Toronto GO Transit: Davenport Diamond Grade Separation | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx

[Filip]

LOL - I love how we're discussing a transit 'dead zone' that has excellent service, but we are to put a GO station there because God forbid these poor souls have to look at infrastructure and walk 800m to the nearest subway station... wow

 

[CDL.TO]

A trail would be great, but if there's room for four tracks I think we may want to preserve that space for future rail transport infrastructure.

The Barrie line is pretty long, so if Toronto continues to grow a mix of express and local trains on the Barrie line is a realistic future scenario, which may require an additional pair of tracks. Alternatively, the Barrie corridor/Newmarket Sub through Toronto is actually relatively residential. So using the space for the provision of an extremely local service with frequent stops, be it LRT or RER or whatever, may make sense at some point in the future as well.

I don't want to see us give up transportation corridor capacity if there is reason to believe that it could be needed in the future.

 

[salsa]

LOL - I love how we're discussing a transit 'dead zone' that has excellent service, but we are to put a GO station there because God forbid these poor souls have to look at infrastructure and walk 800m to the nearest subway station... wow

People could get to Eglinton, York University or beyond much faster with GO than the subway ever could. I don't see anything wrong with having a new GO station at Bloor to interchange with the subway. I definitely don't agree with some people that this hood is transit starved, but transit should always be further improved whenever possible.

I don't want to see us give up transportation corridor capacity if there is reason to believe that it could be needed in the future.

Except there is no reason to believe that extra tracks could be needed in the future. It was said during the walk that Metrolinx has no plans to do that, otherwise the proposed bridge would be designed with three tracks. If one day the need arises for express service, a couple of passing tracks away from the bridge would be all that's needed.

 

[Platform 27]

People could get to Eglinton, York University or beyond much faster with GO than the subway ever could. I don't see anything wrong with having a new GO station at Bloor to interchange with the subway. I definitely don't agree with some people that this hood is transit starved, but transit should always be further improved whenever possible.

Right, but a new Barrie line GO station at Bloor with a longish-but-plausible connection to Lansdowne subway station is a solution to a different problem than the alleged "problem" that's been raised by some posters here.

If we take it at face value that there is a "hole" in the transit network at Lansdowne and Dupont that needs filling, a new GO station at Bloor does nothing to solve this --- surely if a subway 900 m away is unacceptable then so is a GO station 900 m away. And if there's an unacceptable hole in the transit network where the Barrie line crosses Dupont, then there's also one where it crosses St. Clair, and Rogers, and Castlefield, and Lawrence, and Bentworth, and Wilson, and Finch and on and on...

If the problem you're trying to solve is to connect residents of Lansdowne+Bloor with the CBD, then a new GO station there is kind of a solution, although it's really close to existing GO/UP at Bloor+Dundas W and basically cannibalizes ridership from it.

If the problem you're trying to solve is to connect up the network a bit more to link various origins and destinations north along the Barrie line to those along Bloor-Danforth, then a Lansdown+Bloor GO station might well be the solution. However, you'd need to look carefully at how much ridership new connectivity would generate compared to how much might be lost due to a slower travel time.

 

[nfitz]

The only reason you'd stick a station on the Barrie line at Dupont, is if you wanted an interchange with the east-west CP line which might carry a future GO line through Dupon and Summerhill stations.

Which might make sense, as I don't see how you'd build a station easily on that line where it intersects the Kitchener line.

 

[wopchop]

If the problem you're trying to solve is to connect up the network a bit more to link various origins and destinations north along the Barrie line to those along Bloor-Danforth, then a Lansdown+Bloor GO station might well be the solution. However, you'd need to look carefully at how much ridership new connectivity would generate compared to how much might be lost due to a slower travel time.

I agree with this, and it would probably necessitate some sort of express/local system similar to Lakeshore West.

I think that the connectivity benefits would be worth it. You would create a west-end hub with connections to Kitchener/Barrie/Pearson Airport/Downtown Toronto/West Toronto/East Toronto and potentially future destinations like Bolton or Orangeville.

 

[CDL.TO]

Except there is no reason to believe that extra tracks could be needed in the future. It was said during the walk that Metrolinx has no plans to do that, otherwise the proposed bridge would be designed with three tracks. If one day the need arises for express service, a couple of passing tracks away from the bridge would be all that's needed.

Metrolinx may not have any current plans. That could change in the longer term.

Toronto didn't have any plans for the Richview corridor lands, so they sold them off. Now anyone who supports either a grade-separated ECLRT extension or SmartTrack is cursing that decision.

There's plans, but there's also a need to consider what may be needed further down the road once the current set of plans have been completed or supplanted.

IMO, the reason to believe that extra tracks could be needed in the future is quite simple... because demand will probably only increase and it's good to have the flexibility to deal with it if it happens.

 

[Platform 27]

I think that the connectivity benefits would be worth it. You would create a west-end hub with connections to Kitchener/Barrie/Pearson Airport/Downtown Toronto/West Toronto/East Toronto and potentially future destinations like Bolton or Orangeville.

You have a pretty generous definition of "hub" --- at Bloor, the Barrie tracks are too far from the Kitchener/UP/Milton tracks to function as a single transit station, but too close to really get a unique local catchment from each other. Instead, they're in this awkward middle state of being 400 m apart, a little over 2 times the length of the Spadina transfer. I guess we only have 19th century railway barons to blame for a stunning lack of foresight.

 

[wopchop]

You have a pretty generous definition of "hub" --- at Bloor, the Barrie tracks are too far from the Kitchener/UP/Milton tracks to function as a single transit station, but too close to really get a unique local catchment from each other. Instead, they're in this awkward middle state of being 400 m apart, a little over 2 times the length of the Spadina transfer. I guess we only have 19th century railway barons to blame for a stunning lack of foresight.

What you're saying is correct. I didn't necessarily mean a hub as in one single building, but a hub for the locals in the area. Having that station, even if it is 400m away, gives the local (and future) population more opportunity. And 400m doesn't mean much if people west or east of the stations along the Bloor-Danforth are riding the subway to the GO train. Just one more stop in either direction.

 

[salsa]

Metrolinx may not have any current plans. That could change in the longer term.

Toronto didn't have any plans for the Richview corridor lands, so they sold them off. Now anyone who supports either a grade-separated ECLRT extension or SmartTrack is cursing that decision.

There's plans, but there's also a need to consider what may be needed further down the road once the current set of plans have been completed or supplanted.

IMO, the reason to believe that extra tracks could be needed in the future is quite simple... because demand will probably only increase and it's good to have the flexibility to deal with it if it happens.

Perhaps I should have been more clear. Metrolinx does not see the need for more than two tracks for at least 50 years if ever. Unlike lakeshore west, there will never be a high volume of express trains from small cities like Barrie to justify anything more than a couple of passing tracks on the entire line. Even if one day there is a need for a third track, the public spaces planned along the bridge are not gonna prevent that possibility. The bridge will be similar to the UPX spur to Pearson: a concrete bridge supported by one row of columns in the middle. The public spaces would be built under the bridge as was done with Underpass Park. If a third track is to be built one day, they would simply widen the bridge without losing the public space, therefore your notion that putting a trail along the bridge is "giving up transportation corridor capacity" is incorrect.

 

[drum118]

Perhaps I should have been more clear. Metrolinx does not see the need for more than two tracks for at least 50 years if ever. Unlike lakeshore west, there will never be a high volume of express trains from small cities like Barrie to justify anything more than a couple of passing tracks on the entire line. Even if one day there is a need for a third track, the public spaces planned along the bridge are not gonna prevent that possibility. The bridge will be similar to the UPX spur to Pearson: a concrete bridge supported by one row of columns in the middle. The public spaces would be built under the bridge as was done with Underpass Park. If a third track is to be built one day, they would simply widen the bridge without losing the public space, therefore your notion that putting a trail along the bridge is "giving up transportation corridor capacity" is incorrect.

You are better off building a 3 track bridge from day one even thought it may never get used. Harder to add a 3rd track bridge down the road without rebuilding the whole thing. No simple way to widen a 2 track bridge to 3 as well taking the public land out of service for years.

Having the land under the bridge being used as public space from day one is a must as well the best option and route to go now.

How long has the GO Crosstown Line been on the books and not even in the 25 year plan?? If this line every get built, then you need a station at Dupont for it.

As I stated back in 2007 to Metrolinx, you need more small stations on all GO lines and using different type of service for them as well the system. That 3rd track could be used for those small walk-in stations where the long run trains will bypass those stations on it.

You need to have a station at Eglinton, Bloor & St Clair after this expansion takes place.

 

[CDL.TO]

Perhaps I should have been more clear. Metrolinx does not see the need for more than two tracks for at least 50 years if ever. Unlike lakeshore west, there will never be a high volume of express trains from small cities like Barrie to justify anything more than a couple of passing tracks on the entire line. Even if one day there is a need for a third track, the public spaces planned along the bridge are not gonna prevent that possibility. The bridge will be similar to the UPX spur to Pearson: a concrete bridge supported by one row of columns in the middle. The public spaces would be built under the bridge as was done with Underpass Park. If a third track is to be built one day, they would simply widen the bridge without losing the public space, therefore your notion that putting a trail along the bridge is "giving up transportation corridor capacity" is incorrect.

You originally stated in your photo post:

This is at Wallace looking south. Because of the curve that begins north of the CP corridor, the bridge would be build right up to the property line on the right, away from the existing track. This alignment allow for a straighter bridge which reduces the risk of derailment. The rail corridor is wide enough for 4 tracks, but since only two tracks will be needed there might be room for a trail similar to the West Toronto Railpath.

Are you now saying that the number of tracks are unrelated to to the number of tracks? If not, putting a trail along this line IS giving up potential transportation corridor capacity.

If they can add a trail without actually giving up potential corridor capacity, by all means please do.

And again, we have seen that just because planners don't currently envision the need for a transportation corridor doesn't make it unneeded. The city saw "no need ever" for the Richview corridor, and now we're wishing they hadn't sold it off. GO and the city saw "no need ever" for the Leaside spur, and now we're wishing they hadn't converted it to a trail. No one saw any need for dedicated tracks for GO along the Milton corridor back before Mississauga got built up (when a corridor would have been cheap to assemble), but now we're faced with a situation which will be very expensive to resolve.

Like I said, the Barrie corridor could actually be a decent spot for a local LRT, offering rapid transit along that corridor within Toronto (letting GO just focus on the long distance trips). The surroundings are primarily residential and connections to other rapid transit are good. My point being that it's not actually hard to envision a future use for the corridor. Just because there isn't anything currently envisioned doesn't mean there aren't any ideas that make sense now or will at some point in the future.

Once transportation corridors are lost, it's usually impossible to get them back. And we're really, really bad a preserving transportation corridors here in the GTA.

 

[smallspy]

You are better off building a 3 track bridge from day one even thought it may never get used. Harder to add a 3rd track bridge down the road without rebuilding the whole thing. No simple way to widen a 2 track bridge to 3 as well taking the public land out of service for years.

The converse is that there may simply not be enough room to build the 3-track bridge in one shot. The corridor is much more constrained through there than most of the other corridors in Toronto. While it may be wide enough for 4 tracks ultimately, there just simply may not be enough room for a single live track, construction equipment AND the 2 track structure.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[k10ery]

You originally stated in your photo post:
And again, we have seen that just because planners don't currently envision the need for a transportation corridor doesn't make it unneeded. The city saw "no need ever" for the Richview corridor, and now we're wishing they hadn't sold it off. GO and the city saw "no need ever" for the Leaside spur, and now we're wishing they hadn't converted it to a trail. No one saw any need for dedicated tracks for GO along the Milton corridor back before Mississauga got built up (when a corridor would have been cheap to assemble), but now we're faced with a situation which will be very expensive to resolve.

Like I said, the Barrie corridor could actually be a decent spot for a local LRT, offering rapid transit along that corridor within Toronto (letting GO just focus on the long distance trips). The surroundings are primarily residential and connections to other rapid transit are good. My point being that it's not actually hard to envision a future use for the corridor. Just because there isn't anything currently envisioned doesn't mean there aren't any ideas that make sense now or will at some point in the future.

Once transportation corridors are lost, it's usually impossible to get them back. And we're really, really bad a preserving transportation corridors here in the GTA.

This makes no sense to me. The city certainly did have a plan for the Richview corridor, it was called Phase 2 of the Eglinton LRT. Why Rob Ford was permitted to sell it is a mystery to me, but it is not because of a lack of foresight -- something more nefarious, surely.

The notion that the Leaside spur could have been made into an active rail line again is preposterous. Have you seen how close it is to people's backyards? It was hard enough to beat the NIMBYs to put in a pathway. A double track railway was simply not on, ever.

Your idea is that we should deny people use of these corridors for 50 years because of the faint chance we will then want to build a rail line. How about put them to good use now, and if later they are better used for another purpose, let people in the future decide that.

(I'd love to see a path along the Barrie Line. Now, how to connect it to the West Toronto Railpath, so make a continuous off-road path from Fort York, to the Beltline, and back down the Don Valley? That would be great for runners, cyclists, and walkers in Toronto.)

 

[vic]

The converse is that there may simply not be enough room to build the 3-track bridge in one shot. The corridor is much more constrained through there than most of the other corridors in Toronto. While it may be wide enough for 4 tracks ultimately, there just simply may not be enough room for a single live track, construction equipment AND the 2 track structure.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

Metrolinx is planning to build the bridge wedged up along the west side of the corridor. The explanation for this is that it somehow makes the bridge less curved as it heads north, making it safer.... But I'm guessing the main benefit to them doing this is to be able to have a live track on the east side during construction.