News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.7K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.5K     0 

denfromoakvillemilton said:
let's hope although even with Brampton fixed in the future the tracks from Georgetown to Kitchner are in poor shape.
Click to expand...

I was up that way yesterday, and there was room for hope - speed limits have mostly been restored Georgetown to Kitchener. Lots of maintenance crews from both PNR and CN doing work on their respective territories. Metrolinx does have a project plan for 2019 for that zone, and it’s not bogged down in procurement, so we might see some better things next year. But the path forward east of Georgetown is still a question mark.

- Paul
 
crs1026 said:
I was up that way yesterday, and there was room for hope - speed limits have mostly been restored Georgetown to Kitchener. Lots of maintenance crews from both PNR and CN doing work on their respective territories. Metrolinx does have a project plan for 2019 for that zone, and it’s not bogged down in procurement, so we might see some better things next year. But the path forward east of Georgetown is still a question mark.

- Paul
Click to expand...
For sure. I would be happy with Mount Pleasant but now they have said Kitchener they will have to find a solution to that quickly. Going through Acton at times is a pain imo.
 
I'm sure I've made my share of "typos" in my life, but there seem to be so many errors that I get the feeling the revised schedules were rushed out the door...to the point that I wonder if there was pressure so that they could stage some photo-ops well before Christmas.

1. The day the Schedule Changes were released (coincidental to the Minister's announcement in Kitchener), the bus changes weren't listed/summarized explicitly as they were in the past. Instead, the message was a stock "Please check your schedules to see if you trip is changing..."
(Thankfully, this was fixed the next day.)

Zooming in to the Barrie and Richmond Hill lines:

2. One change is a new 68C, described as

  • Faster ride! Two new northbound Friday only 68C express trips will connect to the 1:20 and 2:20 p.m. train from King City GO Station and stop at Barrie South, Allandale and Barrie Bus Terminal. This means your trip will be 30 minutes faster!
Click to expand...

I think offerings such as this are a great idea to make GO more attractive and pull people from their cars. But no mention of the 68C on the full schedule; the website still presents options connecting at Aurora.

3. The Changes page says the 69 is being discontinued...but the 12:10pm and 8:10pm southbound trips still appear on the new full schedule. Did someone simply forget to delete these two rows on the document?

5. New 65C services, departing at 3:20pm and 5:20pm are described as "Friday only" but this exception isn't on the full schedule either.

4. There a new 61F from Gormley to Union, which is great because the existing trips fill up at Richmond Hill. But I see Trip 61284 (also departing Gormley at 9am) is listed as a 61A. Shouldn't it be 61C since it continues to Richmond Hill?


I only checked the schedules that are important to me and my household, so I'd wager there's more. And there's plenty of time to quietly revise both the tables that feed the website and the PDF full schedules, but it would have been nice to get it right the first time. #youhadonejob
 
@joet00 Would you be willing to tweet at them so they can address the errors? Like you said, small details, but it's important and nice and to them right. Hold them accountable as well.
 
joet00 said:
I'm sure I've made my share of "typos" in my life, but there seem to be so many errors that I get the feeling the revised schedules were rushed out the door...to the point that I wonder if there was pressure so that they could stage some photo-ops well before Christmas.
Click to expand...

Adding to the above I still don't get this tweet (as I posted earlier):
https://twitter.com/x/status/1075161339386060800

I'm confused. I'm looking at the January 5, 2019 schedule and I only see a 0639 departure from West Harbour. I don't see a 0609 in the new schedule:

1545239017833.png


Am I missing something?
 
Allandale25 said:
Adding to the above I still don't get this tweet (as I posted earlier):
https://twitter.com/x/status/1075161339386060800
Click to expand...

There seem to be a number of comments about that tweet. ^EP is most certainly wrong in this case.

Allandale25 said:
I'm confused. I'm looking at the January 5, 2019 schedule and I only see a 0639 departure from West Harbour. I don't see a 0609 in the new schedule:

View attachment 168190

Am I missing something?
Click to expand...

That's the Route 12 schedule - it doesn't have any buses that connect with the 6.09 train out of West Harbour.

If you look at the Route 01 schedule here (https://www.gotransit.com/static_fi...ipPlanning/FullSchedules/05012019/Table01.pdf) you'll see that both of those trips are still existing - although there are no notes in there about the Niagara Falls trips beginning or ending elsewhere.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.
 
^ Oh okay thanks. Now I see what you're talking about on the Table 01 schedule. My question remains though. For that 0519 Niagara Falls departure stopping at West Harbour at 0639 is it or is it not going to back into West Harbour? Someone suggested here it would but the tweet from GO said "no" trains will back in.

UPDATE: in a different thread a Metrolinx staff member confirmed the train will back in (or as they call it, a "special maneuver"):

https://twitter.com/x/status/1073662382948392960

1545246645127.png
 
alexanderglista said:
Shelburne mayor says extended GO service could prop up lagging Orangeville ridership
Click to expand...
Interesting article, and perhaps one of the reasons the route doesn't get as many passengers as it could/should is that it was slashed a few years back. I used to take it up to/down from the Elora/Cataract Trail, and the bus may not have been full, but it had more passengers than some other routes have off-peak, one being the Malton to Bolton GO bus, which shares some of the same drivers. I've had discussions with them on the Orangeville route, and they've expressed frustration with how GO is managing the route. Correctly or not, the point of a county subsidy was raised.

I also read:
Anderson said that if Metrolinx isn’t responsive to servicing the area, there are options with provincial Trillium grant funding and even the potential for partnerships with local developers. “We’ve heard from developers who are interested in becoming community partners,” he said, noting the possibility for private-sector support. “Sometimes this is about having a vision, being creative.”
Click to expand...
This point is appearing more often with other instances, developers are realizing the benefits of being part of a transit scheme. A good part of that can be a lower fee to the local jurisdiction for road allowance, and also less parking, as well as offering transit for the progressives who just don't want to drive every day. MOOSE got a lot of flak for this approach, but like it or not, it's one of the ways of the future, as it was in the past.

I also note:
RELATED CONTENT
Good signs!

Addendum: Off topic for this string, but by following links above, found this article fascinating, and not being mentioned much if at all in the Toronto press:
https://www.orangeville.com/news-st...lly-want-to-amalgamate-dufferin-and-caledon-/
 
Last edited:
^Folks I know up that way tell me that Shelburne is itching to grow, and GO service would likely be a tipping factor that would trigger that.

I’m of mixed emotions on this, because a) we don’t need the sprawl and b) Shelburne doesn’t have the infrastructure for growth, and it will look to the Province to invest in that. Open for Business resonates up there.

I guess it depends on whether we see the greenbelt as the demarcation zone beyond which development is discouraged and farmland is conserved, or is it just a quiet zone with the GTA sprawl resuming as you drive further north/west.

I would deginitely like to see better bus service all the way up to Owen Sound, but not necessarily in a way that triggers commuting.

- Paul
 
crs1026 said:
^Folks I know up that way tell me that Shelburne is itching to grow, and GO service would likely be a tipping factor that would trigger that.

I’m of mixed emotions on this, because a) we don’t need the sprawl and b) Shelburne doesn’t have the infrastructure for growth, and it will look to the Province to invest in that. Open for Business resonates up there.

I guess it depends on whether we see the greenbelt as the demarcation zone beyond which development is discouraged and farmland is conserved, or is it just a quiet zone with the GTA sprawl resuming as you drive further north/west.

I would deginitely like to see better bus service all the way up to Owen Sound, but not necessarily in a way that triggers commuting.

- Paul
Click to expand...

I very much share your concerns.

I would add there are a host of areas that demonstrably justify investment in new/enhanced rail service before this proposal should be up for serious discussion (Milton GO, cough)

That said, I feel a bit of pull in the other direction. I wonder how much commuting there is today, and how much we could shift to a greener choice by way of offering limited train service.

I wonder how much non-commuting traffic (shopping in the City on a Saturday etc.) might be shifted by even one train each way.

I also worry about losing the rail infrastructure to disuse, and the impact that has on existing freight shifting to truck, and whether we simply end up w/growth that doesn't even pay lip service to transit or good planning.

Would a limited-scope investment ever be worth it if the we held firm on the greenbelt?

Could we allow and sustain (including drinking water) limited intensification entirely within the built up areas of Shelburne, Alliston, Orangeville etc?

I'm not sure I have a satisfactory answer, except to say any investment here should be approached with caution, having thought through most if not all of the above.
 
Northern Light said:
That said, I feel a bit of pull in the other direction. I wonder how much commuting there is today, and how much we could shift to a greener choice by way of offering limited train service.
Click to expand...
Consideration of using the rail line for GO service is impractical, at least at this time. Highway 10 bus service increase is the way to do it. Faster travel time, cheaper, more immediate implementation and flexibility of destination. Perhaps some better bays for bus stops would be called for, but overall, it's something that could be up and running in months. In lieu of limited local bus services, as is done in other towns, the bus could take a loop off the highway to bring stops closer to the bulk of the population. That's a double-edged sword though, as it also slows overall transit time.

As per sprawl: Unless pop growth slows down, it's going to happen anyway, so best cater to it in terms of transit rather than cars, and for that to be the case, transit must be made available as the growth is planned. Metrolinx have an obligation to get in front of this...well...Fug Head Ford besides...

Orangeville Transit ready to explore bus route partnership with Shelburne
NEWS Nov 16, 2017 by Chris Halliday Orangeville Banner

RuralTransportationEMMA_Super_Portrait.jpg

Transit options from the north end of Dufferin County to Orangeville are limited to say the least. However, Orangeville's transit committee recently voted in favour of exploring a bus route partnership with Shelburne. - Banner file photo

https://www.orangeville.com/news-st...explore-bus-route-partnership-with-shelburne/
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top