Metrolinx $55 Billion Plan

[MisterF]

^And serving fewer people.

WRT to the "downtown core line", we should create two different "teams." Each would represent the businesses and land owners around the two most often cited corridors for such a route, Queen and the Rail Corridor. Whichever group promises to cover a greater share of the total costs, gets the route.

With the Metrolinx plan we'll be getting both, for all intents and purposes. With the Lakeshore, Richmond Hill, Brampton, and Mississauga GO lines getting converted to "express rail", they'll basically be the equivalent of subway lines. Here's how Metrolinx defines express rail:

High speed trains, typically electric, serving primarily longer-distance regional trips with two-way, all day service. Station locations would generally be the same as for regional rail, but with faster and more frequent service.

Average speed: 50-80 km/h
Headway: as low as 5 minutes between trains
Capacity: 25,000-40,000 per hour
Stations: 2-5 km apart

...So basically the GO lines will become a DRL serving longer distance trips from the suburbs, connecting to Union while the Downtown Core line will be a DRL serving shorter, urban trips using Queen or another street through downtown. Sounds like a good plan to me.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

Re: GO lines becoming a DRL - improved GO trains will offer some "relief" to the subway system, but they won't do anything for "downtown" unless quite a few stations are added on the GO lines, which probably won't happen. They also can't function as suburban subways without more stations. I assume that diferent trains (electrified?) will be used that can accelerate/decelerate quicker, permitting more stations while retaining decent average speed.

 

[Le Gique]

and don't forget another key consideration in whether GO/regional rail will be a real alternative to adjacent local service is pricing
-if fares are markedly higher, will people shun GO-type options?
-the RER operates in central Paris on the same fare structure as the metro

 

[Chuck]

I'd like to remind you all of the definition of transportation planning:

The process in which a consulting firm is paid millions of dollars by a public or private entity to develop traffic models that support the said entity's agenda, while overlooking options that would yield a better result.

Whether it was Metrolinx's preference that the downtown subway be built now or after 2030, consist of express service or local service, take the form of subway, LRT, or bus, or be located on King, Queen, or Dundas, it is well within the limits of transportation modeling to prove any, all, or none of the above.

To support any one of their initiatives, Metrolinx need only present one simulation result, which might have been based on population estimate A, density forecast B, modal split C, and modelling software D. If even one of those parameters is changed, which in real life is absolutely possible, the simulation would yield entirely different results. But that doesn't matter, because the public is only shown supporting evidence.

Bottom line: whatever Metrolinx wants, Metrolinx can "prove". Building a DRL now may make much more sense than in 2030. However, in order to push its agenda, Metrolinx need only prove that building it in 2030 is beneficial. They are under no obligation to study the possibility of building it now, let alone proving that to building it now would be wrong.

 

[Anth]

I'd like to remind you all of the definition of transportation planning:

The process in which a consulting firm is paid millions of dollars by a public or private entity to develop traffic models that support the said entity's agenda, while overlooking options that would yield a better result.

Whether it was Metrolinx's preference that the downtown subway be built now or after 2030, consist of express service or local service, take the form of subway, LRT, or bus, or be located on King, Queen, or Dundas, it is well within the limits of transportation modeling to prove any, all, or none of the above.

To support any one of their initiatives, Metrolinx need only present one simulation result, which might have been based on population estimate A, density forecast B, modal split C, and modelling software D. If even one of those parameters is changed, which in real life is absolutely possible, the simulation would yield entirely different results. But that doesn't matter, because the public is only shown supporting evidence.

Bottom line: whatever Metrolinx wants, Metrolinx can "prove". Building a DRL now may make much more sense than in 2030. However, in order to push its agenda, Metrolinx need only prove that building it in 2030 is beneficial. They are under no obligation to study the possibility of building it now, let alone proving that to building it now would be wrong.

Well said. The numbers presented in this modelling backgrounder are absolutely meaningless without far more detail than "we used 2001 census data", we took "social values" into account, and we measured density within 500m(!) of a given line.

I find the Metrolinx plan even more infuriating with this appendix than I did without it.

 

[TOareaFan]

and don't forget another key consideration in whether GO/regional rail will be a real alternative to adjacent local service is pricing
-if fares are markedly higher, will people shun GO-type options?
-the RER operates in central Paris on the same fare structure as the metro

I alluded to this in an earlier posting but I am not sure I made my opinion clear. We have to do a better job of convincing/showing/selling people on the idea that there is more than just the distance travelled that should contribute to the cost of transit....comfort and speed are factors too.

It should cost more for someone to take a GO train than a subway (it is faster and more comfortable) and it should also cost more to take a subway than a bus.

I think some consumers get this. Every morning at the Brampton GO station there is a Via train that leaves around 7:45 to Union. Right in between two GO trains.........there are still a fair number of commuters that get on that train every morning.....they like the comfort and speed and are, therefore, willing to pay the higher price.

Getting the balance right is always the trick but there is no reason a comfortable express trip should be priced the same as a jam-packed, standing room only milk run.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

It's not just some of the crunched numbers that are dubious and trying to "prove" stuff. In the "Diversion of person trips from 400 series highways" category (measured on a neutral/good/better/best scale), the *only* project in the 416 listed under 'good' is the Sheppard East LRT. The notion that switching from the 85 bus to the 85 streetcar will save so much time that drivers will leave their cars at home and flock to transit is just ridiculous.

The GO lines run through the 416, too, and are listed as 'better' or 'best' but even the "downtown core" line gets slotted under 'neutral,' probably just because the DVP and the Gardiner aren't 400 series (and absolutely no one cares about the distinction when talking about busy highways).

 

[borgo100]

Metrolinx should consider building the DRL and Eglinton line as just one circle line...

 

[taal]

Not a bad idea but I think the portion on the waterfront should be LRT while the DRL should be further north (King ... Queen ... Dundas) and it can go North at Dufferin / Don mills.

I'm not sure if it's really needed though ... i.e. having it terminate at bloor is probably fine and LRTs can take care of the less.

 

[Anth]

Local rapid transit not on track till at least 2012

ROB FAULKNER
The Hamilton Spectator

Oct 15, 2008

Regional transportation agency Metrolinx gave Hamilton a reality check yesterday, suggesting planning won't even begin for local rapid transit until 2012 or 2013.

Hamilton city staff -- confident that the city has a good case for light rapid transit -- had hoped for shovels in the ground by 2011.

Metrolinx chair Rob MacIsaac said Hamilton rapid transit will likely appear in Year 4 or 5 of the agency's 2009-2013 budget. Due next month, the budget will outline timing, but not whether Hamilton is to get rail or bus rapid transit. That needs more study.

The budget, and related final regional transportation plan, are being closely watched by city staff, who have said they are "ready to go" on a new light rail system.

MacIsaac, at a Spectator editorial board meeting yesterday, said Hamilton made a good pitch for LRT, but lags behind other cities.

"City of Hamilton staff have done an outstanding job of making the case, but I think that's different than being ready to go. There is a huge inertia to getting one of these things off the ground," he said.

York Region, for example, has a construction consortium ready and environmental assessments done.

"There is no doubt that Toronto, the TTC, York Region are in a league of their own" when it comes to being ready to build rapid transit, said John Howe, Metrolinx manager of investments and projects.

Metrolinx is a provincial Crown agency charged with planning and implementing a regional transportation plan. Its draft plan shortlisted rapid transit from Centennial Parkway to McMaster University in the first 15 years of its strategy.

To start, Metrolinx has $11.5 billion in provincial cash, enough to fund seven years of a $50-billion, 25-year plan revealed this fall.

"I don't see Hamilton competing with others, I see a secure place for Hamilton," said MacIsaac, noting that the first projects to be funded in the Metrolinx budget are likely to be those being studied now: mostly Toronto projects and the electrification of GO Transit's Lakeshore line, which serves Hamilton.

MacIsaac also said that if he were a city manager, he would put money aside in the municipal budget to help fund projects. Metrolinx will only fund a "bare bones" version of rapid transit lines, he added.

City staff studying the issue say two LRT lines in Hamilton -- one east-west, and one north-south -- could cost $1.1 billion. City councillors want Ontario to pay capital costs, and worry about the cost of operating any new system.

Hamilton Mayor Fred Eisenberger, who is on the Metrolinx board, was unavailable for an interview yesterday.

Eisenberger is one of the 11 Metrolinx board members, mostly a collection of Toronto-area politicians and transit system chairs.

 

[Kiwi]

^ Major disappointment, Hamilton always get the short end of the stick even though everyone is united to get LRT ASAP.

 

[taal]

I'm looking at the demand on the LRT routes they want to build in the document above ... now if money isn't an issue go for it. But in terms of priority shouldn't Hamilton be close to dead last ... the usage is so much less then most of the other LRTs proposed!

 

[AKS]

Metrolinx should consider building the DRL and Eglinton line as just one circle line...

LOL looks like the yamanote line ^^; It's a good idea though. It might help to add more stops though so it's accessible by more people.

 

[W. K. Lis]

LOL looks like the yamanote line ^^; It's a good idea though. It might help to add more stops though so it's accessible by more people.

Wasn't that the Belt Line Railway, which failed in 1894? A few remains of which is the current Belt Line bike path.

 

[RedRocket191]

The GO lines run through the 416, too, and are listed as 'better' or 'best' but even the "downtown core" line gets slotted under 'neutral,' probably just because the DVP and the Gardiner aren't 400 series (and absolutely no one cares about the distinction when talking about busy highways).

I think it won't divert trips from the highways because someone living along the line probably isn't going to use the Gardiner to get from Queen West to Yonge (for example). They would probably just stick to city streets.

My two cents anyway.