Premier Kathleen Wynne recently unveiled the Moving Ontario Forward plan which, at this point, consists of a website and a general idea of what level of spending we could see. The details won’t be released until the budget is tabled in early May.
Some ideas come out in comments by Transportation & Infrastructure Minister Glen Murray who is as active on Twitter at times as he is in press scrums. How much these comments are realistic, how much they reflect government policy or detailed study, is quite another matter.
From a funding point of view, there will be two pots of money – one for the GTHA and one for the Rest Of Ontario. When the Transit Panel released its Making The Move revenue tool proposal, misinformed media stoked the idea that rural gas taxes would go to pay for subways in Toronto even though this was explicitly rejected by the panel.
The solution is to fund the non-GTHA projects with non-GTHA money, in effect building a wall around whatever the “GTHA” means for planning purposes from day to day. This may quiet those who feel “Toronto” gets everything, but with the scale of transit operations in southern Ontario, “Toronto” grows every time the government announces a new GO service.
The political rhetoric takes the Scarborough-vs-Downtown battle over rapid transit spending to a province-wide scale. Perish the thought that Thunder Bay should pay one penny toward a rapid transit line in Toronto even though they will reap the benefit from cars manufactured to operate it. The Liberals bought into this divisive talk to win a by-election in Scarborough, ironically in a riding that won’t even see a subway line. The danger is that even within the GTHA, voters may well ask “why should I pay for a service I won’t use”.
According to the Premier’s announcement, “nearly $29 billion” will be split between the GTHA and non-GTHA funding pools over the coming decade with four sources of funding:
- “Repurposing” the sales tax (HST) now charged on gasoline and diesel fuel for on-road use;
- “Redirecting” 7.5 cents of the existing fuel tax;
- Sales of government assets, and
- Proceeds of a “Green Bonds” program.
Among the tactics proposed by the Transit Panel was the leveraging of any revenue stream through borrowing. A government that once was terrified of more public debt may now embrace it with the proviso that it can be retired with earmarked revenue.
The problem here is that new spending requires either new revenues, or cuts in expenses elsewhere. Shifting existing tax streams into a transit fund will leave a hole in general revenues that could be made up by other taxes on classic targets such as the well-to-do and the corporate sector. We must await for the budget for any details.
A backgrounder from the Ministry of Finance hints at some of the projects that might be funded:
Proceeds from the dedicated fund for the GTHA would help build the next set of priority projects included in Metrolinx’s regional transportation plan, The Big Move. Projects identified in The Big Move include: GO Rail Service Expansion (more two-way, all day and rush hour service) on key corridors, Brampton Queen Street Rapid Transit, Dundas Street Bus Rapid Transit, Durham-Scarborough Bus Rapid Transit, Hamilton Rapid Transit, Hurontario-Main LRT linking Mississauga and Brampton, a Relief Line, and Yonge North Subway Expansion to York Region. The fund could also support other transit infrastructure projects that stimulate economic development and improve mobility, such as the East Bayfront Light Rail Transit project.
This list sticks mainly to the established Metrolinx plans and implies that they still have some relevance in this very political setting. However, a backgrounder on GO Regional Express Rail ups the ante:
The new Moving Ontario Forward plan would work toward phasing in electric train service every 15 minutes on all GO lines.
This is a rather careful statement, and the words “work toward phasing in” have been the death knell of more than one project, most recently the Transit City LRT plan. The backgrounder talks of the benefits, oddly, of relieving subway congestion rather than of the much larger regional role GO could have.
It would also give commuters within Toronto another way to get downtown by increasing service between GO stations and Union Station. A commuter could get to Union Station from Danforth GO Station in just 9 minutes, or from Bloor GO Station in just 15 minutes.
This ignores the problem of transferring between routes and the substantial barrier now posed by GO’s separate and punitive fares for travel over short distances within the city. It also presumes there would be capacity available for such short-hop trips. Near-downtown trips were an odd choice to feature in such an important announcement.
Although the “Downtown Relief Line” is still mentioned as an important part of overall plans, work now underway by Metrolinx and comments by some politicians imply that they would love to put this project on a slow track with GO improvements taking up the role. If nothing else, this would free up money in the short-to-medium term for large pet projects elsewhere. Both GO and an expanded subway system have a role to play, but too much rhetoric has focused on single-line “solutions” rather than a network view.
All this begs the question of just how much of The Big Move will actually survive the Minister’s interventions.
In qualifying the electrification plans, both the Premier and the Minister talk of “lines that we own”, although the Minister is on record about acquiring more track for GO:
“We’re looking at higher speed connectivity, buying up rail lines more aggressively, improving service outcomes and more regular two-way GO service,” Murray said of the priorities that will be laid out in the budget.
… he said the province is actively buying up rail capacity so that GO Trains are no longer seen as “tenants” on other railroad’s lines.
“We now own 80 per cent of the track that we need to own, we will be buying up the remaining 20 per cent and a lot of that is on the lines that come to Kitchener,” Murray said.
[Kitchener-Waterloo Record March 31, 2014]
That will be a challenge considering that portions GO does not yet own are the main lines of CNR and CPR, not lightly used or abandoned branches.
GO has long had an aversion to electrification both because of objections from the railways whose lines would be affected, and from a chronic lack of strong, dedicated funding that could expand service and operations to a range where electrification made sense. Changing that outlook would be quite a coup, but this depends on continuity in the government and long-term commitment to transformation of the GO network. GO must have a publicly announced plan for expansion and improvement beyond whatever is needed to win the election of the day.
On the municipal front, things are not quite as clear. Although the Metrolinx Investment Strategy included 25% of new revenues for municipal projects (with 15% going to transit), municipal funding was completely absent in this announcement. Indeed, Murray has rather testily noted that Toronto, especially, already gets money from the gas tax and has revenue tools such as Vehicle Registration Tax that it chose not to use.
The gas tax revenue, of course, has been established for many years and is worked into the budgets of all local transit systems. It is not “new money”, and can hardly be cited in response to questions about the hoped-for Investment Strategy dollars. [Toronto splits its provincial gas tax between the operating and capital budgets. See 2012 financial statements at page 26 (operating, $91.6m) and page 28 (capital, $75.0m).]
Murray also spoke of “High Speed Rail” in the Toronto KW London corridor, an idea that has been floated before. Although this was unclear in the press statements, Murray’s Twitter exchanges claim that the corridor would see 320 km/h operation (see below). The problem with the Toronto-Kitchener-London corridor, however, is not simply getting from one and to the other, but to the many stations in between.
The line once had reasonably frequent VIA trains on rider-friendly schedules, but this service withered through years of cutbacks and, more recently, competition from GO expansion. The infrastructure needed for operation at this speed is substantial, and one must ask whether the corridor’s demand could be better served simply by more frequent service at typical (Canadian) rail passenger speeds up to 150 km/h. Better service for southwestern Ontario risks being highjacked as an HSR technology project rather than a service improvement that could be delivered faster at much less cost.
The operative phrase throughout the announcement was “wait for the budget”. A Liberal party website promotes the Moving Ontario Forward plan, but is short on details pending the budget announcements.
Meanwhile, Minister Murray, a prolific tweeter, adds his own spin to the debate. [The tweets have been edited to remove extraneous user ids and hastags. All of this can be retrieved by browsing Murray’s Twitter account @Glen4ONT.]
On April 17, an exchange about GO and Downtown Relief, Murray shows support for both regional and local relief.
Glen Murray: #RER15Min will build transit ridership on local transit routes. Need 2 plan GO-local transit connections together. Greater demand w/RER
Robert Zaichkowski: I wonder if #RER15Min will lead to GO stations being placed closer together? Could be a good #ReliefLine solution.
Glen Murray: Robert you are absolutely right. Downtown relief needs system wide relief & increased capacity downtown.
Also on April 17, an exchange about the Scarborough Subway.
Rob Salerno: So if Scarb has access to improved GO service, is there still ridership/need for a subway there?
Glen Murray: MLX will make that decision. We will meet our commitments.
Rob Salerno: erg, so now the Scarb subway may be cancelled if @Metrolinx says it’s not necessary?
Glen Murray: No. Let MLX do their job.
Rob Salerno: Huh? Those two sentences are contradictory.
Glen Murray: No. MLX has made a decision. I don’t imagine that will change, but it is their decision.
Oh come off it, Glen. The idea that Metrolinx makes any decision independently of the government is riotously laughable. The Liberals ran on a Scarborough Subway platform to win the Scarborough-Guildwood by-election, and Murray himself is pushing a subway from Kennedy Station to Scarborough Town Centre via the existing SRT alignment.
It’s amusing that in one line, Murray says that Metrolinx “will make” the decision, and later that they “have made” it. One of these statements cannot be true.
Is there now a recognition that the rationale for the subway may have been cooked to placate Scarborough voters (not to mention the Scarborough Liberal Caucus)? Might a proper analysis show that another option including GO improvements might be preferable? If Metrolinx made a decision, where was this analysis? Nobody has ever published a review including GO services, the subway option and the Scarborough LRT network proposals.
Even better, what would happen if an independent Metrolinx actually concluded that the Scarborough Subway was a waste of money? Would such a report ever see the light of day?
In a discussion with the Globe’s Oliver Moore, we hear about the benefits of more frequent off-peak service.
Oliver Moore: Increased GO service will lead to higher ridership and lower subsidy required, @Glen4ONT says. Could lead to more competitive fares.
@GTAMOVEnetwork: The big problem is spending the money required to take GO transit from “commuter” to “rapid transit” and in ensuring that the investment in GO Transit will not be pulled back in the first 3 years when ROI is not great.
Glen Murray: Not an issue at all.
@GTAMOVEnetwork: I very much hope so. This is going to be a huge investment and ROI won’t be seen for a long time.
Glen Murray: Not true. 1/2 hour Lakeshore service increased ridership & fare revenue by 30% in less than a yr.
This discussion dodges the basic point that capital costs have never been considered in evaluating GO’s business, only day-to-day operating costs. The situation is the same at the TTC. It is very unlikely that GO will make a profit from extra fares with expanded service. If anything, one could argue that service improvements should come as quickly as possible to maximize the ridership and convenience from the capital investment.
On service to Niagara Falls, London and “HSR”:
Glen Murray: Niagara will be getting 15min Regional Express Rail. See today’s announcement. Completed with in 10 yrs.
Tom W: Wynne said GO-owned tracks only – still valid? Or will GO be buying tracks from Burlington to Niagara Falls?
Glen Murray: No. All tracks we own or lease.
Tom W: Thanks! Also, does “high-speed rail” to London mean 200+km/hr?
Glen Murray: 320KM
Tom W: To be clear, you’re promising a train with a top speed of 320 kilometres per hour running from Toronto to London?
Murray really seems to be freelancing on both of these issues given the ownership and existing uses of the corridors in question, not to mention the challenge of truly high speed operation in the KW-London corridor.
On April 17, asked about travel across Toronto rather than to the core:
Glen Murray: #RER15Min is 15 minute service across the GTHA using Electric Multiple Units (EMUs) running on all GO lines. Huge reduction in congestion.
Saurabh: Someone going from York region to Peel can bypass Union?
Glen Murray: Yes. Once the Crosstown is complete. It is under construction now.
Someone should mention to the Minister that his own government chopped off the western end of the Crosstown, and unless the boundary of Peel Region is now at Weston Road, the Crosstown won’t get someone to Peel from Richmond Hill even presuming they wanted to take such a route.
And finally on April 19:
Glen Murray: Projects 4 Prov funding will b evaluated by MLX based on Big Move priority & net benefits.
This, of course, presumes that “net benefits” are fairly calculated and don’t include politically inflated assumptions.
When the budget comes out, we will see just how much of the “promises” made here have survived.
Steve Munro 
Blame city council for the Scarborough subway fiasco.
Steve: Yes, but Queen’s Park was rather compliant in the whole mess too. Instead of arguing the merits of the agreed-to LRT plan, they pushed the Minister’s own version of the subway.
LikeLike
HSR not suitable? While I agree that not running some sort of local service on top of the HSR to serve the likes or Guelph is important, HSR is something that has been missing from the North American context for years and is badly needed. If they want to introduce HSR service with no local service paralleling it, I may be concerned, but HSR will absolutely be worth it. Being able to get to London in say, 1:15 would be revolutionary. It could fix some issues with Pearson capacity as well, as shuttle flights between London and Kitchener would no longer be needed. There are currently 8 daily flights out of London making the short hop to Pearson, for example. freeing up 15-20 slots at Pearson for larger planes to do longer distance flights isn’t insignificant.
The corridor is also fairly straight, there may be a few realignments required but it won’t be any worse than say, building a freeway on the route. $3-4 Billion tops for the project. I don’t see them doing too many modifications to the Georgetown south section of track either, they will probably just have it run at 90mph through there.
That said, what I am getting from this is that they don’t really have a set list of projects for Metrolinx to fund beyond the modifications they seem to be making for the GO service. I feel they are going to give, say, $8 or $9 billion to GO to electrify and create that service, and leave the rest with Metrolinx to fund what makes the most sense. You also probably are going to see a big push for municipal contributions, so that this money can be spread further. Getting Peel to drop a couple hundred million in the Hurontario LRT pot, Durham a hundred million for the BRT, etc.
As for the rollout schedule, I agree that its been a mess. Release of policy by twitter is never a good thing.
Steve: My problem with the HSR proposal is that major changes would be needed on the line where it passes through towns where HSR will never make local stops. To run at a sustained 320km/h, the right-of-way needs to be exclusive and the grade crossings must go. There is also the small matter of freight operations which are not trivial on parts of this corridor. Also, this has never been part of the Metrolinx plan, and it should not be competing with priorities in the GTHA for funding. In the context of the announcement, it is a completely red herring. However, we’re good at this sort of thing — just look at the money spent on the airport express when what was really needed was better local service in the corridor. Yet another Queen’s Park cock up, a triumph of technology over good planning.
LikeLike
Is the (gasoline) Fuel Tax still at 14.7¢ a litre? Not 14.7%, but 14.7¢. How many years now has it been? Is it adjusted for inflation? No. The Fuel Tax rates last changed on January 1, 1992. See Historical Fuel Tax Rates.
The HST on gasoline is a percentage. If the price of gasoline goes up, the tax collected on the HST also go up.
Steve: It is quite ridiculous that the government is afraid of raising the fuel tax even though it has, as you point out, been fixed for two decades. The regular swings in retail prices are far more than any transit tax that might be imposed.
LikeLike
Murray never replied to the “To be clear, you’re promising a train with a top speed of 320 kilometres per hour running from Toronto to London?” tweet…
Steve: Yes, that’s how the thread stood when I wrote this article. I think he really does not understand what he is talking about here, and this sort of gaffe throws the whole announcement into disarray. Will they now pedal back from this claim in the budget, or is it a case that “the Minister said” and therefore we will make it so to avoid embarrassment.
Current Transport Canada rules require in-cab signalling for trains doing 100mph (160km/hr) or more. (This is why the maximum speed across the GO network is 95mph, and their new locos have a nominal top speed of 93mph).
That said, there is huge scope for improvement in inter-city passenger rail service in southern Ontario. 150km/hr every 1 or 2 hours On the Sarnia/Windsor-London-Kitchener/Brantford-Toronto-Kingston-Ottawa corridors would extremely beneficial. Unfortnately VIA’s current legal status makes it very hard for them to have any of their services funded by the province. (Amtrak, by contrast, gets all its subsidy for short routes outside the NE from the states). Still, I would hope the federal government would find a way to let Ontario give VIA money!
In Toronto, GO already has plans for two-way all-day service on those tracks it doesn’t own. On the Milton line (owned by CP), for example, it involves GO adding two new tracks, separating passenger and CP’s freight traffic. (This would be similar to the LSE east of Pickering).
Steve: If only we could simply get frequent service operated within the existing technology and regulatory framework, folks would be ecstatic. There is a mystique about super-fast trains that is simply not warranted in a corridor where we’re down to two trips a day and an unmet demand between closely spaced towns. HSR is the “subway” of intercity rail. Applicable in the right place, but a huge waste of money when the basic need is better service.
LikeLike
High speed rail over short distances seems a waste, especially if a large portion of the trip would have a number of intermediate stops. Yes you could reduce running time, but is not a fair amount the travel time now in station and station approach and departure which must be at low speed?
LikeLike
Has Murray actually ridden a 320 km/h rail line. The ones in France tend to enter and leave built up urban areas on existing corridors so do not get anywhere near 320 km/h. When they get to the rural area they are on totally isolated rights of way with no freight trains or level crossings. This would give short sections between Brampton West (Mt. Pleasant and Guelph then past Guelph to east of Kitchener where they MIGHT be able to build HSR. This has shades of Davis’ announcement to back Krauss Maffei and Mag-Lev. We do not need more stupid futuristic plans. Perhaps he is going to build vacuum trains with cars that run at near supersonic speeds in pipes like they used to use for sending messages in departments stores.
Does GO actually lease any tracks? I have not heard of any. Again 320 km/h requires totally new and isolated infrastructure. I though that a prerequisite for being Minister of Transport would be a tiny bit of knowledge of the possible. Also what about the Welland Canal? It seems to have a nasty habit of raising bridges to let boats pass through.
I think Murray is a poster child for the term “loose cannon.” He needs to be reined in before he completely scuttles any chance at a reasonable transit solution. I have not had time to totally digest this yet.
Steve: What will be particularly interesting will be Murray’s position in a post-election government, presuming that the Liberals are still in office. It is astounding that Northern Ontario is told to get lost when it comes to passenger rail, but we can find new billions for HSR in south-western Ontario.
LikeLike
I’m surprised that the Finance Backgrounder on possible projects that $29B will fund doesn’t mention any projects in the Ottawa area. Presumably, as the largest centre outside of Toronto and as the only other place in the province with a long-term rapid transit plan, it would be a big beneficiary.
LikeLike
Finally the provincial government seems to be cluing in to what is actually the priority – running electric GO trains every 15 minutes, something which every large European and Japanese city has had for years, and which would if completed would result in the GTA having the best commuter rail system in North America. Meanwhile the Finch and Sheppard LRT proposals seem on the verge of being dead. These aren’t exactly a high priority, and if the province is short on money the GO system is the top priority. It appears that the government wants to go in to even more debt to fund this proposal because the NDP won’t let them raise taxes. The whole subway/LRT debate we had for the last few years was a huge waste of time, commuter rail always should have been the top priority not either subways or LRT. Hopefully the province will study the option of running electric GO rolling stock along the SRT instead of the expensive McCowan Road subway tunnel proposal, an option which presumably would mean that Scarborough Centre is served by lower frequencies than the LRT/subway options but by longer trains.
The proposal for “high speed rail” between Toronto, Kitchener and London presumably really means lower speed rail, as I assume that Glen Murray is misusing the term. If this is to stop at Pearson Airport, this means totally rebuilding the brand new airport rail link spur for longer trains, which means wasting quite a bit of money. This sort of service (and trains to Niagara as well) probably ought to be run by GO but separately from the rest of the GO system i.e. express trains separate from shorter-distance trains with hourly frequencies and reserved seating. True high speed rail is too expensive and does not make sense for these lines.
LikeLike
Doesn’t this say more about Glen Murray being a fool, than it does about the Liberal’s transit planning?
Murray has said some bizarre things on Twitter, including denying that the Liberal’s ever promised to build the Sheppard East LRT before 2020. Why are we suddenly taking him seriously?
Steve: Because the Minister is always right. At least until he is shuffled to another portfolio, and then the staff gets a chance to train in a new one. The sad part is that he is likely the most pro-transit Minister we are likely to see for a while, and a lot may fall off of the table.
LikeLike
Glen’s response to my question on twitter was mind-boggling to say the least. I did give him a specific example (Richmond Hill – Mississauga) later but didn’t get a response. Even if Crosstown went all the way to Square 1, does that mean that the Richmond Hill line will have a new stop to connect to the Eglinton crosstown? Same question arises for the Stouffville line.
Steve: I fear that Glen is making this stuff up as he goes along, and his lack of knowledge at the detailed level is distressing, to put it mildly. Good proposals may be sandbagged because the Minister just has to answer, even if he doesn’t know what he’s talking about.
LikeLike
I have heard Glen at other (non-transit) constituency meetings and he always has to have an answer for everything and seems to think adding details is wise. In general people would probably prefer politicians (and others) who say “I do not know the answer to that but I will find out.” That way too they could avoid making rash and unfulfillable promises.
LikeLike
I don’t think “the corporate sector” can be considered a classic target as the Libs have been cutting corporate taxes in Ontario. They could (and should) easily raise corporate taxes by a few percentage points to fund transit. And of course, the return on infrastructure investment to the business sector far exceeds what they would be putting in (assuming transit was actually built).
Steve: I am partly in jest here. The groups mentioned are classic targets for the NDP whose support is necessary to getting any of this past budget day.
LikeLike
I presume this would come from the $14 billion in money from the “rest of province” funds, as well as some of the more far flung GO upgrades Murray is talking about such as Niagara.
As for the issues with the line, I am aware of them. I presume they wouldn’t push for 100% 320km/h at all times once you pass Brampton, but in general I can forsee $3-4 billion doing it easily. Major squish points would be downtown Brampton where you would probably have to squeeze through 4 tracks as well as Guelph, which would likely require some small scale demolition to completely grade separate the corridor through the city. I presume the freight tracks through the heavy use section would run independently and they may have to build a grade separation between them and the HSR tracks to get it over to the south side for when it leaves the corridor. The relatively little GEXR freight that occurs could probably be pushed to the evenings when the HSR isn’t operating.
As for Murray’s seeming lack of knowledge, it appears from his twitter convos (such a horrid way to let out info) that they had some basic reports done up to look at ridership and some simple justifications, just like they did with the Scarborough subway. (Murray had that report done behind the scenes looking at the viability of the subway running on the SRT corridor.) While I doubt that he has the knowledge to look at initial problems with a project immediately, I’m sure that he can read a report on it and judge it based on the information contained in it. At some point somewhere he mentioned that they looked at bringing “regular speed” rail to London but the ridership and economic benefits of upgrading to HSR were huge so they went that route.
Steve: And how will folks in the Rest of Ontario feel about a huge chunk of “their” money going to this sort of project when, for example, there isn’t decent rail passenger service to many other areas, let alone HSR? Shouldn’t there be some sort of analysis and prioritization method in allocating money for projects, the sort of “value for money” the Minister is so wont to trot out whenever he talks about projects?
Your attitude about $3-4 billion, about 1/4 of the funding available, is rather cavalier, almost the sort of approach that blows billions on a subway we don’t need. The difference here is that HSR to London won’t do anything for votes elsewhere in Ontario, especially the north.
LikeLike
Just a note, but the Stouffville, Kitchener, and Barrie lines will have connections to the Eglinton LRT on opening day. A Richmond Hill connection wouldn’t be too unreasonable, though it would be a roughly 150 meter walk up a valley hill to get to Wynford station on the Crosstown.
As for York Region to Peel, I presume highway 407 bus service utilizing the Mississauga transitway will be the proper solution to that. GO express rail to Unionville or Langstaff, GO bus along the 407, and down the (future, but funded) 427 HOV lanes to the transitway.
LikeLike
I agree with Steve. HSR is a lamentable spanner in the works. Most of my smart, critical friends respond with, “yes, let’s build high speed rail it works so well in Europe/Japan” while not considering that first they had robust transit service at all levels. Toronto might be a possible node for high speed rail, but London? Unless I’m mistaken and the transit mode share is quite high, most people in London will find it more convenient, faster, and cheaper just to drive to Toronto rather than take the bus or drive to the station in London.
I really wish the province would channel much more of their funding towards basic ridership goals. Reach X level get X chunk of funding (eg, get 10 million more rides a year, get $10 million in capital funding, $5 million/year operating.) The way it works now is that the province pays for a big new subway but then leaves the TTC to operate it. New riders on the subway cost the TTC more money than they bring in, so thanks to the province and all other things being equal, service gets cut on local surface routes. Absurd!
LikeLike
Will transit pet projects ever end? (Sheppard stubway, Vaughan subway, Scarborough subway)
I won’t hold my breath for that!
LikeLike
The question with regards to HSR to London should be what is the destination within the GTA, and how many people want to make that trip. London to Toronto is only 200 km. How much difference is the 150 km vs 320km going to make? How frequently is the trip made and would frequent more express trains not have a greater impact?
3-4 billion could have a huge impact on Ottawa or KW Cambridge transit. High speed will make little difference if it has frequent long stops, or runs so infrequently as to be ineffective. I would argue the trip from London or Kingston to Toronto is not where the most urgent problems are.
Guelph, Milton, Oshawa to Toronto yes, but will exceeding 150 km/h make a difference or are dwell times and speeds/close to station more of an issue?. Windsor or Ottawa might be a long enough trip for the extra speed to matter, but is that what is being proposed? Reducing daily commutes is where the focus needs to be to really have an impact. The question then is where is that time spent, between say 120 and 150 km/h or at much lower speeds than 100km/h or at stops or waiting on platforms?
LikeLike
With all of the talk about making GO more than a commuter service and the sudden jump to high speed rail, I think the province needs a province-wide rail strategy to organize these initiatives, especially as they grow out of Metrolinx’s mission to serve the GTHA. There is more to rail than just running passenger services, there are also the issues of trackage and freight. A body devoted to rail with a mission to cover the entire province could ensure that valuable rail links are not lost, since these can affect the rest of the province. For example, the loss of the link between Smith’s Falls and Mattawa now forces all traffic through Toronto, clogging lines that could be better serving passengers.
As mentioned, in the United States, Amtrak routes under 750 miles are entirely state funded. This creates systems like Amtrak California and Amtrak Cascades, which serves Oregon, Washington and Vancouver British Columbia. The province could either work with VIA or create it’s own system building on what exists, which I believe would be broadly supported across the province. This would serve the middle ground between commuter rail and high speed rail. With the government announcing it no longer plans to sell Ontario Northland this is a start, and the ONR could be a building block of this new organization with a similar mandate, to protect and either operate or organize rail services in the rest of the province.
LikeLike
Hi Steve, it’s me again. I have to say I am not impressed with this announcement at all. I was hoping to hear about the post second wave projects (Eglinton Phase 2, Jane LRT, etc.) I feel that the government has decided that they can push the DRL back by announcing this, but without fare integration, the people within Toronto’s borders simply will not ride. I also fear for the Finch LRT and the Sheppard East LRT. I feel the the Scarborough Liberal Caucus led by Brad Duguid is holding up the Sheppard LRT in hopes they can complete the Sheppard subway.
Murray has also mentioned that he never said that Finch LRT would be completed by 2020. I find this ridiculous. Finch between the Malton Border and Jane is the most inaccessible part of Toronto proper by transit. This LRT is sorely needed to rejuvenate places like Jane-Finch, Finch-Weston, and the Rexdale area. I feel the Liberal government keeps changing its plan for GTHA transit too often and that is to the detriment to all of us, because if the PCs get elected, I feel Hudak would cancel all LRTs.
Steve: Murray should look at the dates Metrolinx, presumably with Queen’s Park’s blessing, announced for the LRT lines and has not (yet) rescinded. His interference in the plans risks derailing everything.
LikeLike
I agree 100 percent. I understand he is looking to keep the government in power, but he should choose one plan and then stick to it. It seems like Murray is in over his head. The focus right now should just getting GO to half hourly frequencies on the other lines, it would be much cheaper and fulfill the mandate. The Finch LRT should be built in its entirety, perhaps extended to into Scarborough. I always felt it could have been brought to Neilson Road and tied into the Scarborough Malvern LRT. I would also like to see the Scarborough Subway canceled, have they even started the EA for it?
Steve: Money for an EA is approved, but there has not yet been any public participation announced.
Just a note, but the Stouffville, Kitchener, and Barrie lines will have connections to the Eglinton LRT on opening day. A Richmond Hill connection wouldn’t be too unreasonable, though it would be a roughly 150 meter walk up a valley hill to get to Wynford station on the Crosstown.
Extending the crosstown to Pearson would be a much, much better solution then all of these. Then you could also bring the DRL to the crosstown’s Weston or Keele Stops.
Steve: What is so funny here is that Glen Murray talks as if this extension is already under construction when (a) it is not even funded and (b) I suspect that Metrolinx eyes anything like this as competition for their precious UPX.
LikeLike
I think that this would play better politically as well. As it is, people will believe that he is really planning to do nothing! He needs to focus down on a handful of priorities within the Toronto, a handful beyond in the GTHA, and a handful in the balance of the province. A completed CrossTown will have a carry on effect in most of Toronto through shifting length travel and load on buses, and likely even some diversion from existing subway.
Enhanced GO will also pull people off roads, subway and buses, and have a material impact on the commutes of people who change nothing. He needs to announce less and focus on the impact of what is already a serious proposal. He needs to sell how he can make the largest improvement to the most people’s commutes with the smallest amount of money. GO for the through commutes, LRT & BRT for the trunk lines except where these will not serve. That would mean having credibility because now the 14-15 billion for the GTA would be huge. Spend it on subway and high speed rail, and you get very little bang. He should not even be talking about the west side of a DRL, as there is still room on the Spadina line (especially post automatic train operations and increased/multiple terminus capacity with Vaughan extension after completion). He can also talk about the impact of projects already well underway.
He should look to the projects that have the maximum impact on the network, by shifting loads and reducing bus trips and crowding for as many as possible. The gee whiz stuff will likely not be sustainable, and will cost too much to expand later as required (see SRT for history). Please let us stick with commuting and stay with best proven practice, this also provides credibility because you can point to where it already works, and how much impact it has. We can look around and see where commuter rail, LRT & BRT work (and do not) and what the implementation costs were.
LikeLike
When Murray talks about the CrossTown line I assume it is the Eglinton CrossTown line new under construction and not the future possible GO cross town line on the CP’s North Toronto Sub.
Steve: Yes.
Another point that is often made is that the 14.7 cent a litre tax on gas is a highway tax. It has not been a dedicated highway tax since the 60s. Cars create a lot more cost than simply the road upon which they drive. There are increases in health, policing, snow clearance and environmental costs and this is part of general revenues. It also gives the government more freedom in how it is spent which probably the real reason for the change.
LikeLike
I agree completely, he needs to stick to one thing and implement it. I was in Hamilton today, I walked past the James North project. That is just an example of how Metrolinx has not been clear with their priorities. First it was all day service. Then it was 2 trains. Now it’s 15 minute service. I mean of course people will think you will do nothing if you keep switching plans!
LikeLike
Most of the HST’s in Japan and Europe (Spain, Britain, Germany) are not travelling at 300 (+) km/hr.
Express trains yes. But most are putting along at maybe 220 km/hr to 280 km/hr.
For Toronto to London 220 km/hr should do, once you clear the city.
Four stops: Union Station, Pearson, Kitchener, and London.
LikeLike
I wonder how the good folks of Stratford will feel about their city being torn up to accommodate a high-speed train that more than likely won’t stop there?
What a wretched, back-of-the-napkin idea.
LikeLike
The problem of course means that you will have a harder time getting elected, and the incoming government will have an easier time cancelling vapor transit, as they will not really have to make an announcement, or deal with real fall-out, as nobody was expecting anything anyway. Focus on a very short list, and have real commitments made and seen to have been made. Is GO on 15 minutes all day for real? Does it really make sense on all lines? Commit now to all day 15 minute GO, and start buying what is required and show a roll-out, start bidding Scarborough LRTs, start bidding the 2nd phase of the CrossTown, get an EA started on a Don Mills Subway. That should be enough to talk about at a Provincial minister’s level.
LikeLike
I think John Tory and Glen Murray need to have a joint press conference so they can announce the new 100 year 320 km/h subway high speed rail line to London ON. They could extend the Bloor subway out Dundas street to downtown London. The acceleration and braking rates might be a little high for comfort but who cares if it can get to London in an hour or so.
God save us from idiot politicians and their dumb pronouncements.
LikeLike
Some thoughts:
1. Splitting the GTHA and non-GTHA funds: makes perfect sense. GTHA is both more densely populated and more wealthy; it would not be fair to expect rural communities to pay more taxes for GTHA transit. (Thunder Bay is an exception in that it actually benefits from GTHA’s transit orders, but we aren’t going to create a customized tax model for one small city.)
Steve: Where a problem will come in is that there is a lot of “rural”, or more accurately non-GTHA, Ontario. Is there enough money to cover things like urban transit systems, highway expansion in both the south and the north, and transit options outside the GTHA (of which the High Speed Rail proposal bridges that boundary)?
2. Borrowing for transit expansion: I support it, given the scale of backlog and the difficulty of selling transit taxes to the public.
3. Running 15-min service on “all” GO lines: IMO, not all lines within Toronto’s borders have same potential to service the areas they run through. Priority should be given to lines that serve remote corners with no easy access to subways: Lakeshore E and W, Brampton, Milton, and Stouffville lines. Other GO routes can live with less frequent service for the time being: Barrie line (too close to Spadina subway for much of its length within Toronto), Richmond Hill line (too curvy), and Bolton line (most of its catchment area will be served well by the Brampton line).
4. HSR: only if it fully commercially viable, i.e. can sustain prices that cover 100% of operating costs and recover the construction costs within 15 – 20 years. If a public subsidy is required, then a less speedy but more frequent “local” GO service will be more useful.
5. The Relief subway line should be a priority in any case. It can’t be substituted by GO service expansion as most of the new GO capacity will be consumed by new trips between 905 and 416, not within 416.
6. It would be unwise to cancel Scarborough subway at this point.
Steve: I don’t agree on this. Much depends on a more detailed cost estimate that would come out as part of the EA process, as well as the political lie of the land in a year’s time.
7. Glad to see some interest in the East Bayfront LRT project; it is relatively cheap and will be definitely useful.
8. Surprised that finishing Eglinton LRT to the airport is not on the map; seems both quite useful and an easy sell to the public.
Steve: Metrolinx and Queen’s Park don’t want any competition for their pet project, the UPX. Hence the absence of the western ends of both the Eglinton and Finch LRT lines which would actually bring airport service to a much wider potential ridership.
LikeLike
Sorry but after countless corruption scandals, the Liberal plan will be remain exactly that (i.e. a plan) as an election is very close and the Liberals are going out of power. I would prefer an NDP government but I would accept anyone but Liberals as I need accountability even if less transit is built.
LikeLike
I hate to say it, but this feels like the Ernie Eves time. The government has run pasts its clear notion of what needs doing. It is now drifting around without a clear focused set of priorities. I am not convinced that a change in government would perforce mean less transit, although the Conservative rhetoric scares me. Should be, this is the plan, we can discuss what needs to be done after this is complete, or at least the last project is under construction.
LikeLike
And what’s worse, they had a legacy in hand: Transit City. If they hadn’t cut it way back and then delayed the remainder, at least some and possibly much of it (depending on the scenario) would now be done or approaching completion. Ford and his fellow travellers’ lies about LRT would be revealed as such to a wider audience, and McGuinty would have a legacy nobody could question.
With LRT more widely viewed as positive, they could turn the “why isn’t there one in my neighbourhood” question into support for higher funding levels to expand the system even more, which would in turn give them a clear purpose now in 2014.
LikeLike
I have to say I was disappointed with the announcement of 15 minute Electrified Go service. It smells of trying too hard to win votes from some segment of the population. I have to ask, aren’t there still orders for new coaches, new cab cars and new locomotives outstanding to grow the current fleet? What happens to all the equipment we have now and are slated to get?
At this point, I believe 30 minute frequencies on all lines should be the medium term goal (10 years). Heck, I’d be cool even with hourly service. With the astronomical cost of a) electrifying the whole network and b) having to buy a new fleet of EMUs this just doesn’t seem feasible to me. Or would we simply purchase a new fleet of electric locos & cut all the trains in half? In the present political climate, staying the course on previous announcements of 30-60 minute all-day 2-way train service is a much more solid & achievable goal than a half-baked fantasy that anyone looking at the current record of promises made to actual buildout would either laugh their faces off or storm out of the room.
LikeLike
In addition, I like HSR. I wish we had built it a long time ago. But I fail to see how the Union-Pearson segment washes with the still unfinished UPX.
LikeLike
Off Lakeshore I would happilly argue to stay diesel and lease additional locomotives and cut the trains and headway in half, and perhaps gradually buy an additional number of cars to allow the trains to grow. Leading demand, but not massively.
On the Lakeshore Line is electrification required to get us to 8 trains per hour? If not do the work required to get there first (changes to platforms and signals). Building transit should ideally be done a little at a time, as Moaz said with “leaps of faith” not “leaps of insanity”. A 30% increase in capacity should not be dismissed, and should be a reasonable current goal, and should be pursued with the minimum commitment reasonably possible. Have a plan in terms of what next (once we get close to using that up).
High Speed Rail sounds like an expensive commitment with dubious payoff. Good management means addressing the most effective least expensive solutions first.
Steve: One important reason that GO likes fewer, longer trains is that the process of qualifying a new engineer is very long. As things stand today, the growth of service is partly constrained by the number of people available to drive them and the rate at which this can be increased. This is not, by the way, a union plot, but a regulatory requirement designed to ensure well-trained engineers on freight railways.
LikeLike
I’ve had the pleasure of riding the Shinkansen along the Tokaido line at speeds of 220 and 270 km/h, the HSR in Taiwan (280km/h) and the Shanghai Maglev (437km/h).
The amount of infrastructure required to move trains at those speeds is mind – boggling…even if they don’t move at top speed for the entire trip. The Shanghai Maglev, for example, reaches 100km before it leaves the station, and 437km around 3 minutes on. It sustains that speed for 2 minutes and 30 seconds then coasts for the remainder of the 7 mins 30-odd seconds trip. Taiwan’s HSR is pretty fast and speeds are at the higher end of what HSR could do last decade … but I’ve recently read that there are concerns the elevated guideways are dropping millimeter after millimetre. The line is also losing money hand over fist and the finances had to be restructured recently.
Japan’s Tokaido line has had 50 years to become established. When I rode it 20 years ago they had just decided to run trains every 20 minutes … but many trains were not carrying many passengers so they retained the older, slower fleet and used the newer trains for the busiest periods. Of course things may have changed now.
From my discussion on twitter with Murray (as GTAMOVENetwork) I think highly of his enthusiasm but I worry greatly that he isn’t thinking through all the details. I’m not trying to nitpick or catch his mistakes but I’d like to be confident and accuracy is a big part of that. Saying … for example … that the HSR would service Pearson Terminal 2 (which was closed in 2007) is just a little strange.
Cheers, Moaz
Steve: I really do think Murray is “off track” with some of his HSR remarks. As they like to diplomatically say in government circles, the Minister has been badly briefed.
LikeLike
In the short term as long as you were leasing locomotives from presumably CN or CP could you contract their staff? or even have CN & CP do the moves? Or is it likely that you would be able to train operators at about the same rate that you would be able to actually acquire locomotives?
Steve: It does not matter who pays the driver, there are rules about how you become an engineer, and these include spending time in the pipeline as a conductor (e.g. second in command). The pipeline can be plugged by the limited number of people who want to move up.
LikeLike
I was thinking that due to recent cut backs in Via service, and CN & CP train length increases that they might have some qualified operators available to GO as a shorter term fix. However, given that this has been an ongoing trend I would not be terribly surprised if they did not (I suspect that many more crews are required for the minister’s plan of 15 minute all day all line service). I would prefer to see things done in small increments on the theory that they are more likely to be done shortly.
This approach builds credibility, and allows a great deal more predictability both for the riders, and those planning the system. Planners would be able to see the reactions of riders to changes as they are implemented. People will make choices of travel mode, job, and residence as the system evolves. Also if you do not see an expected ridership change as service is implemented, you can go look at why. A little more local transit service required? Or do we need to delay the next increment at this location, as it is not required yet?
It also permits the bottlenecks to not be discussed as theory but as a visible reality on the ground. You will approach the issue at Union more gradually. Incremental change allows creating a positive opportunity, not force negative change on those who must make it work.
It does however mean fewer big splashy announcements, and mostly a long series of seemingly trivial ones. This used to be called good governance.
LikeLike
This is one of those details that will rarely see the light of day in a political announcement about new service. The training of a Railway engineer takes a long time and there aren’t enough places to accommodate any increase in training spaces that would be needed to provide service for 15 minute RER.
The need to maintain 2 engineers on freight trains (3 crew members … 2 engineers and an ‘ambassador’ on GO Trains) is also not likely to change especially in light of the disaster at Lac Megantic. I don’t see Metrolinx applying for an exemption from Transport Canada any time soon.
Cheers, Moaz
LikeLike
Actually GO needs to maintain an engineer, a conductor and a “Customer Service Ambassador”. The conductor does not need to be qualified as an engineer but GO would like it to be so. CP runs their GO service with an engineer and a conductor the last time I rode one but that was a while ago. The problem is that I believe that you need 2 years experience with a railway before you can train as a conductor then an engine man.
LikeLike
Not at all this is government. Until they have completed construction nothing is for sure, um … or sorry until it has been operating for several years, oh wait you can reverse that too, oh um … never mind.
LikeLike