A Grand Plan

by

Staging the Electrification of GO Transit

For a good part of today, April 18, a conversation has flown back and forth via email between me, Karl Junkin of TRAC, Mike Sullivan and Rick Ciccarelli of the Weston Coalition, and Robert Wightman (a frequent contributor to comments here and a member of the original Streetcars for Toronto Committee).  I will not attempt to précis all of the threads, but thought it worthwhile to bring the discussion out into a broader context in this blog.

The problem, in brief, is to ensure that the electrification of the Weston/Georgetown corridor happens sooner rather than later and that the number of diesel trains operated on that corridor is kept to a minimum as service builds up to projected levels.

We had quite a discussion about dual mode locomotives with the major points pro and con boiling down to:

  • Bombardier produces a dual mode locomotive which is operating or on order in a few cities.
  • This locomotive could handle a 10-car GO train, but not a 12-car consist.
  • Dual mode would allow electrification to proceed in smaller increments with diesel operation beyond the end of the electrified territory.
  • These locomotives are very expensive, and the added capital spent on them must be weighed against the cost of electrification.
  • They need both diesel power and the power conversion equipment to convert the 25KV distribution voltage for use by the train.  Because there are, in effect, equipment for two power plants, you are always towing around one that isn’t doing anything, but both have to be maintained.

The idea lurking behind this is to maximize the amount of electric operation in the Weston corridor at least as far as the airport in keeping with the desire of communities along the corridor to minimize diesel operation, noise and fumes.

Various links of interest:

Railway Age article (quoted on another site).

Bombardier specification sheets for existing New Jersey and on-order Montreal equipment.

Specification sheets for GO’s current equipment (here and here, similar content).

Recently, I threw a new variation into the discussion by suggesting that there could be two separate fleets of locomotives.  Purely electric locomotives would be used to hall the service on the all-day section of the Lakeshore and Georgetown lines, and diesels would be used for peak period express trips running on the extended routes.

This arrangement would mean that all off-peak service would be electric, and diesel operations would remain only for peak extensions and for lines that had not been converted for electric operation.

There are downsides to this, notably that more infrastructure would be needed to get to the point where electric service could start, but it would achieve much of the goal of reduced diesel operation in the major corridors without requiring electrification to the end of service territory.  It would also eliminate the need for dual mode locomotives — whether this is a “benefit” depends a lot on where you stand on this type of operation.

Finally, all of this assumes that “Blue 22” would be electrified from day 1.  This seems highly unlikely given current arrangements with the proponent, SNC Lavalin, who are not even providing new equipment for their service.  Whether the proposed structures for the airport access tracks can even accommodate future electrification is unknown, and I would not be surprised to hear how we couldn’t possibly force SNC Lavalin to include this in the initial build.

Metrolinx is showing its usual colours on this whole issue saying that the project to get new service on the Weston corridor is far to important to delay, and that electrification is something for the future.  They are not making a lot of friends along the line on this count as well as on other structural issues involving neighbourhood impacts.  I will explore those in a separate post.

by

Praxis II Showcase 2009 at U of T

When:  Wednesday, April 15 from 9:00 am to 7:00 pm

Where:  Bahen Centre Lobby, 40 St. George Street

What:  First year engineering students spent half a term identifying and researching issues of usability, accessibility, and sustainability within the TTC system.  This led to 80 “Requests for Proposals (RFPs)” of which the top six were selected as design challenges to be solved during the second half of the course.

Topics:

  • Improving Passenger Safety Near TTC’s Exposed Subway Tracks
  • Solving the Heat Loss Problem
  • Improving Wayfinding Signage on the TTC
  • Service Delays Caused by the inefficiency of Passenger Dynamics Into and Out Of Subway Cars
  • Revising TTC Bus Interiors to Maximise Space and Boost Passenger Satisfaction
  • Improving the Emergency Response System on the TTC Subways to Decrease Delay Time and Increase Safety

For more information, please see the full invitation.

by

Weston Corridor Meetings Start Tonight

Metrolinx and GO begin their series of open houses for the expansion of tracks and service in the Weston corridor tonight.  Politically, this project has moved from a concern just in the town of Weston to a growing controversy along the line as neighbourhoods learn of the potential impact on them.

Among the issues are:

  • How many tracks are required to handle the planned service
  • To what degree does the proposed Air Rail link (Blue 22) affect track layouts
  • What pollution will be caused by a high level of diesel-hauled trains in the corridor
  • Why isn’t the line being electrified, and what effect would this have on track and equipment needs
  • What is the effect of increased service on existing grade crossings in Weston and at Strachan Avenue

GO Transit fought a long battle with the Weston Community Coalition over issues in their neighbourhood during an earlier GO-managed study of the line.  GO used the term “NIMBY” in an attempt to marginalize this opposition, and that term crept into recent provincial announcements about the need for an enhanced (read less vulnerable to opposition) transit environmental assessment process.  Sadly GO and their new partner, Metrolinx, do not seem to have learned much about meaningful public participation, but now face opposition from other neighbourhoods and possibly from the City of Toronto itself.

The open house schedule is available at the project website.

by

Metrolinx Cancels April Board Meeting

The planned April 24 meeting of the “old” Metrolinx Board has been cancelled.  A May meeting still appears in the events list on the Metrolinx website, but it’s anyone’s guess at this point which version of the Board will exist by then.

Among the long-awaited reports that were expected this month is the Benefits Case Analysis for the Eglinton line.  Meanwhile work continues on design work leading to Transit Environmental Assessments by the City of Toronto and TTC.

by

GO Transit Contemplates Customer Satisfaction and Station Design

Today’s GO Transit board meeting (yes, that Board still exists) included presentations on two related items:

  • Customer Satisfaction and Loyalty Survey
  • Station Access Strategy

The link between these, although they were separate items on the agenda, is that people who cannot conveniently get to GO services won’t use them.

Board members were in a chatty mood, and asked many questions of the presenter, a Transportation Planner from GO’s staff who acquitted herself well on a variety of topics.  I could not help noticing how many questions with a direct relevance to customer experiences, to feelings people have about GO, to problems of convincing more people to use the system, came from the politicians on the Board.  These are members who have a direct relationship with GO customers and potential new riders.  Other members spoke too, but the preponderance of questions informed by a direct link to constituents and municipal issues was quite striking.

All of this will be lost on the new consolidated Metrolinx board where, we are told, politicians would just get in the way. Continue reading →

by

GO Transit Buys CN Weston Subdivision

GO Transit announced today that it will purchase the CN Weston Subdivision for $160-million.  The line in question runs from roughly the Strachan Avenue grade crossing to the junction with the CN York Subdivision at Steeles Avenue.

CN and VIA run comparatively few trains (3 and 6 respectively) each day on the line, although VIA has planned improved service in this corridor for some time.  GO plans greatly expanded service both in frequency and in destination (extending to Kitchener), and this corridor will also host the Blue 22 Airport link should that line ever get beyond the drawing boards.

By purchasing the corridor, GO will not only have better control of train operations, it will be able to retain ownership of the substantial improvements needed to accommodate all of the new services.

The press release is silent on the matter of funding.

by

Metrolinx New Speak

Roger Brook passed on to me a formal reply from the Ministry of Transportation to various questions about the Metrolinx/GO merger.  In the quoted sections below, the questions are Roger’s, the answers are from Emna Dhahak, MTO Bilingual Senior Media Liaison Officer, Media and Issues Office.

Both Minister Bradley and Premier McGuinty have dug themselves into a rather deep hole with their convoluted explanations for the changes at GO and Metrolinx.  Rather than simply saying “Metrolinx and GO were always intended to merge and be governed by a board more like GO’s with few politicians”, we get bafflegab.  Not only that, it’s cut-and-paste bafflegab with the same paragraphs repeated in the answers. Continue reading →

by

Ottawa & Queen’s Park Announce GO Transit Improvements

A joint federal-provincial announcement today added a long list of GO transit improvements to the parking lot and the Hamilton Junction grade separation projects.

Among today’s improvements are:

  • Extension of GO Rail service into downtown Barrie (completion in 2011)
  • Expansion of the tunnel at Exhibition Station to provide a new north access, and additional track capacity at this station (completion in 2011)
  • Widening of the Credit River bridge on the Georgetown line to a capacity of three tracks, with two tracks initially on the new structure
  • Refurbishing existing locomotives to improve reliability
  • Adding 20 bi-level coaches to the fleet

Regular readers will know that I railed [sorry about that] against the amount of spending on parking lots announced in February.  Today’s project list is much more oriented to improvement of service and passenger facilities.  Yes, I know that to car commuters, parking is an important part of those facilities, but it’s not the only one.

From a longer range point of view, the planning issue of how parking lots and structures poison station locations remains a big problem.  The Metrolinx plan for “Mobility Hubs” doesn’t work very well without pedestrian-oriented stations and good local bus services.

by

Ontario Funds Three Transit City Routes

Today, Queen’s Park announced that it would fund three of the Transit City projects — Eglinton, Finch and the Scarborough RT rehab/extension — as well as upgrading of York VIVA BRT corridors with dedicated lanes.

The announcement is fascinating in places for what it does not say, or leaves for future decisions.  Despite much of the build-it-yesterday rhetoric accompanying the GO/Metrolinx merger, the design and EA processes now under way will run their course.  Indeed, the Transit City projects have been proceeding apace thanks to funding at the municipal level to complete this work without waiting for agencies like Metrolinx to get on board.

The estimated cost for the York VIVA project is $1.4-billion with completion in stages from 2011 to 2013.  Lines that will connect with VIVA include the Spadina and Yonge subway extensions although full funding for the latter is not yet in place.

The Scarborough RT will undergo vehicle replacement, infrastructure upgrades and extension to Malvern Town Centre or to Markham Road.  This project will cost $1.4-billion “depending on the technology choice”, and construction will run from 2010 to 2015.  Connecting lines include “the proposed Sheppard East LRT”.

The Eglinton Crosstown line will run from Pearson Airport to Kennedy with a future extension to Malvern (this is the Scarborough-Malvern TC line).  The line will be tunneled between Keele and Leslie, and the total pricetag is $4.6-billion.  Constuction will run from 2010 to 2016.

The Finch LRT will run from Humber College to Don Mills, and then south to Don Mills Station where it will connect with the “proposed Sheppard Avenue East LRT”.  The project will cost $1.2-billion with construction running from 2010 to 2013.

An obvious question in response to this impressive list is “where’s Sheppard East”?  First off, as I noted above, some lines mentioned in the announcement don’t have funding yet, and the Sheppard LRT is mentioned twice.  Finch is explicitly listed as an LRT project, and the technology choice for the RT is still up in the air (no pun intended).  That choice depends on Metrolinx’ own Benefits Case Analysis (BCA) for Eglinton expected to be available, at least in private session, to the Metrolinx Board this month.  We know that the Scarborough RT BCA looked favourably on the LRT option.

There isn’t much point in building one lonely LRT line up on Finch if it wouldn’t be connecting with a larger network, and I think this suggests a larger LRT network is in our future.

Although the source of funding for Sheppard isn’t announced yet, Mayor Miller speaks of construction starting this year on Transit City.  The only place that is possible is on Sheppard.  Also coming up will be the new streetcar order for the “city” network, yet another opportunity for substantial provincial funding.  I suspect there are more rabbits waiting to pop out of one or more hats.

Finally, lest our friends to the west think I have ignored them in my haste to talk about Transit City, Queen’s Park will also fund rapid transit studies in Hamilton.  No technology is mentioned.  There is strong political support for LRT in Hamilton, but will Queen’s Park and Metrolinx let them build anything more than BRT.  A lot depends on what the studies will reveal about demand and development impacts.

by

Metrolinx Marries GO, Dumps Pesky Politicians

Today the Government of Ontario announced that GO Transit and Metrolinx would be merged together in one agency.  Some sort of takeover was contemplated in the original Metrolinx legislation which proposed that GO become a division of Metrolinx, but this part of the bill was never proclaimed.

Since last fall when the Regional Transportation Plan emerged, some at Metrolinx have spoken darkly, and usually privately, about how the politicians are getting in the way of accomplishing Metrolinx’ manifest destiny.  Not long ago, a report on the innocent matter of cross-border fare integration showed Metrolinx’ staff’s true colours and their hunger for power over local transit agencies.  Now Queen’s Park has stepped in.

This is hardly a shotgun marriage, but it came as a big surprise to the local politicians who make up the current Metrolinx board.  This group has been accused of being dysfunctional and obstructionist when in fact anyone who actually watches the board at work sees a truly collegial group of senior politicians who are trying to do the right thing both for their own cities and for the region as a whole.  The 416-vs-905 dynamic everyone thought might doom Metrolinx never developed.

Problems lay, however, in Metrolinx staff and its Chair, Rob MaacIsaac.  Although the agency professed to want as much public input as possible, this was stage managed to produce feel-good support for Metrolinx work, and dissent was actively discouraged.  When the Board asked for a few extra months to fine-tune the RTP, a process that anyone who saw early drafts will know made a huge improvement to the final product, they were seen as delaying progress even though the plan did come out on time.

If anything, the foot-dragging lies at Queen’s Park and in Ottawa, neither of which has shown much love for actually paying for transit projects.  Lots of promises, but no money.  Indeed, the whole concept of multi-party funding schemes is a guarantee of inaction.

What will be the effect of this merger?  In the short term, many things are unknown, but there is good reason to worry that Queen’s Park may actually have derailed the very agency that was on the verge of building a regional network. Continue reading →