[nfitz]

Like I have said - big picture level - i.e. Informing the timeline of improvements to Exhibition - which it did not offer. This is a community notice.

Perhaps I missed something there ...

Yeah, the current Exhibition situation. If I take the various comments at face value, once they finish some minor work on the platforms themselves, there's no work planned for years when they do the RER/Electrificaiton ... but that seems in contradiction to the half-build new exit stairway.

I assume the new tunnel extension itself is finished, given all the hoarding down there. And I can't imagine what could actually stop them finishing at this point, with most of the structure built. And I can't really see how electrification would interfere with a tunnel.

So I'm a bit mystified at Metrolinx's comments, that seem simply unaware of the tunnel construction. Other than the hoarding in the tunnel, I think the entire construction work is now taking place on City of Toronto land - perhaps that's creating the disconnect? There isn't another agency building the exit stairs is there?

I should walk slowly around that thing one day, and see if there's signage. I'm just not there during daytime hours on weekdays - are there construction workers on site?

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

I wonder if there is anything to suggest the CP Rail traffic volumes for their mid-Toronto route are such that weekend Barrie service for GO is now easier (because CP volume on weekends is low and has fallen), but for CN and the Halton Sub, which impacts the Kitchener Corridor, it's remained steady. Since it's hard to get official or public data I'm just speculating and don't have any inside information.

I think so. And the fact it is not the main route, unlike Galt, is a factor as well.

 

[crs1026]

A complication for CP is there are no-waiting zones on the North Toronto Sub. This means that a freight train can't be held for a GO train right at the diamond. Clearing each freight means timing its arrival well in advance of the train's approach. And, because the passing zone for GO trains are at a distance, hourly service translates into half-hourly GO occupancy of the diamond. To avoid slowing and delaying GO, routes can't be lined at the last minute, either.

All in all, it's a very different proposition to run all-day hourly service over that diamond than to declare freight curfews for just morning and afternoon rush hours.

- Paul

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

A complication for CP is there are no-waiting zones on the North Toronto Sub. This means that a freight train can't be held for a GO train right at the diamond. Clearing each freight means timing its arrival well in advance of the train's approach. And, because the passing zone for GO trains are at a distance, hourly service translates into half-hourly GO occupancy of the diamond. To avoid slowing and delaying GO, routes can't be lined at the last minute, either.

All in all, it's a very different proposition to run all-day hourly service over that diamond than to declare freight curfews for just morning and afternoon rush hours.

- Paul

I agree with 90 percent of this. What I want to know now is if this is the case, why are they only going to aurora rather then laying another track down and terminating at Newmarket? It would not cost more then 100 million to do so.

 

[SaugeenJunction]

Construction has started on the pilot Tim Horton's at Oakville GO. I was surprised that it will be a stand-alone building, but I guess kicking the current retailer out of the Oakville GO station doesn't make sense. I'll update the thread as this develops.

 

[TOareaFan]

Construction has started on the pilot Tim Horton's at Oakville GO. I was surprised that it will be a stand-alone building, but I guess kicking the current retailer out of the Oakville GO station doesn't make sense. I'll update the thread as this develops.

but starving them of business while still expecting them to make rent payments does?

 

[SaugeenJunction]

but starving them of business while still expecting them to make rent payments does?

No, not at all.

 

[TOareaFan]

No, not at all.

well that is what GO appears to be doing here.

 

[SaugeenJunction]

well that is what GO appears to be doing here.

To be honest the current retailer isn't that great, and a Tims will be a big improvement for commuters. But you're right, I'd be angry if I was the other retailer.

 

[rbt]

To be honest the current retailer isn't that great, and a Tims will be a big improvement for commuters. But you're right, I'd be angry if I was the other retailer.

Either the restriction is in the lease contract or it isn't; and if it isn't, they almost certainly had every opportunity (and likely a recommendation by their agent) to pay for exclusivity in their category (food/coffee services).

 

[TOareaFan]

Either the restriction is in the lease contract or it isn't; and if it isn't, they almost certainly had every opportunity (and likely a recommendation by their agent) to pay for exclusivity in their category (food/coffee services).

It is easy to just say "too bad, they should have negotiated an exclusivity clause in their lease"....and I would agree if we were talking about a mall or shopping centre...it is common and recommended. These people, though, signed a lease in a non-traditional retail building (a train station) that had 1 retail store location in it....you can hardly fault them when they signed a lease presented to them that did not have an exclusivity agreement.....where was a competitor going to go? Now that ML is planning on building new coffee outlets on the station grounds...I would be asking "did they offer the existing purveyor of coffee a chance to lease those locations".

It is easy to just gloss over this as normal business between a landlord and his tenant.....and say (as it does) it happens all the time....but I am a bit uncomfortable with this primarily because this is a government owned entity (us, in other words) crapping over an existing tenant.....taking away their business and expecting them to honour their lease anyway.

 

[rbt]

It is easy to just say "too bad, they should have negotiated an exclusivity clause in their lease"....and I would agree if we were talking about a mall or shopping centre...it is common and recommended. These people, though, signed a lease in a non-traditional retail building (a train station) that had 1 retail store location in it....you can hardly fault them when they signed a lease presented to them that did not have an exclusivity agreement.....where was a competitor going to go? Now that ML is planning on building new coffee outlets on the station grounds...I would be asking "did they offer the existing purveyor of coffee a chance to lease those locations".

The entire point of contract law is to protect against future unknowns, including changes of mind by the party you are dealing with, but it's still up to you (and your team) to write it.

you can hardly fault them when they signed a lease presented to them that did not have an exclusivity agreement

Businesses don't get the same safety net that residential owners have; and they never have. A lease agreement is also a solid asset; many bankrupt restaurants only have their hard negotiated lease to sell as an asset after everything is over.

So yes, I can and do blame the owner for allowing their current misfortune just the same as I would if they were late with the rent by 1 day and got evicted as a result. Business sucks but the rules of the game are fairly well defined and there are tens of thousands in the GTA selling expertise/support in this area (legal, commercial real-estate, etc).

 

[drum118]

Came home a few days earlier than plan due to car issues to the point I left the 2nd AVIS car in the US and came home in another.

Pass 50 site and most of the old area is gone with work taking place for the new GO Station. No photos.

The Hamilton Channel Bridge hasn't seen anything done since my last visit. I could hear hammering to my right and most likely for the retaining wall. Photos to follow.

The north east corner of Burlington GO Station is fully paved and strip with 12 handicapped spots that has a walkway every 2 parking spots on concrete. A new pickup area is in the same area as well more parking spots. Some metal seats/bench have been install in the terminal area. The roof is still in the same shape as I last saw it, with no work at all. Elevators should be in operation by May 24 or that week according to the people working on it. They stated there been a lot of hydro issues for the last 2 years. Computers being install for the customers fare area. The doors are still not fix. One could say, the new parking area and new entrance could open June 1st as well the new bus terminal, that could still be months off. Photos to follow.

 

[alexb]

A complication for CP is there are no-waiting zones on the North Toronto Sub. This means that a freight train can't be held for a GO train right at the diamond. Clearing each freight means timing its arrival well in advance of the train's approach. And, because the passing zone for GO trains are at a distance, hourly service translates into half-hourly GO occupancy of the diamond. To avoid slowing and delaying GO, routes can't be lined at the last minute, either.

All in all, it's a very different proposition to run all-day hourly service over that diamond than to declare freight curfews for just morning and afternoon rush hours.

- Paul

Could you explain this further? I often see a CP train holding east of the diamond when I'm passing on the Barrie line.

 

[crs1026]

Could you explain this further? I often see a CP train holding east of the diamond when I'm passing on the Barrie line.

I bet it's a short one. There are places between Leaside and Davenport where locomotives are not allowed to sit and idle, per Transport Canada order. There is also the grade crossing at Bartlett Ave which isn't supposed to be blocked.

Trains do creep over and stop for a short time, especially if they can do so without blocking the crossing..... but longer freights will have to hold back if the wait is going to be more than a few minutes.

- Paul