[EnviroTO]

There would be no way for Milton, Georgetown, and Barrie trains to all serve a station at Liberty Village. At King or Queen you could put in platforms to serve at most 2 of 8 tracks. At Bloor they can easily put in platforms to serve 5 of 6 tracks, and at Lansdowne and Bloor you could serve 2 Barrie tracks. Bloor works better anyways as it serves 2 streetcar lines (could serve 3 if the Howard Park loop wasn't seen as important) and the Bloor line

 

[TOareaFan]

There would be no way for Milton, Georgetown, and Barrie trains to all serve a station at Liberty Village. At King or Queen you could put in platforms to serve at most 2 of 8 tracks. At Bloor they can easily put in platforms to serve 5 of 6 tracks, and at Lansdowne and Bloor you could serve 2 Barrie tracks. Bloor works better anyways as it serves 2 streetcar lines (could serve 3 if the Howard Park loop wasn't seen as important) and the Bloor line

your right that a station between king and Queen could not serve all 3 at the same time but who says they all have to arrive at the same time? couldn't the schedule be worked so that they arrived and departed at intervals?

while it is true that bloor serves multiple streetcars and could handle more trains at the same time....it does not, however, serve the ex/ontario place/bmo field/lv very well.......people would be discouraged from use by the need to transfer (adding time to their travel) and pay an additional fare.

I guess everyone has their different views but I think off-peak service, to be successful, has to go to places that people go on weekends and evenings....those places aren't necessarily the same places they go monday to friday during the day. I just figured that a limited service, "events and weekends only" stop would give the off peak service the best chance of capturing a decent ridership. It stuns me (in a good way) everytime I walk through the Ex station after a TFC match what a big share of the fans come in and leave via the lakeshore trains (you can even tell when the train from the west has arrived as those people are always about 10 minutes or so late for the game....since kick-off is usually on the hour and that is when their train arrives)......for people who do not live on the lakeshore line, however, we witness the crowds on the platforms as we walk through the station to Liberty Village to get in our cars and drive home.

 

[ShonTron]

Yes, you wouldn't need platforms at all tracks, as there will be tracks needed for express and airport runs that will not serve a Parkdale/LV station. Obviously, all the tracks planned for the Weston/Galt/Newmarket subs will mostly be used for peak periods only when perhaps only some local commuter trains would make use of the stop, just like at Exhibition now.

I'm flabbergasted by the inflexibilty and the inability to work outside extremely narrow parameters, and the defense of such.

 

[unimaginative2]

Agreed! Excellent point, ShonTron, and very well said. The number of tracks they're building through there is comical, especially considering we are barely increasing the service levels. If we just reduced the size of the trains and increased frequency along with a couple additional downtown-area stations, we wouldn't need to budget for 10-minute dwell time at Union. They're acting like it's impossible to squeeze more people through Union even though there are at least 50 stations in the world that move multiples of Union's traffic.

 

[Mapleson]

Agreed! Excellent point, ShonTron, and very well said. The number of tracks they're building through there is comical, especially considering we are barely increasing the service levels. If we just reduced the size of the trains and increased frequency along with a couple additional downtown-area stations, we wouldn't need to budget for 10-minute dwell time at Union. They're acting like it's impossible to squeeze more people through Union even though there are at least 50 stations in the world that move multiples of Union's traffic.

Capacity is constrained getting into and out of Union Station in the USRC. They've been upgrading the switches and signalling, but trains still need to slow down prior to Union Station more than would otherwise be necessary. It doesn't matter if there were 1000 stations that move more traffic than Union, it's a matter of how many we can move with the constrains on operation and expansion. There are only 7 tracks at the foot of the CN tower and from there trains can switch to any of the Union tracks. Station dwell time is less the issue than track occupancy.

 

[unimaginative2]

Well maybe we should adopt the technologies and techniques used by the dozens of other stations that move vastly more people with comparable or more limited station trackage.

 

[rbt]

Capacity is constrained getting into and out of Union Station in the USRC. They've been upgrading the switches and signalling, but trains still need to slow down prior to Union Station more than would otherwise be necessary. It doesn't matter if there were 1000 stations that move more traffic than Union, it's a matter of how many we can move with the constrains on operation and expansion. There are only 7 tracks at the foot of the CN tower and from there trains can switch to any of the Union tracks. Station dwell time is less the issue than track occupancy.

Passenger railways around the world seem to get down to 2 minute intervals on a single track without much effort and that includes station dwell time.

I understand that crossing over tracks is a problem but $2Billion should be able to rearrange the Union corridor so GO has dedicated tracks (no freight or via ever touch them), reduced cross-overs (prevent Georgetown trains from blocking LakeShore trains), install ATO, and get down to 90 second intervals per track.

I can see how Union would be well over capacity and would expect yard movements to be difficult (hint, run trains through so there are no more yards at Union); but 4 tracks in/out of union should allow for 120 to 150 trains per hour if reconfigured.

 

[unimaginative2]

All very good points, and we already have well over four tracks. The key to any passenger capacity issue at Union is offloading some of its traffic onto other stations on either end of downtown (and I'm not talking about terminating trains there and bypassing Union). The problem is that because we've never had real regional rail service on the downtown rail corridor, the city has developed in a north-south fashion along the subway lines. Still, a station at Spadina and Cherry, say, would be able to offload at least some passengers, especially if we had a DRL adjacent to the rail corridor as originally planned and not way up on Queen.

 

[Dan416]

All very good points, and we already have well over four tracks. The key to any passenger capacity issue at Union is offloading some of its traffic onto other stations on either end of downtown (and I'm not talking about terminating trains there and bypassing Union). The problem is that because we've never had real regional rail service on the downtown rail corridor, the city has developed in a north-south fashion along the subway lines. Still, a station at Spadina and Cherry, say, would be able to offload at least some passengers, especially if we had a DRL adjacent to the rail corridor as originally planned and not way up on Queen.

Agree 100%. There should be DRL-GO transfer stations east and west of Union, and Union itself.

 

[drum118]

Agree 100%. There should be DRL-GO transfer stations east and west of Union, and Union itself.

There is to be a Cherry St Station, once Cherry St bridge is rebuilt, and only then.

I support the idea of a station at King but perfer it further south, but the flyunder is in the way. Where do you put it as well which lines will use it is the question? You only can have one platform and it would be track 8 at this time.

 

[Dan416]

There is to be a Cherry St Station, once Cherry St bridge is rebuilt, and only then.

I support the idea of a station at King but perfer it further south, but the flyunder is in the way. Where do you put it as well which lines will use it is the question? You only can have one platform and it would be track 8 at this time.

I think we have to decide that we want these east and west of Union stations first, and then decide where we can integrate them with the DRL, and then we find the perfect locations for them and make it work. Keep in mind by the time all this comes to pass, hopefully we aren't running these monster 12-car diesel trains anymore.

 

[unimaginative2]

The shame is that if we had real regional rail service and a stop at Spadina, the Cityplace lands would be much more attractive for office development.

 

[drum118]

I think we have to decide that we want these east and west of Union stations first, and then decide where we can integrate them with the DRL, and then we find the perfect locations for them and make it work. Keep in mind by the time all this comes to pass, hopefully we aren't running these monster 12-car diesel trains anymore.

GO has already decided on the Cherry St Station and is to be built when the new underpass is built. It's part of the Waterfront Master Plan.

We will be running 12 cars trains at peak time down the road along with 3-5 cars emu's.

As it has been pointed out, having a west station will take pressure off Union for events at the CNE as well shorter riders travel time to get there.

The DRL is a total different thing and it should not have an impact on existing lines. Don't support the DRL going to Union since Union will not be able to handle the excess ridership in the first place.

 

[unimaginative2]

The problem with still using the 12-car trains is that they tie up so much time at Union that they wind up having comparable capacity to more frequent, smaller EMUs. Look at all kinds of systems that move far more people than GO: none of them use that kind of bi-level megatrains for that very reason.

 

[rbt]

The problem with still using the 12-car trains is that they tie up so much time at Union that they wind up having comparable capacity to more frequent, smaller EMUs. Look at all kinds of systems that move far more people than GO: none of them use that kind of bi-level megatrains for that very reason.

The length isn't really a problem provided appropriate vertical access points exist. One escalator for every 3 cars may be enough.

Bi-level cars are a problem due to the low capacity of the internal staircases.

That said, doesn't CityRail in Sydney carry something like 350Million trips per year on bilevel rolling stock? They have 16 lines instead of GOs 7 but many are interlined through downtown.

GO should be fine with bilevels for another 30 years (at current growth rate), particularly if they build stops at Jarvis and Spadina to spread load out from Union.