as a way of framing the issue as "Metrolinx wants to ignore Hamilton" is simply wrong. Now you can make this argument in regards to other projects like the B-Line, but I have my own choice words regarding that project that I think everyone here can easily predict.

Most definitely, more than once, to or beyond the 10% design stage..

If you look across the Metrolinx system, there are many cases where the current solution has been judged "good enough for a decade or two". I dissent from ML's apparent lack of urgency on some of these, but again, there are limits to how much money is available. I would not single out Hamilton as receiving more of this deferral mentality than other places.

- Paul

I think its worth reminding people about the current state of Scarborough Junction, where Metrolinx decided to not build it at all (unless DB tells them otherwise) despite the operational and system usability improvements it can provide. This is just something Metrolinx does, they find some way to value engineer something if they don't think the benefits of building it are good enough, even if its something like "their darling Stouffville Line" that serves their precious Markham over Hamilton.

 

[TheHonestMaple]

It would help if you actually read what people told you, because I think I quite clearly outlined the challenge of expanding the Hunter Street tunnel.

I'll expand it with this: I'm pretty sure that expanding a hypothetical 10km (ok maybe not 10 but 2km) long 50m deep tunnel would actually be cheaper and easier than what we currently have, since there you could hypothetically just plop a TBM down and have that dig whilst the existing tunnel is in service. WIth Hunter Street you're going to have to acquire all of the surface properties along the sides of the street, and build significant easements because you will have to disrupt traffic through the tunnel during construcion. There is no other way around it.

Also, calling the expansions to the Barrie and Stouffville Line "Vanity Projects" is kinda yikes. If double tracking a station to allow it to have service more often than every hour is a vanity project, I don't know what I'd call spending billions of dollars to shift a station over by 1.5km.


Its an interesting argument to look at, but its still a very arbitrary criterion, especially regarding the context of what TheHonestMaple is advocating for. There is a lot more to infrastructure construction than just "deserves" and "don't deserves", there's also feasibility and cost benefit ratios. Even ignoring the whole "Vanity Project" nonsense, why does a city like Vaughan or Markham get to have frequent electrified all day service, meanwhile Hamilton is stuck with 30m service? Well its because Metrolinx owns the Newmarket and Uxbridge Subs, and thus have the full freedom to do as they wish with the ROW, and don't have to deal CN or CP trains during service hours. You don't have to do stuff like widen an existing tunnel under a fully built up street, or try and build a flyover on extremely weak and flimsy soil, all you really need to is plop another track, and give stations a 2nd platform. You can tout all you want the Hamilton CMA having 800k residents or it being a "cultural center", but if the environment makes it too difficult to provide ultimate infrastructure, then perhaps (and maybe rightfully so) these projects aren't worth it despite the 800k population. In other words, using this as a way of framing the issue as "Metrolinx wants to ignore Hamilton" is simply wrong. Now you can make this argument in regards to other projects like the B-Line, but I have my own choice words regarding that project that I think everyone here can easily predict.


I think its worth reminding people about the current state of Scarborough Junction, where Metrolinx decided to not build it at all (unless DB tells them otherwise) despite the operational and system usability improvements it can provide. This is just something Metrolinx does, they find some way to value engineer something if they don't think the benefits of building it are good enough, even if its something like "their darling Stouffville Line" that serves their precious Markham over Hamilton.

Again, where is the value in Bloomington? 100 million dollars of tax payer money vanished into thin air when that thing was built. And underserved Hamiltonians noticed.

Also, i've quite clearly mentioned that 100 million to expand the short and shallow Hunter Street tunnel is likely quite reasonable.

 

[nfitz]

This is a very Toronto-centric point to make.

Isn't that the entire raison d'être of a Toronto forum?

 

[ARG1]

Again, where is the value in Bloomington? 100 million dollars of tax payer money vanished into thin air when that thing was built. And underserved Hamiltonians noticed.

1) You specifically said "Barrie and Stouffville Lines", last I checked Bloomington is on the Richmond Hill Line.
2) Your hyperfixation on Bloomington implies that you believe that Bloomington being an overbuilt waste of money means that every project on York Region is an overbuilt waste of money (which Viva Orange might actually be). I think everyone here agrees that Bloomington probably shouldn't have been built, but it being a mistake certainly doesn't mean that everything else being built doesn't have value.
3) Say what you will about Bloomington Station, at least its 100m dollars that went into a station that can be used by people avoiding DVP traffic, and to reduce congestion at Aurora Station. I'd certainly place the value of this project (relative to its cost) much higher than spending several billions of dollars expanding the Hunter Street Tunnel just to move a rail alignment by 1.5km.

 

[Chris R.]

Isn't that the entire raison d'être of a Toronto forum?

No? This is a thread about all Metrolinx construction projects.

Regardless of the reason for the existence of the forum, I don't see how that impacts the content of a discussion.

 

[TheHonestMaple]

1) You specifically said "Barrie and Stouffville Lines", last I checked Bloomington is on the Richmond Hill Line.
2) Your hyperfixation on Bloomington implies that you believe that Bloomington being an overbuilt waste of money means that every project on York Region is an overbuilt waste of money (which Viva Orange might actually be). I think everyone here agrees that Bloomington probably shouldn't have been built, but it being a mistake certainly doesn't mean that everything else being built doesn't have value.
3) Say what you will about Bloomington Station, at least its 100m dollars that went into a station that can be used by people avoiding DVP traffic, and to reduce congestion at Aurora Station. I'd certainly place the value of this project (relative to its cost) much higher than spending several billions of dollars expanding the Hunter Street Tunnel just to move a rail alignment by 1.5km.

Several billion dollars?!


That's my point exactly though about Bloomington, it probably takes like 15 people off the DVP every hour. Whereas increased Hamilton frequency could take literally a couple thousand off the QEW.

 

[nfitz]

No? This is a thread about all Metrolinx construction projects.

Though an urban Toronto lens. Tossing around terms like Toronto-centric seems redundant. And even if it wasn't, obviously GO Rail is designed to be Toronto-centric, for very good reasons.

Also this thread isn't about all Metrolinx construction projects. And perhaps not even most Metrolinx construction projects. There's separate threads for many different Metrolinx construction projects. And even threads for projects that may never happen - like the Hamilton LRT.

I'd think speculation about GO service within Hamilton would be in https://urbantoronto.ca/forum/threads/hamilton-general-service-discussion.21120/ - which would then only be through a Toronto lens, rather than Toronto-centric.

There's also the Ontario forum of CPDTB which has various threads for smaller municipalities - https://cptdb.ca/forum/10-ontario/

 

[TheHonestMaple]

Though an urban Toronto lens. Tossing around terms like Toronto-centric seems redundant. And even if it wasn't, obviously GO Rail is designed to be Toronto-centric, for very good reasons.

Also this thread isn't about all Metrolinx construction projects. And perhaps not even most Metrolinx construction projects. There's separate threads for many different Metrolinx construction projects. And even threads for projects that may never happen - like the Hamilton LRT.

excellent troll