Metrolinx has posted the final version of the Regional Transportation Plan and Investment Strategy on their website. The Plan goes before the board this Friday for approval. The meeting will be held at the Metro Convention Centre, November 28 at 10:00 a.m.

Links, so you don’t have to dig through the agenda:

• Metrolinx Regional Transportation Plan (Final)
• 15 Year Map
• 25 Year Map
• 2009/2010 and Five-Year Capital Investment Plan
• There is also an interesting report on the Cost of Congestion in the GTHA

You might have caught our first post on the PickupPal vs Ontario debacle. Since then, the rideshare networking site PickupPal has been found guilty by the OHTB of facilitating a ride from Toronto to Montreal for $60. The actual crime? One of their 15,000 Ontario members paid another private citizen for a ride across municipal boundaries.

Although PickupPal did not financial benefit from the rideshare transaction, they were fined $11,336.07. This fine amount does not include any of the legal fees PickupPal incurred defending the case in court).

As a result of the broad public outcry via PickupPal’s petition and extensive media coverage both locally and internationally, the Government of Ontario has moved quickly to introduce an amendment to the Public Vehicles Act.  Once Bill 118 is amended, fair and reasonable carpooling and ridesharing in Ontario will be permitted. (More info at this link, near the bottom of the page).

According to PickupPal, in the 104 countries where they provide their service, they have never before encountered this type of “antiquated law” discouraging ridesharing. PickupPal Co-founder and CTO, Eric Dewhirst, commented on the government’s new proposed legislation, saying, “What they are in effect doing is bringing their transportation laws in line with the rest of the provinces in Canada and jurisdictions around the world. We applaud the government for suggesting these changes — however, the legislation has not been amended yet and there is still a chance that it may get dropped.”

PickupPal is asking their members and the general public to send messages to the Minister of Transportation, Jim Bradley, to let him know that you support the changes to Bill 118 that will allow for fair carpooling and ridesharing in Ontario.

(more…)

Two station names, four stations nowhere near one another.

A rose by any other name would smell as sweet, but higher-order transit stations aren’t there to smell sweet, they serve an important navigational purpose, and the proportion of that importance is directly related to the size of the system.  As the network of the GTHA is poised to grow by a significant measure, the importance of the names for higher-order transit stations is going to grow in step with it, especially if a fare-integrated network comes to fruition.  Naming stations in large and growing networks can become complicated and/or problematic if a cautious, comprehensive approach isn’t taken towards the issue, and addressing it will be an exercise in management and planning, with the name of the game being “Foresight.”

The name of a station may be seen as a minor detail, and it is true that it is one of the final things to be decided in design and construction since a decision on the name isn’t required until the interior finishes stage.  However, changing the name later, after the service is operating and an integrated component of the network, comes with a high price.  Changing it later is more expensive than the first time the name is decided and built into the network, and involves a lot of co-ordinated, less-evident-but-no-less-important changes within the system.  “Crescent” is a good example… which the TTC changed to ”Rosedale” at the last minute. 

The key is that stations are not stand-alone structures.  Even as a piece of architecture, stations tie into the running structure for the transit vehicle (which falls under civil engineering, not architecture).  In denser areas, stations may be built into other buildings, prime examples include St.Clair West, and Bloor-Yonge.  Then, of course, there is the larger network that the station is a part of, making the term “stand-alone station” an oxymoron.  (more…)

Since my first post here on Metronauts, I have been energized by the positive (and negative) response from the community. Despite the relative silence on the comments thread in the last week or so, the discussion is far from over. I think we have reached the point where we would benefit from a meeting face-to-face, to discuss the formation of a transit advocacy group.

 To this end, I would like to invite readers and members of the community to meet on Saturday November 29^th, to the inaugural meeting of what I have tentatively named the Transit Riders Advocacy Coalition – or TRAC. The meeting will be held at the University of Toronto Faculty of Information (140 St George Street), Room 728, from 1:30 pm to 3:30 pm. There is no need to RSVP – just show up and join in!

 The tentative agenda follows after the jump.  (more…)

Tick, tock. There’s now just a week until the Regional Transportation Plan goes to the Metrolinx board of directors for approval.

Before next Friday’s meeting, please consider joining me and other interested GTA residents for another “Metro Hall Meeting” this Tuesday November 25, at 7pm. In anticipation of this informal public session and my upcoming column in Metro on Monday, I asked the province to explain how it would proceed with the RTP, once approved.

It might also be useful to understand how the federal government will deal with funding requests for projects included in the “Big Move”. I’ve included those questions at bottom, although the economic situation has Ottawa quite engaged right now. As of Friday afternoon there has been no confirmation my questions were received. I’ll post any reply in the comments below.

I am also hoping to get VIA Rail’s perspective on how their services fit into the planning process for the GTHA, including the future of intercity rail service connections with Pearson airport. VIA has yet to acknowledge my phone calls or email message.

Here are my questions for the province with replies, via the Ministry of Transportation (MTO).

Q1: As the lead funder of the Big Move, how does the province envisage the construction timeline for projects in the 15-year plan? How are recent economic changes affecting this forecast?

MTO: Metrolinx has the responsibility of developing a roll-out plan for the Regional Transportation Plan.  The Province is awaiting the approval of the Plan and this advice from Metrolinx which will be considered as part of the provincial budget process.

Q2: Which projects in the 15-year plan are expected to proceed in their current form, regardless of the results of Benefits Case testing by Metrolinx?

Metrolinx has not yet finalized the Regional Transportation Plan or the benefits case analysis.  The Province will consider this advice from Metrolinx in deciding how to proceed.

Q3: Is the province of Ontario obligated to negotiate with the successful bidder of the federal airport rail link process? If so, how did this obligation come about?

Yes, under the Canada Strategic Infrastructure Fund (CSIF) agreement signed by Ontario and the federal government for the $1 billion GO-TRIP initiative, Ontario committed to  supporting  the Air Rail Link.

Q4: How does the province envisage access to Pearson from stations along the Georgetown corridor, including transit hubs such as Brampton, Bramalea and Weston? Should there be an exclusive contract to provide premium service to YYZ from Union station, will users of other stations along the Georgetown corridor be required to go out of their way to reach the airport, or to use alternate transit service?

The Regional Transportation Plan, being developed by Metrolinx is addressing travel across the region, including access to Pearson airport.  Any further stops either on the GO Georgetown service or Air Rail Link will be addressed in the detailed planning stages.

Q5: How is Ontario coordinating the planning and funding of the RTP with the federal government? I note that in a recent column, federal finance minister Jim Flaherty said: “This has to be worked out between the levels of government co-operatively. It isn’t up to one level of government to say, ‘Here’s a shopping list of 50 billion or 100 billion dollars … and here’s what you get to pay.’ That isn’t the way it works.”

MTO: Once the RTP is finalized, Ontario and the federal government will review opportunities for funding RTP projects through the Building Canada Fund under the terms of the BCF framework agreement.  Beyond that, it is Ontario’s intention to engage the federal government in further discussions on potential federal support for implementation of the Plan based on national interests affected and addressed by the Plan.

– –

QUESTIONS POSED TO FEDERAL MINISTRY OF FINANCE:

Q1: How is the federal government coordinating with the planning and funding process of the Metrolinx RTP, known as “The Big Move”?

Q2: How does the RTP planning process fit with federal procedures for identifying new expenditures, i.e. funding for projects not already allocated within existing agreements?

Q3: Noting the current financial situation, is the federal government considering the possibility of additional, new funding for projects outlined in the RTP?

Metrolinx green paper

A number of themes emerged at the Metro Hall meet up on Nov. 18th, 2008, when transit interested individuals discussed goods movement.  Some of our discussion points originated from the Metrolinx Green Paper on goods movement, others reflected the interests of the group.  My summary of our discussion is listed below:

1)    The bigger geographic picture
In discussing goods movement our group automatically jumped beyond the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Areas (GTHA).  We discussed interprovincial routes such as the Continental Gateway. We considered border crossings in Windsor and Niagara Falls.   Finally, we discussed the impact of NAFTA and how trade agreements impact goods movement.

2)    Impacting change through local urban efficiencies
We were very interested as a group in how to effectively impact change by realizing efficiencies.  For example, air freight was noted to be a relatively minor component of goods movement in GTHA.  Major improvements however may be realized if urban efficiencies can be achieved (i.e., through consolidating delivery trips and preventing less than full or empty truck loads).

3)    The interlinked nature of moving goods and moving people
The group recognized that the infrastructures for moving goods and moving people are currently interlinked.  For example, the same highways and rail lines may be used for moving goods and people.   Designated lanes for trucks on highways and better differentiation and additions to rail lines may be needed to improve the infrastructures.

4)    Understanding models
As a group, we expressed some interest in better understanding the models which inform predictions and planning for transportation infrastructure.  For example, how does an economic recession alter the anticipated need for infrastructure?  How do trends such as telecommuting impact models?

5)    Seeing new possibilities
A final discussion point amongst the group was creative in nature.  We asked what possibilities we may see for goods movement?  Big opportunities (such Lake Ontario) might be right before our eyes but currently unseen.

Disappointed that the deadline to comment on the draft regional transportation plan on the Metrolinx website has passed? Still have a lot to say but worried your comments will fall upon deaf ears? Feel like the train has already left the station?

I’m listening!

In November of 2008, Metrolinx appointed me to sit on their Regional Transportation Plan Citizens Advisory Committee – a group of 18 community leaders tasked with analyzing the public consultation process, engaging in dialogue with the public, and providing advice to the Metrolinx Board of Directors. For the past year I’ve been faithfully fulfilling my duty by closely following the conversations on Metronauts, Urban Toronto, the Canadian Public Transportation Discussion Board and dozens of other sites and blogs for interesting ideas and opinions to bring to the people who have the power to implement them. It has shaped the Regional Transportation Plan in many ways already, and there are still opportunities for that to continue as we move towards final approval and implementation.

If you have any ideas, comments or suggestions that haven’t been brought to the attention of Metrolinx staff though open houses or on the Metrolinx site, post a comment on this post or send me an email at andrae (at) gttavisions (dot) com. The Metrolinx Regional Transportation Plan consultation efforts have set a new standard for how the public can be engaged in the planning process, and we can only hope that policy-makers at other agencies take note. But, in the mean time, here’s one last kick at the can.

Get your comments in and help make the future of this place we all call home just a bit brighter!

Image credit goes to Craig James White on Flickr. Creative Commons License.

Goods movement. Consider the trucks and vans that brought your computer monitor into the city; plus the desk or table it’s perched upon, or the chair holding you off the ground — and most of the material objects surrounding you. We take goods movement utterly for granted, unless perhaps one of those trucks or vans parks in a bike lane or blocks rush hour traffic on Yonge Street. Shipping freight is a huge part of our transport mix — witness the 401 late on a Thursday night or wait for a long train to trundle past a level crossing.

How do we get our stuff from there to here, and still have sufficient room on the roads and rails for people? This is a key question and a component of the proposed Regional Transportation Plan that needs a lot more fleshing out.

Although commenting on the draft RTP is now closed, Metrolinx and the provincial ministry of transportation (MTO) will need ongoing input from citizens and industry stakeholders as the “Big Move” gradually becomes reality. For details, such as they are, on goods and freight you can scan down this consultation page [search for SD#13] … or download the related Green Paper #5 at the bottom of this page.

The Tuesday November 18 session of the weekly Metro Hall Meetings is called “Goods movement, railways and highways” — come on down at 7pm … and have your say here.

Below are some basic questions I posed to Metrolinx and MTO to start off the discussion. I understand they will do their best to provide answers, considering that Metrolinx is now busy preparing the RTP before it goes to a board vote on November 28. When I get some responses, I plan to post them as a comment to this post.

Here’s what I asked:

What is the status of the goods movement component in the regional planning process?

What is the procedure for government to coordinate the public planning process with private entities?

– –

Here’s Andrae Griffith’s post Moving stuff, moving less stuff and trying not to move stuff at all

– –
Et plus cetera:

[Looking a bit ahead, please note that the Tuesday Nov. 25 Metro Hall Meeting is entitled “Budget and timeline for The Big Move”. I’m planning to send some related queries to MTO and Metrolinx soon, including about access to Pearson airport from the Georgetown rail corridor.

And as if I have not already asked a lot of Metrolinx -- at a time when the people there are very busy -- I believe it is crucial to explore some of Steve Munro’s stated concerns about the RTP planning process.  He’s the best known transport critic in the GTA and has published a great deal of online commentary about the Big Move. I feel we could all benefit if Metrolinx were to publicly respond to his well-considered criticism and questions.]

– –

Back to the goods: What would you add to my list of questions?

Today is the final day for official public comment on Metrolinx’ draft Regional Transportation Plan and Investment Strategy.  Metronauts blog authors are submitting their posts, along with readers comments, into the Metrolinx Limehouse public consultation portal.

You should really take the opportunity to leave your comments on the Metrolinx site. The RTP and IS documents are there and a series of questions are open for public comment. The future of $50 billion in investment and a future of sustainable transportation are up for grabs, so the time is now.

If you’re a blogger that’s been writing on these issues for some time, I encourage you to submit a summary of your posts along with links to the originals. This appears to be the most efficient way to get your thoughts and the comments of your readers onto the official public record.

Grade separation west of Union station

The GTHA has an interesting railway network when one includes the rail lines that are not serviced by GO Transit.  It also holds a huge amount of potential if its integration can be exploited to commuter operations’ advantage.

CONNECTING THE DOTS

Already built are a number of connections that can be of significant value to the region’s passenger rail movements.  An interlining GO service on the railways can be extremely useful in both getting more people onto the network, and also at alleviating the stress Union Station could be at significant risk of facing in the future, particularly in a fare-integrated network.

Consider the following connections that already exist in the network that can be used for future service (italics indicate locations not yet serviced by GO):

Oakville – Long Branch – Kipling - North Toronto – Agincourt (CP) - Malvern – Seaton
Existing tracks and junctions

Meadowvale – Kipling - North Toronto - Agincourt (CP) - Malvern – Seaton 
Existing tracks and junctions

Brampton – Weston – North Toronto – Agincourt (CP) - Malvern – Seaton
Existing tracks and junctions

Bolton – Weston (CP) - North Toronto – Agincourt (CP) - Malvern – Seaton
Existing tracks and junctions

Oakville – Union – Agincourt (CP) – Seaton/Locust Hill
Existing tracks and junctions

Pickering – Union - Newmarket
Existing tracks and junctions, and has been run in the past (unofficially… call it “the inside track”)

Oakville – Long Branch - Kipling – Weston – Pearson
Existing tracks and junctions except for Pearson spur

The connectivity of the network is somewhat lopsided in the west end’s favour as the connections between CP and CN lines are generally absent on the east side apart from the CP Belleville Don Branch, but exist at the West Toronto Junction (omni-directional except for north-to-east/west-to-south, which is useless anyway) and at Kipling (uni-directional (NE/SW only)), key points in the west end, allowing all current westbound (Hamilton/Milton/Georgetown) GO corridors to run into the CP North Toronto sub, and would also include Bolton service (which is a CP line anyway, the MacTier sub).

Some of the points after the jump were discussed at one of the earlier meetings hosted by Ed Drass at Metro Hall. (more…)

I hear there is an open house about the proposed Yonge North Subway extension today, Wednesday November 12. It’s a small meeting for stakeholders, but open to the public. I wish I could give you a URL to confirm the details below — perhaps ttc.ca or vivayork.com will have something today. (See links below.)

These subway meetings are setting new standards in public consultation — but I know from personal experience that failing to put timely info on the web can affect turnout. For a public agency, it can’t be an afterthought.

Here’s all I have so far:

Date: Wednesday November 12, 2008
Location: North York Civic Centre, 5100 Yonge Street, Commitee Room #3
Time: 5 – 7 pm

Via ttc.ca: Public meetings

Via vivayork.com follow >> what’s new >> public consultation

This site is Flash-heavy and my browser seems to get indigestion after viewing it. I hear changes are planned, but in the meantime there is a great deal of info about the proposed Yonge extension and the public comments and questions so far.

Transit officials are welcome to leave more details of this meeting in the comments.

Highway 407 Electronic Tolling System
[Source: C. Moy on Flickr]

The Draft Investment Strategy released by Metrolinx sets out a funding framework to deliver  $50 billion in transportation improvements over 25 years. Metrolinx is looking for your feedback. This is your region and your future. I encourage you to weigh-in on what is proposed.

Todd Litman’s recent post on planetizen discusses the costs of different modes of transportation. One conclusion is that “if a typical household shifts from driving everywhere (what we call, automobile dependency) to multi-modalism (using a combination of travel modes) and so is able shed one vehicle, the savings typically average about $5,000 annually. If these savings were invested each year over a typical 45 year working career, the household will retire about a million dollars wealthier.” There’s motivation for ya!

Research by Metrolinx finds that on average, people in the GTAH spending about $70 per week on transportation. Initially, the projects in the Regional Transportation Plan will cost about $155 per year per person in the GTHA, and reach $470 per year per person in 2033. When you break it down like this, $50 billion doesn’t sound so bad.

QUESTION: How much do you spend on transportation within the GTHA in a given week on items such as gas, parking, transit fares, cabs and tolls?  How much more would you be willing to pay per week in order to reduce your travel time, improve the reliability and predictability of your travel time, and/or improve the quality of your travel experience?

(more…)