Peterborough Commuter Rail

[rbt]

I'm not saying the plan makes sense, I am saying that the fact that CP gets some free upgrades shouldn't be affecting the decision making process.

No, it shouldn't.

My issue is it looks a lot more like a gift to CP under the guise of a transit project to make it politically palatable, than something actually useful as a transit project.

I would have far fewer concerns over the political motivations if CP didn't have numerous slow orders along this track due to purposeful maintenance cuts.

 

[MisterF]

I made my "only in Canada" comment because our transportation priorities are the opposite of most of the world. If you look at almost any country with similar (and lower) population densities as the Windsor-Quebec corridor, they have a dense passenger rail network and very few freeways. This is true everywhere from Scandinavia to Scotland to Australia. They run passenger trains to towns and cities like Peterborough without a second thought while multi-lane highways are deemed not feasible. If we planned our transport system the way they do, we'd have passenger rail to not only Peterborough but also smaller towns like Orillia, Collingwood, and North Bay, and the highways that lead to them would never have been widened.

It's worth noting that in most countries the rail networks are owned by the government and leased to private operators. We had the perfect opportunity to have a system like that with CN but we chose to privatize it instead. Again completely backwards compared to the rest of the world.

I'd feel better about this project if they bought the subdivision and gave CP freight rights.

The original alignment (going into Union) was only going to generate 760 passengers per each peak direction train (2 AM-peak, 2 PM-peak) by 2031. The demand forecasts actually predict a decline in trips between Peterborough and Toronto between now and then of -26%. It's a capital cost of $150K per rider. Not being able to come into Union Station means that number will suffer even more (80% of people were expected to walk after alighting at Union, 20% by transit). Once the 407 East extension is built to Highway 115, it probably will drop again. Finally, of the 1520 daily trips, 1130 are expected to come off the GO Stouffville line, meaning there are only 390 new transit trips generated. If 74% of the Peterborough train comes from the Stouffville line, wouldn't the $230M be better spent on the Uxbridge subdivision with its 7,260 passengers or the Barrie line on the Newmarket subdivision?

GO's ridership forecasts are notoriously unreliable. The Barrie line, for example, got much higher ridership than they expected and it's a 1.5+ hour ride downtown. Plus the way they designed the Peterborough service is very shortsighted.

Your point about the 407 is probably true and part of the problem. Very few people deem the 407 extension as "pork", even on this forum, but a comparable investment into rail is lambasted. When we put billions into highways every year and practically nothing into intercity rail, it's no wonder nobody rides trains. The reality is that passenger rail to places like Peterborough is just as feasible as multi-lane highways. We just choose to emphasize cars.

Edit: I just looked it up. The 407 east isn't comparable to the Peterborough rail line at all, it's much more expensive! It's $1.6 billion for only the first phase, or 32 km of highway.

 

[diminutive]

I made my "only in Canada" comment because our transportation priorities are the opposite of most of the world. If you look at almost any country with similar (and lower) population densities as the Windsor-Quebec corridor, they have a dense passenger rail network and very few freeways. This is true everywhere from Scandinavia to Scotland to Australia. They run passenger trains to towns and cities like Peterborough without a second thought while multi-lane highways are deemed not feasible. If we planned our transport system the way they do, we'd have passenger rail to not only Peterborough but also smaller towns like Orillia, Collingwood, and North Bay, and the highways that lead to them would never have been widened.

It's not true in any of those cases that you would be guaranteed to have a rail connection to a town of Peterborough's size so far from the a given rail hub. If a town happens to lay between two larger destinations then maybe, but it hardly seems like the norm.

And it's also not true that other countries don't have freeways... I can't think of a single G20 country that doesn't have one or more highway links between its biggest city pair.

This line wouldn't generate more than a couple hundred passengers per day. In no country I can think of would that be considered sustainable.

Edit: I just looked it up. The 407 east isn't comparable to the Peterborough rail line at all, it's much more expensive! It's $1.6 billion for only the first phase, or 32 km of highway.

The 407 is probably a bad example as it can cover it's operational and capital costs through toll revenue.

 

[innsertnamehere]

the 407 is extremely expensive for a highway because of the huge amount of toll infrastructure that has to be set up. Not that it really matters, the highway will be a money maker for the province.

 

[MisterF]

It's not true in any of those cases that you would be guaranteed to have a rail connection to a town of Peterborough's size so far from the a given rail hub. If a town happens to lay between two larger destinations then maybe, but it hardly seems like the norm.

And it's also not true that other countries don't have freeways... I can't think of a single G20 country that doesn't have one or more highway links between its biggest city pair.

This line wouldn't generate more than a couple hundred passengers per day. In no country I can think of would that be considered sustainable.

It absolutely is the norm. Take a look at the rail maps of different countries. There are countless examples of small towns at the end of rail lines. In Australia alone there's Griffith, Armidale, Swan Hill, and Bairnsdale to name a few, all of which are smaller and farther from big cities than Peterborough. In fact, the only Australian cities bigger than Peterborough that lack passenger rail are in Tasmania. It's the same story in Ireland, Scotland, Sweden, Finland, and France.

I never said that other countries don't have freeways. I said that they tend to build passenger rail long before building divided highways. There are many, many towns around the world with passenger rail service but no divided highway access. Rail networks are almost always more extensive than freeway networks, here it's the opposite.

The 407 is probably a bad example as it can cover it's operational and capital costs through toll revenue.

Is it expected to cover all its costs? I'd be interested in seeing something official that says that. In any case, divided highways are very expensive, generally more than $10 million/km.

 

[ssiguy2]

This kind of line is where tram-trains or Rail-buses should be used. Could be up and running in short order but at a fraction the price of a standard commuter rail service and be a hell of a lot cheaper to run.

 

[innsertnamehere]

The vast majority of the costs with this is upgrading tracks that have had slow orders imposed on them due to crappy quality, using a different kind of train isn't going to change that.

 

[TOareaFan]

If CP would be a direct beneficiary of an investment of public funds in this proposed line, does it not make sense to tie any investment of public funds here with a more co-operative position from CP with regards to the Milton GO line?

I have no problem with a private entity like CP benefiting from an investment of public funds into infrastructure as long as there is some public benefit also (isn't that what happens every time we build/repair a highway...does the trucking industry not benefit?)....but it does grind on me a bit when that same private entity is roadblocking in another area.

 

[rdaner]

Some additional news from a few months ago about a rail link that has really been under the radar. I am unsure of the current status.

http://www.mykawartha.com/news-story/4858003-mp-expects-final-call-on-peterborough-s-commuter-rail-this-fall/

Metrolinx reports:

http://www.metrolinx.com/en/regionalplanning/projectevaluation/studies/studies.aspx

 

[nrb]

Some additional news from a few months ago about a rail link that has really been under the radar. I am unsure of the current status.

http://www.mykawartha.com/news-story/4858003-mp-expects-final-call-on-peterborough-s-commuter-rail-this-fall/

The project is essentially dead, at least the passenger portion is. It was questionably viable in the first place, and Del Mastro's conviction has completely killed it politically. Nobody wants to be associated with him and definitely not his pet project.

 

[Allandale25]

Shining Waters Railway study being assessed by federal, provincial governments

Story in the Peterborough Examiner:

Shining Waters Railway study being assessed by federal, provincial governments 0

By Jason Bain, The Peterborough Examiner
Thursday, April 30, 2015 7:04:46 EDT PM

A decision on whether or not Peterborough will get passenger rail service is still at least three or four weeks away, Shining Waters Railway board president Tony Smith said Thursday.

The proposal is still being evaluated by the provincial and federal governments and the board of directors is waiting for a decision, he said.

The railway has satisfied obligations by submitting all of the documents, such as a comprehensive engineering study, necessary for officials to make a regulatory decision, Smith added. Shining Waters needs approval from both levels of government.

The passenger and freight train service on the railway line between Toronto and Havelock had been the vision of former Peterborough MP Dean Del Mastro. After Del Mastro resigned in November, neighbouring Haliburton-Kawartha Lakes-Brock Conservative MP Barry Devolin took over championing the cause.

An anonymous donor offered $2,350 to the railway last month to help cover half of the non-profit’s insurance policy for the year.

The railway had asked the city and county to split the insurance bill. The county agreed, but city council turned down the request by way of a split vote.

It is unknown how the project, which was not mentioned in the provincial budget, may or may not be impacted after Parliament voted against Bill C-640, which would have protected for Via Rail Canada and made consequential amendments to the Canada Transportation Act.

The private members bill would have granted passenger trains priority over freight trains, required Via to seek approval from Parliament before eliminating service routes and established a clear mandate for the company, according to New Democrat MP Philip Toone, who introduced it Feb. 20.

jason.bain@sunmedia.ca

 

[44 North]

Story in the Peterborough Examiner:

I’m glad this issue still has some life in it. I know the area NE of Peterborough quite well. Somewhat related, but awhile back I stumbled on the photo below which I found quite interesting and thought I’d share. There’s an old (and still very much active) nepheline syenite mine north of Havelock, with trains running back and forth to the mine along the Nephton Sub. I wasn’t aware of it until I saw this photo a few months ago, but back in the 2000s GO apparently ran excursions all the way up to Havelock and along the old spur. Perhaps it will again someday?

from here: http://www.railpictures.net/photo/135302/

 

[ssiguy2]

Why the hell would it need to go to a little place like Havelstock?

The York and Toronto city section would be very well used but I don't think there is demand for a Peterborough commuter rail line. I think the first priority should be Niagara and extending the Milton Line to Cambridge.

 

[wopchop]

I don't see the problem. If they can present a good business case, then I think that we should fully support it.

For reference, it is ~135km along the rails to Niagara Falls and ~160km along the rails to Havelock (even less to Peterborough).

 

[Jonny5]

I don't see the problem. If they can present a good business case, then I think that we should fully support it.

For reference, it is ~135km along the rails to Niagara Falls and ~160km along the rails to Havelock (even less to Peterborough).

A business case would be great. Disgraced ex-MP Del Mastro just randomly decided one day it should be done based on a "report" he put together with some friends. I still wonder about the physical connections required I mentioned four years ago.