News   Nov 13, 2019
 591     3 
News   Nov 13, 2019
 1K     5 
News   Nov 13, 2019
 4K     15 

GO Transit Electrification (Metrolinx, Proposed)

innsertnamehere

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 8, 2010
Messages
13,564
Reaction score
7,794
given that the GO electrification is starting to dominate the GO transit service thread, I thought it would be best to start anew so that the existing thread can be used for discussion of GO service changes.

The EA has been completed for the electrification of the UPX, but nothing beyond that.

http://www.gotransit.com/electrification/en/default.aspx


Article in the Globe and Mail today:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/go-improvements-will-eat-up-most-of-the-money-for-toronto-area-transit/article19355532/
 

MrsNesbitt

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
473
Reaction score
1
I personally doubt it'll take up so much as the $12 billion they describe (they're probably high-balling) but as I posted in the other thread, even if it did, it would be money damn well spent. Nothing will get drivers out of their cars for long commutes like frequent, two-way, electrified GO will.

Also a bit of housekeeping: we now have four active threads edited to GO projects. Not complaining, just saying perhaps some merging could happen?
 

innsertnamehere

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 8, 2010
Messages
13,564
Reaction score
7,794
Its a thread for every major project. Georgetown south has one, Eglinton Crosstown has one, Sheppard and Finch LRTs have one, Union has several (which should change IMO), etc. This should be no different.

That said GO general construction and GO service could probably be combined.

GO is more than a worth spending on. It has a huge cost benefit ratio, as high as 1.8:1, compare to the Eglinton crosstown which is 0.37:1, and is big on removing congestion. If it can delay the DRL, all the better. It improves access across the GTA, and actually serves the same function as 400 series highways in terms of regional transportation unlike the planned LRT lines which function as local corridors.
 
Last edited:

innsertnamehere

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 8, 2010
Messages
13,564
Reaction score
7,794
metrolinx does studies where it accounts for operating and capital costs of a project and looks at it from the financial benefits (GDP increase, reduced congestion, etc.). The GO lakeshore line electrification study determined that for every $1.00 spent on the project, $1.80 worth of "benefits" would occur. That means for the $1.89 billion dollar project, $3.4 billion in benefits would occur.

The calculations are used to show which projects achieve the best "value for money", though are not a definitive reasoning behind which projects get priority.
 

pstogios

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Oct 21, 2013
Messages
1,082
Reaction score
732
metrolinx does studies where it accounts for operating and capital costs of a project and looks at it from the financial benefits (GDP increase, reduced congestion, etc.).
Thank you.

It is interesting that the ECLRT has such a low ratio. Do you know what component of the calculation is dragging this down so much? Is it low expected ridership?
 

denfromoakvillemilton

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 30, 2008
Messages
6,585
Reaction score
616
Location
Former City of York, Ontario, Canada
I personally doubt it'll take up so much as the $12 billion they describe (they're probably high-balling) but as I posted in the other thread, even if it did, it would be money damn well spent. Nothing will get drivers out of their cars for long commutes like frequent, two-way, electrified GO will.

Also a bit of housekeeping: we now have four active threads edited to GO projects. Not complaining, just saying perhaps some merging could happen?
Agreed.
Something like this should have been the centerpiece of the Big Move because it is more transformative for the region.
Agreed.
 

gweed123

Moderator
Staff member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 10, 2009
Messages
7,543
Reaction score
1,016
Location
Burlington
Thank you.

It is interesting that the ECLRT has such a low ratio. Do you know what component of the calculation is dragging this down so much? Is it low expected ridership?
It's the combination of high pricetag and relatively low ridership. When you look at the cost of the line, the length of the line, and the number of expected riders (I don't have all of those numbers handy at the moment), it results in a pretty low ratio.

GO electrification on the other hand has a relatively low per km construction cost, will carry a lot of people, and has miles and miles of trackage to spread those people over. The benefits would be region-wide as opposed to confined to a single avenue.
 

JayBeeGooner

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 28, 2012
Messages
586
Reaction score
30
GO electrification is a no-brainer. It's overdue, and it'll benefit the region. My big issue is Union Station. Can Union handle the increased capacity?
 

andrewpmk

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 6, 2009
Messages
1,065
Reaction score
89
Clearly GO electrification has a very high benefit-cost ratio because it has a low cost relative to the length of the network. GO electrification may cost $12 billion but you are getting several hundred km of track for that price. In comparison building the DRL would probably cost $10 billion or so if you built the full length underground from Dundas West to Don Mills/Eglinton. (If you could use the rail corridor for the western part it would be significantly less).

Eglinton will undoubtedly have a lower benefit-cost ratio because tunneling is expensive, but beware of inaccurate ridership projections. It is hard for me to believe that the OMB won't approve lots of tall condo buildings along the underground portion of this route. Also I suspect that the transfer between the Georgetown line and Eglinton will account for a large portion of Eglinton's ridership. Drastically reducing the capacity of this line because David Miller insisted on building the world's most expensive non grade separated light rail line solely for political reasons, solely to build a not very useful eastern section in an area of low density big box retail, makes no sense. My suspicion is that Eglinton will end up being an orphan line (only LRT line built in the GTA) because GO expansion will suck up so much of the GTA's transit expansion budget that there is no money for anything else. Given that it is very common for transit lines in big cities to be overcrowded, and unusual for them to be underused, building a low capacity line makes no sense.
 

innsertnamehere

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 8, 2010
Messages
13,564
Reaction score
7,794
Andrew, keep your capacity doubts of eglinton in the eglinton thread please. Everywhere you post you seem to post about your opposition to the LRTs no matter the topic everyone else is discussing.


I would like to see GO have its base fare be something like $2 instead of $5 and have it rank up to $5 by the time you leave Toronto, and to have the $0.75 transfer to TTC policy in place.

GO shouldn't be the same price as the TTC IMO, but it should be an option for people who are willing to spend a bit more. It is barely an option today with its fares being so high, but if you can get from, say, Eglinton GO to downtown for $3.20 with PRESTO instead of the current $4.82 and with a $0.75 local bus fare, getting downtown with GO would be priced around $4, and take roughly 25 minutes to get downtown. that would be attractive to a lot of people.
 

TheTigerMaster

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 3, 2012
Messages
12,391
Reaction score
4,371
Location
Best Toronto
Why would you want to make GO a premium service? I don't see anything wrong with pricing it the same as the TTC. Ideally, you should be able to use GO and the TTC within Toronto with a single fair.
 

Top