GO Transit Electrification | Metrolinx

[steveintoronto]

my guess is he won't make it to the 2 year mark before he takes his shtick to the next, well-funded transit program elsewhere on the globe.

"well-funded transit program" is a crucial qualifier. In all fairness to Verster, he was hired by a regime (Wynne Libs) that was pumping money into projects, even if their mode of operation left questions. It was a twisted ship that he could sail with, as long as there was a budget to do it with.

That's now disappeared, and Verster is left holding an empty bag and has to act as the front-man for the Org whose name is on it.

Something a lot of folks are missing is that Metrolinx has never been named as the org that the subway expansion file is to be uploaded to, the org that will be responsible for the Ontario Line, and an org to which money has been committed. And I don't mean by words, I mean by deed.

No matter whether Verster is a "travelling salesman" or not, the product he's expected to flog is empty. It's a shell game, and he's the one left to polish the turds rubbed all over it. He's forced to sing Bafflegab, because he knows so many will buy it. And dance to it...

At some point..."...But you can't fool all the people all of the time" comes to fruition. I think you're right, except I don't think he'll last another two years. He either goes down with the shitp, or he jumps when it does. It's not going to float for two more years...

 

[bbanner102097]

It's interesting to read your take on things...we're certainly coming at it from different angles. Yours seems to be more from one where policy and the government-of-the-day is to blame and Verster is the front person left to try and pick up the pieces (not entirely, but conveniently summarized by me to make the forthcoming comparison). Whereas mine is more cynical toward the global machine of a usual and predictable cast of characters and companies that milk and pillage these handsomely-funded infrastructure programs, under the naiive and unsuspecting watch of that particular tax-paying public. Note that I don't lump together the elected officials and their inner sanctum with the tax-paying locals...the former are a crucial component of the "machine" and will always benefit from hiring this cast of characters, in one way or another.

Regarding Metrolinx being the recipient of the uploaded subway file...make no mistake, it is certainly being handed to them and there are internal communications confirming it. Similarly, there are internal Infrastructure Ontario communications stating that they are also the saviours of the maligned subway file. Both are correct and you can imagine how streamlined and efficient the spending of our public funds will be with two crown corporations teaming up to essentially perform the same function!

And to clarify regarding Verster's tenure, I meant the initial two years that will come up in October 2019 and certainly not a second two year term (contract).

And apologies if this is off topic from electrification...perhaps it belongs more in the Metrolinx All thread.

 

[crs1026]

I'm a pound short and a little too late with this post - but while researching something else I bumped into this old GO presentation (still on their web site) which points to some of the visual impacts of electrification as GO sees them.
Again, I am not arguing against electrification, but if you look at the bridge modifications and the multi-track "portal" structures shown in this presentation, I think one has to agree that there will be impacts. The tunnel - like views looking along multi track structures are particularly noticeable. If I were a better digital artist I would try to do a render of the view from the Sunnyside footbridge post electrification. It may not be awful but it will not be an improvement.

- Paul

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

I'm a pound short and a little too late with this post - but while researching something else I bumped into this old GO presentation (still on their web site) which points to some of the visual impacts of electrification as GO sees them.
Again, I am not arguing against electrification, but if you look at the bridge modifications and the multi-track "portal" structures shown in this presentation, I think one has to agree that there will be impacts. The tunnel - like views looking along multi track structures are particularly noticeable. If I were a better digital artist I would try to do a render of the view from the Sunnyside footbridge post electrification. It may not be awful but it will not be an improvement.

- Paul

I don't recall hearing anyone complaining about the visual aesthetics of streetcar wires and asking that they (the streetcars) be removed. What is the difference here?

 

[crs1026]

I don't recall hearing anyone complaining about the visual aesthetics of streetcar wires and asking that they (the streetcars) be removed. What is the difference here?

Scale, height, and mass. (And actually, yes, lots of people have complained about streetcar wires over the years - trolley bus overhead far moreso than even streetcars). Heavy rail catenary structures are bigger taller and have greater ‘tunnel’ attributes.

Right now the Junction corridor and the railpath is a fairly pleasant area because even with the sound walls at least it’s open and has interesting views. Consider the impact of a complete visual barrier along both sides of the Dundas Street bridges west of Lansdowne. A new taller footbridge at Wallace with solid barriers to above eye level on the sides. The bridges will look much more massive. Same with the Sunnyside footbridge. Won’t feel as open when you walk or cycle over them. And poles and wires and occasionally switchgear and tension mainainer gear sticking out from above those sound walls.

It may not be awful, and again I’m not saying it is a dealbreaker.... but it will be a significant change. It will make it harder to manage the ambience of some areas that we take for granted today. Just be prepared.

- Paul

 

[ssiguy2]

Where there are just 2 tracks, the visual pollution from catenary is relatively small but when you have 4 or more tracks it can turn a rail corridor into looking like something akin to an industrial zone. If you think the downtown rail corridors are a psychological barrier to the Waterfront now, just wait until all those ugly poles and wires go up. This is also relevant to a potential Rail Deck Park. I am no engineer but logic dictates that building such a structure would be far more problematic and costly having to work around them and then incorporate them into the new structure.

Those ugly catenary systems can also make the land around the stations less valuable to potential developers as they make TOD development less appealing to potential buyers of any proposed condos. This could effect the goals of building higher density around RER stations because some of these wider track areas could end up looking like the slums of Calcutta. Ask anyone on the street if they would rather live by a rail corridor which just has tracks or with tracks with large poles and ugly wires and the answer is obvious.

The visual pollution of catenary poles and wires should not be the most important reason for making a decision whether to use catenary or hydrogen but if all things are relatively equal, it should be a deciding one. The success of any transit system is not just dependent on the service itself but also how well it is received in their local communities. Having community groups protesting ugly catenary systems is not the way to endear yourself to potential transit riders and the areas that fight the project make those communities far less receptive to higher density development.

 

[cplchanb]

Where there are just 2 tracks, the visual pollution from catenary is relatively small but when you have 4 or more tracks it can turn a rail corridor into looking like something akin to an industrial zone. If you think the downtown rail corridors are a psychological barrier to the Waterfront now, just wait until all those ugly poles and wires go up. This is also relevant to a potential Rail Deck Park. I am no engineer but logic dictates that building such a structure would be far more problematic and costly having to work around them and then incorporate them into the new structure.

Those ugly catenary systems can also make the land around the stations less valuable to potential developers as they make TOD development less appealing to potential buyers of any proposed condos. This could effect the goals of building higher density around RER stations because some of these wider track areas could end up looking like the slums of Calcutta. Ask anyone on the street if they would rather live by a rail corridor which just has tracks or with tracks with large poles and ugly wires and the answer is obvious.

The visual pollution of catenary poles and wires should not be the most important reason for making a decision whether to use catenary or hydrogen but if all things are relatively equal, it should be a deciding one. The success of any transit system is not just dependent on the service itself but also how well it is received in their local communities. Having community groups protesting ugly catenary systems is not the way to endear yourself to potential transit riders and the areas that fight the project make those communities far less receptive to higher density development.

tokyo, berlin, london would like to have a word...

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

It's interesting to read your take on things...we're certainly coming at it from different angles. Yours seems to be more from one where policy and the government-of-the-day is to blame and Verster is the front person left to try and pick up the pieces (not entirely, but conveniently summarized by me to make the forthcoming comparison). Whereas mine is more cynical toward the global machine of a usual and predictable cast of characters and companies that milk and pillage these handsomely-funded infrastructure programs, under the naiive and unsuspecting watch of that particular tax-paying public. Note that I don't lump together the elected officials and their inner sanctum with the tax-paying locals...the former are a crucial component of the "machine" and will always benefit from hiring this cast of characters, in one way or another.

Regarding Metrolinx being the recipient of the uploaded subway file...make no mistake, it is certainly being handed to them and there are internal communications confirming it. Similarly, there are internal Infrastructure Ontario communications stating that they are also the saviours of the maligned subway file. Both are correct and you can imagine how streamlined and efficient the spending of our public funds will be with two crown corporations teaming up to essentially perform the same function!

And to clarify regarding Verster's tenure, I meant the initial two years that will come up in October 2019 and certainly not a second two year term (contract).

And apologies if this is off topic from electrification...perhaps it belongs more in the Metrolinx All thread.

Welcome to UT!

 

[44 North]

Where there are just 2 tracks, the visual pollution from catenary is relatively small but when you have 4 or more tracks it can turn a rail corridor into looking like something akin to an industrial zone. If you think the downtown rail corridors are a psychological barrier to the Waterfront now, just wait until all those ugly poles and wires go up. This is also relevant to a potential Rail Deck Park. I am no engineer but logic dictates that building such a structure would be far more problematic and costly having to work around them and then incorporate them into the new structure.

Those ugly catenary systems can also make the land around the stations less valuable to potential developers as they make TOD development less appealing to potential buyers of any proposed condos. This could effect the goals of building higher density around RER stations because some of these wider track areas could end up looking like the slums of Calcutta. Ask anyone on the street if they would rather live by a rail corridor which just has tracks or with tracks with large poles and ugly wires and the answer is obvious.

The visual pollution of catenary poles and wires should not be the most important reason for making a decision whether to use catenary or hydrogen but if all things are relatively equal, it should be a deciding one. The success of any transit system is not just dependent on the service itself but also how well it is received in their local communities. Having community groups protesting ugly catenary systems is not the way to endear yourself to potential transit riders and the areas that fight the project make those communities far less receptive to higher density development.

The rail corridor along the waterfront is one of the only places in the whole system where nobody would even notice overhead. It's half elevated half trenched. Nobody will see that.The other stuff about the horrors is a bit far fetched. IMO the renders showing overhead looks clean, modern, and what lines like LSE+LSW should've had thirty years ago.

With crs' link a couple problems do stand out. The "bridge modification", basically a wall right where the train line is. Can't think of anything like that now with the streetcar system, but could be solvable with glass panels. And the loss of trees near the tracks which is unfortunate. Everything else looks pretty good.

 

[ssiguy2]

tokyo, berlin, london would like to have a word...

Using those cities as an analogy to Toronto is completely disingenuous and you know it. Those systems were electrified a 100 years ago. When they were built there were absolutely no electric alternative for a suburban type system. They were fully embraced as most went thru more industrial and lower income areas and often the alternatives were heavy polluting and very loud coal powered trains. Today there are viable alternatives that offer the quiet, fast, and smooth accelerations of catenary without the visual pollution.

As I VERY clearly stated, the visual effects of any electrification system should not be the primary decision making issue. It should be a deciding factor only if all the potential systems offer relatively the same benefits, costs, efficiencies, reliability etc. If they do offer relatively the same benefits then that's when things like visual pollution and community acceptance come into play.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

Using those cities as an analogy to Toronto is completely disingenuous and you know it. Those systems were electrified a 100 years ago. When they were built there were absolutely no electric alternative for a suburban type system. They were fully embraced as most went thru more industrial and lower income areas and often the alternatives were heavy polluting and very loud coal powered trains. Today there are viable alternatives that offer the quiet, fast, and smooth accelerations of catenary without the visual pollution.

As I VERY clearly stated, the visual effects of any electrification system should not be the primary decision making issue. It should be a deciding factor only if all the potential systems offer relatively the same benefits, costs, efficiencies, reliability etc. If they do offer relatively the same benefits then that's when things like visual pollution and community acceptance come into play.

But how much more beneficial, economical, efficient, or reliable should an electric system before you will accept caternary? $1? $1,000? $1,000,000? Seems easy to say "only if it is the better option against alternatives" without giving a threshold of what your definition of a better option is.

You say there is not an active campaign to keep streetcar lines, yet this has been on of the hurdles that Toronto has experienced while planning the DRL. Residents did not want to lose the "character" of having streetcars along Queen/King despite the improved service/capacity of a subway line. I would have expected people to welcome the move of transit underground if overhead wires were such a visual problem.

 

[gibsonm]

But how much more beneficial, economical, efficient, or reliable should an electric system before you will accept caternary? $1? $1,000? $1,000,000? Seems easy to say "only if it is the better option against alternatives" without giving a threshold of what your definition of a better option is.

You say there is not an active campaign to keep streetcar lines, yet this has been on of the hurdles that Toronto has experienced while planning the DRL. Residents did not want to lose the "character" of having streetcars along Queen/King despite the improved service/capacity of a subway line. I would have expected people to welcome the move of transit underground if overhead wires were such a visual problem.

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.

 

[Adjei]

Citizens of cities which look 100 times better than Toronto have learned to live with the visual horrors of catenary wires, I don't see why people in Toronto can't...

 

[nfitz]

Citizens of cities which look 100 times better than Toronto have learned to live with the visual horrors of catenary wires, I don't see why people in Toronto can't...

Haven't been following this closely ... catenary wires on GO tracks - come on, is this really an issue?

Besides, isn't the whole electrification deferred for years with our current government's huge cuts to transit spending?

 

[cplchanb]

Haven't been following this closely ... catenary wires on GO tracks - come on, is this really an issue?

Besides, isn't the whole electrification deferred for years with our current government's huge cuts to transit spending?

Seriously....given the huge upgrade potentials that catenary can give to GO, only Toronto has given such a huge whine about the itty bitty aesthetics. theres a reason why things are overbudget late and severely diluted from the concept or often cancelled. Too many people are just too sensitive to the smallest of things and the decision makers have no spine to draw a line. That and also our dysfunctional politicians. That is why rail should be a private company like MTR or JR. At least politicians wont get in the way at every election cycle and regardless of direction things will most likely get done.