SmartTrack (Proposed)

[kEiThZ]

Don't get why you guys are worried about the RER plan. If there's one thing the Ontario PCs would support it's the plan that most bolsters the 905, frees up a ton of GTA roadspace and makes far off developments more attractive (boon for developers). They'll cut the LRTs before the RER. And if push came to shove, so would the Liberals.

 

[gweed123]

Don't get why you guys are worried about the RER plan. If there's one thing the Ontario PCs would support it's the plan that most bolsters the 905, frees up a ton of GTA roadspace and makes far off developments more attractive (boon for developers). They'll cut the LRTs before the RER. And if push came to shove, so would the Liberals.

Hudak was against the RER plan, instead being in favour a slimmed down AD2W proposal. RER is by far the largest component of the GTHA transit funding pot, so it makes it a prime target to be cut. It's also the most abstract transit mode in people's minds, which makes it particularly susceptible to political downsizing.

 

[crs1026]

There may simply be an overarching reluctance to spend money after the cost of the Wynne experience is tallied up. The same thing will eventually catch up at the Federal level also.

RER is being funded quietly and in small packages, unlike TYSSE, ST, Crosstown, Hurontario, Finch, K-W which have a clear scope and deliverable end point. If the next government decided to throttle back RER, who would know what hit the cutting room floor? It's all just vague promises so far. The next government could just approve a couple segments of double track and announce that they had "completed" RER.

It's a time-honoured game for outgoing governments to try and set commitments in concrete so that the incoming government has no option but to complete them.....but it's also a time-honoured game for incoming governments to try and outsmart this. It's also a fundamentally cynical and slipery way to govern. RER needs a detailed scope document and budget allocation declared now.

- Paul

 

[dowlingm]

I think they should just use standard Metro cars just like the other subway lines except these will have catenary power supple. This is a subway line and should use subway cars.

As long as it runs on a line not physically or temporally separated from heavy rail traffic like GO and VIA trains, it's not a subway line no matter how much you want it to be.

 

[Tulse]

As long as it runs on a line not physically or temporally separated from heavy rail traffic like GO and VIA trains, it's not a subway line

And as long as it runs on shared heavy rail tracks, standard subway trains would not meet legally mandated safety standards.

 

[W. K. Lis]

And as long as it runs on shared heavy rail tracks, standard subway trains would not meet legally mandated safety standards.

Since we always did it this way, we cannot change the rules?

I want to know why can't we change the rules.

 

[kEiThZ]

Hudak was against the RER plan, instead being in favour a slimmed down AD2W proposal. RER is by far the largest component of the GTHA transit funding pot, so it makes it a prime target to be cut. It's also the most abstract transit mode in people's minds, which makes it particularly susceptible to political downsizing.

And Hudak paid the price for his stupidity. They won't make that mistake again (unless they are utterly tone deaf). I guarantee it. They know they have to pivot towards more urban friendly policies. They also know, they have very little chance of winning seats in the 416. Under such a scenario, the smart thing is to split the 905 and 416 and prioritize 905 transit. This way, the vote rich regions can be swayed and nobody can accuse them of being anti-transit.

Watch this happen in about a year or two....

 

[ssiguy2]

As long as it runs on a line not physically or temporally separated from heavy rail traffic like GO and VIA trains, it's not a subway line no matter how much you want it to be.

Wrong.

It is true a standard catenary subway cannot share track with freight/VIA/GO due to not meeting safety standards but it can share the ROW. It can share these corridors just as an LRT or even BRT route could as long as they don't share the same track and are physically separated which means nothing more than a concrete median used on the highways.

It's the track NOT the corridor that is the issue.

They could simply build a third-rail system like the current ones but catenary systems have proven themselves to be more reliable on systems that have long at grade stretches as snow is not an issue on the electrified systems unlike third-rail.
Also maintenance crews will have to access GO rail lines and may need to walk over the subway tracks and with catenary electrification is not an issue. Seeing the entire corridor is being electrified anyway overhead catenary subway trains make the most sense.

They could certainly use EMUs but this line will still have quite a few urban stops and subways trains are easier for exist/entry. I also think it's important that they look like standard subway trains so they are more user friendly. If they have electrified GO and RER using EMU and then TTC using the same it will be hard for the less frequent rider toi figure out which system they should take. Subway cars are easily recognizable and are completely associated with the TTC and not GO.

 

[dowlingm]

ssiguy - read my post again. I said nothing about an ROW. I said a line, i.e. track. Something like a Bombardier M7 with a pantograph creates far fewer headaches than sticking one on a Movia and expecting it to operate through the USRC.

 

[salsa]

 

[W. K. Lis]

Please sir, may we have more transit funding...

 

[WislaHD]

https://twitter.com/moore_oliver/status/692788987761709056
"Cllr Shelley Carroll: there are 45 people in council and probably 45 interpretations of what "fare integration" means"

 

[drum118]

Hello Metrolinx
Proposals announced to improve rail travel across London and the south east

 

[ottbike]

 

[1overcosc]

And Hudak paid the price for his stupidity. They won't make that mistake again (unless they are utterly tone deaf). I guarantee it. They know they have to pivot towards more urban friendly policies. They also know, they have very little chance of winning seats in the 416. Under such a scenario, the smart thing is to split the 905 and 416 and prioritize 905 transit. This way, the vote rich regions can be swayed and nobody can accuse them of being anti-transit.

Watch this happen in about a year or two....

However, keep in mind that the PCs are very beholden to the interests of the rural crowd. They're the group that forms the bulk of the party membership, finances, committed support, and current caucus. When John Tory tried that trick of moving the PCs to a more centrist urban-friendly tone a la Bill Davis, the rural caucus had none of it. There was very serious talk of leaving the PC party in favour of a new "true blue party" among the Randy Hilliers and Monte McNaughtons of the party.

The PCs will have a very hard time drifting away from being the party that criticizes the sex-ed curriculum, attacks wind power, opposes cap and trade, wails on about the "War on Christmas", and dumps on urban needs. And while they fail to do that, they are ultimately unable to win government.