GO Transit: Service thread (including extensions)

[DavidH]

If Durham Transit gets real in terms of service maybe?
To be honest, I think their BRT is a joke. The money was there, and they simply took the opportunity with little motivation other than "it's there so why don't we do it?" There wasn't any "we should be fighting to get people out of their cars and increase density!" like York thought, and they're continuing to push towards being a (backwards) sprawling suburban region.

Some of you may recall that I wrote a "Durham Transit Review" blog for several years before I ran out of energy (read that as "got tired of having little positive to say").

But in fairness, they were pushing for the BRT for several years before Metrolinx included it in the plan and funded the first phase. The problem was that they wanted the money without doing the required preparatory work. The specific scenario is in fact the opposite of the one you described. In general, though, my sense is that Durham Council is all in favour of better transit provided someone else is paying for it.

My problem with the BRT is that the original full plan was to widen Highway 2 *without* putting in physical barriers, but to simply mark the bus lanes with pavement markers. In other words, to use transit as an excuse to fund a general road widening. However, in discussions I've had with DRT and Metrolinx staff, this is under review and the final plan may well be different.

DRT is currently performing a long term transit service study and there are open houses in about a month to show options for public review. We'll get a better idea then where Durham is going, in terms of the Highway 2 BRT, other corridors, and general transit improvements I'm on a community advisory committee for it so I should see some details around October 20th; I'll report back here.

As a side note, DRT was looking at restructuring its Ajax and Pickering routes into a more grid-oriented fashion in 2010. I have no idea of how far they've gotten with this, but 2010 service plan information should start going to committee next month so we'll likely hear then.

You're certainly right that the regional level isn't really looking at densifying. Some of the municipalities are (e.g. Ajax is expropriating a parcel of land near its downtown because they want significantly higher densities than the owner was proposing) but the regional level of government is still very pro-developer.

Anyone interested in WHY Durham is enamoured of cars should take a close look at the Ipsos-Reid "Foundational Study" performed for Metrolinx when they were just starting up. Durham residents are *least* concerned about traffic congestion of any in the GTA. This may be because the major wave of development is just now coming to Durham, but in general they are a pretty happy bunch in the cars. There is really little motivation yet for a serious change.

 

[TOareaFan]

Anyone interested in WHY Durham is enamoured of cars should take a close look at the Ipsos-Reid "Foundational Study" performed for Metrolinx when they were just starting up. Durham residents are *least* concerned about traffic congestion of any in the GTA. This may be because the major wave of development is jus now coming to Durham, but in general they are a pretty happy bunch in the cars. There is really little motivation yet for a serious change.

Perhaps that has something to do with the level of transit service on GO, relative to their population, has exceed anywhere else in the GTA?

 

[DavidH]

Perhaps that has something to do with the level of transit service on GO, relative to their population, has exceed anywhere else in the GTA?

Perhaps. The survey showed the high car usage levels you would expect, but obviously Durham residents have very good access to downtown via GO. I don't recall whether the survey addressed the question of average trip lengths by car; it would be an interesting comparison.

 

[TOareaFan]

Perhaps. The survey showed the high car usage levels you would expect, but obviously Durham residents have very good access to downtown via GO. I don't recall whether the survey addressed the question of average trip lengths by car; it would be an interesting comparison.

All that I meant, really, was that they are a relatively small suburban region (by population) and, whether they use it or not, have very extensive, regular and fairly frequent GO links to downtown.

If you accept (as I do) that one of the big drivers of traffic in all regions is caused by our large populations living far from the major job driver (downtown) then one's level of "concern" over traffic has to be influenced by available options. If you poll someone in, say, Meadowvale that drives to work downtown because the limited schedule Milton line does not appear flexible enough they may be "concerned" by traffic congestion. Someone in, say, Pickering, may also drive but be lesse "concerned" because it is a choice they have made even recognizing that there is a pretty frequent/reliable alternative....so if traffic ever bothered them, they could/would switch....the guy in Meadowvale is more likely to be driving due to need rather than choice so their concern level might be higher.

 

[DavidH]

If you accept (as I do) that one of the big drivers of traffic in all regions is caused by our large populations living far from the major job driver (downtown) then one's level of "concern" over traffic has to be influenced by available options. If you poll someone in, say, Meadowvale that drives to work downtown because the limited schedule Milton line does not appear flexible enough they may be "concerned" by traffic congestion. Someone in, say, Pickering, may also drive but be lesse "concerned" because it is a choice they have made even recognizing that there is a pretty frequent/reliable alternative....so if traffic ever bothered them, they could/would switch....the guy in Meadowvale is more likely to be driving due to need rather than choice so their concern level might be higher.

Agreed, and of course, the Milton-Pickering comparison would also be affected by the degree of local job opportunities. It's not always possible for everyone to work close to home, but those that can reduce congestion for those that can't.

Still, there is a considerable car culture in Durham which is only slowly beginning to change. I get the feeling that transit staff want to do much more than they are currently doing, but funding is the key issue.

At some point, Metrolinx needs to look at a local funding formula for operational costs.

 

[SunriseChampion]

As a side note, DRT was looking at restructuring its Ajax and Pickering routes into a more grid-oriented fashion in 2010.

I will cry tears of joy! Of course, I'm moving back to Toronto next summer. Great timing eh?

Durham Council is a joke as far as their ideas on region building. It seems to be a bunch with a circa 1950s mentality and the back rubs from developers to match. I'm not sure I could meet Roger Anderson without twitching and laying into him.

Unfortunately, because of my movements (Toronto-Pickering-Ottawa-Toronto-Pickering) I've not voted in a municipal election here in Durham since I first moved here 9 years ago and I won't get to again next year but, damn, I'd love to cast a vote against some of these monsters here.

A propos the BRT: is there anywhere I can get information on the proposal for this? I've read a bunch of DRT planning documents but haven't read much about the BRT at all.

 

[SunriseChampion]

Also: Chicken and egg.


Is the car dependence here in Durham a product of the lack of transit service or is the lack of transit service a product of the car dependence?

For me, personally, it's the lack of service that has me driving more than I'd like to be for trips intra-Durham. I also live in the north and have a 15 minute walk to the nearest bust stop. A walk along a gravel shoulder of a rural highway which is neither the safest nor most fun. So my case is a bit different from someone living in urban Durham but the fact remains: if transit were more logically conceived and better delivered, I would use it more.

 

[DavidJamesTO]

Study supports $110M GO train plan from Milton to Cambridge
October 03, 2009
By Kevin Swayze, Record staff

CAMBRIDGE — After three decades pushing for a return of passenger train service to Cambridge, Lee Palvetzian is optimistic a new study shows it could be reality in five years.

“This is the closest we’ve ever been, by far,†said the founder of Cambridge’s passenger rail committee in 1977.

The last passenger train pulled out of the Galt Canadian Pacific Railway station in 1971.

Palvetzian was part of a $100,000 Waterloo Region study looking at extending GO trains west from Milton. It’s an idea that’s been pitched for decades but went nowhere, as GO struggled with a bottleneck at Milton.

Now a Cambridge expansion is firmly on track, Palvetzian said, with firm cost estimates of $110 million to build it. The study projects ridership topping 900 a day if trains started in 2011. By 2021, the 1,600 daily passengers could cover 80 per cent of costs, the standard GO aims for. By 2031, 2,800 daily passengers would easily cover all Cambridge operating costs.

“We’ve got very strong support†in the study, Palvetzian said. “It’s actually even more than what I was expecting.â€

The study goes public Monday at a Cambridge city council meeting, starting at 7 p.m. at City Hall. Regional councillors consider it Tuesday in a 9 a.m. meeting of the planning and works committee at 150 Frederick St. in Kitchener.

Politicians are being asked to endorse the passenger rail feasibility study, take it to a meeting with GO officials to talk about finding the money for it, and start lobbying provincial and federal governments to build it.

The report says GO transit is ready to undertake an environmental study of a Cambridge-Milton extension in 2012. That would finalize details so all that’s needed is money to make it happen.

GO is also expected to announce extension of bus service from Milton into Cambridge and Kitchener-Waterloo later this month. That’s long been touted as a precursor to train service.

GO has nearly finished an environmental assessment of extending trains west from Georgetown through Guelph to Kitchener. To start, that would cost $153 million. Later, as more tracks and overnight storage areas for trains are built west of Kitchener, the cost would reach $549 million.

A Cambridge extension is a bargain compared to that, Palvetzian said. The $110 million for Cambridge includes four stations: one near Galt Collegiate Institute on main bus routes; near Clyde and Franklin for a park-and-ride; at Highway 6 South; and at Guelph Line, west of Milton.

Overnight train parking is proposed in Cambridge, as is twinning single tracks between Milton and Cambridge so passenger and freight trains can safely mingle along Canadian Pacific Railway’s main Ontario corridor.

Cambridge Mayor Doug Craig hadn’t read the report late Friday. Like Palvetzian, he wants Cambridge-Toronto trains sooner than later, to convince people out of their cars on Highway 401. At last count, 10,400 people a day commute from the region to Toronto daily, and 5,000 drive from Toronto west to the region.

What’s needed now is pressure on provincial and federal politicians to make GO trains a reality, Craig said.

“They run GO trains to farther places than Cambridge, they run GO buses farther distances,†he said.

“We haven’t been politically aggressive enough in this region.â€

kswayze@therecord.com

I'm surprised at the number of stations they're planning within Cambridge. Samuelson and Franklin seem a bit close to me, but I'm willing to be proven wrong. 6 and Guelph Line are no-brainers, though.

The only way I can see the extension costing that little--particularly considering the need for a second track--is if CP moves all its shunting operations to the new yard in Ayr and transfers the Galt yard to GO. That would be a significant cost reduction.

 

[RedRocket191]

The "either Kitchener extension or Cambridge extension" mentality that I'm seeing in the article (and in previous ones) kind of irks me. We need and should build both.

 

[DavidJamesTO]

I didn't see it as that so much as it was "Which one should we build first?" It must be admitted that Cambridge would be easier to introduce first if that price tag can be believed (which I, for one, don't).

I think it's generally accepted that we need both. It makes sense to extend both lines westward. Extending Lakeshore to Brantford would be nice, but would be a bit difficult to arrange. Serving two stations in Hamilton is going to be hard enough.

 

[doady]

Knowing GO, the Cambridge station will be location on the outskirts surrounded by parking and farms, similar to the Barrie station. GRT has been improving so much too, a GO station in the middle of nowhere would just encourage people to take the car and hamper GRT's progress.

As a resident of Mississauga and regular user of MT, I am strongly opposed to any sort of improvement for the Milton line, as it would just reinforce the car culture in Mississauga. MT has by far the highest ridership in 905, and had 20% ridership growth in the past 5 years. GO expansion will just negate that and kill the system. MT will become like Oakvile Transit if these plans go through.

 

[DavidJamesTO]

If you read the article, it says they want two in Cambridge; a park-and-ride in suburbia and a reused ex-CP passenger station on the edge of the downtown area of Galt to be served by transit. And that's in addition to a station on the Georgetown Line in Kitchener that will be served by a bus line at first, then by the first phase of our light rail line (which will also serve the Galt station whenever the Region decides we've earned it).

As a resident of Mississauga and regular user of MT, I am strongly opposed to any sort of improvement for the Milton line, as it would just reinforce the car culture in Mississauga.

So Cambridge shouldn't get any GO service because people in Mississauga will use it too? Interesting...

What's stopping people in Mississauga from using MT to get to the GO stations, pray?

 

[waterloowarrior]

cambridge GO staff report

 

[doady]

So Cambridge shouldn't get any GO service because people in Mississauga will use it too? Interesting...

Did I say that? Where did I say that Cambridge should not get an extension because of Mississauga? Interesting...

Because quite frankly, I don't see how an extension to Cambridge will affect Mississauga. No, I was referring to general improvements to the Milton line and the negative effect it would have.

What's stopping people in Mississauga from using MT to get to the GO stations, pray?

How about the fact that the stations are located in the middle of nowhere and surrounded by parking?

Or the fact that transit riders have to pay more than motorists to get to the GO station?

Just look at which areas have the best GO Train service and you will see the same thing: they all have crappy local transit.

 

[DavidJamesTO]

I'm impressed; it looks like they'll be rolling the service out at the same time as Kitchener's, if not a bit earlier.

I wonder; what will happen to the upcoming GO bus services when the trains arrive? Start running them to the townships?