Toronto Union Pearson Express | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx | MMM Group Limited

[denfromoakvillemilton]

If hourly two-way service goes only as far as Mount Pleasant, it should be simple for GO to schedule off-peak trains in such a way that there would only be one train west of Bramalea at any one time (peak periods excepted) - the GO schedule provides 14 minutes for a train to leave Bramalea and arrive at Mount Pleasant, where it would require a 10-15 minute layover for brake check and crew positioning. Say if the train leaves Bramalea at 9:00, it would arrive at Mount Pleasant at 9:15, depart eastbound at 9:30, and be back at Bramalea at 9:45 and soon on the Weston Sub. CN would still have effectively a mainline track and long passing sidings to itself (two mainline tracks to itself east of Kennedy Road), plus the track unoccupied by GO as it sits at Mount Pleasant.

Even with 10-15 minutes leeway for delays, only one GO train need occupy the Halton Sub at any one time, with the exception of 6:15 to 8:45 and 16:15 though 18:45 or so, when there would likely be two or three trains operating - say 10/15/30 minute service in the peak direction (depending on how GO wishes to schedule its trains) and 30-60 minute service in the off-peak direction. Even in peak hours, GO can handle some increased demand with local trains from Bramalea (paired with express trains from Kitchener and Georgetown) that wouldn't even touch the Halton Sub if it used the third layover track. There's also room on the north/east side of the station for another freight track.

For 30 minute service, which would really be useful (60 minutes just being okay), the third track though downtown Brampton would definitely be needed - this is work that I would support, though it would be very expensive - utility relocation, widening Centre Street, Etobicoke Creek, Queen Street, Union Street, Main Street bridges, as well as widening the embankment, moving the station (and probably the old freight/baggage house), rebuilding the platform, rebuilding the John and Mill Street grade crossings and associated track and signal work.

It appears that not committing to AD2W service (hourly off peak) is either a case of letting the search for perfection get in the way of pretty good or there really is no will to do it so if, after spending $1.3B already, you suggest there needs to be 3 or 4 tracks and it will take another 5 years and another $1.1B....people will just go "ah well, it would be nice but not possible".

I grow more skeptical by the day that I will see AD2W service on this line during my working life and I suspect that when the Hurontario LRT is built and the YUS subway extension opens, Bramptonians will just be pointed in those directions and told "see, we gave you all day service'.....hope I am wrong but it is a growing uneasy feeling.

If GO was serious about it, it would technically require zero additional infrastructure to run all day two way, hourly service to Mount Pleasant (plus current and some additional peak-direction trains) once the work on the Weston Sub is finished. This fact needs to be pushed and pushed hard.

Well I believe there is no will honestly. They could have upgraded all the corridors 5 years ago, they didn't. Even Milton it should not have been that expensive in 2007 to lay a forth track. Markham, Barrie and Richmond Hill is worse because they own all of those corridors.

At this point, they should come out and say either Union Station is full or its just not a priority.

Having said this, if CN wants the new track, they should get it. If go does not own the line they have to play ball.

 

[TOareaFan]

I have to ask all the people who know about this stuff.....what benefit did the public obtain from all the track purchases over the past decade or so?

When the bought (most of) the Georgetown/KW corridor (don't remember the date) I recall wondering what was in it for the public as part of the track purchase agreement (and I think all such agreements) was a guarantee to the freight companies that their position was unchanged...that is, their trains would still have priority and they could continue to run as many trains after the purchase as they did before the purchase.

So what did we gain (honest question)? Did we just put a few hundred million into the pockets of CN for no real gain to us and no real loss to them?

 

[gweed123]

If hourly two-way service goes only as far as Mount Pleasant, it should be simple for GO to schedule off-peak trains in such a way that there would only be one train west of Bramalea at any one time (peak periods excepted) - the GO schedule provides 14 minutes for a train to leave Bramalea and arrive at Mount Pleasant, where it would require a 10-15 minute layover for brake check and crew positioning. Say if the train leaves Bramalea at 9:00, it would arrive at Mount Pleasant at 9:15, depart eastbound at 9:30, and be back at Bramalea at 9:45 and soon on the Weston Sub. CN would still have effectively a mainline track and long passing sidings to itself (two mainline tracks to itself east of Kennedy Road), plus the track unoccupied by GO as it sits at Mount Pleasant.

Even with 10-15 minutes leeway for delays, only one GO train need occupy the Halton Sub at any one time, with the exception of 6:15 to 8:45 and 16:15 though 18:45 or so, when there would likely be two or three trains operating - say 10/15/30 minute service in the peak direction (depending on how GO wishes to schedule its trains) and 30-60 minute service in the off-peak direction. Even in peak hours, GO can handle some increased demand with local trains from Bramalea (paired with express trains from Kitchener and Georgetown) that wouldn't even touch the Halton Sub if it used the third layover track. There's also room on the north/east side of the station for another freight track.

For 30 minute service, which would really be useful (60 minutes just being okay), the third track though downtown Brampton would definitely be needed - this is work that I would support, though it would be very expensive - utility relocation, widening Centre Street, Etobicoke Creek, Queen Street, Union Street, Main Street bridges, as well as widening the embankment, moving the station (and probably the old freight/baggage house), rebuilding the platform, rebuilding the John and Mill Street grade crossings and associated track and signal work.

It would be interesting to see a study of this option vs building the 407 freight bypass (aka the continuation of the York Sub west of Bramalea). If that much work is required in Brampton to add an extra track, and the freight is really just passing through Brampton, then logic would suggest that looking at a way to remove the freight, and thus remove the need for the extra track, would be worth it.

Yes, the freight line would probably still be more expensive, but it would make GO service along the Kitchener corridor a lot easier to implement, and would mean a lot fewer freight trains rumbling through downtown Brampton.

 

[rbt]

I have to ask all the people who know about this stuff.....what benefit did the public obtain from all the track purchases over the past decade or so?

Significantly lower operating costs for GO allowing them to run mostly empty off-peak trains and break-even.

LakeShore 30 minute frequencies would not have happened without that step. The real problem is it took GO nearly a decade to get from planning to implementation for 30 minute Lake Shore and they appear to be upgrading the other lines at roughly the same pace.

 

[drum118]

The goal is to get service down to 15-20 minute headway and to do that you need more track to do it.

To put a 3rd track in Brampton will require a new bridge on the north side and moving the station north. The cost will not be that high if they don't put the LRT station on the north side as plan.

There is enough room to put in a 4th track in to Bramalea.

Putting in a 4th track to Georgetown can be done, but the south side of Mount Pleasant will have to be rebuilt and move south.

A new south bridge over the port Credit River will have to be built for 2 tracks.

Most likely a few existing overpass will have to be rebuilt to get the 4th tracks in.

Having the 4 tracks in this corridor will allow GO to run on track 1 & 2 with CN running on the south side track 3 & 4. There will be a need for a fly under at Bramalea station to get from the south side to the north side so there is no interference with CN trains.

The original EA only call for a 2nd track to be added to the single track in the early 2000's and I keep calling for a 3rd track, but prefer to see 4 tracks. When I saw that 3rd track being added during construction, was happy to see it, but could see problems down the road with the 4th track missing.

Not reducing Railroad Rd to a single lane and making it one way hurt trying to move the platform south. Doing so it would have an impact on the bus terminal as well being too close to Main St office building. Don't expect to see that platform rebuilt for the 3rd track at all.

 

[TOareaFan]

Significantly lower operating costs for GO allowing them to run mostly empty off-peak trains and break-even.

It may be semantics, but if that is the benefit then I think we should refer to it as "prepaid" operating costs. I have no idea what it was costing per train to rent the track time from CN but if you write a cheque in the hundreds of millions of dollars to avoid that rent, there must be someone that can figure out how many months/years/decades of prepaid rent that represents and what the opportunity cost is of not having that capital to make other system improvements.

LakeShore 30 minute frequencies would not have happened without that step. The real problem is it took GO nearly a decade to get from planning to implementation for 30 minute Lake Shore and they appear to be upgrading the other lines at roughly the same pace.

What is it about purchasing the track that made the 30 minute frequencies happen? I thought the key element was the improvement along the corridor to a minimum of 3 tracks wide. There is no magic to actual ownership of the tracks is there?

 

[TOareaFan]

The goal is to get service down to 15-20 minute headway and to do that you need more track to do it.

To put a 3rd track in Brampton will require a new bridge on the north side and moving the station north. The cost will not be that high if they don't put the LRT station on the north side as plan.

There is enough room to put in a 4th track in to Bramalea.

Putting in a 4th track to Georgetown can be done, but the south side of Mount Pleasant will have to be rebuilt and move south.

A new south bridge over the port Credit River will have to be built for 2 tracks.

Most likely a few existing overpass will have to be rebuilt to get the 4th tracks in.

Having the 4 tracks in this corridor will allow GO to run on track 1 & 2 with CN running on the south side track 3 & 4. There will be a need for a fly under at Bramalea station to get from the south side to the north side so there is no interference with CN trains.

The original EA only call for a 2nd track to be added to the single track in the early 2000's and I keep calling for a 3rd track, but prefer to see 4 tracks. When I saw that 3rd track being added during construction, was happy to see it, but could see problems down the road with the 4th track missing.

Not reducing Railroad Rd to a single lane and making it one way hurt trying to move the platform south. Doing so it would have an impact on the bus terminal as well being too close to Main St office building. Don't expect to see that platform rebuilt for the 3rd track at all.

With respect, I think that goes back to my earlier comment that we may be letting perfection get in the way of good enough. Unless I am misreading your post (a distinct possibility) you seem to be saying (paraphrase) "the goal is to get to 15-20 headways and all this stuff has to happen to get you there....so in the meantime forget about hourly AD2W service"

I think the travelling public would see a lot of value in the introduction of hourly off peak service. When I talk to people I don't get a lot of "man I wish we could have half hour service like the Lakeshore has"......I more often hear, "I just wish we could get that level of service that they thought wasn't good enough for them".

As for getting a 3rd track at Brampton station, I often wonder if it is not possible to:

1) acquire/buy/expropriate the properties facing the station on the south side of railroad street (from George to Mill)
2) close the intersections of railroad/elizabeth an railroad/mill
3) dig railroad street down to the same level as George street and have it resurface on the west side of Mill
4) Bridge over the newly lowered railroad with a structure that would hold a 3rd track
5) Move the station buildings to the south side of Mill where they would be better located for the existing track 2 and the newly created track 3.
6) take the new track 3 over Main on a new bridge adjacent to the existing one and merge the tracks east of Main before Union.

Again, the musings of a laymen but it is something that crosses my mind sometimes.

 

[smallspy]

If GO was serious about it, it would technically require zero additional infrastructure to run all day two way, hourly service to Mount Pleasant (plus current and some additional peak-direction trains) once the work on the Weston Sub is finished. This fact needs to be pushed and pushed hard.

You're absolutely right, and frankly that's why I wouldn't worry about it. Despite GO's proclamations of "at least 29 trains..." at the end of 2015.

It is, at a minimum, double tracked the whole way......Lakeshore did not need triple tracking until the 30 minute frequency was planned/implemented.

True, but the Halton Sub sees more freight trains than the Kingston and Oakville Sub see VIAs.

I have to ask all the people who know about this stuff.....what benefit did the public obtain from all the track purchases over the past decade or so?

When the bought (most of) the Georgetown/KW corridor (don't remember the date) I recall wondering what was in it for the public as part of the track purchase agreement (and I think all such agreements) was a guarantee to the freight companies that their position was unchanged...that is, their trains would still have priority and they could continue to run as many trains after the purchase as they did before the purchase.

So what did we gain (honest question)? Did we just put a few hundred million into the pockets of CN for no real gain to us and no real loss to them?

It's a valid question to ask, since to the outside viewer there have been very few improvements in any of the services.

The real improvements will happen in 2016, when GO will open up its own RTC office in Oakville. They will then dispatch all of their lines, and that will give them the ability to finally ensure that their trains run on time - rather than having to wait for CN's RTCs.

The other advantage is much more long-term. By owning the corridors, GO/Metrolinx will also own all of the improvements, rather than a third party.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[ShonTron]

As for getting a 3rd track at Brampton station, I often wonder if it is not possible to:

1) acquire/buy/expropriate the properties facing the station on the south side of railroad street (from George to Mill)
2) close the intersections of railroad/elizabeth an railroad/mill
3) dig railroad street down to the same level as George street and have it resurface on the west side of Mill
4) Bridge over the newly lowered railroad with a structure that would hold a 3rd track
5) Move the station buildings to the south side of Mill where they would be better located for the existing track 2 and the newly created track 3.
6) take the new track 3 over Main on a new bridge adjacent to the existing one and merge the tracks east of Main before Union.

Again, the musings of a laymen but it is something that crosses my mind sometimes.

It's probably a lot easier to expand to the north. If any expropriation is necessary, it will just be the auto shops at the southwest corner of Nelson St. East and Union Street. The embankment would be easier to build along a barely-used Nelson St. E. You wouldn't interfere with the office building, bus terminal and historic houses on or near Railroad Street.

 

[TOareaFan]

You're absolutely right, and frankly that's why I wouldn't worry about it. Despite GO's proclamations of "at least 29 trains..." at the end of 2015.

Careful there, GO's "proclamations" aren't quite what you have said. You need to replace "at least" in your quote with "up to"

True, but the Halton Sub sees more freight trains than the Kingston and Oakville Sub see VIAs.

Any idea on the magnitude of difference?

It's a valid question to ask, since to the outside viewer there have been very few improvements in any of the services.

The real improvements will happen in 2016, when GO will open up its own RTC office in Oakville. They will then dispatch all of their lines, and that will give them the ability to finally ensure that their trains run on time - rather than having to wait for CN's RTCs.

The other advantage is much more long-term. By owning the corridors, GO/Metrolinx will also own all of the improvements, rather than a third party.

Not sure I, or many, care about who owns the improvements as long as the public services have access to and see benefit from them.

 

[TOareaFan]

It's probably a lot easier to expand to the north. If any expropriation is necessary, it will just be the auto shops at the southwest corner of Nelson St. East and Union Street. The embankment would be easier to build along a barely-used Nelson St. E. You wouldn't interfere with the office building, bus terminal and historic houses on or near Railroad Street.

Like I said it was just a musing....with GO using track 2 exclusively now we spend more time looking across/at Railroad street than we used to and those "historic" buildings are really about the junkiest of homes in the DT area...not sure they would be such a huge loss.

 

[rbt]

It may be semantics, but if that is the benefit then I think we should refer to it as "prepaid" operating costs.

With normal finances, yes, but government finances work somewhat differently. They have a very clear split between operating and capital funds; all parties and levels of government treat them differently solely for political reasons.

Voters aren't nearly as afraid of debt as they are deficits.

This is clearly visible with TTC, where things like escalator maintenance which would normally be an operating expense is bundled up into a large package and put onto the capital budget. They can't get annual operating funding but they are able to get capital funding. Montreal has a much higher operating subsidy but spends significantly less than the TTC on capital.

GO finances seem to be similar. Very low operating subsidy but a blank-cheque on capital. They can request and receive a one-time $200M payment, but if they asked for $4M/year for 50 years they would be turned down. So, yes, it's prepaid operating costs; but in a manner which would be approved. Also, future governments won't try to cut it because forcing GO to sell track space is far less appealing, politically, than "efficiencies" which reduce the number of trains running. Budgeting and tax impact is similar but politically it's very different.



I've run into private employers that were similar. Everything was from cash (no debt) and they hated ongoing expenses. A $500K hardware solution with a lifespan of about 5 years was preferred to hiring a $50k/year employee. I didn't understand it with them either.

 

[TOareaFan]

With normal finances, yes, but government finances work somewhat differently. They have a very clear split between operating and capital funds; all parties and levels of government treat them differently solely for political reasons.

Voters aren't nearly as afraid of debt as they are deficits.

This is clearly visible with TTC, where things like escalator maintenance which would normally be an operating expense is bundled up into a large package and put onto the capital budget. They can't get annual operating funding but they are able to get capital funding.

GO will be similar. They can request and receive a one-time $200M payment, but if they asked for $4M/year for 50 years they would be turned down. So, yes, it's prepaid operating costs; but in a manner which would be approved. Also, future governments won't try to cut it because forcing GO to sell track space is far less appealing, politically, than "efficiencies" which reduce the number of trains running. Budgeting and tax impact is similar but politically it's very different.

So, if I understand this right, the $7 million annual additional operating cost that GO announced when they introduced 30 minute service on the Lakeshore(s) would have been higher (much?) if they were still renting the track space to do it? Any idea/estimate of what that increase would have been?

 

[rbt]

So, if I understand this right, the $7 million annual additional operating cost that GO announced when they introduced 30 minute service on the Lakeshore(s) would have been higher (much?) if they were still renting the track space to do it? Any idea/estimate of what that increase would have been?

I've been lead to believe it would have been triple that or more. Metrolinx doesn't pushing enough publicly to know for certain.

Of course, going to 15 minute, 10 minute, 5 minute, or even 3 minute frequencies in the future would have created an even larger gap. The purchase price was very reasonable if you believe GO will continue to grow at 8% per year for the next 20 years.

Perhaps, more importantly, it gives GO control of the line to do as they please without needing to negotiate everytime.

 

[gweed123]

With respect, I think that goes back to my earlier comment that we may be letting perfection get in the way of good enough. Unless I am misreading your post (a distinct possibility) you seem to be saying (paraphrase) "the goal is to get to 15-20 headways and all this stuff has to happen to get you there....so in the meantime forget about hourly AD2W service"

I think the travelling public would see a lot of value in the introduction of hourly off peak service. When I talk to people I don't get a lot of "man I wish we could have half hour service like the Lakeshore has"......I more often hear, "I just wish we could get that level of service that they thought wasn't good enough for them".

As for getting a 3rd track at Brampton station, I often wonder if it is not possible to:

1) acquire/buy/expropriate the properties facing the station on the south side of railroad street (from George to Mill)
2) close the intersections of railroad/elizabeth an railroad/mill
3) dig railroad street down to the same level as George street and have it resurface on the west side of Mill
4) Bridge over the newly lowered railroad with a structure that would hold a 3rd track
5) Move the station buildings to the south side of Mill where they would be better located for the existing track 2 and the newly created track 3.
6) take the new track 3 over Main on a new bridge adjacent to the existing one and merge the tracks east of Main before Union.

Again, the musings of a laymen but it is something that crosses my mind sometimes.

Just putting this out there, but what about the possibility of building an elevated guideway over top of the existing tracks through Brampton station? Lower level (existing) for VIA and CN, upper level for GO. Start the guideway east of downtown Brampton where the track goes from 3 to 2, and have it descend back to grade somewhere just east of McLaughlin. Naturally, add the 4th track from Bramalea westward too.

This would negate having to move the existing station (although platforms would likely need to be readjusted). No doubt it would be complicated and expensive, but you would also save a lot of money from not having to rebuild a bunch of bridges and create a bunch of new road over/underpasses.

Just an option to consider, not sure how feasible it would be.