Orangeville-Brampton Railway (OBRY)

[denfromoakvillemilton]

It maybe the best option, but a very costly one when you look at the CP Corridor from Weston Station to this cut off.

I don't know the width of the corridor in detail, but you are going to have to do the same thing as the KW line to get under the 401 for CP corridor.

Again, will CP allow this??

Using the Orangeville line, it opens up a new market that will see more riders use it than the Bolton Line.

Again, this is an example where GO/Metrolinx needs a smaller train/fleet to service low level ridership areas. Even with RER, you don't need 12 cars trains off peak as well peak on some lines.

I think if Metrolinx stepped up to the plate, then yes. In the other thread @crs1026 mentioned that CP has said they will be fully cooperative with whatever costs metrolinx wants to pay. So I think it can happen if Metrolinx wants to.

 

[steveintoronto]

I think some of the aversion to transferring is the fear of getting on the wrong train at transfer point, or missing transfer due to long gate to gate connection. This is especially true for seniors. (Again IMO)

Anyone remember why Toronto built the interchanges to allow suburbanites "one seat to downtown" on the Bloor and University lines with the Y interchange? It's none of the pragmatic reasons posters have mentioned, it's the socio-logic wish to not have to move until you get there. Unfortunately, that mentality makes a lot of things difficult with transit planning.

The shuttle makes sense, especially since the diamond has been rebuilt with the newer flangeless crossing trackage. This requires a very slow and bumpy north south movement. Crossing three tracks would be problemmatic for operations, anyways.
I bet a dMU would be a lot more marketable than a bus connection, even if it only made two return trips per rush hour.

- Paul

Plus there's the very relevant separation of system signalling and diamond control possible by having an Orangeville terminal on the north side of the diamond (next best bet, south side, lots of room and easier pedestrian access) and *no direct ownership/operational issues*! B-O could do as Ottawa is doing, use a single operator and non-rail union for the LRT vehicle. Again, like the initial O-line a passing loop could be built, or a number, where necessary. Costs will have to be kept to an absolute minimum, which is why I'd avoid any kind of physical track connection at Brampton, at least for now. The goal will be to build up ridership, add more cars to the LRV(s) when necessary, and come the time, fully integrate with GO.

Can't agree more on the preference for a railed vehicle over bus, as long as travel time is similar. I'd suggest to Dufferin County, Shelburne and Orangeville to form a cmte along with QP/Metrolinx to study this option.

Included in the study must be the possibility of tying this into the Hurontario LRT, and stone two birds with one kill as to how each line is terminated and/or run through, even if only partial length, onto the other. Sharing platforms is an obvious advantage, and all the connecting tunnels and stairways that come with that. Needless to say, OBRY would have to obtain a temporal waiver from TC, shouldn't be a problem if Ottawa is used as the template. It would be very premature to think it would be cost-effective to run catenary up to Orangeville at this time, but to the northern limits of Brampton would make sense for electric LRVs and frequent service, and diesel LRVs south to Brampton GO and north to Orangeville for peak to start.

 

[dowlingm]

The B-Y interchange was abandoned, though. One can argue as to the why of that but it was. If it's reasonable to ask 416ers to take a bus to the subway, it's reasonable to ask Orangevillers to change platforms at Brampton rather than send another dinky train through Georgetown South, as if UPX wasn't enough.

The love for the Talents on this and other boards is striking with all sorts of schemes to make them do things. Seems telling to me that Ottawa aren't choosing to keep theirs, now they have Lints.

 

[steveintoronto]

Seems telling to me that Ottawa aren't choosing to keep theirs, now they have Lints.

There's irony in that one of the early faults OC-Transpo noted was damage to the bogies by crossing heavy rail diamonds.

 

[TOareaFan]

The B-Y interchange was abandoned, though. One can argue as to the why of that but it was. If it's reasonable to ask 416ers to take a bus to the subway, it's reasonable to ask Orangevillers to change platforms at Brampton rather than send another dinky train through Georgetown South, as if UPX wasn't enough.

The love for the Talents on this and other boards is striking with all sorts of schemes to make them do things. Seems telling to me that Ottawa aren't choosing to keep theirs, now they have Lints.

I have no love for (or knowledge of) the Talents....I took whoever posted it above as just a "for example" or a "a vehicle like this" kind of reference....but I 100% agree that if we get the stage where we are running smaller trains to more sparsely populated places that we do that by having short run lines that terminate at a logical point on the existing network with a transfer to the mainline services already in (or soon to be in) operation..so, Talents or not, any service to/from a place like Orangeville should terminate at Brampton for connection to the KW line.....heck, If I was the city of Brampton I may even contribute to the cost of something like this as it may actually establish Brampton as a destination for some people along that line for goods/service otherwise not available in their smaller community (theatre shows, dinners out...etc).

 

[robmausser]

I bet a dMU would be a lot more marketable than a bus connection, even if it only made two return trips per rush hour.

- Paul

Absolutely. People often cite how buses are better for such and such area than a DMU, but they are forgetting about public perception of buses versus trains. They are looking at it as engineers strictly from a numbers point, but forget that attracting ridership is also about attractiveness and marketing.

Buses are mainly used by people who don't have a car.

To get people out of cars you need to offer them transit that is not based on the same road they would have been stuck in traffic anyways, but in their nice clean private car.

 

[robmausser]

I have no love for (or knowledge of) the Talents....I took whoever posted it above as just a "for example" or a "a vehicle like this" kind of reference....but I 100% agree that if we get the stage where we are running smaller trains to more sparsely populated places that we do that by having short run lines that terminate at a logical point on the existing network with a transfer to the mainline services already in (or soon to be in) operation..so, Talents or not, any service to/from a place like Orangeville should terminate at Brampton for connection to the KW line.....heck, If I was the city of Brampton I may even contribute to the cost of something like this as it may actually establish Brampton as a destination for some people along that line for goods/service otherwise not available in their smaller community (theatre shows, dinners out...etc).

I posted the Talent and while it was just an example, any small DMU would do, the fact that I thought Ottawa would be selling them provided an opportunity to snatch them up.

This is a low ridership line so I was thinking of low cost solutions, provided the trains are reliable enough, I really don't know that.

If Talents were used, they would have to terminate at Brampton station, as to go down either the Milton Line or Kitchener Line to Union, they would be going over Freight corridors (remember CN still owns Brampton to Bramalea) and I dont think they would be allowed.

They would operate like the Sprinter Line in San Diego, which, also uses Talents.

It operates on a Spur to Oceanside, which then people transfer either to LA or San Diego.

The spur does see freight still, but only at night, just like the O-train line and soon to be ION LRT.

We're not reinventing the wheel here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sprinter_(light_rail)

 

[smallspy]

Buses are mainly used by people who don't have a car.

Bullshit.

70% of people who use the TTC on a daily basis have access to a car. Are you telling me that every single one of those 70% are driving to a subway station and then taking the subway? Because the numbers certainly don't bear that out.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[robmausser]

Bullshit.

70% of people who use the TTC on a daily basis have access to a car. Are you telling me that every single one of those 70% are driving to a subway station and then taking the subway? Because the numbers certainly don't bear that out.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

I meant GO style commuter buses that run out to suburban areas, which is what the topic of discussion is for this thread.

 

[innsertnamehere]

Which is also bullshit. There are many large commuter lots serviced exclusively by buses.

 

[SaugeenJunction]

I just wanted to post a link to a government of Ontario study from 1980 examining the extraction and transportation of aggregate from Mid-Western Ontario using branchlines, called the Mineral Aggregate Transportation Study. Lots of good information and analysis in it, but it is a pretty big read.

 

[smallspy]

I meant GO style commuter buses that run out to suburban areas, which is what the topic of discussion is for this thread.

Still bullshit. What's the ridership on GO's 407 corridor, 15,000 per day now? Between a quarter to a fifth of GO's daily ridership is carried on buses.

While rail ridership can be seen as more permanent and therefore more of a plus, a fast and reliable bus service will be used if there is a market to justify it.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[Fritter]

Buses are mainly used by people who don't have a car.

Bullshit.

70% of people who use the TTC on a daily basis have access to a car. Are you telling me that every single one of those 70% are driving to a subway station and then taking the subway? Because the numbers certainly don't bear that out

Just an observation from experience. When GO only operated trains to Pickering with bus connection to Ajax, Whitby and Oshawa on weekends, I had several passengers who when informed that they had to take a bus to Pickering, said "forget that" and drove to Pickering to catch the train there.

 

[steveintoronto]

Still bullshit. What's the ridership on GO's 407 corridor, 15,000 per day now? Between a quarter to a fifth of GO's daily ridership is carried on buses.

While rail ridership can be seen as more permanent and therefore more of a plus, a fast and reliable bus service will be used if there is a market to justify it.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

Or if rail isn't provided as an alternative. If anyone in Ontario is taking a bus rather than the train, all things being equal in ticket price, there's some other bearing factor like ridiculous management of resources or allocation of same. On a busy freight line, there's a very real obstacle to achieving what rail has to offer. In the case of OBRY? They'd *welcome* the chance to host it, and make it a success, caveats pertaining, of course.

Perhaps some people enjoy being cooped up without toilet facilities or without the opportunity to stretch one's legs on impetus, but what you expound is the pathetic Hobson's Choice many are forced to reckon with.

Why do you think Toronto still has streetcars, and is happy to doing so? And why is passenger rail (of any form) having such a resurgence world wide? Rob's comments may have been strident, but his gist hit the mark. LRVs for the OBRY are a very valid option.

 

[steveintoronto]

I just Googled for facts, figures and articles to substantiate my claim in the previous post. Most of the many articles are on the US, for good reason, there are a few on Canada, but the stats for Canada are not as readily available, not least because...well...some nations lag on these things...I'll stick with the US and European examples for now, where the resurgence of rail transit has been profound:

The Numbers Behind America's Mass Transit Resurgence
2013 saw 10.7 billion passenger trips, the highest in almost 60 years.

• Jenny Xie
• @canonind
• Mar 10, 2014
• 331 Comments

(Pic and charts removed to save characters to quote at length, access the link to see them)

So it’s official: Americans are choosing public transportation in record numbers. The American Public Transportation Association announced this morning that the U.S. made 10.7 billion mass transit trips in 2013, the highest figure in 57 years.

The story here is not of a sudden resurgence, but rather a slow, steady climb over the last decade, back toward ridership levels not seen since the 1950s. In fact, transit ridership has consistently hit over 10 billion for the past eight years in a row — in 2012, the total was 10.5 billion, and in 2011, 10.4 billion.

Hover over the blue line to see the "year" values on the chart below. These numbers come from the APTA:

More tellingly, the numbers show that the public's renewed embrace of public transportation really has spread nationwide. Record ridership numbers were posted in communities large and small, ranging from Tampa, Florida, to Oakland, California; Ann Arbor, Michigan to Flagstaff, Arizona. Overall, rail ridership grew the most, at a rate of 2.8 percent. However, commuter rail appears to be gaining the most momentum — seven commuter rail systems across the country posted double-digit increases, while only three light rail systems and one heavy rail system saw double-digit increases. The biggest jump for buses was 3.45 percent, in Washington, D.C.

As Michael Melaniphy, president and CEO of APTA, put it to the AP: "People are making a fundamental shift to having options” for getting around. Indeed, this increase in public transportation usage outpaced the growth of vehicle miles traveled on roads by 0.8 percent in 2013.

But of course, this growing preference for subways and buses hasn't come out of nowhere: it's come hand-in-hand with investment in public transportation. Transit systems with the biggest increases in ridership are, unsurprisingly, those that have found new ways to offer their services. For example, Miami’s rail system saw a 10.6 percent increase in passenger trips, largely due to increased frequency of trains during peak service. New Orleans’ streetcar system, which just added a new line in January 2013, saw a 28.9 percent jump. Salt Lake City’s commuter rail system saw a whopping 103.3 percent increase in ridership, thanks to a new rail line that opened in December 2012.

While public transportation is becoming more popular overall, not all cities with a wide range of transit offerings are seeing consistent ridership growth across all services. In Chicago, ridership on both the "L" and the bus system is down, while commuter rail is up. In Boston, subway ridership is up, but both commuter rail and bus ridership are down. In Washington, D.C., subway ridership is down, but bus ridership is way up. New York City, meanwhile, has managed to see increases across the board. But as even new and different commuting options — such as various ride-share and bike-share schemes — gain steam, public transportation systems must keep improving to attract more customers year after year.

http://www.citylab.com/commute/2014/03/numbers-behind-americas-mass-transit-resurgence/8600/

Commuter Rail Members
Governments should develop and implement policies and programs that support and promote the use of commuter, intercity and tourist passenger rail services in major urban centres, corridors and regions across Canada.

Canada is one of the largest countries in the world in terms of landmass. As such, Canadians from coast to coast spend a lot of time in transit. In fact, Canadians drove over 300 billion kilometres in 2009, with each Canadian driving an average of over 16,000 kilometres a year.

Passenger rail service provides a more efficient way to travel and commute and offers opportunities for improved mobility and access in travel corridors across the country. Investments that improve the quality of intercity and commuter rail service stimulate economic and community development by increasing mobility, creating jobs and influencing decisions on business and housing location.

The increasing recognition of the benefits of rail transportation is reflected in the resurgence of passenger rail. User benefits, those benefits that can only be enjoyed by passengers, include shorter travel times and improved personal comfort while travelling. Important societal benefits include decreased road congestion, fewer vehicle accidents and environmental advantages such as air quality improvement. [...]

http://www.railcan.ca/rac/member_railways?type=Commuter

And from the Financial Times:

UK rail revival spurs commuter projects

May 31, 2015 by: Andrew Bounds and Gill Plimmer

While the debate rages about the benefits of HS2 and other big rail projects, old train lines up and down the UK — closed as part of the Beeching cuts of the 1960s — are quietly being revived. Burnley, for example, has just made its own modest piece of railway history. A 500m section of track pulled up in 1972 — known as the Todmorden curve — has been relaid, reopening a direct rail link to Manchester. Funded by Lancashire county council, Burnley council and the government, the link has halved the journey time from the former cotton town to the city, just 21 miles away, to 52 minutes, for an investment of about £10m. Growth in rail passenger numbers is allowing the reopening of stations and track closed following the Beeching report on railway modernisation in 1963. “We are reversing the legacy of Beeching,” says Sir Richard Leese, the leader of Manchester city council and chairman of Rail North, the body drawing up a rail infrastructure plan for the region. Alex Hynes, managing director of Northern Rail, the local franchise holder, said: “British Rail was managing decline. It spent years closing stations, depots and lines. Now we spend our time opening things.” Passenger numbers are at record levels. There were 1.6bn passenger journeys in 2013-14, and there has been steady growth since the UK’s railways were privatised in the mid-1990s. [...]

https://www.ft.com/content/69ee6cf6-04a4-11e5-95ad-00144feabdc0
(To access without subscription, enter the article title into Google, and click the link shown)