Kitsune
Senior Member
I know federal EA's have been required for the highway 69 four laning.... so those minimums seem a little high, unless they counted everything at once.
|
|
|
- Thread starter dunkalunk
- Start date
Allandale25
Senior Member
Interesting that the threshold is 32 km. There's a Metrolinx slide that says the Bypass would be 30 km.
Attachments
Last edited:
timio
Active Member
32 kilometers = 20 miles.
Allandale25
Senior Member
^ I thought I was comparing with the same units. The subsection Paul provided mentioned 32 km and the Bypass slide I showed said it would be 30 km. Am I missing something? Apologies.
timio
Active Member
Sorry, misread the thread as trying to understand the odd number of 32km. Apologies.
Allandale25
Senior Member
Metrolinx has updated their page for the Kitchener Line Expansion and added a fact sheet PDF.
Page: http://www.metrolinx.com/en/greaterregion/projects/kitchener-go-expansion.aspx#projectupdate
Fact sheet: http://www.metrolinx.com/images/gre...o-expansion/MX RER Factsheet Kitchener V2.pdf
I've extracted the map:
Page: http://www.metrolinx.com/en/greaterregion/projects/kitchener-go-expansion.aspx#projectupdate
Fact sheet: http://www.metrolinx.com/images/gre...o-expansion/MX RER Factsheet Kitchener V2.pdf
I've extracted the map:
crs1026
Superstar
Remarkable - ML is now proposing bypassing CN altogether to Georgetown. That might enable some form of enhanced GO to be squeezed onto the Halton Sub without building the bypass. With one more track Bramalea to Peel, and a third track through central Brampton, 30 min service to Mt Pleasant could operate without getting in CN's way.
The route options are so close to developed areas in Mississauga that it would be controversial, as would bypassing central Brampton altogether.
The suggested route just east of Georgetown is so close to the old Toronto Suburban Railway - full circle!
- Paul
The route options are so close to developed areas in Mississauga that it would be controversial, as would bypassing central Brampton altogether.
The suggested route just east of Georgetown is so close to the old Toronto Suburban Railway - full circle!
- Paul
Northern Light
Superstar
The Pearson connection options don't appear to follow any established ROW that I could see (anyone feel free to correct my impression if I'm wrong).
To plow an entirely new option through on the surface, w/attendant grade separations and a minimum of 2 tracks would strike me as rather costly, not to mention disruptive.
Were it intended solely for high-speed, electrified rail, I suppose one could consider tunnels, but that might not represent a cost-saving, even if it avoided most of the expropriation.
***
Strikes me that he CN By-pass, (new connection of Halton/York Sub) is still likely to be needed, in the longer term, if the longer term vision involves moving CP off its mainline through mid-town Toronto.
Any new Pearson connector would not address that issue at all.
There's also the much longer term consideration of whether passenger service itself should follow the 407 ROW as a means of creating a suburb to suburb rail connection.
Clearly not a near-term happening (or medium term either), but if one wishes to protect for that possibility the bypass work gives you a chunk of the western route, w/the work done to provide for or build the requisite bridges/separations now, even if the track doesn't follow for 2 or more decades.
aquateam
Active Member
Metrolinx has updated their page for the Kitchener Line Expansion and added a fact sheet PDF.
Page: http://www.metrolinx.com/en/greaterregion/projects/kitchener-go-expansion.aspx#projectupdate
Fact sheet: http://www.metrolinx.com/images/greaterregion/projects/kitchener-go-expansion/MX RER Factsheet Kitchener V2.pdf
I've extracted the map:
So many options for servicing the airport seem to involve expensive, long detours where there is no existing ROW. Not just with the Kitchener bypass, but I also think of how the Eglinton LRT will jog up to the airport instead of continuing west to the Missisauga Corporate Centre or how the Finch West LRT will service the airport instead of RER.
Since the airport is multiple terminals, not just a singular point, wouldn't it make sense to expand the people mover to be a rapid transit link from north to south across the airport zone? I.e. Malton GO RER/HSR station on the north end and Renforth gateway on the south end?
Stations would be:
- Malton - connections to HSR, GO RER, Finch LRT, Missisauga Transit
- Viscount
- Terminal 3
- Terminal 1 - connection to UPX
- Silver Dart
- Convair
- Renforth Gateway - connection to Eglinton LRT, Missisauga transit
Alternatively, I found a proposal by @jcam that was an interesting way of servicing the airport, assuming the link train could be rebuilt to allow LRT vehicles on it.:
Kitsune
Senior Member
That map shows UP-X / Pearson spur going along a new route that aligns with Dixon ? How have I missed that plan.
mdrejhon
Senior Member
If a new spur is ever built, then a HSR+UPX viaduct above Dixon? It actually literally connects Weston to Malton, with a stop in Pearson.
This would discontinue the old UPX viaduct but would cover the "UPX/VIA/HSR coming from east" versus "HSR/VIA coming from the west" rail connections.
If we can tolerate a viaduct rather than tunnels, and only on Dixon, maybe doable within this budget. Have to be reasonably aesthetic looking, not Gardiner-like, but not necessarily full Davenport (maybe almost in sections, where necessary).
I still think a Link II shuttle is more feasible, keeping HSR/RER on existing corridor.
This would discontinue the old UPX viaduct but would cover the "UPX/VIA/HSR coming from east" versus "HSR/VIA coming from the west" rail connections.
If we can tolerate a viaduct rather than tunnels, and only on Dixon, maybe doable within this budget. Have to be reasonably aesthetic looking, not Gardiner-like, but not necessarily full Davenport (maybe almost in sections, where necessary).
I still think a Link II shuttle is more feasible, keeping HSR/RER on existing corridor.
TOareaFan
Superstar
Exactly (although you can at Brampton Transit/Zum to Malton connections)
SaugeenJunction
Senior Member
Metrolinx has updated their page for the Kitchener Line Expansion and added a fact sheet PDF.
Page: http://www.metrolinx.com/en/greaterregion/projects/kitchener-go-expansion.aspx#projectupdate
Fact sheet: http://www.metrolinx.com/images/greaterregion/projects/kitchener-go-expansion/MX RER Factsheet Kitchener V2.pdf
I've extracted the map:
What is the NW GTA Corridor (purple line). It isn't routed the same way as the GTA West highway proposal, so I'm confused.
idc24
Active Member
The prospect of having a heavy rail corridor running along Dixon would be even more controversial than when Smart Track was proposed along Eglinton West. Between Royal York and Kipling, Dixon is residential with a cluster a tall rental apartments and condos and two major commercial nodes at Kipling and Islington.
Attachments
Last edited:
idc24
Active Member
Also a bridge crossing would be required at the Humber river which would be costly and complex.