News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.6K     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
 5.4K     0 

Allandale25 said:
Recent article here with the agency's view of itself and how things are going.
Click to expand...
It has come to my attention of a potential situation that may affect Northlander. (Thanks, michael_can) Ouch.

One of the many DRL options is that TTC wants to possibly interline DRL with Richmond Hill.

Northlander need to work with TTC and GO to create a Grand Richmond Hill Interchange terminal as the potential terminus of Yonge Extension, Relief Line North (both of which meets each other at Richmond Hill GO Station). So, big interchange station opportunity for Richmond Hill:
-- North terminus of Yonge Extension Subway
-- North terminus of Relief Line North Subway (DRL trains use RH GO route north of Caledonia)
-- South terminus of a future new combined Northlander/RHGO diesel service

This could be one big win if Northlander extends southwards to connect to this major interchange station. Imagine Northlander (or some future variant merged Richmond Hill GO + Northander unified train) serving two different subway routes in our lifetimes? Understandably many may wish for a one-seat ride all the way to Union again, but a lot of people double-back on TTC anyway. But lemons to lemonade, many will save on transfers by transferring at a major Union Station North at Richmond Hill instead?

It may be a long time before it happens, but the talk, has to be talked now, in a masterplanning perspective. Today's Northlander trains and today's diesel GO trains will both wear out.

So what if a brand new diesel train could continue onwards further north, merging Richmond Hill GO route with Northlander route, but terminating in Richmond Hill as south terminus -- because two subways will be meeting there?

TTC+GO are now genuinely discussing the concept of Relief Line North becoming the same as Richmond Hill RER. So this changes things, and we all want improved Northlander (me too), could this be a solution?
 
Last edited:
mdrejhon said:
It has come to my attention of a potential situation that may affect Northlander. (Thanks, michael_can) Ouch.

One of the many DRL options is that TTC wants to possibly interline DRL with Richmond Hill.

Northlander need to work with TTC and GO to create a Grand Richmond Hill Interchange terminal as the potential terminus of Yonge Extension, Relief Line North (both of which meets each other at Richmond Hill GO Station). So, big interchange station opportunity for Richmond Hill:
-- North terminus of Yonge Extension Subway
-- North terminus of Relief Line North Subway (DRL trains use RH GO route north of Caledonia)
-- South terminus of a future new combined Northlander/RHGO diesel service

This could be one big win if Northlander extends southwards to connect to this major interchange station. Imagine Northlander (or some future variant merged Richmond Hill GO + Northander unified train) serving two different subway routes in our lifetimes? Understandably many may wish for a one-seat ride all the way to Union again, but a lot of people double-back on TTC anyway. But lemons to lemonade, many will save on transfers by transferring at a major Union Station North at Richmond Hill instead?

It may be a long time before it happens, but the talk, has to be talked now, in a masterplanning perspective. Today's Northlander trains and today's diesel GO trains will both wear out.

So what if a brand new diesel train could continue onwards further north, merging Richmond Hill GO route with Northlander route, but terminating in Richmond Hill as south terminus -- because two subways will be meeting there?

TTC+GO are now genuinely discussing the concept of Relief Line North becoming the same as Richmond Hill RER. So this changes things, and we all want improved Northlander (me too), could this be a solution?
Click to expand...

So, let's say someone's final destination is not Toronto, but, say, Windsor. How do you propose they catch their Via train?
 
Just transfer.

People transfer anyway at Union station after you arrive at Toronto Union.
Most peoples' destinations aren't within 1 block of Union station.

Here's my concept for a Richmond Hill interchange station (25-year masterplanning).

Interchange Station 2041 Concept
- Yonge North Extension
- TTC Relief Line merged with Richmond Hill GO RER (they're actually considering it)
- Diesel service north of Richmond Hill

Will reduce grand total number of transfers for Northlander passengers.

View attachment 141154

- Fewer transfers!
- No stations lost!
 
mdrejhon said:
Just transfer.

People transfer anyway at Union station after you arrive at Toronto Union.
Most peoples' destinations aren't within 1 block of Union station.

Here's my concept for a Richmond Hill interchange station (25-year masterplanning).

Interchange Station 2041 Concept
- Yonge North Extension
- TTC Relief Line merged with Richmond Hill GO RER (they're actually considering it)
- Diesel service north of Richmond Hill

Will reduce grand total number of transfers for Northlander passengers.

View attachment 141154

- Fewer transfers!
- No stations lost!
Click to expand...

With all of your luggage? Not reasonable or realistic. Great for Toronto, bad for the rest of the province.

It would be like if they built the Pickering Airport and moved all international flights to there, but kept all national flights in Pearson.

Except for Torontoians, that would be a horrible solution.

The same can be said about your thought on RH.
 
micheal_can said:
With all of your luggage? Not reasonable or realistic.
Click to expand...
But, genuinely, I want to undestand why it would increase luggage lugging?

People on the route long time ago, still had to still lug the luggage onto the TTC or to the taxis (and from the taxis). Visiting family along the Bloor line. That still required a bunch of transfers.

The total amount of lugging would not necessarily change for most passengers.

It's as if you're picturing a Station Mahal -- it's not. The size of the interchange would be roughly comparable to the larger transit interchange stations, not a grand station.
So shorter walk between two transit services, than from the platform-to-TTC at the large Toronto Union station.

I asked a former Northlander passenger and he thinks it is a good idea but only if the walk is very short (much shorter than at the big Union station, with the pain to TTC and/or taxistands).

Understandably the trust in goverment is low. I agree there's a lot of problem there. But let's set politics aside for a moment, it's not a rural vs urban issue, it's a convenience-for-all-of-Ontario issue, so, let's look at the whole picture.
 
mdrejhon said:
But, genuinely, I want to undestand why it would increase luggage lugging?

People on the route long time ago, still had to still lug the luggage onto the TTC or to the taxis (and from the taxis). Visiting family along the Bloor line. That still required a bunch of transfers.

The total amount of lugging would not necessarily change for most passengers.

It's as if you're picturing a Station Mahal -- it's not. The size of the interchange would be roughly comparable to the larger transit interchange stations, not a grand station.
So shorter walk between two transit services, than from the platform-to-TTC at the large Toronto Union station.

I asked a former Northlander passenger and he thinks it is a good idea but only if the walk is very short (much shorter than at the big Union station, with the pain to TTC and/or taxistands).

Understandably the trust in goverment is low. I agree there's a lot of problem there. But let's set politics aside for a moment, it's not a rural vs urban issue, it's a convenience-for-all-of-Ontario issue, so, let's look at the whole picture.
Click to expand...

That assumes that your final destination is in Toronto area.
 
micheal_can said:
That assumes that your final destination is in Toronto area.
Click to expand...
And that's what Northlander passengers want. Access to more of Ontario.

You want Northlander to go all the way to downtown Union station. Correct?
But Union station is Toronto. Correct?

Example One:

So if you want to go to Bloor Line from Northlander
1. You catch the old Northlander train to Toronto Union Station
2. You transfer to Yonge subway
3. You transfer to Bloor subway
Correct?

But with the Richmond Hill interchange station option (assuming it's compact station with easy transfer)
1. You catch the new Northlander train to Richmond Hill
2. You catch either Yonge subway or Relief Line subway
3. You transfer to Bloor subway

Same number of transfers, but much faster because you don't double-back northwards.
- And the transfer becomes faster at the smaller Richmond Hill interchange station instead of the big downtown Union station

Example Two:

Now, if you needed to visit family in Mississauga, that's an expensive taxi ride!
1. You catch the old Northlander train to Toronto Union Station
2. You catch an expensive taxi ride (big walk from platform to taxi)

But with the Richmond Hill interchange station option
1. You simply get off at Richmond Hill interchange station and catch the 407 GO Bus straight to Square One.
Big time saver, you get there quicker.

Example Three:

Now, if you needed to visit Scarborough
1. You catch the old Northlander
2. You transferred to Yonge subway -> Bloor Subway / Scarborough RT
3. Or you had to catch an expensive taxi that takes longer to get to Scarborough

With the new Richmond Hill interchange station option
1. You catch the new Northlander
2. You catch a taxi that gets to Scarborough faster from Richmond Hill than from Toronto Union
You get there quicker

Example Four:

If you needed to go to Pearson Airport in the olden days from Northlander route
1. You catch the old Northlander to Union station
2. You caught a taxi from Union or took the shuttle bus

With the new Richmond Hill interchange station option
1. You catch the new Northlander to Richmond Hill
2. You catch a taxi there. It goes faster to airport than from downtown
You get there quicker
(Or you jump on the 407-to-Airport GoBus (if saving money))
You get there cheaper and equally as fast

Many examples
Less lugging luggage, less time travelling
Etc, etc.
 
Example 5

You need to catch a Via or Go train to get to your final destination.

Currently, you would take a train into Union. You would get off and go down, then go back up to the platform.

With this new plan, you get off at RH, carry your luggage onto a subway and take up lots of room. You then ride to Union station as the subway gets fuller, and fuller. You get off at Union, and then walk through the entire station to get to your platform.

Which would you rather do?
 
mdrejhon said:
It has come to my attention of a potential situation that may affect Northlander. (Thanks, michael_can) Ouch.

One of the many DRL options is that TTC wants to possibly interline DRL with Richmond Hill.

Northlander need to work with TTC and GO to create a Grand Richmond Hill Interchange terminal as the potential terminus of Yonge Extension, Relief Line North (both of which meets each other at Richmond Hill GO Station). So, big interchange station opportunity for Richmond Hill:
-- North terminus of Yonge Extension Subway
-- North terminus of Relief Line North Subway (DRL trains use RH GO route north of Caledonia)
-- South terminus of a future new combined Northlander/RHGO diesel service

This could be one big win if Northlander extends southwards to connect to this major interchange station. Imagine Northlander (or some future variant merged Richmond Hill GO + Northander unified train) serving two different subway routes in our lifetimes? Understandably many may wish for a one-seat ride all the way to Union again, but a lot of people double-back on TTC anyway. But lemons to lemonade, many will save on transfers by transferring at a major Union Station North at Richmond Hill instead?

It may be a long time before it happens, but the talk, has to be talked now, in a masterplanning perspective. Today's Northlander trains and today's diesel GO trains will both wear out.

So what if a brand new diesel train could continue onwards further north, merging Richmond Hill GO route with Northlander route, but terminating in Richmond Hill as south terminus -- because two subways will be meeting there?

TTC+GO are now genuinely discussing the concept of Relief Line North becoming the same as Richmond Hill RER. So this changes things, and we all want improved Northlander (me too), could this be a solution?
Click to expand...

I dont understand the issue is here.

Just because TTC and GO make the relief line a replacement for the Richmond Hill GO does not mean that the tracks for the Richmond Hill GO aka the Don Valley CN tracks now owned by Metrolinx suddenly vanish in a puff of smoke.

It would actually mean they would be more available for the Ontario Northlander and the VIA Canadian.

The DRL would never use the corridor of the existing Richmond Hill GO line south of Oriel GO station. They are deeply winded in the valley, inaccessible for any stations along that stretch, and go through a known flood plain.

If anything they would be tunneled or use the bought CP Don Branch, which is currently unused.
 
@mdrejhon Ripping out a heavy rail alignment (used by VIA, GO and GO services diverted around other disruptions) is as mad as a box of frogs - you don't get more of those in the 21st century (you only need to look at what happened to the Leaside Spur and the extreme unlikelihood that will be reversed), and that's aside from the extreme unlikelihood of CN going along with a subway being plopped into its ROW north of Doncaster Diamond.
 
Another example of how Ford is realizing that appeasing voters in different parts of the province isn`t as easy as appeasing them in one small section of a city. With his seemingly endless proclamation of the projects he won`t be cancelling he has set up a precedent and now will not be able to refuse other local Conservative MPs their pet transit project. All this at the same time as he promises to balance the books. Despite how I can't stand the guy, I have always thought this fear of Ford cancelling transit projects was just hysteria as is now being proven.
 
Has anyone offered a validated price tag for restoring this service?

I can't see Ford getting past the sticker shock.

- Paul
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top