GO Transit Electrification | Metrolinx

[kEiThZ]

People in the end want transit

All we do is complain and shut our ears to new ideas. Are we just incompetent as a society to come up with a plan and action it within a competent timeframe? What would you do differently to stimulate the growth of our networks and expedite the modernisation of our draconian systems.

You seem to be operating under the assumption that the average person is bothered by the current state of rail transport in Canada. They are not. Most Canadians have never been or never will go to Japan or Hong Kong. I'm not even sure if the majority of Canadians have been to Europe. Over half our trips abroad are to the US. So the idea that the average Canuck is clued in to what transit is like globally is a stretch. And that's just familiarity with how a system works....

The next step beyond that is convincing them to pay higher taxes to fund substantial investment in transit. Even if you want to get to the point where Metrolinx and TTC are developers, you need to endow them with enough capital to build a network that will justify the rents they want to get for those developments. So how are you going to convince Torontonians to do that? Toronto has some of the lowest property taxes in the country. And unlike the US or Europe, Metrolinx can't charge region wide sales taxes, income taxes, property taxes, congestion charges or even a simple $2 toll for the Gardiner.

So you're left with a public that doesn't have much knowledge with how things are overseas and is opposed to even minor increases in taxes to greater investment in public transport. And while transportation is a major concern, I'm not sure that automatically translates in to public support for higher investment in transit. There's a lot of voters who will simply say the government needs to build more roads. Just watch how people are reacting to a carbon tax that added 4.4 cents per litre. And when you can't even get a Liberal Premier to allow a $2 toll, I'm not sure how you make the argument to get the billions needed for so much else.

You still havent answered my question though: what would you do that can help improve the situation; that is more feasible and similarly effective as the items above?

Simple. I wouldn't. At least not on the timeline that anybody here would imagine. You can only go so far as public support and willingness to fund will take you.

I personally think the Liberals screwed up by not prioritizing GO over the TTC last term. Yes, the TTC has more riders. But building RER, and integrating it with the TTC (or at least the subway network), with Presto, would have completely changed how 905ers see transit. I would have traded Eglinton for GO RER. That would have provided a starting point to justify region wide tolls and taxes that could help fund more subways, LRTs, etc.

 

[kEiThZ]

The biggest problem is that the execs at said agencies need to buy into those ideas themselves. Currently they seem to be content with the status quo and collect their paycheck and pension.

This is the kind of ignorant tosh that Conservatives put out about the Hydro One CEO. Have you ever known anyone who was an executive in charge of several billion? I have. You can't be a slouch at that level.

The simple reality is that these execs can't "buy in" to ideas that are beyond their mandate. We have a very strict culture in our public service in Canada. And public servants are entirely subordinate to elected governments. Not just on the letter of law, but in spirit. As a public servant, you are obligated to try and execute their vision. Not yours. Do otherwise and you'll be unemployed. If the Chair of Metrolinx ran off and started getting the agency to develop property, he/she would find themselves unemployed shortly. If they lobbied to do that and pissed off the wrong minister, they'd find themselves unemployed. If they publicly disagreed with the government, they'd find themselves unemployed. If they privately disagreed with the government and refused to execute the government's vision, they'd find themselves unemployed. I hope you get where this is going.....

You want a different outcome? Elect different politicians who agree with your vision. The public servants who leads these organizations will then deliver what you want.

 

[crs1026]

Why are these tall barriers required for GO electrification, but not required for bridges that cross over TTC subway tracks?

The general requirement in various electrical codes is for people to be able to come no closer than 3m to an energised 25kv source, as there is risk of arcing. TTC is at ground level, not elevated, and is 600 V rather than 25 kv.

From the GO Electrification EA:

Bridge Protection Barriers
The purpose of a bridge protection barrier is to protect pedestrians and travelers/infrastructure users within the public right-of-way on bridges from direct contact with adjacent live parts of the OCS for voltages up to 25 kV to ground. In addition, these barriers protect against damage to the OCS passing under bridges by providing an obstacle to debris that may be thrown onto the railway from overhead.

The length of the protection barrier will extend a minimum of approximately 3m laterally beyond the live parts of the overhead contact system, on either side the bridge. The barriers will be made of solid-faced material, and will be a minimum height of approximately 2m (barriers of greater heights may be required in areas where vandalism is prevalent). High voltage signage will also be provided as an additional safety measure.
Metallic elements of the protection barriers will be grounded and bonded to the static wire in minimum two locations, as previously described.

- Paul

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

I think the ideal would be to see the Queen and College streetcars in their own rights of way (like St. Clair) and for the DRL Ontario Line to have its stations located between Queen and King Streets. The digging for each direction of subway might be easier, simple cut and cover, underneath Richmond and Adelaide, with the stations located at north-south junctures between the two streets, at Yonge, University, Spadina, Bathurst (perhaps even Trinity-Bellwoods and Liberty Village before the final station at the Ex/Ontario Place). It would mean that the streetcars wouldn't have to be removed, adding transit options. There would be subway interchanges, therefore, between the Yonge-University Line and the Ontario Line at King, Queen, St. Andrew's, and Osgoode stations. This maximizes connectivity and reduces congestion. Not sure though whether the EA and other work on the Queen tunneling is so far along at this point that it's not worth changing the alignment.

What???

I'm sorry what does this have to do with a: The perceived visual distraction of caternary wires over GO lines, ob b: the desire to keep streetcars over upgrading to subway due to wishing to retain a "community feel"

 

[gibsonm]

My point is that many Torontonians do like the character of the streetcars and I don’t think that getting rid of them, even if a subway follows the same route, is wise in the long run. We need redundancy built into the system due to current and future capacity issues. The catenary isn’t as unattractive when streetcars are in their own right of way or are given upgraded medians/platforms with street furniture/art.

 

[gibsonm]

My point is that many Torontonians do like the character of the streetcars and I don’t think that getting rid of them, even if a subway follows the same route, is wise in the long run. We need redundancy built into the system due to current and future capacity issues. The catenary isn’t as unattractive when streetcars are in their own right of way or are given upgraded medians/platforms with street furniture/art.

 

[Streety McCarface]

Not regulated by Transport Canada, regulated provincially, and less than a 30th of the voltage potential.

Not only that, but the third rails themselves are covered, it's very very unlikely that someone would be able to damage any infrastructure from such a height. It's not like they need the barriers.

The general requirement in various electrical codes is for people to be able to come no closer than 3m to an energised 25kv source, as there is risk of arcing. TTC is at ground level, not elevated, and is 600 V rather than 25 kv.

From the GO Electrification EA:





View attachment 185029

- Paul

Is there really that much of a risk? The general rule is 1mm arc per 1000 V in dry conditions, meaning that the potential arc length is 2.5 cm from the wire. Could it theoretically reach a meter in extremely humid conditions or heavy rain? I'm not an electrical engineer, I'm just wondering.

 

[steveintoronto]

Is there really that much of a risk?

Yes.

 

[kEiThZ]

My point is that many Torontonians do like the character of the streetcars and I don’t think that getting rid of them, even if a subway follows the same route, is wise in the long run. We need redundancy built into the system due to current and future capacity issues. The catenary isn’t as unattractive when streetcars are in their own right of way or are given upgraded medians/platforms with street furniture/art.

How much more in taxes are you willing to pay for that redundancy and character?

It's not cheap.

 

[crs1026]

Is there really that much of a risk? The general rule is 1mm arc per 1000 V in dry conditions, meaning that the potential arc length is 2.5 cm from the wire. Could it theoretically reach a meter in extremely humid conditions or heavy rain? I'm not an electrical engineer, I'm just wondering.

I’m not an engineer either, but the whole point of codes and standards is to have a margin of safety that you never come close to exceeding. The Fukushima nuclear plant had sufficient tide protection to deal with once in a hundred year tides.

- Paul

 

[lenaitch]

Not only that, but the third rails themselves are covered, it's very very unlikely that someone would be able to damage any infrastructure from such a height. It's not like they need the barriers.

Is there really that much of a risk? The general rule is 1mm arc per 1000 V in dry conditions, meaning that the potential arc length is 2.5 cm from the wire. Could it theoretically reach a meter in extremely humid conditions or heavy rain? I'm not an electrical engineer, I'm just wondering.

Electrical safety protocols (either Code or operating standards) are in place to minimize risk and balance the requirements with a degree of practicability. Imagine, without the barrier, some 'mischievous' person tossing something conductive off the bridge that is long enough to span both conductors. It might well burn through, as the fault current is quite high, or not. Or imagine some graffiti or tagging fan wanting to adorn the face of the bridge and needing a foothold.
With streetcars, the distance between the conductor and ground plane is quite significant, and with subways they are closer but reasonably inaccessible and, has mentioned, the hot conductor is quite guarded.

 

[Streety McCarface]

I’m not an engineer either, but the whole point of codes and standards is to have a margin of safety that you never come close to exceeding. The Fukushima nuclear plant had sufficient tide protection to deal with once in a hundred year tides.

- Paul

It's interesting, I never would have assumed that factors of safety that high would have been considered. My bad, it certainly makes sense.

 

[Streety McCarface]

How much more in taxes are you willing to pay for that redundancy and character?

It's not cheap.

The streetcars are still required, however, not just for character and redundancy, but because any relief line proposal is going to have insanely wide stop spacing (>1km), meaning that local service NEEDS to be provided, and if a relief line comes, so does density, putting more pressure on the existing surface routes.

It's not like they need to go especially deep to put in the streetcars, keeping them there is good for businesses on the surface, providing local service, etc. Despite the bloor subway being cut and cover, I, as well as many other people believe it was a huge mistake to remove the bloor st streetcar because it provided the redundancy and capacity necessary to keep the bloor line in decent service during a weekend closure or outage. For any relief line, this is even more important because of how deep it'll have to be.

 

[Rainforest]

How much more in taxes are you willing to pay for that redundancy and character?

It's not cheap.

Certainly a valid point, but do they (streetcars) cost that much more to operate?

It should be noted that the original Yonge subway and BD subway were fairly lightly used when they first opened, compared to these day's loads. Back then, removing much of the parallel streetcar services could be a sensible way to improve the subway usage.

This time, if we are going to build the Ontario Line relatively cheap, but without much spare capacity, then retaining the parallel streetcar routes may be a good way to retain a few extra thousand per hour in extra capacity.

 

[crs1026]

This time, if we are going to build the Ontario Line relatively cheap, but without much spare capacity, then retaining the parallel streetcar routes may be a good way to retain a few extra thousand per hour in extra capacity.

I would be surprised if the Ontario Line removed much ridership from either King or Queen, especially as further development adds even more density along those routes. Ditto College and Dundas. I'm not sure that there is much "parallel" routing.

What worries me more is actually the reverse - the impact of just constructing along the proposed route could be cancellation or at best rerouting of some routes. Can King Street handle both 501 and 504 volumes?

- Paul