Barrie Collingwood Railway (BCRY)

[wopchop]

This trail will probably prevent that. Not that there was a ton of demand for it. Probably best to have a connecting bus at Allandale. There probably wouldn't be enough demand for a passenger rail service to Collingwood. It is similar to the concept of GO rail to Orangeville. A nice dream, but something that will never become a reality.

It is not similar to Orangeville at all.
The route is much better than that, for one.
From a distance perspective, the route is probably better than even the competing roads to Collingwood.
Finally, the community at the end of the line is not comparable to Orangeville at all. It is also a hub for tourism, which changes travel patterns significantly.

 

[ShonTron]

I don't mean in the next few years, but more like 20-30 years. I do agree that a GO bus should be instated first, but the need may end up building there.

There’s already a bus between Barrie, Angus, Wasaga Beach, and Collingwood. Simcoe County Linx only runs weekdays between Barrie and Wasaga Brach right now, but it’s there.

 

[micheal_can]

It is not similar to Orangeville at all.
The route is much better than that, for one.
From a distance perspective, the route is probably better than even the competing roads to Collingwood.
Finally, the community at the end of the line is not comparable to Orangeville at all. It is also a hub for tourism, which changes travel patterns significantly.

The one thing NW of Barrie has going for it is it can work in a reverse commute. Many people who work at CFB Borden live in Barrie/Bradford/Newmarket area. This means a train coming from Union in the mornings could actually have people on it going up the line.

There’s already a bus between Barrie, Angus, Wasaga Beach, and Collingwood. Simcoe County Linx only runs weekdays between Barrie and Wasaga Brach right now, but it’s there.

That does not count, unless the fare is integrated with GO.

 

[Northern Light]

There’s already a bus between Barrie, Angus, Wasaga Beach, and Collingwood. Simcoe County Linx only runs weekdays between Barrie and Wasaga Brach right now, but it’s there.

I think the primary case for rail here will be tourism, access to summer beaches, access to winter skiing etc.
That is about weekend and holiday service, not weekday service. Its also about total travel time from the primary feeder market (Toronto); comfort, and service set up, particularly in winter for people with gear.
I could also see the area as a cycling tourism hub as well; though considerable improvements to on-road cycling infra are required first. Whether or not demand is there now is difficult to gauge.
I'm unaware of a proper study, and inter-city bus service, to my knowledge, has not really aimed at this market as yet.

 

[Nomad_87]

It is not similar to Orangeville at all.
The route is much better than that, for one.
From a distance perspective, the route is probably better than even the competing roads to Collingwood.
Finally, the community at the end of the line is not comparable to Orangeville at all. It is also a hub for tourism, which changes travel patterns significantly.

Not to mention there’s more people along this corridor than that Owen Sound sub. Honestly as a Simcoe Resident I’d be happy with the prospect of a trail if it didn’t rule out future rail service. This seems like such a short sighted decision, much more so than the OBRY imho

 

[lenaitch]

The one thing NW of Barrie has going for it is it can work in a reverse commute. Many people who work at CFB Borden live in Barrie/Bradford/Newmarket area. This means a train coming from Union in the mornings could actually have people on it going up the line.

Outside of Barrie, I'll take your commuting demographics at face value. That would still require a bus connection to the Base, which has employment nodes scattered over several square kilometers. Apparently Barrie Transit is reinstating their route to the Base this summer - I don't know how many stops on site but I doubt there would be many.

I think the primary case for rail here will be tourism, access to summer beaches, access to winter skiing etc.
That is about weekend and holiday service, not weekday service. Its also about total travel time from the primary feeder market (Toronto); comfort, and service set up, particularly in winter for people with gear.
I could also see the area as a cycling tourism hub as well; though considerable improvements to on-road cycling infra are required first. Whether or not demand is there now is difficult to gauge.
I'm unaware of a proper study, and inter-city bus service, to my knowledge, has not really aimed at this market as yet.

Seems like a lot of public money for weekend-only tourist service, particularly if the intent is to get tourists close to the hills and beaches. An argument could be made that the large ski resorts could pay for their own shuttle service. Actually, they could do that now to Allendale if they felt it was to their financial advantage.

 

[Nomad_87]

I think the primary case for rail here will be tourism, access to summer beaches, access to winter skiing etc.
That is about weekend and holiday service, not weekday service. Its also about total travel time from the primary feeder market (Toronto); comfort, and service set up, particularly in winter for people with gear.
I could also see the area as a cycling tourism hub as well; though considerable improvements to on-road cycling infra are required first. Whether or not demand is there now is difficult to gauge.
I'm unaware of a proper study, and inter-city bus service, to my knowledge, has not really aimed at this market as yet.

With the Niagara Falls train having been a success I think there’s a good reason to believe more tourist services could succeed. If only we didn’t keep destroying our own infrastructure.

 

[Nomad_87]

The one thing NW of Barrie has going for it is it can work in a reverse commute. Many people who work at CFB Borden live in Barrie/Bradford/Newmarket area. This means a train coming from Union in the mornings could actually have people on it going up the line.

The rails between Utopia and Allandale will remain for the foreseeable future, so this doesn’t seem like too far fetched of an idea in about 5-10 years maybe (albeit rails to Angus will likely have to be rebuilt)

 

[Northern Light]

Seems like a lot of public money for weekend-only tourist service, particularly if the intent is to get tourists close to the hills and beaches. An argument could be made that the large ski resorts could pay for their own shuttle service. Actually, they could do that now to Allendale if they felt it was to their financial advantage.

Its fair to ask about the $$; but to my knowledge we don't have any estimate on either the capital cost to replace/relay/or newly lay rail; we do know the the public already owns the vast majority of any required ROW; its unclear how much would be required to reach destinations (the km are pretty knowable but would vary by route choice), but property values could skew widely.

We also don't have an operating cost estimate; but I'm thinking that any subsidy there would not be larger than the one for Niagara (they are comparable distances).

****

The argument about resorts paying some costs are fair; however, we didn't bill any hotels/resorts in Niagara for the GO train.

We also don't bill out the cost of highways providing 'to the door' access.

I think a reasonable take would likely be that any resort with an on-site station would be expected to donate all of the requisite land, the cost of the station, and maintence service for same.

****

Part of a proper study would compare not simply the cost of rail to the status quo; it would consider how the GTA's growth will drive traffic in this area; and the alternative investments in highways and local roads, and those capital and operating costs as well.

In addition to weighing ecological impacts.

I'm truly not stuck on the idea, but I would like to see it tested and tried with buses from Toronto (coach-style) on a pilot basis, then we have some hard data with which to work.

 

[lenaitch]

Its fair to ask about the $$; but to my knowledge we don't have any estimate on either the capital cost to replace/relay/or newly lay rail; we do know the the public already owns the vast majority of any required ROW; its unclear how much would be required to reach destinations (the km are pretty knowable but would vary by route choice), but property values could skew widely.

We also don't have an operating cost estimate; but I'm thinking that any subsidy there would not be larger than the one for Niagara (they are comparable distances).

****

The argument about resorts paying some costs are fair; however, we didn't bill any hotels/resorts in Niagara for the GO train.

We also don't bill out the cost of highways providing 'to the door' access.

I think a reasonable take would likely be that any resort with an on-site station would be expected to donate all of the requisite land, the cost of the station, and maintence service for same.

****

Part of a proper study would compare not simply the cost of rail to the status quo; it would consider how the GTA's growth will drive traffic in this area; and the alternative investments in highways and local roads, and those capital and operating costs as well.

In addition to weighing ecological impacts.

I'm truly not stuck on the idea, but I would like to see it tested and tried with buses from Toronto (coach-style) on a pilot basis, then we have some hard data with which to work.

I would think the land costs alone to get rail to the foot of the hills would be pretty steep (likewise to the Beach) but I am only speculating (as, no doubt, would others ). Much of the land to the southwest of town is zoned residential, and I will guess already in the hands of developers.

Part of me wonders why GO, whose primary mandate is to deliver a GTHA commuter network, is involved in what is essentially a tourist train to Niagara Falls in the first place. Perhaps it is filling a vacuum, but the argument is similar to proponents who wish to see GO expand to London, Brantford, etc. I'm not even sure how these services fit into its legislated mandate (he said without looking it up).

 

[Northern Light]

I would think the land costs alone to get rail to the foot of the hills would be pretty steep (likewise to the Beach) but I am only speculating (as, no doubt, would others ). Much of the land to the southwest of town is zoned residential, and I will guess already in the hands of developers.

I'm not going to attempt that estimate today, I actually have work on my desk; which i mostly set aside for posting here this morning! LOL Maybe later.

Part of me wonders why GO, whose primary mandate is to deliver a GTHA commuter network, is involved in what is essentially a tourist train to Niagara Falls in the first place. Perhaps it is filling a vacuum, but the argument is similar to proponents who wish to see GO expand to London, Brantford, etc. I'm not even sure how these services fit into its legislated mandate (he said without looking it up).

GO, I would argue is, at its core, a commuter rail service to Toronto, and would, as-of-right (in terms of intent, if not statute) run as far as the GTA commutershed reaches.

***

That said, I have argued for GO Hubs in multiple locations throughout Ontario.

Its not a matter of expanding Toronto's commutershed per se, but acknowledging that there are Woodstock-London, St. Thomas-London, and even K-W-London commuters. Similar profiles existing in other areas,
where commuting goes well beyond traditional municipal or even regional boundaries.

There's a place for a provider similar to GO (both rail and bus) which is not Toronto-centric.
Saves reinventing the wheel and creating new carriers here, there and everywhere.

ONTC is already something like GO in the north, albeit with very limited passenger rail, a small ridership/scale, and a freight rail business that GO lacks.
I don't know that one requires ONTC to be absorbed by or branded as 'GO'.......its a similar idea at any rate.

***

As to legislative mandates, I would tend to suggest that these can and should evolve.
In the same way that VIA should evolve and others. Not merely in transportation either.
The world is not static and neither should its institutions be such.

 

[picard102]

Seems like a lot of public money for weekend-only tourist service, particularly if the intent is to get tourists close to the hills and beaches. An argument could be made that the large ski resorts could pay for their own shuttle service. Actually, they could do that now to Allendale if they felt it was to their financial advantage.

If the train can't take me there, and I have to transfer to a shuttle bus, I would much rather just drive there.

 

[Nomad_87]

GO, I would argue is, at its core, a commuter rail service to Toronto, and would, as-of-right (in terms of intent, if not statute) run as far as the GTA commutershed reaches.

***

That said, I have argued for GO Hubs in multiple locations throughout Ontario.

Its not a matter of expanding Toronto's commutershed per se, but acknowledging that there are Woodstock-London, St. Thomas-London, and even K-W-London commuters. Similar profiles existing in other areas,
where commuting goes well beyond traditional municipal or even regional boundaries.

There's a place for a provider similar to GO (both rail and bus) which is not Toronto-centric.
Saves reinventing the wheel and creating new carriers here, there and everywhere.

ONTC is already something like GO in the north, albeit with very limited passenger rail, a small ridership/scale, As to legislative mandates, I would tend to suggest that these can and should evolve.
In the same way that VIA should evolve and others. Not merely in transportation either.
The world is not static and neither should its institutions be such.

100%. I’d argue that service to Niagara, Kitchener, Guelph and even maybe Barrie doesn’t fit into the mandate and yet these have all been very successful and net positives to the communities they serve. Things will change and mandates should change to adapt. After all, in areas where railroads are far more successful passenger rail service is useful for much more than just 9-5 commuting to one major city.

 

[MisterF]

I would think the land costs alone to get rail to the foot of the hills would be pretty steep (likewise to the Beach) but I am only speculating (as, no doubt, would others ). Much of the land to the southwest of town is zoned residential, and I will guess already in the hands of developers.

Part of me wonders why GO, whose primary mandate is to deliver a GTHA commuter network, is involved in what is essentially a tourist train to Niagara Falls in the first place. Perhaps it is filling a vacuum, but the argument is similar to proponents who wish to see GO expand to London, Brantford, etc. I'm not even sure how these services fit into its legislated mandate (he said without looking it up).

GO is becoming much more than just a commuter network. One could argue that the Barrie line will be more of an intercity line than a commuter line when it's fully upgraded. Same with Kitchener and Hamilton. As the system grows more complex, differentiating between commuter and other types of services will become next to impossible, which isn't a bad thing. It's a sign of a mature rail network.

 

[wopchop]

If the train can't take me there, and I have to transfer to a shuttle bus, I would much rather just drive there.

OK? I thought we are talking about the future here.
There is a large market of households in GTA without cars. I think something like 1/3 of Toronto households have no vehicle.
This trend is likely to keep increasing in the coming decades.
Preparing our public infrastructure to accommodate that growth is essential. Especially if we want to continue encouraging that trend so that we can drive down emissions.
We won't be able to grow a transit culture if our transit options are so limited.