GO Transit

[Spokes]

Thats terrible. I hope they're ok

[tomh009]

Looks like the GO Train hit a pedestrian at Lancaster.

https://twitter.com/WRPSToday/status/119...0557293568

https://twitter.com/RosieDelCampo/status...3875075075

From the Record:

On Wednesday, a witness told The Record he saw a woman and child cross the two tracks on the sidewalk when the rail crossing arm was down.

Mitch Martyn said he was in his vehicle waiting at the crossing while a CN train was shunting.

"All of a sudden you heard a loud train horn and the GO train appeared coming west, and struck the two parties, with the younger child going under the train," said Martyn, who is an animal control officer with the Humane Society of Kitchener Waterloo.

https://www.therecord.com/news-story/970...m-therapy/

[KevinL]

The implication is that the young boy was a client of hers. Oof.

[westwardloo]

Business case for the kitchener go line.

http://www.metrolinx.com/en/docs/pdf...chener_IBC.pdf

[kps]

Business case for the kitchener go line.

http://www.metrolinx.com/en/docs/pdf...chener_IBC.pdf

Your link is broken — looks like your source gave you an abbreviated link with ‘…’ replacing part of it.

This looks like the correct document: Kitchener GO Rail Service Expansion: Initial Business Case Update — November 2019

[westwardloo]

Business case for the kitchener go line.

http://www.metrolinx.com/en/docs/pdf...chener_IBC.pdf

Your link is broken — looks like your source gave you an abbreviated link with ‘…’ replacing part of it.

This looks like the correct document.

Thanks, I copied it from a different forum site. Should have just attached my downloaded file. Interesting read though if you want to know more about the strategy to improve GO service along the kitchener corridor. 2 trains per hour during peak period, 1 train per hour off peak and 1 train per 1.5hours on the weekends. Hoping to achieve it by 2025. Two different options including building the freight by-pass(which I don't see happening for 3.6billion) or improve the existing rail and add more passing tracks for 927million. This includes rail separation in guelph to increase speed for the from 10mph and in kitchener from 30mph. I wonder in Lancaster will be considered for rail separation?

[KevinL]

I'm not sure Option 2 will work as well as they are claiming - it will require a lot of cooperation from CN that we have no guarantee of securing. I know the bypass in Option 1 is very expensive, but it would ensure separation of passenger and freight to allow everything we're looking for.

[tomh009]

The document projects roughly 10x the ridership for Kitchener/Breslau as compared to today. Maybe reasonable. But the surprising thing is that they expect 80% of that to be to Breslau. Is it an airport traffic projection?

[kps]

The document projects roughly 10x the ridership for Kitchener/Breslau as compared to today. Maybe reasonable. But the surprising thing is that they expect 80% of that to be to Breslau. Is it an airport traffic projection?

A Breslau station with sanely designed access to the prophesied New Highway 7 (e.g. via Fountain, unlike the currently proposed maze) would be the natural choice for park-and-ride commuting to Toronto.

[jwilliamson]

I'm not sure Option 2 will work as well as they are claiming - it will require a lot of cooperation from CN that we have no guarantee of securing. I know the bypass in Option 1 is very expensive, but it would ensure separation of passenger and freight to allow everything we're looking for.

 
Suggesting that it is better for every single resident of the province to pay a few hundred dollars rather than forcing CN to cooperate with passenger rail is indicative of the dysfunctional state of rail in Ontario.

[KevinL]

Forcing CN to cooperate would take federal intervention, at no small political cost. Doable, but unlikely at least in the current environment.

[ijmorlan]

I wonder in Lancaster will be considered for rail separation?

They should just close Lancaster at the tracks to motor vehicle traffic. Either keep a pedestrian/bicycle level crossing or build an overpass just for that traffic. With the new roads being built as part of the highway interchange to the east, and the bridge at Margaret, there is no need for Lancaster to remain as a route for crossing the tracks in motorized transportation.

[westwardloo]

I wonder in Lancaster will be considered for rail separation?

They should just close Lancaster at the tracks to motor vehicle traffic. Either keep a pedestrian/bicycle level crossing or build an overpass just for that traffic. With the new roads being built as part of the highway interchange to the east, and the bridge at Margaret, there is no need for Lancaster to remain as a route for crossing the tracks in motorized transportation.

Hmm I don't know about completely cutting off lancaster and Bridgeport from accessing Victoria street. I am sure the people living on wellington would be upset with the increase traffic on an already busy street. Realistically weber separation was about 30 million. So 50million of the 900+million dollar budget isn't unreasonable. I think they will be looking at closing a lot of the level crossings in guelph though.

[YKF]

I wonder in Lancaster will be considered for rail separation?

They should just close Lancaster at the tracks to motor vehicle traffic. Either keep a pedestrian/bicycle level crossing or build an overpass just for that traffic. With the new roads being built as part of the highway interchange to the east, and the bridge at Margaret, there is no need for Lancaster to remain as a route for crossing the tracks in motorized transportation.

I don't think Lancaster would ever be closed to vehicular traffic. It's far too significant of a street to close off at the tracks. If anything, St. Leger could be a candidate for closing off at the tracks to eliminate another at-grade rail crossing. As for Lancaster, I believe it should be grade separated. It's very similar to the grade crossing of Adelaide Street/CPR in London, IMO (which is currently in the process of getting grade separated).

[jwilliamson]

They should just close Lancaster at the tracks to motor vehicle traffic. Either keep a pedestrian/bicycle level crossing or build an overpass just for that traffic. With the new roads being built as part of the highway interchange to the east, and the bridge at Margaret, there is no need for Lancaster to remain as a route for crossing the tracks in motorized transportation.

Hmm I don't know about completely cutting off lancaster and Bridgeport from accessing Victoria street. I am sure the people living on wellington would be upset with the increase traffic on an already busy street. Realistically weber separation was about 30 million. So 50million of the 900+million dollar budget isn't unreasonable. I think they will be looking at closing a lot of the level crossings in guelph though.

The Margaret Ave. bridge reconstruction was only $6.5 million. If Lancaster could be a bridge instead of an underpass, I would expect that to be a closer comparable. I'm not sure if the grade on Lancaster would allow that though.