News   Jun 04, 2024
 167     0 
News   Jun 04, 2024
 620     0 
News   Jun 03, 2024
 1.5K     4 

SmartTrack (Proposed)

Tory could simply have a number of trains short-turn within Toronto itself and slap on a ST logo and Bob's your uncle. That, however, is not what I think Tory's concern is.

I think his problem is that his campaign pledge was that the fares would be standard TTC ones. Just running trains with some ST logos doesn't do much good because relatively few Torontonians take GO and ST at GO fares wouldn't make a hoot of difference to most transit users in the city.
 
I think his problem is that his campaign pledge was that the fares would be standard TTC ones. Just running trains with some ST logos doesn't do much good because relatively few Torontonians take GO and ST at GO fares wouldn't make a hoot of difference to most transit users in the city.

Has the fare structure been confirmed yet? The city is already working on a Go Transit co-fare, and fare integration is the whole reason for Presto, so I wouldn't be surprised if SmartTrack does end up with the same fares as the subway by the time it's built, or something very competitive. The reason why people in Toronto don't take Go Transit is that it costs an extra $5.00+, on top of the TTC fare (and until recently, you couldn't use a TTC transfer with mid-trip Go Transit). A co-fare like the suburbs have would make Go Transit way more attractive to Toronto commuters.

People elected him because he wasn't ford not because he was a transit guru

IIRC, there was another "not Ford" candidate, and she got half as many votes as either Ford or Tory did.
 
Last edited:
Today's TorStar:

https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/20...0-million-toronto-lrt-funding-assumption.html

Tory is going from bad to worse. He'd be best off just admitting it's a flop, and then working with Metrolinx and QP to find out what can work, and soon, and affordable.

Like an early version of the Western Corridor RER light: Use existing redundant F59s and triple refurbishment-waiting coaches for 15 minute schedule runs Bramalea to Union. It could be up and running within a year.

This Mississauga thing is an embarrassment.
 
Tory could simply have a number of trains short-turn within Toronto itself and slap on a ST logo and Bob's your uncle. That, however, is not what I think Tory's concern is.
Except Tory's "concern" never was achievable with the financial and interoperability requirements with GO. At this point, Tory's "concern" should be having something...*anything* that's a do-able vestige of SnortTrack, and pre-RER would be it, at next to no cost. The rolling stock exists, the tracks are virtually all there, the stations minus the ST ones are already there...if he had any sense of reason, he'd immediately state: "On my original surmise, we no can do, but here's what we can do for now, do it within a year, the ST stations will be bare-bones utilitarian, owned and run by the TTC, and at a later date (and this is the classic way out, do-able or not) when the Georgetown Corridor is electrified, we can revisit this".
I think his problem is that his campaign pledge was that the fares would be standard TTC ones. Just running trains with some ST logos doesn't do much good because relatively few Torontonians take GO and ST at GO fares wouldn't make a hoot of difference to most transit users in the city.
Well that's impossible, polish the turd all you like, it's still shid. At some point, GO and TTC fares have to become equal for the same distance travelled. That's the way many cities do it, and that's the *only* way to fully integrate transit systems and fare payment across the GTHA.
"relatively few Torontonians take GO and ST at GO fares wouldn't make a hoot of difference to most transit users in the city"

UPX ridership numbers prove you wrong.
 
This Mississauga thing is an embarrassment.
It truly is, and I notice it's the lead headline story on the Star's print edition. (Edit to Add: Don't have link handy, but TorStar Editorial on it was pretty scathing too)

The man had best start doing some damage control, and quick, and the place to start is with a mea-culpa. He's lost more than just camaraderie with Mississauga, he's now poisoned the well with any municipal neighbour.

I smell toast burning....he's just set the stage for a number of hopefuls to declare running for Mayor.
Has the fare structure been confirmed yet? The city is already working on a Go Transit co-fare, and fare integration is the whole reason for Presto, so I wouldn't be surprised if SmartTrack does end up with the same fares as the subway by the time it's built, or something very competitive
Sub "SmartTrack and RER" as same fare with TTC (distance based at same rate) and I wholeheartedly agree.

A vastly more sophisticated system that Tory used as a model for "surface subway" (The Overground) London, has a totally integrated fare system via Oyster Card, and it's been in place for at least fifteen years (when my last work sojourn in London happened):
Where you can use Oyster
You can use your Oyster card on most public transport in London.
different-ticket-types2.jpg

Buses and trams
All buses showing the red roundel, and trams.

Tube, DLR, TfL Rail and London Overground
All services in Zones 1-9 and to Watford Junction and Shenfield.

National Rail

All suburban trains stopping in Zones 1-9 and on journeys to:

  • Chafford Hundred
  • Grays
  • Ockendon
  • Purfleet
  • Watford Junction
  • Broxbourne
  • Hertford East
  • Ware
  • St Margarets
  • Rye House
  • Merstham
  • Earlswood
  • Redhill
  • Salfords
  • Horley
  • Gatwick Airport
But not on:

  • Heathrow Express
  • Heathrow Connect services between Hayes & Harlington and Heathrow
  • Any journey starting or finishing outside the pay as you go area
Oyster cards are not accepted on East Midlands Trains, Grand Central, Hull Trains, Virgin Trains, or Virgin Trains East Coast services.

River services
Did you know?

With a contactless and Oyster account, you can protect your Oyster card, see your journey history, apply for a refund for incomplete journeys, top up your pay as you go credit and add or renew Travelcards. Find out more
Pay as you go
Pay as you go using your Oyster card to travel on Thames Clippers River Bus services. These journeys do not count towards daily caps.

Travelcards
Travelcards are not valid on Thames Clippers River Bus services. If you have a Travelcard on your Oyster card, you'll get a third off standard pay as you go fares.

Emirates Air Line
  • You use pay as you go by touching your Oyster card on the yellow card reader on a ticket gate
  • If you've got a Travelcard, you can buy a discounted Boarding Pass
Oyster Rail services map
PDF 181KB

Oyster navigation

Follow us on Twitter
Advance information about disruption and planned works on public transport

Follow @TfLTravelAlerts
https://tfl.gov.uk/fares-and-payments/oyster/using-oyster/where-you-can-use-oyster
 
Last edited:
Paris is a better comparison. You can use RER and the Metro on the same trip, with the same flat fare within zones 1 and 2. You don't even have to leave the fare-paid area to transfer. If you go outside of zones 1 and 2 on RER, then you pay the extra fare-by-distance (including at La Defense where the Metro still runs on a flat rate)
 
Paris is a better comparison. You can use RER and the Metro on the same trip, with the same flat fare within zones 1 and 2. You don't even have to leave the fare-paid area to transfer. If you go outside of zones 1 and 2 on RER, then you pay the extra fare-by-distance (including at La Defense where the Metro still runs on a flat rate)
Good example also, yes. The GTHA has an opportunity to do this even better than that, however, by doing it totally by incremental distance, not zones, albeit zone is the method used by London and Paris. GPS positioning is now much further developed...the real question though...is Presto up to the task?

One would hope so, but it's so incredibly buggy...
 
If so, then it is worth it. The six additional heavy rail stations will cost $1.25 billion (not $2 or $3 billion as some posts suggested), that translates to $200 million per station, all of which are going to be quite useful.

K, hold on. $200M per station is the low estimate? How does such a high price make any sense? Yes they're 300 metres long, but surely these stations would be in the $50M range... it's a GO platform with a couple of new stairs/elevators. They're the most basic of basic.
 
K, hold on. $200M per station is the low estimate? How does such a high price make any sense? Yes they're 300 metres long, but surely these stations would be in the $50M range... it's a GO platform with a couple of new stairs/elevators. They're the most basic of basic.

And the short version of the DRL, from King station to Pape, shouldn't cost $6.7 billion to tunnel, yet here we are.

http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2016/ex/bgrd/backgroundfile-94624.pdf (page 5)
 
The Tory Mississauga Saga continues...(a note, it would serve TorStar well to not cater to the iPad vaccuous readership, and feature such stories on the opening web-page)
Toronto mayor downplays Mississauga’s concerns over SmartTrack request
| Betsy PowellCity Hall Bureau, San GrewalUrban Affairs Reporter
Thu., Nov. 3, 2016

Mayor John Tory is dismissing Mississauga’s concern over funding part of the proposed Eglinton West LRT extension to Pearson airport, insisting the two cities will come up with a plan “that will benefit us all.”

“I’ve been trying to play down that sort of political rhetoric and say what we have to do is co-operate with each other and the discussions are going to begin if (Toronto) city council . . . gives that authority next week,” Tory said Thursday.

“We’ll just move ahead with the constructive discussions to find a way to get this done and to make sure people find themselves in a position where they can make an appropriate contribution.”

On Monday, the city and province announced a major transit agreement to build SmartTrack, a scaled back version of the mayor’s campaign promise that proposes to build six new stations on existing GO tracks and an LRT route along Eglinton Ave. W.

A city manager’s report showed that Toronto expects Mississauga and the Greater Toronto Airports Authority (GTAA) to pay $470 million towards the LRT project.

Mississauga Mayor Bonnie Crombie and several councillors suggested they were blindsided by this.

“Mr. Tory, we are not going to pay for your wall,” Councillor Jim Tovey bellowed during a committee meeting Wednesday, comparing the Toronto mayor to Donald Trump, who expects Mexico to pay for a border wall it doesn’t want.

“Let’s call it a non-starter,” Crombie said.

The report assumes a $1.18 billion contribution from Toronto, and a $822.9 million contribution from the federal government toward the $2.47 billion cost.

Toronto city spokesperson Wynna Brown wrote in email that “the City Manager’s report does not request $470 million, but requests the City of Mississauga and the GTAA to formally, through their council and board respectively, to indicate whether they are interested in this extension from Renforth to Pearson.”

Mississauga staff and council members said they have no idea how Toronto calculated the $470 million figure. Brown described the figure as a “placeholder estimate.”

Tory played down any rift with his Mississauga counterpart, saying they have an “excellent, constructive, productive, friendly” relationship and had in fact spoken Thursday morning.

A project connecting Toronto’s west end to Mississauga has been under discussion for years, said Tory, expressing optimism it can move forward with the backing of a “financial partnership.”

Earlier this week, Tory’s executive committee gave the green light to a transit expansion proposal that goes to council next week. A vote is expected by the end of the day Tuesday, Tory said.

“I’m very hopeful it’s going to be approved and that will be a major step forward for building an extensive amount of transit in this city and this region.”

The province set a Nov. 30 deadline for council approval, which comes before a city staff report on potential revenue tools to help pay for transit and housing.

Critics say Tory needs to identify where the money is coming now before council decides on the transit proposal.

The mayor admitted Thursday the timing may not be perfect, but vowed within weeks to outline how he intends to pay for it once he receives staff reports assessing all the different options.

“In less than a month’s time, we will be having a full discussion where I will set out . . . my own thoughts on what we should be doing by way of long-term revenue measures to pay for transit and housing projects that are of importance to the city.”
https://www.thestar.com/news/city_h...ys-mississaugas-concerns-over-smarttrack.html

Without commenting directly on this particular issue with Mississauga (I'm sure there's lots forthcoming in the next few days), I can't help but view of a lot of 'announcements' lately not worth the space they take in the media. The bottom line is that it's not just a case of no financing for this initiative, there's none for *any*! Toronto is broke! So is the Province. I'm not a fiscal nazi, nor a socialist, we do have to press ahead on modernizing the GTHA's dismal state of transportation, and the emphasis must be on transit, not roads, but there's nothing to underwrite all these announcements save for hot air.

I'm at the point, even as a Centrist, as thinking the answer lies in the private sector. I don't mean to sell the Crown Jewels, but I do have hope for the Fed's new Investment Bank. But before that is tapped to feed the "announcement addiction" (most of which is very poorly thought out, and intended to distract the plebs as much as help them) it might be time *yet again* (I can hear the sighs already) to step back and take a *grander vision* of planning. Nothing could make that point better than the SnarkTrack and Scarborough Subway issues.

Rob and 44's posts on actual costs make a point: There's been so many figures presented, almost all for surreal announcements, that we've become desensitized to the massive sums being touted. Not every project could or should show a profit (greater fiscal return than cost), but most of them should! Which underlines the case for the Investment Bank. Rather than municipalities paying vast sums on these projects (often unfairly as a tax burden on the local taxpayers), it might be time to allow the private sector in the form of the Investment Bank, with Federal participation and oversight, to do a number of crucial projects from which they'd receive a reasonable and sustained return. They would of course have to assume some of the risk. And therein is an excellent filter and incentive to get these projects done right, and actually get them done. Local municipalities and/or the Province or transport companies could then lease them, and use their credit and tax-dollars for much more nuanced infrastructure.

In short, the model at present is broken, and it's not just BrokeTrack. It's time for a fresh approach. Is there a choice? When you have no money, there is no choice.

Edit to Add: I tout, for the Investment Bank's (should it materialize as proposed) first and grandest scheme: The Missing Link. That alone simplifies almost every and all Toronto and GTHA centric rail transit planning issues in one fell swoop. It's got to happen, and it also promotes national efficiency in Cdn rail transport. The money is there, far more than necessary. And much of it is already being invested overseas doing projects like this in other nations.

Why not here? The model is broken.
 
Last edited:
Today's Globe:
Liberals prepare to pitch infrastructure bank to investors
[...]
In an open letter to Mr. Morneau, former Bank of Canada governor David Dodge said the government needs to do a better job of persuading Canadians more private investment and user fees are a good thing.

“You need to have the political courage to explain to Canadians why it is in their interest that they should pay for the use of public use infrastructure, at least in part, through user charges,” he wrote in his capacity as national council chair of the C.D. Howe Institute.

In an interview, Mr. Dodge said user fees ensure revenue to help cover the maintenance costs of the infrastructure. He said road tolls can also ease congestion by giving drivers the option of paying for a faster commute on either a new highway or dedicated lanes.

“When we’re giving away roads for free, it’s kind of hard to charge for transit,” he said. “That’s what our politicians – federal, provincial and local – need to come to, and it’s a major effort.”

Mr. Dodge’s comments echo advice from Dominic Barton, the head of Mr. Morneau’s Advisory Council on Economic Growth.

Robert Shouldice, a Vancouver-based lawyer who has represented municipal governments and private companies in negotiating public-private partnerships, said proponents of the infrastructure bank will need to address the aversion to tolls.

“It’s just a mindset. It’s a cultural thing in Canada that creates the challenge,” he said. “I think it does make some sense that the people actually using the infrastructure pay for it in a disproportionate way. That makes sense conceptually, philosophically, as a matter of principle, so I do support that where it makes sense.”
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...astructure-bank-to-investors/article32672730/

It might be time for UT to open a forum on the subject of the Investment Bank.
 
Last edited:
I can't wait til this falls flat on it's face and Toronto can focus on getting the DRL and SSE funded and completed.
 
And where is the funding for either coming from?

This. Bash Smarttrack all you want on its technical merits, but the fact that the SSE will cost $4.9 billion and the DRL $.6.7! billion for just the king to pape section, I don't understand where people think the money for this will come from if we can't afford a billion for above ground 6 stations.
 

Back
Top