[Sunnyside]

Me: "The Milton line has fewer all-day trip generators than the Kitchener or LSW lines"

Them: "So you hate the Milton line?!"

I would say it’s not as many fewer as is commonly argued, and certainly not enough to be noticable if all else (service) were the same. While it’s not exactly at the doorstep, this line does go as close as possible to UTM, MCC, and ECC.

Something explains the extremely high ridership pre-pandemic, and I think it’s because the line is very well positioned in the suburban fabric. The dearth of employment areas in Mississauga alone could go toe to toe with whatever reverse-commuting occurs towards Hamilton or Kitchener if properly serviced.

Barring all that, I still don’t think we can say the Milton line does not have good all day trip generators if the line isn’t open outside of peak; we can literally *only* examine this line at the time GO is doing the worst, relatively speaking. That is no test.

 

[crs1026]

Me: "The Milton line has fewer all-day trip generators than the Kitchener or LSW lines"

Them: "So you hate the Milton line?!"

I would even take this one step further

Me: "Metrolinx and the Province do not have the funding or the project bandwidth to attack the Milton line at this time"

Them: "So you hate the Milton line?!"

Me: "No, but it's a particularly big project, and it needs a full solution (ie two dedicated tracks for GO, alongside CP's tracks) and that's more than we can pile on ML's plate at this time when RER and various subway/LRT projects are not yet completed, and by the way there are reasons why those projects had to go first"

Them: "So you hate the Milton line?!"

- Paul

 

[guavadelic]

I would even take this one step further

Me: "Metrolinx and the Province do not have the funding or the project bandwidth to attack the Milton line at this time"

Them: "So you hate the Milton line?!"

Me: "No, but it's a particularly big project, and it needs a full solution (ie two dedicated tracks for GO, alongside CP's tracks) and that's more than we can pile on ML's plate at this time when RER and various subway/LRT projects are not yet completed, and by the way there are reasons why those projects had to go first"

Them: "So you hate the Milton line?!"

- Paul

I take your point but its really frustrating to watch them waste billions on pre-election shenanigans then cry poor when it comes to tackling important gaps in the regional rail system.

 

[Dan416]

I would even take this one step further

Me: "Metrolinx and the Province do not have the funding or the project bandwidth to attack the Milton line at this time"

Them: "So you hate the Milton line?!"

Me: "No, but it's a particularly big project, and it needs a full solution (ie two dedicated tracks for GO, alongside CP's tracks) and that's more than we can pile on ML's plate at this time when RER and various subway/LRT projects are not yet completed, and by the way there are reasons why those projects had to go first"

Them: "So you hate the Milton line?!"

- Paul

But then if people suggest a subway to MCC, they go "but what about the Milton Line, it's good enough?". Whereas York Region gets 2 subways and RER with a smaller population.

 

[T3G]

I take your point but its really frustrating to watch them waste billions on pre-election shenanigans then cry poor when it comes to tackling important gaps in the regional rail system.

Not only that, but their insistence on running subways, and deep tunneled subways at that, in places where an LRT would suffice.

Other communities get crumbs because mounds of the transit budget are swallowed by megalomaniacal subway projects.

 

[crs1026]

I take your point but its really frustrating to watch them waste billions on pre-election shenanigans then cry poor when it comes to tackling important gaps in the regional rail system.

It sure is. Wynne was bad for glossy but un-launched promises. Ford is far worse. And ML is not delivering.

All the same, I see logic in why Milton had to be a v2.0 project. If you look on the GO-RER plan as a series of spokes radiating from Union station.... imagine that Milton is added as a spoke. Now remove enough of the other spokes to bring the project cost back to the original envelope (which was at the limit of affordability, given the need to also fund municipal level transit). Stouffville 2WAD would be gone, Barrie 2WAD would be gone, LSE and LSW extensions would be gone. You would have Kitchener, Milton, and LSW but big gaps to the north and east. Bad politics and worse network building.

Mississauga's overall transportation plan does not make sense to me, but even there I question the wisdom of putting so many dollars in one project, to the exclusion of other things. We certainly need regional transit to intercept drivers out around Lisgar and get them off the 401. Milton serves that purpose, so it's a good thing.. I don't see Milton providing a good backbone for Mississauga, however. I do favour building more LRT and less subway, but in that respect I don't see the Milton line being much different than a subway....and not a good candidate as Mississauga's subway.

- Paul

 

[afransen]

Mississauga's overall transportation plan does not make sense to me, but even there I question the wisdom of putting so many dollars in one project, to the exclusion of other things. We certainly need regional transit to intercept drivers out around Lisgar and get them off the 401. Milton serves that purpose, so it's a good thing.. I don't see Milton providing a good backbone for Mississauga, however. I do favour building more LRT and less subway, but in that respect I don't see the Milton line being much different than a subway....and not a good candidate as Mississauga's subway.

Wouldn't upgrading Milton cost much less than subway? The only downside is that Milton doesn't quite reach MCC.

And extending Line 2 is not really fit for purpose to serve Mississauga. I'm not sure street-running LRT is warranted in much of Mississauga, either. It doesn't serve a rapid transit function to cover large distances quickly. Having Lakeshore and Milton (and eventually Line 5 extension along the transitway) as backbones with BRT feeding it seems like a good start. I can't see $1B/km subway barely making it to MCC being the best use of funds to serve Mississauga as a whole.

 

[DirectionNorth]

Wouldn't upgrading Milton cost much less than subway? The only downside is that Milton doesn't quite reach MCC.

And extending Line 2 is not really fit for purpose to serve Mississauga. I'm not sure street-running LRT is warranted in much of Mississauga, either. It doesn't serve a rapid transit function to cover large distances quickly. Having Lakeshore and Milton (and eventually Line 5 extension along the transitway) as backbones with BRT feeding it seems like a good start. I can't see $1B/km subway barely making it to MCC being the best use of funds to serve Mississauga as a whole.

A Milton GO realignment, tunnelling to reach MCC and using the 403 Transitway corridor at-grade, should be doable for net <$1 billion, maybe even less than $700 million, assuming no issues with easements (I know that's partly responsible for MTL's Anjou Extension blowouts). Though we're moving into semi-fantasy map territory.

Knowing Metrolinx, it'd probably get escalated to $4 billion.

 

[sixrings]

I think the problem is not that mississaugans hear “I hate the Milton line” it’s that we feel like what that equates to is it’s not worth whatever dollar figure it is to serve the sixth biggest city in Canada by population. It’s double frustrating when we see wasted money going to other projects and then are told our project costs to much or we need to wait longer.

Largest Cities in Canada by Population

Since the Second World War, Canadians have become increasingly urban, living primarily in cities. In an attempt to keep housing affordable, local governments ha...

www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca

Also ottawa may have a million people but that’s within 2800 sq km. While Mississaugas 800k is within 288 sq Kms.

 

[Sunnyside]

I would even take this one step further

Me: "Metrolinx and the Province do not have the funding or the project bandwidth to attack the Milton line at this time"

Them: "So you hate the Milton line?!"

Me: "No, but it's a particularly big project, and it needs a full solution (ie two dedicated tracks for GO, alongside CP's tracks) and that's more than we can pile on ML's plate at this time when RER and various subway/LRT projects are not yet completed, and by the way there are reasons why those projects had to go first"

Them: "So you hate the Milton line?!"

- Paul

This is a much better framing. It’s not that the project isn’t worth tackling, or even that it’s less worthy than other projects being built right now… (which is what I tried to explain in my posts) it’s just too big to add to our collective plate. And that is, in a very strong sense, extremely significant.

Full Expansion is more similar in scope to the Ontario Line than GO Expansion, which was noticeably pushed at the expense of other projects. Now, is it necessary? Yes. Is it worth prioritizing ahead of others? Likely yes too. BUT—we cannot confuse rapid political action for excess work capacity. Metrolinx’s is at the limit, and all other active projects are affected directly (GO Exp, funded projs) or indirectly (the LRTs, SSE, YNSE) from having time and energy diverted to something of this size.

The under-discussed consequence of trying to force things through is that we’ll pay significantly more to get contractors to A) take our work instead of something else’s’, and/or; B) find the additional labour needed to actually do that. And they don’t play fair on pricing, as we all know.

The Milton Line’s time will come. Perhaps planning work can start if it hasn’t already. But shovels will need to wait a while

 

[crs1026]

Wouldn't upgrading Milton cost much less than subway? The only downside is that Milton doesn't quite reach MCC.

I don't profess any specific knowledge, but I would speculate that Milton and a subway ate both an order of magnitude beyond surface LRT or BRT, so the business case would be similar.

And extending Line 2 is not really fit for purpose to serve Mississauga. I'm not sure street-running LRT is warranted in much of Mississauga, either. It doesn't serve a rapid transit function to cover large distances quickly. Having Lakeshore and Milton (and eventually Line 5 extension along the transitway) as backbones with BRT feeding it seems like a good start. I can't see $1B/km subway barely making it to MCC being the best use of funds to serve Mississauga as a whole.

I have trouble figuring how any of the station pairs along the Milton line west of Kipling serve a useful role in a Mississauga centric transit network.....without an investment in feeder lines. LRT with sensible stop spacing and traffic signal priority might be fast enough.

The idea of diverting the line to MCC is interesting..... but hey, that's building a subway, and not the best subway we can build. If the Ontario Line spec actually works, perhaps it would suit a Mississauga subway, and be cheaper than a buried GO tunnel.

To my mind, trying to use the GO line for two functions, ie heavy rail/limited stop to reach Kipling and Union, as well as more intensive transit within the city, will do neither well.

We are all frustrated with what could have been done better and sooner, and how money flows to plainly dumb ideas instead of good ones. Milton belongs on the list, but it might have had to wait all the same.

- Paul

 

[sixrings]

I don't profess any specific knowledge, but I would speculate that Milton and a subway ate both an order of magnitude beyond surface LRT or BRT, so the business case would be similar.

I have trouble figuring how any of the station pairs along the Milton line west of Kipling serve a useful role in a Mississauga centric transit network.....without an investment in feeder lines. LRT with sensible stop spacing and traffic signal priority might be fast enough.

The idea of diverting the line to MCC is interesting..... but hey, that's building a subway, and not the best subway we can build. If the Ontario Line spec actually works, perhaps it would suit a Mississauga subway, and be cheaper than a buried GO tunnel.

To my mind, trying to use the GO line for two functions, ie heavy rail/limited stop to reach Kipling and Union, as well as more intensive transit within the city, will do neither well.

We are all frustrated with what could have been done better and sooner, and how money flows to plainly dumb ideas instead of good ones. Milton belongs on the list, but it might have had to wait all the same.

- Paul

well I’m not the biggest fan of the term “business case.” The business case should have recognized that the Vaughan extension should have been above ground. The Eglinton west at surface. The Rt conversion an LRT and the Ontario line a full blown subway. But depending who’s in charge these “business case” magically change to whatever political agenda gets the most votes. Suddenly the Milton line is where we draw the line in the sand and say no more. We aren’t wasting another dime.

When Sheppard announces their next multibillion dollar extension that will cost about the same as whatever is needed out here I don’t know how people exp cut Mississauga to be patient and understand the business case about it.

 

[ARG1]

I don't profess any specific knowledge, but I would speculate that Milton and a subway ate both an order of magnitude beyond surface LRT or BRT, so the business case would be similar.

well I’m not the biggest fan of the term “business case.” The business case should have recognized that the Vaughan extension should have been above ground. The Eglinton west at surface. The Rt conversion an LRT and the Ontario line a full blown subway. But depending who’s in charge these “business case” magically change to whatever political agenda gets the most votes. Suddenly the Milton line is where we draw the line in the sand and say no more. We aren’t wasting another dime.

When Sheppard announces their next multibillion dollar extension that will cost about the same as whatever is needed out here I don’t know how people exp cut Mississauga to be patient and understand the business case about it.

The business case is really only there to tell the public and the people in charge whether the project and its studied alignments make sense to be built in terms of economic and social benefits given its expenses - along the lines of a given set of alignments and constraints. It doesn't exist to propose engineering decisions to cut costs, unless those options were initially provided. So, unless the business case was studied with a surface alignment for the TYSSE, it wasn't going to propose a surface alignment option (which iirc the reason why the TYSSE was as deep as it was was because York University endlessly moaned about Vibrations in the lecture halls).

 

[sixrings]

The business case is really only there to tell the public and the people in charge whether the project and its studied alignments make sense to be built in terms of economic and social benefits given its expenses - along the lines of a given set of alignments and constraints.

well it didn’t make sense to build Vaughan above ground or Eglinton west underground and it didn’t make sense not to convert the Rt to lrt and to not build the Ontario line using actual subways.

 

[nfitz]

well it didn’t make sense to build Vaughan above ground or Eglinton west underground and it didn’t make sense not to convert the Rt to lrt and to not build the Ontario line using actual subways.

The central section of the Ontario line downtown as subway may have made sense, but don't forget the plans for it are epic, from Burlington to Oshawa - and all that makes more sense overground.