Note: At 4:35, I mention that CN's dedicated line in York Region (York and Halton subdivisions, to be exact) is used exclusively by freight trains. That's not entirely true... Technically, all westbound VIA Rail "Canadian" trains from Toronto to Vancouver use a small section of this line. Also, once in a while, if there's some kind of maintenance on the tracks owned by GO Transit/Metrolinx, VIA Rail trains will continue operating but on detour through part of this line.
can confirm took the via train to Oshawa when the Lakeshore East line was shutdown for maintenance it was crazy slow and had to wait a lot for freight traffic on the York line interestingly it reversed at the grade junction of the Richmond Hill line to connect to the York line and vice versa to use the RH line to get back to union
A very interesting proposal. Couple things I want to share though: The milton line is getting new, passenger only parallel tracks! Few months back the province announced the milton line will see new tracks to allow all day 2-way service which is super exciting. The mid town corridor is also super wide and can easily carry 4 tracks (it originally did have 4+). The only industry still connected to this line is the TTC hillcrest yard on the north side, seeing as we are now getting parallel tracks on the milton line, I think it is very possible that CP may allow Metrolinx to build parallel tracks for a midtown line in the future. Given that re routing CP freight trains would change up how they have to run trains in and out of their yard, I think they would fight that pretty hard but, if the gov plays their cards right, they may be able to use that to get CP to "compromise" and let them run parallel tracks through mid town instead. Regardless of how it gets done, if it allows us to get midtown passenger service, that's a win in my books. All that said, I do like the idea of better connecting the lines to build a ring line. Bolton line would also be nice- has some serious potential to reduce crowding on the 35 Jane bus by offering a really fast and high capacity alternative. Given how much money we are already pouring into transit expansion in Ontario, I find it unlikely we will see any midtown line announcements anytime soon due to funding availability but seeing as Metrolinx is very good at future proofing projects and plans, I think its very likely the new tracks on the milton line will be designed to accommodate a future midtown line connection.
Adding dedicated tracks to the Milton line is definitely a more realistic and simple option... If increasing service on the Milton Line is the only priority, then adding dedicated tracks is a better approach that I'd strongly support. Unfortunately, these plans to expand the Milton Line are deliberately left out of the official GO Expansion plans (on their website), because there doesn't seem to be a "full" commitment yet. It also doesn't help that the funding from all levels of government has not been sorted out yet. For example, the federal government has not yet committed to funding for the Milton Line, even though they have brought up the topic in the past few years. I believe this Milton Line expansion proposal spearheaded by the provincial government is mostly for scoring more political points in time for the 2026 election. It's not the first time something like this has happened; the proposal for high-speed rail in Southwestern Ontario was another good example of this.
"The milton line is getting new, passenger only parallel tracks! Few months back the province announced the milton line will see new tracks to allow all day 2-way service which is super exciting." Sadly no such announcement was made The Premier made a vague unfunded comment to get votes in the byelection There are no plans or funding to make the Milton line 4 tracks, it would be extremely expensive Better to fund the Missing Link and help both the Kitchener and Milton lines at the same time.
It will include dining cars as well I Hope (Given the example of the westcoast express line which has a Coffee Stand in one of the coaches designating it as a dining car)
I feel like most people already know and agree on what GO Transit needs. For anyone that doesn’t, it’s three things: 1) All-day train service in both directions on all lines. You can cut busses out of this system entirely since they get stuck in road traffic just like everybody else or better yet, have busses service local neighborhood routes that allow people to travel to the train station without having to drive. Some can even serve as full length transfers from one train line to another. Speaking of which… 2) Line transfer options beyond just Union Station. Lay down new tracks and/or use busses to fill gaps depending on location. There is clearly a percentage of the Ontario population who would love to use GO Transit for intercity travel but some trips just aren’t practical without a transfer point outside of downtown, Toronto. Speaking of tracks… 3) Dedicated tracks across the network. The whole point of passenger rail is to avoid intersecting with other vehicles. Freight trains are not part of the deal.
I'm really hoping that they stick to these basics as they roll out the GO Expansion plans... I think there's much room for improvement in their expansion plans.
It's a fairly good plan, however it requires the governments to convince CN and CPKC to play ball and cooperate with each other. That alone makes this very difficult. Also, if the whole point is to put all the freight on the York sub, the York Line part near the end doesn't make sense unless the intention is to expand the number of tracks. Also, if I may offer a media production tip: narration should be mixed louder than the music. I found it hard to hear what you were saying sometimes. Overall good video though! This would be pretty good for all involved, if they can be convinced to make the investment.
The Missing Link would be welcomed by both freight operators, it would benefit them both and would be provided at no cost to them. The only problem is getting the big amount of government funding necessary.
@@mattjones366I disagree. CN would not want all of CPKC’s trains clogging up their York Sub and CPKC wouldn’t want to rely on CN playing ball and giving their trains any reasonable amount of priority.
@@roger1818 It would probably rely on both having their own dedicated tracks. But I would point out they both cooperate with no problems going through the Rockies and for many decades with CP having running rights across what we now call the Lakeshore West corridor.
@@mattjones366 the missing link would definitely not be liked by CPKC or CN, CPKC would not want to give up the Galt, North Toronto, and Belleville subs to run on the York/Halton and CN would not want to let CPKC use the York and Halton Sub. CPR Toronto yard is also not set up for the missing link at all and would require CPKC to either rebuild the entire yard or force trains to make inconvenient movements
@@devvydoesstuff Not so sure. At this point the Galt/North Toronto are essentially run through tracks with little to no customers. Getting that track and its expensive Toronto property taxes off the books would be welcomed. Potentially also helps with fuel economy as certainly the Galt sub climbs a significant amount which potentially could be avoided by staying north. As for CN there are also benefits from avoiding having to cross over 2 sets of tracks to get from the North to South (or vice versa). Not saying there won't be issues, but the benefits for both likely outweigh any negatives. Its also the only way to get increased / all day service on the Milton corridor and solving the Brampton/Georgetown issue which potentially (eventually) means the various levels of government will step up with the necessary money.
The York line would be a godsend. I used to frequently make trips between Hamilton and Newmarket. The York line would’ve made that a much nicer experience
Great video! I know you are more focused on TO, and maybe have less knowledge on other cities, but I would love a similar video explaining how to improve Montreal's EXO lines!
I would love to see a new Go line that runs from Port Credit up to Kipling and along the Toronto North corridor all the way to UoT Scarborourgh and then down to Pickering. Most of the track already exists, as do some of the stations, and it would fix so many connection issues we have in Toronto. Ideally this route wouldn't use the full double decked Go trains used on the other existing routes, but rather would use new trains similar to the Montreal RER system which consist of 2-4 self-propelled electric train cars
Great vid. A midtown line would be amazing. I desperately want to see a Hamilton-Kitchener GO line at some point in my lifetime but that doesn't seem to be anywhere on their list of priorities.
There is only one active line that would connect Hamilton to the lines further north, but it is extremely slow and curvy. Building a new line through the Niagara Escarpment (this area) would likely be prohibitively expensive.
@@TransitTalksClub Could they extend the line that goes from Hamilton west to Lynden? Maybe go north from there until they meet up with the kitchener line? That way they don't need to build any new lines through the escarpment. I guess a direct from hamilton to kitchener might not make sense to finance, at least not yet. Would be an easier sell if it could tie in cambridge or brantford or something, but then we're getting into the territory of super slow/inefficient and complicated to build, probably
I think more northerly terminals would be very useful. GO trains only make sense if you work within walking distance of Union Station. And that was fine for a while, but TO is much bigger now, and there are business hubs in Markham, Vaughn and Richmond Hill. These are modestly serviced by bus hubs, but subject to traffic and weather, making them useless
Northern terminals would cause reverse branching, which is extremely bad. Better to have the midtown line and build good transfers from the other lines to it
This sounds excellent, except that we can't run or fly before we can even walk. At the financial rate of progress that we have, it'll take 30 years to get full electrification with 15 min intervals to Hamilton, Bramalea, Aurora, Unionville, and Oshawa. If been watching the double tracking/platforming of the Scarborough junction to Unionville part of the Stouffville line for 3 years. It's still not finished, and it's technically child's play easy to do. If it was fully financed, it could have been finished in less than 2 years. A little bit here, a little bit there, and eventually the whole quilt will be one bedsheet so to speak; but we only have bits and pieces so far, even though I've seen excellent bits done, like the Davenport Flyover. The Lakeshore East and West will have to be mostly quadruple tracked; they are only triple tracked currently. Let's walk before we can fly. Aarre Peltomaa of Mississauga, Ontario
People who need to travel from Durham region need a more northerly east-west rail corridor, perhaps to the northern part of Toronto with connections to the subway.
I love the idea of the Richmond Hill line trains bypassing the future possible Midtown line instead of using that slow winding track around the Don Valley Parkway and Toronto conservation area to improve their service frequencies
One error. There are movement conflicts between Burlington and Hamilton. The conflict isn't necessarily obvious but occurs because the reversal from west to east flips what is north/south. So both Hamilton Centre (to the old TH&B station) and the newer West Harbour stations require the GO Trains to cross over the CN freight line.
Thanks for pointing that out... I wish I could go into more detail but I had to keep the video short. I was mainly thinking of freight trains to/from the Dundas Subdivision (to London, Chicago, etc.). Also, most Lakeshore West trains terminate at Aldershot and Oakville. The few trains that go to/from West Harbour, Hamilton GO Centre, or Niagara Falls may in fact have conflicts, as you mentioned. I believe service west of Aldershot is limited for that reason.
Nothing a couple flyovers couldn't fix. And if Go is electrified into Hamilton, you could use steeper grades for said flyovers. Hamilton Centre trains also have to cross / compete with the CP line running up through Aldershot to Waterdown. Not sure why Metrolinx did add space for two extra tracks at the CN King Rd overpass in Burlington.
At 07:13, you have a graph showing rankings of railroads. This is in the USA. Since the 1980s, CP has been disivensting in Canada and investing in USA, and every time they bought a US railroad, they have been forced to agree to concession to allow passenger trains. Canada has rubber stamped these mergers without any requirement for concessions. The USA also has offcial rules requiring freight railroads to give passenger trains priority, though this is a rule o paper only as the rules have enough loopholes to still let freight have priority (too long to fit siding for instance),
I wish I could use a Canadian report card if one were available (I know on-time performance is actually measured by VIA Rail, but the report card is more dramatic), but proving your point about the Canadian government's lack of effort in advocating for concessions, VIA Rail and the federal government don't care enough to create such a report card. Also, there are only 2 major freight companies but Metrolinx frequently prioritizes GO trains and delays VIA Rail trains as well yet I don't see them getting blamed as much as they should be. What is true, however, is that CP is more resistant than CN to passenger trains. Both the Milton line (east of Erindale) and Kitchener line (between Georgetown and Bramalea) have a mix of 2- and 3-track sections, but have drastically different levels of service. While Canada doesn't have a passenger train priority law, there is a section in the Canadian Transportation Act allowing the Canadian Transportation Agency to decide on passenger train service level disputes. As far as I know, I doubt this has ever been exercised: 152.1 (1) Whenever a public passenger service provider and a railway company are unable to agree in respect of any matter raised in the context of the negotiation of any agreement concerning the use of the railway company’s railway, land, equipment, facilities or services by the public passenger service provider or concerning the conditions, or the amount to be paid, for that use, the public passenger service provider may, after reasonable efforts to resolve the matter have been made, apply to the Agency to decide the matter.
@@TransitTalksClub "CP being resistent to passenger trains" is an understatement. The last big VIA cuts of late 1989 involved widthdawing services from CP's tracks, with 2 exceptions, the Sudbury-White-Rover (formerly served by now cancelled The Canadian) and the Victoria-Nanaimo-Courtenay (which was required by the Constitution). CN was still a crown corporation at the time. CP Rail was going to kill the Montréal-Rogaud line in 1980, but a group of citize s (including me) got involved and got politicians to get on board. The then PQ transport minister Michel Clerc was gung-ho about it and forced the CTCUM (now STM) to contracts with CP to run the trains. (this was later moved to its own org AMT, later renamed to EXO). CP Rail moved to Calgary and split its remaining Québec tracks into separate company with a goal of letting it go bankrupt (easier than formally amabdonning it) and Chemin de Fed Canadien Pacific Québec ended up becoming more agressive to survive and allows commuter trains to Delson on south shore as well as St-Jérome to increase their revenues (and that line passes over CP's the line that goes to the port, CP's last big customer in Québec). With change of management at Calgary, CP changed its mind and re-integrated the québec company. But what had been acquired during those years remains. CP has very few tracks left in Québec.
@@TransitTalksClub While not truly applicable to commuter service, one reason Amtrak can afford to pay long distance train guests for hotel rooms etc when a train is late is that the operating railroads pay hefty penalties when a long distance train is late due to freight traffic. EXO in Montréal owned the tracks to Deux Montagnes, but it took time to get its newer rail cars (multi level) approved for use in Tunnel to increase frequencies, and just as this got approved, the REM pulled the rug from under them and demolished the service. EXO owns the track from Dorion to Rigaud (M&O sub from when CP was a trans continental railway). (But Hudosn-Rigaud abandonned by EXO). These were the transcontinental tracks. And it owns/rebuilt the tracks from Ste Thérèse to St-Jérome. Other than that, fully dependent on CP and CN. Metrolinx is pretty lucky to own a huge chunk of its network.
@@jfmezei Metrostinx is pretty lucky to own a huge chunk of its network alright, at full cost to the Onscario taxpayers. They bought existing right-of-ways and in-service tracks, because (mostly CN) was losing customers on a weekly basis, and was considering closing tracks in those areas. In my personal opinion, it was a good move to buy up these corridors and take control, although CN still has a few freight customers to serve, and they try to do as much of it as possible overnight so as not to disrupt passenger operations. What does burn my butt though, was the creation of Metrolinx out of thin air. Now we have another un-needed layer of bureacracy, and outrageous salaries and bonuses to pay out. My personal opinion was that things were fine when the whole thing was simply GO Transit.
My only question for that is how would they build the tracks there, there is many roads and interchanges along that corridor and building tunnels would be very expensive, I know you could make it as a dug out and have the interchange roads and usual roads as bridges but if your going to do a dug out strategy then your playing soccer with the electrical towers to build around them.
@@fuzzylion1172 The 407 hydro corridor was planned for the rail line to be added in the future. The simply answer your missing is adding bridges to the roads - they are already using bridges to get over the 407 so another set of bridges would be easy and cheaper than tunneling the rail lines.
The CPR needs to access their industrial customers along the main mid-town line. They also have their yards, such as Leaside Junction. I'm not sure how much industry is serviced around there now. Leaside used to be a industrial powerhouse with Canada Wire and Cable, Aluminum smelting, scrap metal, aggregates and asphalt, furniture, etc, and what I knew was pale in comparison to earlier times as there were many spurs leading to empty lots and buried under asphalt. Most of that's gone now, I think. I was five minutes by bicycle from Leaside Station (born '63). Me and a friend would hang out all the time after school in the mid seventies; checking out the station and trains, and watching trucks service the various industries.
They would simply move to serving the industries overnight or on weekends as is done on other lines in the GTA now owned by Metrolinx (and done in parts of the US).
Go look at the customers on the midtown line. From the junction with Kitchener all the way to the CP yard in the east, there's one customer, and it's the TTC. Surely GO and the TTC can work out a deal if it brings transit expansion
@@thespanishinquisiton8306 One customer, aye? THAT is depressing and speaks of how Toronto lost it's industrial base . This country has become more or less a warehouse spur for imported goods. When I was fifteen, Canadian Tire sold Canadian made tires and Canadian products (with a smattering of American) Many of those products were made in Toronto.
A lot of the industries have moved to the suburbs, for various reasons. Land within the City of Toronto is much more scarce and valuable, so companies can instantly get richer just by moving further away from Toronto.
CN & CP will never share the same tracks in the GTA. Construct the 407 freight bypass for CN trains in order to open up the Kitchener line. Construct a 413 freight bypass for CPKC trains in order to open up the Milton line. The proposed path of the 413 highway heads directly towards CPKC's intermodal terminal in Vaughan next to highway 50. Negotiate with CPKC to construct a railroad that runs parallel with the 413 highway. The 413 highway hasn't been constructed yet. Why not work with CPKC to construct both at the same time? It wouldn't open up the Midtown line, because CPKC trains would still use MacTier. But it frees up tracks exclusive for GO trains from Lisgar to Bloor. Also allow CPKC to construct a switch yard north of Brampton to compensate for losing access to the Lambton yard. CN will NEVER allow CP trains on the York region line, because it goes right pass CN's Brampton intermodal terminal and MacYard. If a CP train were to break down in front of either yard it would impact CN's business. They won't allow it. That's why proposing both freight companies to share the same track isn't even up for discussion. It's a non-starter in their eyes. CN often parks trains on the York region line when they're constructing trains out of their Brampton Yard. It would be very difficult to run passenger trains on this line without impacting CN's business. Also remember that the whole point of CN construct the York region, east-west bypass, and Mac Yard in Vaughan, back in the 1960's, was to allow passenger trains to use the Lakeshore line, which CN used to own.
Highway 413's construction should definitely be used as an opportunity to potentially add a new rail line alongside the highway. I agree that the freight companies will not want to share tracks if it results in congestion, so tracks would need to be added (as I've mentioned in the video)... they would only agree if their own existing capacities are maintained or improved. I think in many of the problematic areas you've mentioned, additional tracks resolve any capacity related issues. If they insist on being separate, then it's best to think of the additional 2 tracks added to the York subdivision as being dedicated to CP trains only. That being said, CN and CP already share tracks with each other in cases where it benefits both of them. In parts of BC and Northern Ontario, they have designated each of their single track lines for one direction or the other (e.g. CP track for all NB trains, CN track for all SB trains). Also, if the same tracks are shared, a special company jointly owned by both companies may be used (e.g. The Union Station Rail Corridor was owned by Toronto Terminals Railway, jointly owned by CN and CP; Conrail in the US, shared between CSX and NS).
@@TransitTalksClub The parts in B.C. where CP & CN share tracks is the exception. Because it would be enormously expensive to blow a tunnel through the rocky mountains. So both CP & CN made a "special" track sharing agreement within B.C.. Otherwise they don't want to share tracks.
@@drewpatterson8261 But CN would also be getting their freight trains off of the segment through downtown Brampton and the hassles that are involved with that. So there is room for compromise to create something that works for everyone.
Interesting proposal. Your audio mix could use a bit of tweaking; make sure your voice goes through a compressor to normalize the level, then put a sidechain duck on the music so your voice causes it to lower whenever you talk. Also, I'd recommend music that's a bit "smoother" with less staccato notes since they tend to punch through the mix.
The CP corridor would also offer superior access to Whitby, Oshawa, and Bowmanville. The line passes right through the centre of these municipalities. The current GO stations for these municipalities are isolated from their customers as they are no where near the downtowns. Whitby and Oshawa GO stations, like many GO stations, are on the wrong side of 401 forcing people to drive to and from the stations. Having station where people actually live would make them much more useful.
The major issues are: 1) not lack of ideas but lack of concrete plan and actions to realize the potential. 2) the path is radial as opposed to close loop, circular, offering multiple ways to get to a destination. 3) at the end of each go station, there is no connecting transportation e.g. buses. We need a well planed out and execute. Have a look at the system in Japan, HK, Singapore or China and you will know what I mean.
GO Transit definitely has a lot of room for improvement... Many of the stations outside of the City of Toronto have reasonable connecting bus services right at the station... but in the City of Toronto, where it matters the most, the TTC and GO Transit see each other as competitors and don't do much to improve connectivity between them. It's a shame.
Things I would love: 1. Some sort of train from Hamilton/Burlington to the Tri city Area. 2. A connection from Lakeshore West to Milton or YYZ that’s not Union Station
It would cost may arms and many legs to meet the demands of both CN and CP to alllow your suggestion to cobien both along the existing York/Halton sub, including flyovers so C traffic would not cross CN traffic and this would need to be 4 tracks (don't think CN would accept to retain its single track when it sees potential of governent paying to upgrade to twin tracks). Your missing link is bulliant however. The other concern here is that what is left of CP in eastern canada still has customers that generate that feight and they still need local access to those customer in Toronto and forcing CP to move to CN right of way would move CP away from its existing/remaining customers. Back when CP was a transcontinental railway, a big part of traffic went from Sudbury to Montréal without needing to transit through Toronto. When it abandonned Sudbury-Montréal, it meant that all of its remainig traffic has to go trhough mentopolitan Toronto and its yards there etc. So harder to convince them to give up their current geography m area.
I agree that this is a challenging part... as long as both companies either have the same or better capacity after the changes, and access to/from CP Agincourt Yard is sorted out, they're more likely to agree with the changes. Just like CN customers within GO Transit-owned lines, access to CP customers may still be maintained with limited, local freight trains operated during the night.
just a note that this whole proposal would be more expensive than the crosstown and finch west LRT put together. the midtown line is a good idea, just a few things in the east make things complicated. CPKC has a massive railyard in the malvern district, where the midtown line terminates. having GO trains pass through it and connect to the York Subdivision between Meadowvale and Beare Rd would be a massive disruption to almost everyone in the area. Connecting the York Sub to the GO Sub would be nearly impossible without a fortune and a half. from where the bridge over Hwy 401 connects to the CN Kingston Subdivision, to then connect back to the GO Sub, would require the current Pickering GO Station to be relocated. This idea is great, but you didnt seem to look at how the east end would work. It's possible, for sure, but not necessary.
This proposal would indeed be very expensive... it also calls into question whether other rapid transit lines should be prioritized instead. For example, many areas of the GTA are in desperate need of BRT lines at a fraction of the cost. I generally prefer local transit projects to be prioritized, as I believe a good backbone bus system is needed before expanding rail services. That being said, the potential benefits of at least some of what I've proposed are likely big enough to justify the cost. The east end will definitely be challenging, especially with the CPKC yard in the way. Many of the past Midtown line plans don't even go all the way to Pickering because of the challenges in the east end (terminating somewhere in Scarborough instead).
I haven’t heard this specifically before and it’s really smart! I have long supported the Midtown Line which RM Transit did a great video on a few months back. This could def make it happen, Just a note - the Milton line could only go to Lisgar with frequent service, with the heavy freight traffic it could be worse for people in Milton proper. If the right of way accommodates - building separate GO tracks to Milton could be done. 13:30 and onwards you’re talking about maybe using the 905 link for passenger service as well? Would the right of way accommodate it?
The "achilles heel" or flaw of the Missing Link is the section between Lisgar and Milton. I think maintaining service between Milton and Lisgar is a must, at least for the existing rush hour services. This should definitely be a condition of the Missing Link project. There are two solutions to this (either one or both could be implemented): 1) Add extra tracks between Lisgar and Milton for two-way all-day service to Milton. 2) Without any extra upgrades (existing tracks), interline the York/Kitchener lines and introduce two-way all-day service between Milton and Union Station via Brampton (trip times would be around the same, as the express track can be used for this service).
@@TransitTalksClub Note that the Missing Link is actually planned to start west of Trafalgar Road. Extending extra tracks from that point to Milton GO would be something Metrolinx could achieve.
GO trains on the CN York Corridor would be amazing and an easy way to go east west across GTA suburbs. Would love to see a connection with the Highway 407 Bus Terminal as the tracks are less than 400m away
That's basically a big translation from GO Bus network into Go Train. For example, the Hamilton-Pickering 41 bus could well be into a 407 rail corridor.
Nice video. I'm excited about GO expansion but also disappointed as I feel a lot of the proposed upgrades should have been done yesterday and not well after congestion has gotten this bad. You forgot to mention the ORBY line on the map when talking about abandoned rail lines @1:20. It connects Orangeville, Brampton and Mississauga. I think there was some talk about possibly having trains running on that again or having an LRT in its place. As for the Kitchener line, I think what they're doing is fourth tracking it all the way up to Bramalea. And further up the line proposing an additional track at the downtown station where there's currently a bottleneck, it only being double tracked. Hopefully that would remove all conflict between GO trains and CN freight on the Kitchener line. I do wish the people who originally built these lines had the foresight to double (or more) track these lines. Or at least allot space so that work could be done in the future. Probably a lot more harder, complicated and expensive to do so now when the land is all built up. City planning really is atrocious here. I wonder if I'll ever see high speed rail here in my lifetime.
I certainly could've brought up more abandoned lines like the OBRY line between Brampton and the rest of the Milton Line. This line would be very good for people travelling between downtown Brampton and Mississauga, as well as between northwestern Mississauga/southwestern Brampton and downtown Toronto. Even the Hurontario LRT line won't connect the two Mississauga and Brampton downtowns directly! The Toronto Suburban Railway also used to have a line through Mississauga. For the Kitchener Line... aside from the uncertainty of freight train schedules, not removing freight trains from the entirety of the Kitchener Line greatly reduces capacity for reliable two-way all-day express service and future express/high-speed rail services west of Kitchener (i.e. London). As you said, planning is atrocious and future considerations such as these are considered "too far into the future".
This is tricky because there are still lots of Yards and Customers along the Midtown line and the Freight Railroads generally dont like to Share track so theyd both probably be hostile towards this plan since they dont want to do anything that would hurt their Bottom line
The main problem with cp and cn sharing the York sub, would make CPs agin court yard would be useless unless they connect the York sub with cp Belleville sub
The proposal itself is much more detailed than what I've "briefly" mentioned in the video. Maintaining access to/from the CP Agincourt Yard is one of the biggest challenges that likely contributed to previous proposals being killed. But it's not impossible. For example, a balloon loop could be added west of the yard. Better yet, CP could relocate the yard and make money selling the yard's lands for redevelopment.
Reactivating the Leaside Spur (probably the most contentious proposal in the area) would mean abandoning the existing line, which is also beside many houses. It's not a completely "net zero" change, but it's quite close. The Leaside Spur would allow for electrification of the Richmond Hill Line (no more diesel trains) and could also accommodate a new station on Lawrence/Leslie, increasing property values and the quality of transit in the area. Lower traffic noise and decreased pollution in the area are also advantages that can be pointed out. Some won't be convinced to take transit (inevitably), but some will be. Likewise, some may support the proposal. That being said, NIMBYs are not uncommon and are a reality that has to be accepted. They're entitled to have any opinion they want, after the facts are presented.
@@TransitTalksClub I don’t disagree with you at all but I do know first hand how frustrating it is to get any type of project off the ground in these areas. If only our city was bold enough to say “up yours” to these folks for the greater good of the city and surrounding towns.
I wonder if the area under/around the high-voltage transmission lines could be used as the right-of-way for this new "missing link". That could potentially make the expropriation costs much cheaper!
The midtown line connecting east-west traffic and the upgrade of Milton line to full-day service are desperately needed, so the connector you talked about to link the CP line to the CN northern bypass tracks make sense. However, aside from building the tracks itself, CP and CN will need to figure out how the financial would work out. CP theoretically would need to pay CN to use CN's northern bypass tracks but CP would say they have the tracks (i.e. Midtown tracks) already, so why would they pay to use someone else's tracks. The governments will need to step in to subsidize that day-to-day usage fee possibly to make it happen. In terms of using the northern bypass tracks for passenger service, I think we need to include the Hwy 7 BRT into consideration. Technically, the Hwy 7 BRT is serving that purpose. And since all the new condos are now built along Hwy 7, especially between Markham Road and Jane St., I think upgrading the Hwy 7 line to a full-blown SkyTrain style medium capacity mass transit track on a viaduct would attract more ridership. The Hwy 7 SkyTrain can use the space above the current BRT lanes to build, and the BRT lanes can be retired after the completion of the SkyTrain viaduct.
I've already made two comments that you might find relevant: "I agree that the freight companies will not want to share tracks if it results in congestion, so tracks would need to be added (as I've mentioned in the video)... they would only agree if their own existing capacities are maintained or improved. I think in many of the problematic areas you've mentioned, additional tracks resolve any capacity related issues. If they insist on being separate, then it's best to think of the additional 2 tracks added to the York subdivision as being dedicated to CP trains only. That being said, CN and CP already share tracks with each other in cases where it benefits both of them. In parts of BC and Northern Ontario, they have designated each of their single track lines for one direction or the other (e.g. CP track for all NB trains, CN track for all SB trains). Also, if the same tracks are shared, a special company jointly owned by both companies may be used (e.g. The Union Station Rail Corridor was owned by Toronto Terminals Railway, jointly owned by CN and CP; Conrail in the US, shared between CSX and NS)." "Just because there's an existing BRT or regular bus line doesn't mean trains can't be added. Obviously, for any new line, the benefits need to outweigh the costs when compared to existing services. In many areas, I believe there needs to be a BRT network first, before expanding rail service. Also, some people may (irrationally) prefer to take trains with inferior service, even if they are slower than buses: the extent of this is debatable but bus lines being converted to streetcar lines in North America is a good example of this. There are so many GO bus routes running on the section of Hwy 407 in York Region that a train line with small trainsets could potentially absorb a lot of the demand. And this is not including possible induced demand. Adding rail service means having spare bus capacity to improve bus service in the same area or elsewhere. More trains will often require strengthening the existing bus network, rather than cutting it. This is especially important in suburbs, where stations can't realistically be beside everyone and everything."
This plan would free up more space for passengers and see more service. I often go from Niagara Falls to Newmarket so I'd be taking a train from there to Union and from Union to Newmarket and the problem is that the trains traveling from Niagara falls GO don't run as often compared to trains going to Hamilton.
Avoiding Union Station for a trip like that would cut the travel time by a lot. Between St Catharines and Hamilton, there is a long section of single track, which greatly reduces capacity for passenger trains. CN allows just the 4 trains per day (1 VIA/Amtrak, 3 GO) in each direction.
Even without this missing link, couldn't Canadian National already switch to the Canadian Pacific route south-west of Milton and north of Scarborough? I'm guessing they don't, because they find having their own lines to be more reliable and have no incentive to give up their midtown corridor for GO passengers. It is a good idea to push both freight rail companies into the suburbs, where there is more space to double the lines for a GO passenger service, and for GO to take over the Midtown line, I'm just not sure if this missing link needs to be built to accomplish that?
The Missing Link isn't the only solution... many of the upgrades I proposed are 100% debatable. For example, sharing lines with freight trains might be an acceptable solution in the first place if there was a law in place prioritizing passenger trains under all circumstances. But the status quo is to compromise around the needs of the freight companies.
There's another line that may become important that you didn't mention: the CP Havelock subdivision from the Malvern yard, running northeast. If the East Toronto airport (north of Pickering) is ever built, this line would be able to provide service to it. Beyond, the line snakes its way eventually to Peterborough, which probably isn't worth the investment, but the corridor is there in case.
The Havelock is part of VIA's plans for their own line to allow more frequent VIA service that is slowly progressing. There will not ever be a Pickering airport.
When VIA Rail abandoned all of their regional and commuter trains in southern Ontario, GO Transit was given the opportunity to take over the line via Havelock Subdivision to Peterborough in 1990. They did not. Even before the abandonment of the VIA Rail service around 1990, the service wasn't good as trip times were already quite long (2 hours one-way) due to the tracks having a speed limit of only 40 mph. As you may be aware, there are other rail infrastructure projects that may be more relevant to the Peterborough area...
@@TransitTalksClub As I said, the Peterborough destination is probably not worth it. However, servicing of the airport (should it ever come to be) probably would be.
Could also be an opportunity to serve the rapidly growing and underserved areas of Durham region along the 407 corridor (in addition to the branch in the video going down to Pickering)
Funnily enough I thought about a potential 407 GO Train line a few days ago, with all the GO Buses that use the 407. Your idea for the York Line probably makes more sense as it covers more residential neighbourhoods. I also thought of connecting the 407 line to Pearson and Mississauga City Centre via the 427 and either the Mississauga Transitway or the 403. I suppose you could add another branch of the York Line with something like that.
The possibilities are endless. One of my thoughts was how close the proposed line would be to other transit routes and major destinations: the Missing Link or "407 line" itself doesn't seem to do as good of a job at either. The Kitchener Line goes through downtown Brampton with connections to Brampton Transit bus routes at many stops along the way. The Milton Line (sort of) goes through downtown Mississauga with connections to MiWay bus routes. So those corridors have more potential. Also, each new section of line proposed will likely use different lengths of trains, and over- or under-crowding should be avoided by choosing a route so that the size of the train matches with the demand throughout most/all of the interlined route in question. I can only guess the potential ridership at best, but this is why I've made the York Line as winding as I did.
You're right, the York Line would only connect to two major transit hubs within York Region: Highway 407 and Unionville. However, there seems to be a hydro corridor that diverges off the rail corridor from Dufferin into the 407 between those two terminals, so maybe the York Line could run along that instead and ultimately serve Langstaff/Richmond Hill Centre too, making it a "central station" for all branches. It still covers some neighbourhoods, and residents on Yonge Street would still be able to easily access the line since the Line 1 TTC extension should be long done by the time the York Line opens anyway. Only problems would be the costs of having to build even more rail and possible service duplication with existing YRT Viva routes.
Never taken the GO train to get anywhere. Not Mississauga, not Brampton, not Hamilton, not even to Niagara Falls, which would make for great day trips from the Toronto for locals and for tourists.
The Parkway Belt has conserved a corridor along Hwy 407 which would be suitable but their are problems with ramps at 407 interchanges; the ramps would have to be reconfigured or a number of bridges built.
There’s already many highway 407 GO Buses. Because the tolls on the 407 are so high, these GO buses are generally pretty fast, fairly frequent, and not too busy. Having a rail line on the same route would be entirely redundant.
There are so many GO bus routes running on the section of Hwy 407 in York Region that a train line with small trainsets could potentially absorb a lot of the demand. And this is not including possible induced demand. If the line in York Region is implemented, the existing GO and/or YRT bus routes should service more stops along the way (areas between two stations) frequently to provide a robust network to/from the new stations in York Region.
If you wanted to get from Mississauga to York Region you can take one of the extremely frequent highway 407 buses…. Youre forgetting the fact the GO buses fill in the gaps where the GO train doesn’t run.
Here's one of my previous comments. Hopefully this helps. "GO Transit has a robust bus network that I personally use quite frequently... I feel like it's underrated. GO Transit didn't even bother publishing a map of their extensive bus network until this year, which speaks to how much they're neglected. Just because there's an existing BRT or regular bus line doesn't mean trains can't be added. Obviously, for any new line, the benefits need to outweigh the costs when compared to existing services. In many areas, I believe there needs to be a BRT network first, before expanding rail service. Also, some people may (irrationally) prefer to take trains with inferior service, even if they are slower than buses: the extent of this is debatable but bus lines being converted to streetcar lines in North America is a good example of this. There are so many GO bus routes running on the section of Hwy 407 in York Region that a train line with small trainsets could potentially absorb a lot of the demand. And this is not including possible induced demand. Adding rail service means having spare bus capacity to improve bus service in the same area or elsewhere. More trains will often require strengthening the existing bus network, rather than cutting it. This is especially important in suburbs, where stations can't realistically be beside everyone and everything."
407 ROW?? Stops at evey second or third interchange and at all higher order transit crossings. Could even incorporate the 403 busway through Mississauga to hit Pearson and link up to the main line at 427/407. Start at Aldershot and end at Hwy 115 or better yet, in Peterborough. Add express trains that stop only at major stations and make them 200kph. Possibly run local trains back and forth between major stations? Dougie can take the 10+ billion earmarked for the 413 and use it here!
If transit funding were as much as the highway funding... GTA (and Ontario as a whole) would be a much better place. Traffic, the very thing these highways are trying to fix, would probably be much better off. The other big mistake was selling the 407... for less than the price of the 413, the provincial government could partially/fully subsidize the tolls effective immediately. I know that there are many people who only take the congested 401 just because the 407 is too expensive...
Don't get me started. $3.3B lease so Mikey could balance the budget with his common sense revolution. Did you know that extra $300M extended the lease from 60 to 99 years? Talk about fiscal mismanagement. And now another $1B spent by Dougie to buy out the Beer Store a year early. Sorry for the political rant.
In a perfect world, all the highways here (i.e. 401, 400) are passenger/freight train lines instead lol. I guess something’s better than nothing though.
There's nothing wrong with building strategic, necessary highways between large cities... the problem is building massive (or arguably, any) highways in dense or urban areas. It's hard to justify building 18 lane "parking lots" when superior bus and rail systems can significantly be improved with that amount of money. Most people drive because it's simply the fastest way to get around; when transit becomes as fast or faster than driving, then it becomes the most popular option because it's just better. This is the case for GO Transit, which has been massively successful for suburb to downtown Toronto commuters. This simple concept is overlooked in many transit projects that aim just to meet the "bare minimum" standards.
This is great feedback for Go’s rail system. But adding extra additional tracks, can freights still run like usual without interfering Go trains without delaying each other?
Maybe... With new flyovers and realignments in strategic locations, I think they could get away with frequent service alongside freight trains. This would take a lot of resources that are already limited (i.e. funding), which are better off being used towards the Missing Link (in my opinion) for maximum benefit.
@@transittown7891 Basically a bridge crisscrossing the lines so that the trains from different lines in opposite directions don't have to stop and wait for each other to get from one track to the other. Something like this is already present west of Union Station, if you look on satellite maps.
Yeah the missing link solution doesn't fix the CPKC issues due to conflicts with CN, it only really solves the CN issues in Brampton (instead of using a fly over). The Government has already decided to add more tracks along the Milton line to solve the Milton line issues, but no planned solution for Brampton.
@@mattjones366not surprised about the vagueness, but I'm not sure I agree it's not practical. A lot of the line has room for more track. Mississauga has been building new bridges for a while in preparation.
Here's a previous comment I've made: "Adding dedicated tracks to the Milton line is definitely a more realistic and simple option... If increasing service on the Milton Line is the only priority, then adding dedicated tracks is a better approach that I'd strongly support. Unfortunately, these plans to expand the Milton Line are deliberately left out of the official GO Expansion plans (on their website), because there doesn't seem to be a "full" commitment yet. It also doesn't help that the funding from all levels of government has not been sorted out yet. For example, the federal government has not yet committed to funding for the Milton Line, even though they have brought up the topic in the past few years. I believe this Milton Line expansion proposal spearheaded by the provincial government is mostly for scoring more political points in time for the 2026 election. It's not the first time something like this has happened; the proposal for high-speed rail in Southwestern Ontario was another good example of this."
@@Mystro256 No Mississauga hasn't, as a look at Google satellite images would show. There are 4 bridges capable of 4 tracks (maybe, see below) - Derry, 403, Confederation and Cawthra. These are all old bridges. Newer built bridges Like Eglinton, Mavis and Winston Churchill only allow 3 tracks (as does Dixie) The also relatively new Brittania bridge has no extra space. Burnhamthorpe and Hurontario also have no extra space. But this all also assumes that there is enough room on the existing corridor for 2 additional tracks. This may not be true depending on meeting current building standards for rail lines. But now the big problem - CP wants a 9m separation between their freight tracks and any GO electrified tracks. This means an additional chunk of land needs to be acquired along the entire length of the Milton line from Milton to West Toronto. This is mentioned in the Feasibility Study done in 2015, found at www.mississauga.ca/projects-and-strategies/city-projects/missing-link/
A few comments on this, because TH-cam recommended this video again. Looks like the flyover is happening west of mount pleasant in Halton hills. I'm still sceptical of this missing link idea as a fix for the Milton line alone, but it obviously could have many benefits to the network as a whole. Adding more track on the Milton line, especially a square one route and maybe use of OBRY for a few more stations in Brampton/Mississauga, is something I'd like to see explored first.
GO Transit is aiming to become a regional rail system, rather than just a commuter rail system. Some of the existing lines have been handed over directly from VIA Rail. To what extent do they want to prove this? Who knows. Regional rail lines in other continents like Europe are sometimes several hours long. Few people ride those trains all the way, as those services are targeted towards those going between stops close to each other (e.g. London-Kitchener, Kitchener-Guelph, etc.) Unless GO Transit wants to execute a "low-price, high-capacity" service with very limited stops, expanding all the way to Windsor is likely not worth it. Whether GO Transit should replace or supplement VIA service to London, ON is also up for debate. I think a "proper" GO train service to London, ON would be reasonable with a "low-price, high-capacity" strategy, but this brings up another discussion... who should ultimately be serving Southwestern Ontario and in what ways? VIA Rail, GO Transit, or both? Which markets should each company focus on?
@@TransitTalksClub I think that via should leave west of Toronto to GO and via focus on rual trains in northern Ontario as well as the corridor between Toronto and Quebec.
This makes a lot of sense - I wonder if GO/Metrolinx would even have the will to explore and negotiate this with CN/CPKC, or is this something that would require political push from the province directly. My guess is the latter - a politician would need to step up to the plate to sponsor something like this
I think the biggest hurdle for such a project is the funding... that inevitably brings up politics. Most politicians would rather support more "local" projects that are a fraction of the cost. This project would need someone to truly understand the big picture of transit and transportation across the GTA, rather than focusing on their own riding.
Well, technically, GO ran trains to London from 2021 to 2023... but they used the slow, degraded tracks between London and Kitchener, with a 4 hour trip time. So obviously it wasn't that successful, even between neighbouring cities (e.g. London-St. Marys, etc.)
You should really think about losing the background music. It's intrusive and distracting, and gets in the way of what is otherwise interesting and pertinent information delivered well.
This would effectively remove freight service from the city of Toronto, making for one very boring city. Nothing beats the sound of an AC4400CW or an ES44AC rumbling by Kipling when you are waiting for the bus. As many have stated, the ROW on the CPKC Galt sub is wide enough for GO tracks to be built parallel to the CPKC line.
Passenger trains are just as fun... you can ride them, unlike "most" freight trains. Legally, at least. Building dedicated GO tracks on the Milton and/or Midtown Line has its advantages, but there are disadvantages as well: 1) Express tracks and services on the Midtown Line and portions of the Milton Line likely wouldn't be as easy. This is especially important within the core of Toronto, where having several frequent stops is necessary to benefit transit within the area and also having express services is important for already long trip times to/from the suburbs. 2) The Kitchener Line would still have freight trains limiting their capacity. 3) The Richmond Hill Line cannot be frequent and interlined with the Midtown Line (unless a flyover crossing the northern freight trains is built). 4) Though I see this branch as "optional", the MacTier Sub branch to Bolton would still be unavailable for passenger trains.
Interesting proposal; it sounds like it would solve a lot of problems. Please ditch the music. It's irritating and distracting, which means it's more difficult to follow your logic. Not every video needs background noise behind the voice over.
Yes, music is way too loud at certain points, and becomes a distraction. A "voice-over" is meant to have the speech prominently obvious over the much lower background music. Choice of music wasn't bad, just too overpowering at certain points of the video.
That was also one of my first impressions of the Midtown Line... however, the existing commuting data demonstrates that this line would benefit two groups that have just as high (if not higher) of a demand: 1) People who live outside of Toronto commuting to a City of Toronto suburb (e.g. Mississauga to North York) 2) People who live outside of Toronto commuting to another place outside of Toronto (e.g. Mississauga to York Region) I am also wary of provincial taxpayer funding from one place being used elsewhere... in general, though, it's actually taxes collected from denser areas like Toronto funding and picking up the slack of less dense areas outside of Toronto. So such an approach would actually be worse for non-Torontonians. Toronto is responsible for 50% of Ontario's GDP, but receives less than 50% of provincial funding.
Some arguments elsewhere in the world, like in the UK and London But your comment ignores that the Toronto and the rest of the GTA generate the majority of the tax revenue that funds Ontario and thus investments in making the GTA more competitive pay off with increased tax revenue. Which can then be used to pay for things in the rest of Ontario.
This video feels a bit like someone has stared too long at the train maps without actually riding the routes a lot. A lot of the train connections that you want are already being served by alternate transportation services or are having alternate services under construction. The highway 407 GO Buses already provide good Mississauga-Brampton-Richmond Hill service. The Mississauga transit way plus the under-construction Eglinton LRT extension will provide fast service between Mississauga to midtown. The Hurontario LRT should allow movements between different rail lines. GO has an extensive bus service for suburban transportation, and I suspect they are heavily subsidized due to poor ridership since suburban people prefer driving. Trains only make sense when they can provide superior service to buses, so buses often work better in the suburbs. Let’s not forget that the suburbs were built around highways, so all the places that people want to go are near highways, not train lines, so highway buses simply go to more useful places than old train lines do (except in the historical downtowns of older cities like Kitchener or Guelph). Personally, I think extending GO train into the US might be more valuable (people can take advantage of the lower housing prices in dumps like Buffalo, and we can use their airport for cheap flights) plus the high speed rail to Kitchener and London, plus the usual better integration with local service (why are the GO stations positioned so far from the nearest bus stops?) and electrification.
GO Transit has a robust bus network that I personally use quite frequently... I feel like it's underrated. GO Transit didn't even bother publishing a map of their extensive bus network until this year, which speaks to how much they're neglected. Just because there's an existing BRT or regular bus line doesn't mean trains can't be added. Obviously, for any new line, the benefits need to outweigh the costs when compared to existing services. In many areas, I believe there needs to be a BRT network first, before expanding rail service. Also, some people may (irrationally) prefer to take trains with inferior service, even if they are slower than buses: the extent of this is debatable but bus lines being converted to streetcar lines in North America is a good example of this. There are so many GO bus routes running on the section of Hwy 407 in York Region that a train line with small trainsets could potentially absorb a lot of the demand. And this is not including possible induced demand. Adding rail service means having spare bus capacity to improve bus service in the same area or elsewhere. More trains will often require strengthening the existing bus network, rather than cutting it. This is especially important in suburbs, where stations can't realistically be beside everyone and everything. Also, many of the GO stations are far from local bus stops/terminals because many of the local bus stops/terminals were not built with enough capacity in mind to accommodate other buses... Many of the existing bus terminals are at capacity. I think there needs to be more collaboration and coordination between different agencies to avoid such situations.
Officially pairing lines together for through-running needs to be done eventually... There is so much capacity wasted by trains terminating and turning around at/near Union Station. The full capacity of Union Station and the adjacent downtown Toronto stations cannot be achieved otherwise.
The "Missing Link" can no longer be built because the "Hazel McCallion LRT" line Maintenance Facility is built on the right of way at Kennedy Road and there is no easy way around it. The missing link is dead. CN now limits it freight train length to that of the ruling sidings so they do not cause a passing problems. Richmond Hill service is not very good because it is not time competitive with the subway, especially when they build the North Yonge subway extension. The CN and CP line in the Don Valley are not close together from a vertical point of view. Height difference is too great. Joining the lines would be very difficult. You need to look in three dimensions, not just two. Running trains on the Canpa Sub, CN to CPKC in Etobicoke, is speed restricted because of curves. This has all the earmarks of drawing maps on napkins without looking at the grade and curve problems, let alone getting trains from one side of the right of way to the other. The current Don Branch of CP is owned by Metrostinks but the high level bridge is unusable. Before you do another video get out and look at the actual track corridors in three dimensions.
The Missing Link and the Midtown line and all of their challenges are far from easy but not impossible to "get around" (pun intended)... it's a matter of cost and complexity, which are definitely the biggest barriers. Bridges can be repaired/replaced, though at a cost. All of the challenges that you mentioned are great points. I could've brought up the costs/benefits, but that alone could be its own video, for that matter. This video was meant to be more of a short summary than anything (still ended up being a long one)... though I could definitely make more detailed and technical videos on a specific subject. In the Don Valley area, connecting the Richmond Hill line with the Midtown line would be accomplished by reinstating not only the Don Branch but also the Leaside Spur (which is currently a trail) which actually used to connect the two lines, without rapid changes in altitude. But I totally agree that the Richmond Hill line is terrible compared to the subway... and when Yonge subway extension opens, the subway will become even more attractive. That being said, alongside the rerouting, if frequency on the Richmond Hill Line is improved (which is unlikely as it's single track), then it has potential to be an "express" alternative to Line 1. More importantly, it could serve as a "link" between Union Station and the Midtown line (though Line 1 could easily fulfill this role on both branches). What would be challenging as well is building a connecting track between the CN and CP lines in the Rouge area and somehow maintaining easy access to/from the Agincourt Yard. The Canpa Sub does indeed have an alignment with tight curves (4 degrees), but 4 degree curves are *technically* capable of roughly 30 mph (unbanked) - 60 mph (very banked) speeds if the tracks and turnouts are improved. Again, far from easy but not impossible.
@@TransitTalksClub Canpa Sub will require two grade separations, Horner and Evans, expensive. Leslie rail Trail runs in a residential area and people are going to object. It will also require the re-grading of Lawrence and Leslie to get rid of the grad crossing at Lawrence. There might be room to squeeze the missing link in between 407 and the OMSF for Hazel Line but it would require massive reconstruction of the 407-410 interchange plus hwy 10 and other north south roads. Also CN and CP would have to agree to it and CP does not want to operate on CN tracks. The province cannot force this to happen as railways are federally regulated. I am surprised you haven't mentioned the Havelock line. It requires a total rebuild but actually might connect some useful areas. To avoid running on CP's Belleville sub it might be feasible to join the Stouffville line at Agincourt yard. If you do build all these lines it would probably be wiser to avoid dunning multiple route that switch between different line and run frequent service with easy transfer connections. You need updated origin destination studies to validate the need for these line than a real cost benefit analysis, not a fake Metrostinks one, to justify the expenditure. Just because there is a right of way doesn't mean it needs a rail line.
@@dbolt6543 It's very likely that only some of the branches I've brought up are ultimately worth it after considering all of the challenges, but at least they're considered. The Havelock line also has potential, especially for Peterborough residents, though there is another project that may bring back service to Peterborough and the area in between. And I do agree that existing rights of way are not always the best place to put a new rail line. It's better to build the Crosstown along Eglinton Ave rather than using the beltline trail right-of-way. It would've been better to build the Mississauga Transitway along a busy transit corridor like Dundas and/or Burnhamthorpe in the first place, rather than using the space beside Highway 403 and the hydro corridor.
I totally agree... though practically, it's much cheaper for them to keep their current fleet of railcars and switch the locomotives for electric or dual mode. These railcars and locomotives are likely best suited for express and/or long-distance services (also because the cars aren't really meant for standing passengers), so they should be allocated to those services where possible. At the same time, any growth in the fleet should just be new EMUs (with more standing room) assigned to local and frequent-stop services, as this is where acceleration and efficiency really matters.
The tricky part is that between Cambridge and Milton, the line is mostly single track, so that section would have to be double tracked for passenger rail service to go all the way to Cambridge. The other option is to upgrade the line between Cambridge and Guelph, which can be bought out by GO Transit and would be one step closer towards completing a "triangle" of transit between Kitchener, Guelph, and Cambridge.
They are already moving forward to Build Light Rail between Cambridge and Kitchener and there are plans to build something between Cambridge and Guelph
Note: At 4:35, I mention that CN's dedicated line in York Region (York and Halton subdivisions, to be exact) is used exclusively by freight trains. That's not entirely true... Technically, all westbound VIA Rail "Canadian" trains from Toronto to Vancouver use a small section of this line. Also, once in a while, if there's some kind of maintenance on the tracks owned by GO Transit/Metrolinx, VIA Rail trains will continue operating but on detour through part of this line.
Exactly ! Aarre Peltomaa of Mississauga, Ontario
can confirm took the via train to Oshawa when the Lakeshore East line was shutdown for maintenance it was crazy slow and had to wait a lot for freight traffic on the York line interestingly it reversed at the grade junction of the Richmond Hill line to connect to the York line and vice versa to use the RH line to get back to union
A very interesting proposal. Couple things I want to share though: The milton line is getting new, passenger only parallel tracks! Few months back the province announced the milton line will see new tracks to allow all day 2-way service which is super exciting. The mid town corridor is also super wide and can easily carry 4 tracks (it originally did have 4+). The only industry still connected to this line is the TTC hillcrest yard on the north side, seeing as we are now getting parallel tracks on the milton line, I think it is very possible that CP may allow Metrolinx to build parallel tracks for a midtown line in the future. Given that re routing CP freight trains would change up how they have to run trains in and out of their yard, I think they would fight that pretty hard but, if the gov plays their cards right, they may be able to use that to get CP to "compromise" and let them run parallel tracks through mid town instead. Regardless of how it gets done, if it allows us to get midtown passenger service, that's a win in my books. All that said, I do like the idea of better connecting the lines to build a ring line. Bolton line would also be nice- has some serious potential to reduce crowding on the 35 Jane bus by offering a really fast and high capacity alternative. Given how much money we are already pouring into transit expansion in Ontario, I find it unlikely we will see any midtown line announcements anytime soon due to funding availability but seeing as Metrolinx is very good at future proofing projects and plans, I think its very likely the new tracks on the milton line will be designed to accommodate a future midtown line connection.
Adding dedicated tracks to the Milton line is definitely a more realistic and simple option... If increasing service on the Milton Line is the only priority, then adding dedicated tracks is a better approach that I'd strongly support.
Unfortunately, these plans to expand the Milton Line are deliberately left out of the official GO Expansion plans (on their website), because there doesn't seem to be a "full" commitment yet. It also doesn't help that the funding from all levels of government has not been sorted out yet. For example, the federal government has not yet committed to funding for the Milton Line, even though they have brought up the topic in the past few years.
I believe this Milton Line expansion proposal spearheaded by the provincial government is mostly for scoring more political points in time for the 2026 election. It's not the first time something like this has happened; the proposal for high-speed rail in Southwestern Ontario was another good example of this.
"The milton line is getting new, passenger only parallel tracks! Few months back the province announced the milton line will see new tracks to allow all day 2-way service which is super exciting."
Sadly no such announcement was made
The Premier made a vague unfunded comment to get votes in the byelection
There are no plans or funding to make the Milton line 4 tracks, it would be extremely expensive
Better to fund the Missing Link and help both the Kitchener and Milton lines at the same time.
An east-west go train line in the north of Toronto would be a game changer!
It will include dining cars as well I Hope (Given the example of the westcoast express line which has a Coffee Stand in one of the coaches designating it as a dining car)
I feel like most people already know and agree on what GO Transit needs. For anyone that doesn’t, it’s three things:
1) All-day train service in both directions on all lines. You can cut busses out of this system entirely since they get stuck in road traffic just like everybody else or better yet, have busses service local neighborhood routes that allow people to travel to the train station without having to drive. Some can even serve as full length transfers from one train line to another. Speaking of which…
2) Line transfer options beyond just Union Station. Lay down new tracks and/or use busses to fill gaps depending on location. There is clearly a percentage of the Ontario population who would love to use GO Transit for intercity travel but some trips just aren’t practical without a transfer point outside of downtown, Toronto. Speaking of tracks…
3) Dedicated tracks across the network. The whole point of passenger rail is to avoid intersecting with other vehicles. Freight trains are not part of the deal.
I'm really hoping that they stick to these basics as they roll out the GO Expansion plans... I think there's much room for improvement in their expansion plans.
It's a fairly good plan, however it requires the governments to convince CN and CPKC to play ball and cooperate with each other. That alone makes this very difficult. Also, if the whole point is to put all the freight on the York sub, the York Line part near the end doesn't make sense unless the intention is to expand the number of tracks.
Also, if I may offer a media production tip: narration should be mixed louder than the music. I found it hard to hear what you were saying sometimes.
Overall good video though! This would be pretty good for all involved, if they can be convinced to make the investment.
The Missing Link would be welcomed by both freight operators, it would benefit them both and would be provided at no cost to them.
The only problem is getting the big amount of government funding necessary.
@@mattjones366I disagree. CN would not want all of CPKC’s trains clogging up their York Sub and CPKC wouldn’t want to rely on CN playing ball and giving their trains any reasonable amount of priority.
@@roger1818 It would probably rely on both having their own dedicated tracks.
But I would point out they both cooperate with no problems going through the Rockies and for many decades with CP having running rights across what we now call the Lakeshore West corridor.
@@mattjones366 the missing link would definitely not be liked by CPKC or CN, CPKC would not want to give up the Galt, North Toronto, and Belleville subs to run on the York/Halton and CN would not want to let CPKC use the York and Halton Sub. CPR Toronto yard is also not set up for the missing link at all and would require CPKC to either rebuild the entire yard or force trains to make inconvenient movements
@@devvydoesstuff Not so sure. At this point the Galt/North Toronto are essentially run through tracks with little to no customers. Getting that track and its expensive Toronto property taxes off the books would be welcomed. Potentially also helps with fuel economy as certainly the Galt sub climbs a significant amount which potentially could be avoided by staying north.
As for CN there are also benefits from avoiding having to cross over 2 sets of tracks to get from the North to South (or vice versa).
Not saying there won't be issues, but the benefits for both likely outweigh any negatives.
Its also the only way to get increased / all day service on the Milton corridor and solving the Brampton/Georgetown issue which potentially (eventually) means the various levels of government will step up with the necessary money.
The York line would be a godsend. I used to frequently make trips between Hamilton and Newmarket. The York line would’ve made that a much nicer experience
Great video! I know you are more focused on TO, and maybe have less knowledge on other cities, but I would love a similar video explaining how to improve Montreal's EXO lines!
I would love to see a new Go line that runs from Port Credit up to Kipling and along the Toronto North corridor all the way to UoT Scarborourgh and then down to Pickering. Most of the track already exists, as do some of the stations, and it would fix so many connection issues we have in Toronto. Ideally this route wouldn't use the full double decked Go trains used on the other existing routes, but rather would use new trains similar to the Montreal RER system which consist of 2-4 self-propelled electric train cars
Great vid. A midtown line would be amazing. I desperately want to see a Hamilton-Kitchener GO line at some point in my lifetime but that doesn't seem to be anywhere on their list of priorities.
There is only one active line that would connect Hamilton to the lines further north, but it is extremely slow and curvy. Building a new line through the Niagara Escarpment (this area) would likely be prohibitively expensive.
@@TransitTalksClub Could they extend the line that goes from Hamilton west to Lynden? Maybe go north from there until they meet up with the kitchener line? That way they don't need to build any new lines through the escarpment.
I guess a direct from hamilton to kitchener might not make sense to finance, at least not yet. Would be an easier sell if it could tie in cambridge or brantford or something, but then we're getting into the territory of super slow/inefficient and complicated to build, probably
I think more northerly terminals would be very useful. GO trains only make sense if you work within walking distance of Union Station. And that was fine for a while, but TO is much bigger now, and there are business hubs in Markham, Vaughn and Richmond Hill. These are modestly serviced by bus hubs, but subject to traffic and weather, making them useless
Northern terminals would cause reverse branching, which is extremely bad. Better to have the midtown line and build good transfers from the other lines to it
This sounds excellent, except that we can't run or fly before we can even walk. At the financial rate of progress that we have, it'll take 30 years to get full electrification with 15 min intervals to Hamilton, Bramalea, Aurora, Unionville, and Oshawa. If been watching the double tracking/platforming of the Scarborough junction to Unionville part of the Stouffville line for 3 years. It's still not finished, and it's technically child's play easy to do. If it was fully financed, it could have been finished in less than 2 years. A little bit here, a little bit there, and eventually the whole quilt will be one bedsheet so to speak; but we only have bits and pieces so far, even though I've seen excellent bits done, like the Davenport Flyover. The Lakeshore East and West will have to be mostly quadruple tracked; they are only triple tracked currently. Let's walk before we can fly. Aarre Peltomaa of Mississauga, Ontario
People who need to travel from Durham region need a more northerly east-west rail corridor, perhaps to the northern part of Toronto with connections to the subway.
I love the idea of the Richmond Hill line trains bypassing the future possible Midtown line instead of using that slow winding track around the Don Valley Parkway and Toronto conservation area to improve their service frequencies
One error. There are movement conflicts between Burlington and Hamilton.
The conflict isn't necessarily obvious but occurs because the reversal from west to east flips what is north/south.
So both Hamilton Centre (to the old TH&B station) and the newer West Harbour stations require the GO Trains to cross over the CN freight line.
Thanks for pointing that out... I wish I could go into more detail but I had to keep the video short.
I was mainly thinking of freight trains to/from the Dundas Subdivision (to London, Chicago, etc.). Also, most Lakeshore West trains terminate at Aldershot and Oakville. The few trains that go to/from West Harbour, Hamilton GO Centre, or Niagara Falls may in fact have conflicts, as you mentioned. I believe service west of Aldershot is limited for that reason.
True, but CN only runs 6 freight trains per day on the Grimsby subdivision, so the conflicts are not many.
Nothing a couple flyovers couldn't fix. And if Go is electrified into Hamilton, you could use steeper grades for said flyovers.
Hamilton Centre trains also have to cross / compete with the CP line running up through Aldershot to Waterdown.
Not sure why Metrolinx did add space for two extra tracks at the CN King Rd overpass in Burlington.
At 07:13, you have a graph showing rankings of railroads. This is in the USA. Since the 1980s, CP has been disivensting in Canada and investing in USA, and every time they bought a US railroad, they have been forced to agree to concession to allow passenger trains. Canada has rubber stamped these mergers without any requirement for concessions. The USA also has offcial rules requiring freight railroads to give passenger trains priority, though this is a rule o paper only as the rules have enough loopholes to still let freight have priority (too long to fit siding for instance),
I wish I could use a Canadian report card if one were available (I know on-time performance is actually measured by VIA Rail, but the report card is more dramatic), but proving your point about the Canadian government's lack of effort in advocating for concessions, VIA Rail and the federal government don't care enough to create such a report card. Also, there are only 2 major freight companies but Metrolinx frequently prioritizes GO trains and delays VIA Rail trains as well yet I don't see them getting blamed as much as they should be.
What is true, however, is that CP is more resistant than CN to passenger trains. Both the Milton line (east of Erindale) and Kitchener line (between Georgetown and Bramalea) have a mix of 2- and 3-track sections, but have drastically different levels of service.
While Canada doesn't have a passenger train priority law, there is a section in the Canadian Transportation Act allowing the Canadian Transportation Agency to decide on passenger train service level disputes. As far as I know, I doubt this has ever been exercised:
152.1 (1) Whenever a public passenger service provider and a railway company are unable to agree in respect of any matter raised in the context of the negotiation of any agreement concerning the use of the railway company’s railway, land, equipment, facilities or services by the public passenger service provider or concerning the conditions, or the amount to be paid, for that use, the public passenger service provider may, after reasonable efforts to resolve the matter have been made, apply to the Agency to decide the matter.
@@TransitTalksClub "CP being resistent to passenger trains" is an understatement. The last big VIA cuts of late 1989 involved widthdawing services from CP's tracks, with 2 exceptions, the Sudbury-White-Rover (formerly served by now cancelled The Canadian) and the Victoria-Nanaimo-Courtenay (which was required by the Constitution). CN was still a crown corporation at the time.
CP Rail was going to kill the Montréal-Rogaud line in 1980, but a group of citize s (including me) got involved and got politicians to get on board. The then PQ transport minister Michel Clerc was gung-ho about it and forced the CTCUM (now STM) to contracts with CP to run the trains. (this was later moved to its own org AMT, later renamed to EXO). CP Rail moved to Calgary and split its remaining Québec tracks into separate company with a goal of letting it go bankrupt (easier than formally amabdonning it) and Chemin de Fed Canadien Pacific Québec ended up becoming more agressive to survive and allows commuter trains to Delson on south shore as well as St-Jérome to increase their revenues (and that line passes over CP's the line that goes to the port, CP's last big customer in Québec). With change of management at Calgary, CP changed its mind and re-integrated the québec company. But what had been acquired during those years remains. CP has very few tracks left in Québec.
@@TransitTalksClub While not truly applicable to commuter service, one reason Amtrak can afford to pay long distance train guests for hotel rooms etc when a train is late is that the operating railroads pay hefty penalties when a long distance train is late due to freight traffic.
EXO in Montréal owned the tracks to Deux Montagnes, but it took time to get its newer rail cars (multi level) approved for use in Tunnel to increase frequencies, and just as this got approved, the REM pulled the rug from under them and demolished the service.
EXO owns the track from Dorion to Rigaud (M&O sub from when CP was a trans continental railway). (But Hudosn-Rigaud abandonned by EXO). These were the transcontinental tracks. And it owns/rebuilt the tracks from Ste Thérèse to St-Jérome. Other than that, fully dependent on CP and CN. Metrolinx is pretty lucky to own a huge chunk of its network.
@@jfmezei Metrostinx is pretty lucky to own a huge chunk of its network alright, at full cost to the Onscario taxpayers. They bought existing right-of-ways and in-service tracks, because (mostly CN) was losing customers on a weekly basis, and was considering closing tracks in those areas. In my personal opinion, it was a good move to buy up these corridors and take control, although CN still has a few freight customers to serve, and they try to do as much of it as possible overnight so as not to disrupt passenger operations. What does burn my butt though, was the creation of Metrolinx out of thin air. Now we have another un-needed layer of bureacracy, and outrageous salaries and bonuses to pay out. My personal opinion was that things were fine when the whole thing was simply GO Transit.
I love this idea. Even checking google maps, the missing link in Mississauga has a hydro corridor that could be used
My only question for that is how would they build the tracks there, there is many roads and interchanges along that corridor and building tunnels would be very expensive, I know you could make it as a dug out and have the interchange roads and usual roads as bridges but if your going to do a dug out strategy then your playing soccer with the electrical towers to build around them.
@@fuzzylion1172 The 407 hydro corridor was planned for the rail line to be added in the future.
The simply answer your missing is adding bridges to the roads - they are already using bridges to get over the 407 so another set of bridges would be easy and cheaper than tunneling the rail lines.
The CPR needs to access their industrial customers along the main mid-town line. They also have their yards, such as Leaside Junction. I'm not sure how much industry is serviced around there now. Leaside used to be a industrial powerhouse with Canada Wire and Cable, Aluminum smelting, scrap metal, aggregates and asphalt, furniture, etc, and what I knew was pale in comparison to earlier times as there were many spurs leading to empty lots and buried under asphalt. Most of that's gone now, I think. I was five minutes by bicycle from Leaside Station (born '63). Me and a friend would hang out all the time after school in the mid seventies; checking out the station and trains, and watching trucks service the various industries.
They would simply move to serving the industries overnight or on weekends as is done on other lines in the GTA now owned by Metrolinx (and done in parts of the US).
The concept and the route seems ideal for Go-trains - double track.
Go look at the customers on the midtown line. From the junction with Kitchener all the way to the CP yard in the east, there's one customer, and it's the TTC. Surely GO and the TTC can work out a deal if it brings transit expansion
@@thespanishinquisiton8306 One customer, aye? THAT is depressing and speaks of how Toronto lost it's industrial base .
This country has become more or less a warehouse spur for imported goods. When I was fifteen, Canadian Tire sold Canadian made tires and Canadian products (with a smattering of American) Many of those products were made in Toronto.
A lot of the industries have moved to the suburbs, for various reasons. Land within the City of Toronto is much more scarce and valuable, so companies can instantly get richer just by moving further away from Toronto.
Well done !! Great analysis of the challenges and potential solutions.
CN & CP will never share the same tracks in the GTA.
Construct the 407 freight bypass for CN trains in order to open up the Kitchener line.
Construct a 413 freight bypass for CPKC trains in order to open up the Milton line.
The proposed path of the 413 highway heads directly towards CPKC's intermodal terminal in Vaughan next to highway 50. Negotiate with CPKC to construct a railroad that runs parallel with the 413 highway. The 413 highway hasn't been constructed yet. Why not work with CPKC to construct both at the same time?
It wouldn't open up the Midtown line, because CPKC trains would still use MacTier. But it frees up tracks exclusive for GO trains from Lisgar to Bloor.
Also allow CPKC to construct a switch yard north of Brampton to compensate for losing access to the Lambton yard.
CN will NEVER allow CP trains on the York region line, because it goes right pass CN's Brampton intermodal terminal and MacYard. If a CP train were to break down in front of either yard it would impact CN's business. They won't allow it. That's why proposing both freight companies to share the same track isn't even up for discussion. It's a non-starter in their eyes. CN often parks trains on the York region line when they're constructing trains out of their Brampton Yard. It would be very difficult to run passenger trains on this line without impacting CN's business.
Also remember that the whole point of CN construct the York region, east-west bypass, and Mac Yard in Vaughan, back in the 1960's, was to allow passenger trains to use the Lakeshore line, which CN used to own.
The Misssing Link would need to add CPKC tracks alongside the York Sub.
@@mattjones366 Not happening. CN owns all the land running along side their tracks on the York sub.
Highway 413's construction should definitely be used as an opportunity to potentially add a new rail line alongside the highway.
I agree that the freight companies will not want to share tracks if it results in congestion, so tracks would need to be added (as I've mentioned in the video)... they would only agree if their own existing capacities are maintained or improved. I think in many of the problematic areas you've mentioned, additional tracks resolve any capacity related issues. If they insist on being separate, then it's best to think of the additional 2 tracks added to the York subdivision as being dedicated to CP trains only.
That being said, CN and CP already share tracks with each other in cases where it benefits both of them. In parts of BC and Northern Ontario, they have designated each of their single track lines for one direction or the other (e.g. CP track for all NB trains, CN track for all SB trains). Also, if the same tracks are shared, a special company jointly owned by both companies may be used (e.g. The Union Station Rail Corridor was owned by Toronto Terminals Railway, jointly owned by CN and CP; Conrail in the US, shared between CSX and NS).
@@TransitTalksClub
The parts in B.C. where CP & CN share tracks is the exception. Because it would be enormously expensive to blow a tunnel through the rocky mountains. So both CP & CN made a "special" track sharing agreement within B.C.. Otherwise they don't want to share tracks.
@@drewpatterson8261 But CN would also be getting their freight trains off of the segment through downtown Brampton and the hassles that are involved with that. So there is room for compromise to create something that works for everyone.
Interesting proposal. Your audio mix could use a bit of tweaking; make sure your voice goes through a compressor to normalize the level, then put a sidechain duck on the music so your voice causes it to lower whenever you talk. Also, I'd recommend music that's a bit "smoother" with less staccato notes since they tend to punch through the mix.
The CP corridor would also offer superior access to Whitby, Oshawa, and Bowmanville. The line passes right through the centre of these municipalities. The current GO stations for these municipalities are isolated from their customers as they are no where near the downtowns. Whitby and Oshawa GO stations, like many GO stations, are on the wrong side of 401 forcing people to drive to and from the stations. Having station where people actually live would make them much more useful.
Hopefully the Bowmanville Extension will become a reality sooner rather than later
The major issues are: 1) not lack of ideas but lack of concrete plan and actions to realize the potential. 2) the path is radial as opposed to close loop, circular, offering multiple ways to get to a destination. 3) at the end of each go station, there is no connecting transportation e.g. buses. We need a well planed out and execute. Have a look at the system in Japan, HK, Singapore or China and you will know what I mean.
GO Transit definitely has a lot of room for improvement... Many of the stations outside of the City of Toronto have reasonable connecting bus services right at the station... but in the City of Toronto, where it matters the most, the TTC and GO Transit see each other as competitors and don't do much to improve connectivity between them. It's a shame.
Things I would love:
1. Some sort of train from Hamilton/Burlington to the Tri city Area.
2. A connection from Lakeshore West to Milton or YYZ that’s not Union Station
The Second thing is happening in the Form of a Light Rail line hose that may have issues
It would cost may arms and many legs to meet the demands of both CN and CP to alllow your suggestion to cobien both along the existing York/Halton sub, including flyovers so C traffic would not cross CN traffic and this would need to be 4 tracks (don't think CN would accept to retain its single track when it sees potential of governent paying to upgrade to twin tracks).
Your missing link is bulliant however.
The other concern here is that what is left of CP in eastern canada still has customers that generate that feight and they still need local access to those customer in Toronto and forcing CP to move to CN right of way would move CP away from its existing/remaining customers.
Back when CP was a transcontinental railway, a big part of traffic went from Sudbury to Montréal without needing to transit through Toronto. When it abandonned Sudbury-Montréal, it meant that all of its remainig traffic has to go trhough mentopolitan Toronto and its yards there etc. So harder to convince them to give up their current geography m area.
I agree that this is a challenging part... as long as both companies either have the same or better capacity after the changes, and access to/from CP Agincourt Yard is sorted out, they're more likely to agree with the changes.
Just like CN customers within GO Transit-owned lines, access to CP customers may still be maintained with limited, local freight trains operated during the night.
They should Rebuild the Toronto Bypass between Sudbury and Montreal
It would be very helpful seeing a GO station at the original Summerhill Station
7:56 - The big thing in this Toronto plan is that CP will share the freight tracks with CN through Toronto.
Which is something they don't like doing
just a note that this whole proposal would be more expensive than the crosstown and finch west LRT put together. the midtown line is a good idea, just a few things in the east make things complicated.
CPKC has a massive railyard in the malvern district, where the midtown line terminates. having GO trains pass through it and connect to the York Subdivision between Meadowvale and Beare Rd would be a massive disruption to almost everyone in the area.
Connecting the York Sub to the GO Sub would be nearly impossible without a fortune and a half. from where the bridge over Hwy 401 connects to the CN Kingston Subdivision, to then connect back to the GO Sub, would require the current Pickering GO Station to be relocated.
This idea is great, but you didnt seem to look at how the east end would work. It's possible, for sure, but not necessary.
This proposal would indeed be very expensive... it also calls into question whether other rapid transit lines should be prioritized instead. For example, many areas of the GTA are in desperate need of BRT lines at a fraction of the cost. I generally prefer local transit projects to be prioritized, as I believe a good backbone bus system is needed before expanding rail services. That being said, the potential benefits of at least some of what I've proposed are likely big enough to justify the cost.
The east end will definitely be challenging, especially with the CPKC yard in the way. Many of the past Midtown line plans don't even go all the way to Pickering because of the challenges in the east end (terminating somewhere in Scarborough instead).
I haven’t heard this specifically before and it’s really smart! I have long supported the Midtown Line which RM Transit did a great video on a few months back. This could def make it happen,
Just a note - the Milton line could only go to Lisgar with frequent service, with the heavy freight traffic it could be worse for people in Milton proper. If the right of way accommodates - building separate GO tracks to Milton could be done.
13:30 and onwards you’re talking about maybe using the 905 link for passenger service as well? Would the right of way accommodate it?
The "achilles heel" or flaw of the Missing Link is the section between Lisgar and Milton. I think maintaining service between Milton and Lisgar is a must, at least for the existing rush hour services. This should definitely be a condition of the Missing Link project.
There are two solutions to this (either one or both could be implemented):
1) Add extra tracks between Lisgar and Milton for two-way all-day service to Milton.
2) Without any extra upgrades (existing tracks), interline the York/Kitchener lines and introduce two-way all-day service between Milton and Union Station via Brampton (trip times would be around the same, as the express track can be used for this service).
@@TransitTalksClub Note that the Missing Link is actually planned to start west of Trafalgar Road. Extending extra tracks from that point to Milton GO would be something Metrolinx could achieve.
@@TransitTalksClub let’s hope they ensure that adequate room is left in the right of way to build extra tracks when the time comes!
GO trains on the CN York Corridor would be amazing and an easy way to go east west across GTA suburbs. Would love to see a connection with the Highway 407 Bus Terminal as the tracks are less than 400m away
Unlikely to happen tho
That's basically a big translation from GO Bus network into Go Train. For example, the Hamilton-Pickering 41 bus could well be into a 407 rail corridor.
The missing link could also be multitracked also allowing (at least infrequent) GO service on it.
Nice video. I'm excited about GO expansion but also disappointed as I feel a lot of the proposed upgrades should have been done yesterday and not well after congestion has gotten this bad.
You forgot to mention the ORBY line on the map when talking about abandoned rail lines @1:20. It connects Orangeville, Brampton and Mississauga. I think there was some talk about possibly having trains running on that again or having an LRT in its place.
As for the Kitchener line, I think what they're doing is fourth tracking it all the way up to Bramalea. And further up the line proposing an additional track at the downtown station where there's currently a bottleneck, it only being double tracked. Hopefully that would remove all conflict between GO trains and CN freight on the Kitchener line.
I do wish the people who originally built these lines had the foresight to double (or more) track these lines. Or at least allot space so that work could be done in the future. Probably a lot more harder, complicated and expensive to do so now when the land is all built up. City planning really is atrocious here. I wonder if I'll ever see high speed rail here in my lifetime.
I certainly could've brought up more abandoned lines like the OBRY line between Brampton and the rest of the Milton Line. This line would be very good for people travelling between downtown Brampton and Mississauga, as well as between northwestern Mississauga/southwestern Brampton and downtown Toronto. Even the Hurontario LRT line won't connect the two Mississauga and Brampton downtowns directly!
The Toronto Suburban Railway also used to have a line through Mississauga.
For the Kitchener Line... aside from the uncertainty of freight train schedules, not removing freight trains from the entirety of the Kitchener Line greatly reduces capacity for reliable two-way all-day express service and future express/high-speed rail services west of Kitchener (i.e. London). As you said, planning is atrocious and future considerations such as these are considered "too far into the future".
This is tricky because there are still lots of Yards and Customers along the Midtown line and the Freight Railroads generally dont like to Share track so theyd both probably be hostile towards this plan since they dont want to do anything that would hurt their Bottom line
Go Train across the 401 with stops only at subways, other GO-Rail lines, and maybe Airport/STC!
The main problem with cp and cn sharing the York sub, would make CPs agin court yard would be useless unless they connect the York sub with cp Belleville sub
The proposal itself is much more detailed than what I've "briefly" mentioned in the video. Maintaining access to/from the CP Agincourt Yard is one of the biggest challenges that likely contributed to previous proposals being killed. But it's not impossible. For example, a balloon loop could be added west of the yard. Better yet, CP could relocate the yard and make money selling the yard's lands for redevelopment.
All the NIMBY’s in Rosedale would definitely be on board with this midtown idea 😆
Reactivating the Leaside Spur (probably the most contentious proposal in the area) would mean abandoning the existing line, which is also beside many houses. It's not a completely "net zero" change, but it's quite close.
The Leaside Spur would allow for electrification of the Richmond Hill Line (no more diesel trains) and could also accommodate a new station on Lawrence/Leslie, increasing property values and the quality of transit in the area. Lower traffic noise and decreased pollution in the area are also advantages that can be pointed out. Some won't be convinced to take transit (inevitably), but some will be. Likewise, some may support the proposal.
That being said, NIMBYs are not uncommon and are a reality that has to be accepted. They're entitled to have any opinion they want, after the facts are presented.
@@TransitTalksClub I don’t disagree with you at all but I do know first hand how frustrating it is to get any type of project off the ground in these areas. If only our city was bold enough to say “up yours” to these folks for the greater good of the city and surrounding towns.
I really enjoyed your video, dropping a sub!
I wonder if the area under/around the high-voltage transmission lines could be used as the right-of-way for this new "missing link". That could potentially make the expropriation costs much cheaper!
The route that the power lines take perfectly connects up from just west of Lisgar Go to the Industrial area north of Pearson airport.
Id personally call this the Mississauga bypass
The midtown line connecting east-west traffic and the upgrade of Milton line to full-day service are desperately needed, so the connector you talked about to link the CP line to the CN northern bypass tracks make sense. However, aside from building the tracks itself, CP and CN will need to figure out how the financial would work out. CP theoretically would need to pay CN to use CN's northern bypass tracks but CP would say they have the tracks (i.e. Midtown tracks) already, so why would they pay to use someone else's tracks. The governments will need to step in to subsidize that day-to-day usage fee possibly to make it happen. In terms of using the northern bypass tracks for passenger service, I think we need to include the Hwy 7 BRT into consideration. Technically, the Hwy 7 BRT is serving that purpose. And since all the new condos are now built along Hwy 7, especially between Markham Road and Jane St., I think upgrading the Hwy 7 line to a full-blown SkyTrain style medium capacity mass transit track on a viaduct would attract more ridership. The Hwy 7 SkyTrain can use the space above the current BRT lanes to build, and the BRT lanes can be retired after the completion of the SkyTrain viaduct.
I've already made two comments that you might find relevant:
"I agree that the freight companies will not want to share tracks if it results in congestion, so tracks would need to be added (as I've mentioned in the video)... they would only agree if their own existing capacities are maintained or improved. I think in many of the problematic areas you've mentioned, additional tracks resolve any capacity related issues. If they insist on being separate, then it's best to think of the additional 2 tracks added to the York subdivision as being dedicated to CP trains only.
That being said, CN and CP already share tracks with each other in cases where it benefits both of them. In parts of BC and Northern Ontario, they have designated each of their single track lines for one direction or the other (e.g. CP track for all NB trains, CN track for all SB trains). Also, if the same tracks are shared, a special company jointly owned by both companies may be used (e.g. The Union Station Rail Corridor was owned by Toronto Terminals Railway, jointly owned by CN and CP; Conrail in the US, shared between CSX and NS)."
"Just because there's an existing BRT or regular bus line doesn't mean trains can't be added. Obviously, for any new line, the benefits need to outweigh the costs when compared to existing services. In many areas, I believe there needs to be a BRT network first, before expanding rail service. Also, some people may (irrationally) prefer to take trains with inferior service, even if they are slower than buses: the extent of this is debatable but bus lines being converted to streetcar lines in North America is a good example of this.
There are so many GO bus routes running on the section of Hwy 407 in York Region that a train line with small trainsets could potentially absorb a lot of the demand. And this is not including possible induced demand. Adding rail service means having spare bus capacity to improve bus service in the same area or elsewhere. More trains will often require strengthening the existing bus network, rather than cutting it. This is especially important in suburbs, where stations can't realistically be beside everyone and everything."
This plan would free up more space for passengers and see more service. I often go from Niagara Falls to Newmarket so I'd be taking a train from there to Union and from Union to Newmarket and the problem is that the trains traveling from Niagara falls GO don't run as often compared to trains going to Hamilton.
Avoiding Union Station for a trip like that would cut the travel time by a lot.
Between St Catharines and Hamilton, there is a long section of single track, which greatly reduces capacity for passenger trains. CN allows just the 4 trains per day (1 VIA/Amtrak, 3 GO) in each direction.
Isn’t there a plan for GO trains to Bolton in the future?
Not in the near future, but perhaps in the long term
Even without this missing link, couldn't Canadian National already switch to the Canadian Pacific route south-west of Milton and north of Scarborough? I'm guessing they don't, because they find having their own lines to be more reliable and have no incentive to give up their midtown corridor for GO passengers.
It is a good idea to push both freight rail companies into the suburbs, where there is more space to double the lines for a GO passenger service, and for GO to take over the Midtown line, I'm just not sure if this missing link needs to be built to accomplish that?
The Missing Link isn't the only solution... many of the upgrades I proposed are 100% debatable. For example, sharing lines with freight trains might be an acceptable solution in the first place if there was a law in place prioritizing passenger trains under all circumstances. But the status quo is to compromise around the needs of the freight companies.
They won't because Canadian National wouldn't allow it without massive pressure from the government
There's another line that may become important that you didn't mention: the CP Havelock subdivision from the Malvern yard, running northeast. If the East Toronto airport (north of Pickering) is ever built, this line would be able to provide service to it. Beyond, the line snakes its way eventually to Peterborough, which probably isn't worth the investment, but the corridor is there in case.
The Havelock is part of VIA's plans for their own line to allow more frequent VIA service that is slowly progressing.
There will not ever be a Pickering airport.
When VIA Rail abandoned all of their regional and commuter trains in southern Ontario, GO Transit was given the opportunity to take over the line via Havelock Subdivision to Peterborough in 1990. They did not.
Even before the abandonment of the VIA Rail service around 1990, the service wasn't good as trip times were already quite long (2 hours one-way) due to the tracks having a speed limit of only 40 mph.
As you may be aware, there are other rail infrastructure projects that may be more relevant to the Peterborough area...
@@TransitTalksClub As I said, the Peterborough destination is probably not worth it. However, servicing of the airport (should it ever come to be) probably would be.
Could also be an opportunity to serve the rapidly growing and underserved areas of Durham region along the 407 corridor (in addition to the branch in the video going down to Pickering)
Funnily enough I thought about a potential 407 GO Train line a few days ago, with all the GO Buses that use the 407. Your idea for the York Line probably makes more sense as it covers more residential neighbourhoods. I also thought of connecting the 407 line to Pearson and Mississauga City Centre via the 427 and either the Mississauga Transitway or the 403. I suppose you could add another branch of the York Line with something like that.
The possibilities are endless.
One of my thoughts was how close the proposed line would be to other transit routes and major destinations: the Missing Link or "407 line" itself doesn't seem to do as good of a job at either. The Kitchener Line goes through downtown Brampton with connections to Brampton Transit bus routes at many stops along the way. The Milton Line (sort of) goes through downtown Mississauga with connections to MiWay bus routes. So those corridors have more potential.
Also, each new section of line proposed will likely use different lengths of trains, and over- or under-crowding should be avoided by choosing a route so that the size of the train matches with the demand throughout most/all of the interlined route in question. I can only guess the potential ridership at best, but this is why I've made the York Line as winding as I did.
You're right, the York Line would only connect to two major transit hubs within York Region: Highway 407 and Unionville. However, there seems to be a hydro corridor that diverges off the rail corridor from Dufferin into the 407 between those two terminals, so maybe the York Line could run along that instead and ultimately serve Langstaff/Richmond Hill Centre too, making it a "central station" for all branches. It still covers some neighbourhoods, and residents on Yonge Street would still be able to easily access the line since the Line 1 TTC extension should be long done by the time the York Line opens anyway. Only problems would be the costs of having to build even more rail and possible service duplication with existing YRT Viva routes.
Never taken the GO train to get anywhere. Not Mississauga, not Brampton, not Hamilton, not even to Niagara Falls, which would make for great day trips from the Toronto for locals and for tourists.
Great video! I need to watch it a few more times to fully comprehend your ideas. Is there land set aside for rail along the 407 Toll road?
The Parkway Belt has conserved a corridor along Hwy 407 which would be suitable but their are problems with ramps at 407 interchanges; the ramps would have to be reconfigured or a number of bridges built.
There’s already many highway 407 GO Buses. Because the tolls on the 407 are so high, these GO buses are generally pretty fast, fairly frequent, and not too busy. Having a rail line on the same route would be entirely redundant.
There are so many GO bus routes running on the section of Hwy 407 in York Region that a train line with small trainsets could potentially absorb a lot of the demand. And this is not including possible induced demand.
If the line in York Region is implemented, the existing GO and/or YRT bus routes should service more stops along the way (areas between two stations) frequently to provide a robust network to/from the new stations in York Region.
If you wanted to get from Mississauga to York Region you can take one of the extremely frequent highway 407 buses…. Youre forgetting the fact the GO buses fill in the gaps where the GO train doesn’t run.
Here's one of my previous comments. Hopefully this helps.
"GO Transit has a robust bus network that I personally use quite frequently... I feel like it's underrated. GO Transit didn't even bother publishing a map of their extensive bus network until this year, which speaks to how much they're neglected.
Just because there's an existing BRT or regular bus line doesn't mean trains can't be added. Obviously, for any new line, the benefits need to outweigh the costs when compared to existing services. In many areas, I believe there needs to be a BRT network first, before expanding rail service. Also, some people may (irrationally) prefer to take trains with inferior service, even if they are slower than buses: the extent of this is debatable but bus lines being converted to streetcar lines in North America is a good example of this.
There are so many GO bus routes running on the section of Hwy 407 in York Region that a train line with small trainsets could potentially absorb a lot of the demand. And this is not including possible induced demand. Adding rail service means having spare bus capacity to improve bus service in the same area or elsewhere. More trains will often require strengthening the existing bus network, rather than cutting it. This is especially important in suburbs, where stations can't realistically be beside everyone and everything."
I love your videos
407 ROW?? Stops at evey second or third interchange and at all higher order transit crossings. Could even incorporate the 403 busway through Mississauga to hit Pearson and link up to the main line at 427/407. Start at Aldershot and end at Hwy 115 or better yet, in Peterborough. Add express trains that stop only at major stations and make them 200kph. Possibly run local trains back and forth between major stations? Dougie can take the 10+ billion earmarked for the 413 and use it here!
If transit funding were as much as the highway funding... GTA (and Ontario as a whole) would be a much better place. Traffic, the very thing these highways are trying to fix, would probably be much better off. The other big mistake was selling the 407... for less than the price of the 413, the provincial government could partially/fully subsidize the tolls effective immediately. I know that there are many people who only take the congested 401 just because the 407 is too expensive...
Don't get me started. $3.3B lease so Mikey could balance the budget with his common sense revolution. Did you know that extra $300M extended the lease from 60 to 99 years? Talk about fiscal mismanagement. And now another $1B spent by Dougie to buy out the Beer Store a year early. Sorry for the political rant.
In a perfect world, all the highways here (i.e. 401, 400) are passenger/freight train lines instead lol. I guess something’s better than nothing though.
There's nothing wrong with building strategic, necessary highways between large cities... the problem is building massive (or arguably, any) highways in dense or urban areas. It's hard to justify building 18 lane "parking lots" when superior bus and rail systems can significantly be improved with that amount of money. Most people drive because it's simply the fastest way to get around; when transit becomes as fast or faster than driving, then it becomes the most popular option because it's just better. This is the case for GO Transit, which has been massively successful for suburb to downtown Toronto commuters. This simple concept is overlooked in many transit projects that aim just to meet the "bare minimum" standards.
This is great feedback for Go’s rail system. But adding extra additional tracks, can freights still run like usual without interfering Go trains without delaying each other?
Maybe... With new flyovers and realignments in strategic locations, I think they could get away with frequent service alongside freight trains. This would take a lot of resources that are already limited (i.e. funding), which are better off being used towards the Missing Link (in my opinion) for maximum benefit.
Ok, what would flyovers be?
@@transittown7891 Basically a bridge crisscrossing the lines so that the trains from different lines in opposite directions don't have to stop and wait for each other to get from one track to the other. Something like this is already present west of Union Station, if you look on satellite maps.
Can I get a source for your data about mode share in the gtha? I've been looking for data just like that.
In the description
Yeah the missing link solution doesn't fix the CPKC issues due to conflicts with CN, it only really solves the CN issues in Brampton (instead of using a fly over). The Government has already decided to add more tracks along the Milton line to solve the Milton line issues, but no planned solution for Brampton.
No they haven't, a Premier made a deliberately vague election promise with no intent of every doing it (it's not practical).
@@mattjones366not surprised about the vagueness, but I'm not sure I agree it's not practical. A lot of the line has room for more track. Mississauga has been building new bridges for a while in preparation.
Here's a previous comment I've made:
"Adding dedicated tracks to the Milton line is definitely a more realistic and simple option... If increasing service on the Milton Line is the only priority, then adding dedicated tracks is a better approach that I'd strongly support.
Unfortunately, these plans to expand the Milton Line are deliberately left out of the official GO Expansion plans (on their website), because there doesn't seem to be a "full" commitment yet. It also doesn't help that the funding from all levels of government has not been sorted out yet. For example, the federal government has not yet committed to funding for the Milton Line, even though they have brought up the topic in the past few years.
I believe this Milton Line expansion proposal spearheaded by the provincial government is mostly for scoring more political points in time for the 2026 election. It's not the first time something like this has happened; the proposal for high-speed rail in Southwestern Ontario was another good example of this."
@@Mystro256 No Mississauga hasn't, as a look at Google satellite images would show.
There are 4 bridges capable of 4 tracks (maybe, see below) - Derry, 403, Confederation and Cawthra. These are all old bridges.
Newer built bridges Like Eglinton, Mavis and Winston Churchill only allow 3 tracks (as does Dixie)
The also relatively new Brittania bridge has no extra space.
Burnhamthorpe and Hurontario also have no extra space.
But this all also assumes that there is enough room on the existing corridor for 2 additional tracks. This may not be true depending on meeting current building standards for rail lines.
But now the big problem - CP wants a 9m separation between their freight tracks and any GO electrified tracks. This means an additional chunk of land needs to be acquired along the entire length of the Milton line from Milton to West Toronto. This is mentioned in the Feasibility Study done in 2015, found at www.mississauga.ca/projects-and-strategies/city-projects/missing-link/
A few comments on this, because TH-cam recommended this video again. Looks like the flyover is happening west of mount pleasant in Halton hills. I'm still sceptical of this missing link idea as a fix for the Milton line alone, but it obviously could have many benefits to the network as a whole. Adding more track on the Milton line, especially a square one route and maybe use of OBRY for a few more stations in Brampton/Mississauga, is something I'd like to see explored first.
I also don’t think go will ever extend the go train to Windsor
GO Transit is aiming to become a regional rail system, rather than just a commuter rail system. Some of the existing lines have been handed over directly from VIA Rail.
To what extent do they want to prove this? Who knows. Regional rail lines in other continents like Europe are sometimes several hours long. Few people ride those trains all the way, as those services are targeted towards those going between stops close to each other (e.g. London-Kitchener, Kitchener-Guelph, etc.)
Unless GO Transit wants to execute a "low-price, high-capacity" service with very limited stops, expanding all the way to Windsor is likely not worth it.
Whether GO Transit should replace or supplement VIA service to London, ON is also up for debate. I think a "proper" GO train service to London, ON would be reasonable with a "low-price, high-capacity" strategy, but this brings up another discussion... who should ultimately be serving Southwestern Ontario and in what ways? VIA Rail, GO Transit, or both? Which markets should each company focus on?
@@TransitTalksClub I think that via should leave west of Toronto to GO and via focus on rual trains in northern Ontario as well as the corridor between Toronto and Quebec.
@@TransitTalksClubeven London is really far for Go service they'll never get to Windsor
This makes a lot of sense - I wonder if GO/Metrolinx would even have the will to explore and negotiate this with CN/CPKC, or is this something that would require political push from the province directly. My guess is the latter - a politician would need to step up to the plate to sponsor something like this
I think the biggest hurdle for such a project is the funding... that inevitably brings up politics. Most politicians would rather support more "local" projects that are a fraction of the cost. This project would need someone to truly understand the big picture of transit and transportation across the GTA, rather than focusing on their own riding.
It would require provincial shoving since they don't like Sharing Track
Wish they (go) had trains and/or bus going out to London
Well, technically, GO ran trains to London from 2021 to 2023... but they used the slow, degraded tracks between London and Kitchener, with a 4 hour trip time. So obviously it wasn't that successful, even between neighbouring cities (e.g. London-St. Marys, etc.)
You should really think about losing the background music. It's intrusive and distracting, and gets in the way of what is otherwise interesting and pertinent information delivered well.
This is good but it all comes up to: "Who's paying for it?", definitely not the freight railroads.
Funding is quite contentious... many transit projects are like that and this is no exception.
The Milton line is getting 2 day all way now as well
This would effectively remove freight service from the city of Toronto, making for one very boring city.
Nothing beats the sound of an AC4400CW or an ES44AC rumbling by Kipling when you are waiting for the bus.
As many have stated, the ROW on the CPKC Galt sub is wide enough for GO tracks to be built parallel to the CPKC line.
Passenger trains are just as fun... you can ride them, unlike "most" freight trains. Legally, at least. Building dedicated GO tracks on the Milton and/or Midtown Line has its advantages, but there are disadvantages as well:
1) Express tracks and services on the Midtown Line and portions of the Milton Line likely wouldn't be as easy. This is especially important within the core of Toronto, where having several frequent stops is necessary to benefit transit within the area and also having express services is important for already long trip times to/from the suburbs.
2) The Kitchener Line would still have freight trains limiting their capacity.
3) The Richmond Hill Line cannot be frequent and interlined with the Midtown Line (unless a flyover crossing the northern freight trains is built).
4) Though I see this branch as "optional", the MacTier Sub branch to Bolton would still be unavailable for passenger trains.
Interesting proposal; it sounds like it would solve a lot of problems.
Please ditch the music. It's irritating and distracting, which means it's more difficult to follow your logic. Not every video needs background noise behind the voice over.
Yes, music is way too loud at certain points, and becomes a distraction. A "voice-over" is meant to have the speech prominently obvious over the much lower background music. Choice of music wasn't bad, just too overpowering at certain points of the video.
"GO" stands for government of Ontario... while all of us in Ontario pay for it, Toronto is the ONLY beneficiary.
That was also one of my first impressions of the Midtown Line... however, the existing commuting data demonstrates that this line would benefit two groups that have just as high (if not higher) of a demand:
1) People who live outside of Toronto commuting to a City of Toronto suburb (e.g. Mississauga to North York)
2) People who live outside of Toronto commuting to another place outside of Toronto (e.g. Mississauga to York Region)
I am also wary of provincial taxpayer funding from one place being used elsewhere... in general, though, it's actually taxes collected from denser areas like Toronto funding and picking up the slack of less dense areas outside of Toronto. So such an approach would actually be worse for non-Torontonians. Toronto is responsible for 50% of Ontario's GDP, but receives less than 50% of provincial funding.
Some arguments elsewhere in the world, like in the UK and London
But your comment ignores that the Toronto and the rest of the GTA generate the majority of the tax revenue that funds Ontario and thus investments in making the GTA more competitive pay off with increased tax revenue. Which can then be used to pay for things in the rest of Ontario.
And all cities around it
This video feels a bit like someone has stared too long at the train maps without actually riding the routes a lot. A lot of the train connections that you want are already being served by alternate transportation services or are having alternate services under construction. The highway 407 GO Buses already provide good Mississauga-Brampton-Richmond Hill service. The Mississauga transit way plus the under-construction Eglinton LRT extension will provide fast service between Mississauga to midtown. The Hurontario LRT should allow movements between different rail lines. GO has an extensive bus service for suburban transportation, and I suspect they are heavily subsidized due to poor ridership since suburban people prefer driving. Trains only make sense when they can provide superior service to buses, so buses often work better in the suburbs. Let’s not forget that the suburbs were built around highways, so all the places that people want to go are near highways, not train lines, so highway buses simply go to more useful places than old train lines do (except in the historical downtowns of older cities like Kitchener or Guelph). Personally, I think extending GO train into the US might be more valuable (people can take advantage of the lower housing prices in dumps like Buffalo, and we can use their airport for cheap flights) plus the high speed rail to Kitchener and London, plus the usual better integration with local service (why are the GO stations positioned so far from the nearest bus stops?) and electrification.
GO Transit has a robust bus network that I personally use quite frequently... I feel like it's underrated. GO Transit didn't even bother publishing a map of their extensive bus network until this year, which speaks to how much they're neglected.
Just because there's an existing BRT or regular bus line doesn't mean trains can't be added. Obviously, for any new line, the benefits need to outweigh the costs when compared to existing services. In many areas, I believe there needs to be a BRT network first, before expanding rail service. Also, some people may (irrationally) prefer to take trains with inferior service, even if they are slower than buses: the extent of this is debatable but bus lines being converted to streetcar lines in North America is a good example of this.
There are so many GO bus routes running on the section of Hwy 407 in York Region that a train line with small trainsets could potentially absorb a lot of the demand. And this is not including possible induced demand. Adding rail service means having spare bus capacity to improve bus service in the same area or elsewhere. More trains will often require strengthening the existing bus network, rather than cutting it. This is especially important in suburbs, where stations can't realistically be beside everyone and everything.
Also, many of the GO stations are far from local bus stops/terminals because many of the local bus stops/terminals were not built with enough capacity in mind to accommodate other buses... Many of the existing bus terminals are at capacity. I think there needs to be more collaboration and coordination between different agencies to avoid such situations.
I would merge Milton and Richmond Hill lines, to create a European-style S-Bahn.
Officially pairing lines together for through-running needs to be done eventually... There is so much capacity wasted by trains terminating and turning around at/near Union Station. The full capacity of Union Station and the adjacent downtown Toronto stations cannot be achieved otherwise.
The "Missing Link" can no longer be built because the "Hazel McCallion LRT" line Maintenance Facility is built on the right of way at Kennedy Road and there is no easy way around it. The missing link is dead.
CN now limits it freight train length to that of the ruling sidings so they do not cause a passing problems.
Richmond Hill service is not very good because it is not time competitive with the subway, especially when they build the North Yonge subway extension.
The CN and CP line in the Don Valley are not close together from a vertical point of view. Height difference is too great. Joining the lines would be very difficult. You need to look in three dimensions, not just two.
Running trains on the Canpa Sub, CN to CPKC in Etobicoke, is speed restricted because of curves.
This has all the earmarks of drawing maps on napkins without looking at the grade and curve problems, let alone getting trains from one side of the right of way to the other.
The current Don Branch of CP is owned by Metrostinks but the high level bridge is unusable.
Before you do another video get out and look at the actual track corridors in three dimensions.
The Missing Link and the Midtown line and all of their challenges are far from easy but not impossible to "get around" (pun intended)... it's a matter of cost and complexity, which are definitely the biggest barriers. Bridges can be repaired/replaced, though at a cost. All of the challenges that you mentioned are great points. I could've brought up the costs/benefits, but that alone could be its own video, for that matter.
This video was meant to be more of a short summary than anything (still ended up being a long one)... though I could definitely make more detailed and technical videos on a specific subject.
In the Don Valley area, connecting the Richmond Hill line with the Midtown line would be accomplished by reinstating not only the Don Branch but also the Leaside Spur (which is currently a trail) which actually used to connect the two lines, without rapid changes in altitude. But I totally agree that the Richmond Hill line is terrible compared to the subway... and when Yonge subway extension opens, the subway will become even more attractive. That being said, alongside the rerouting, if frequency on the Richmond Hill Line is improved (which is unlikely as it's single track), then it has potential to be an "express" alternative to Line 1. More importantly, it could serve as a "link" between Union Station and the Midtown line (though Line 1 could easily fulfill this role on both branches).
What would be challenging as well is building a connecting track between the CN and CP lines in the Rouge area and somehow maintaining easy access to/from the Agincourt Yard.
The Canpa Sub does indeed have an alignment with tight curves (4 degrees), but 4 degree curves are *technically* capable of roughly 30 mph (unbanked) - 60 mph (very banked) speeds if the tracks and turnouts are improved. Again, far from easy but not impossible.
@@TransitTalksClub Canpa Sub will require two grade separations, Horner and Evans, expensive. Leslie rail Trail runs in a residential area and people are going to object. It will also require the re-grading of Lawrence and Leslie to get rid of the grad crossing at Lawrence. There might be room to squeeze the missing link in between 407 and the OMSF for Hazel Line but it would require massive reconstruction of the 407-410 interchange plus hwy 10 and other north south roads. Also CN and CP would have to agree to it and CP does not want to operate on CN tracks. The province cannot force this to happen as railways are federally regulated.
I am surprised you haven't mentioned the Havelock line. It requires a total rebuild but actually might connect some useful areas. To avoid running on CP's Belleville sub it might be feasible to join the Stouffville line at Agincourt yard.
If you do build all these lines it would probably be wiser to avoid dunning multiple route that switch between different line and run frequent service with easy transfer connections.
You need updated origin destination studies to validate the need for these line than a real cost benefit analysis, not a fake Metrostinks one, to justify the expenditure.
Just because there is a right of way doesn't mean it needs a rail line.
@@dbolt6543 It's very likely that only some of the branches I've brought up are ultimately worth it after considering all of the challenges, but at least they're considered. The Havelock line also has potential, especially for Peterborough residents, though there is another project that may bring back service to Peterborough and the area in between. And I do agree that existing rights of way are not always the best place to put a new rail line. It's better to build the Crosstown along Eglinton Ave rather than using the beltline trail right-of-way. It would've been better to build the Mississauga Transitway along a busy transit corridor like Dundas and/or Burnhamthorpe in the first place, rather than using the space beside Highway 403 and the hydro corridor.
What are the odds of this link being built?
Low. Brampton/Mississauga/Milton/Cambridge have wanted this for decades.
Unlikely especially given other projects
GO could really use an orbital GO lime like so bad
What they need to do is electrify and get EMUs
I totally agree... though practically, it's much cheaper for them to keep their current fleet of railcars and switch the locomotives for electric or dual mode. These railcars and locomotives are likely best suited for express and/or long-distance services (also because the cars aren't really meant for standing passengers), so they should be allocated to those services where possible.
At the same time, any growth in the fleet should just be new EMUs (with more standing room) assigned to local and frequent-stop services, as this is where acceleration and efficiency really matters.
Electrification is already in the Works at least for the Barrie, Lakeshore, Stouffville and a little bit of the Kitchener line
One day Cambridge will get a train
The tricky part is that between Cambridge and Milton, the line is mostly single track, so that section would have to be double tracked for passenger rail service to go all the way to Cambridge. The other option is to upgrade the line between Cambridge and Guelph, which can be bought out by GO Transit and would be one step closer towards completing a "triangle" of transit between Kitchener, Guelph, and Cambridge.
They are already moving forward to Build Light Rail between Cambridge and Kitchener and there are plans to build something between Cambridge and Guelph
Interesting ???
Great video. Where could we get in touch with you? Perhaps via email
transittalksclub@gmail.com
We need highspeed rail not slow caveman diesel
GO transit is already working on Electrification and the Top speeds will increasing they already run at 90 mph in some places
Music is irritating. Who died ?
Meh