PDA

You are viewing a trimmed-down version of the SkyscraperPage.com discussion forum.  For the full version follow the link below.

View Full Version : Rebuilding Canada: Can fixing our crumbling cities save the economy?



Riise
Dec 15, 2008, 5:45 PM
Billions Set To Flow Into Canada's Infrastructure

December 15, 2008
Calgary Herald
Mike De Souza


OTTAWA - Canada's crumbling cities are on the verge of getting a multibillion-dollar makeover through a federal strategy that is being billed by the government not only as a shot in the arm for a fragile economy, but also as a long-awaited plan to rebuild the backbone - from roads to sewage treatment - of our communities.


For years, the country's ever-growing "infrastructure deficit" took a back seat to other priorities. Now it is on the lips of virtually every politician as a key solution for tackling an economic slowdown by providing funds to companies bidding for contracts and putting people to work.


All levels of government are eager to make compromises so that billions of federal dollars can flow to the cities right away, said Transport, Infrastructure and Communities Minister John Baird.


"I have to tell you (that) in all the provinces there has been a sea change," Baird said in an interview. "Everyone wants to work together, everyone wants to make things happen and we're really committed . . . There is very little tolerance in the public in these times of global economic uncertainty for us to not work together."


But there's an equally pressing reason for dramatic action, say the country's mayors, leading civil engineers, urban transit agencies and environmentalists. They believe that aging sewage systems, failing water treatment facilities, crumbling roads, deteriorating bridges, and overloaded public transit networks have left cities in a critical condition, putting the health and safety of Canadians in grave danger.


The Conservative government introduced its Building Canada plan, an infrastructure strategy worth $33 billion over seven years, in its 2007 budget. But key stakeholders have raised doubts about whether it would be enough to fix the problems that are becoming more costly to resolve with each day.


"I think we have reached a crossroads in the face of the situation with (our) infrastructure," said Jean Perrault, the mayor of Sherbrooke, Que., and president of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities.


"Everything is getting old. All our streets, all our bridges, all our sports centres, all our cultural buildings, arts and so on."


Despite repeated warnings since the 1990s that much of the infrastructure has reached the end of its service life, the federal government is at least five years away from completing a study to get a handle on the extent of the problem.


Perrault's federation estimates that cities would need at least $123 billion to bring essential public infrastructure up to acceptable levels and an additional $115 billion to build infrastructure to meet the needs of a growing population.


Within that $123 billion, the Federation estimates that $31 billion would be needed for water and waste water systems, $21.7 billion for roads, sidewalks and bridges, $22.8 billion for public transit, $7.7 billion for waste management and $40.2 billion for community, recreational, cultural and social infrastructure.


Breakdowns in infrastructure have already left tragedies in their wake and many experts fear greater disasters are looming.


The 75-year old Pattullo Bridge crossing the Fraser River in the Vancouver region continues to be the site of numerous fatal head-on collisions and accidents because of its narrow lanes that were not designed with fast-moving cars in mind.


"It's six and a half metres too narrow, we've had numerous fatalities on it and it does need to be replaced," said Dianne Watts, the mayor of Surrey, B.C. "But guess what? A municipal government just does not have the funds to make that happen."


In Quebec, the collapse of an aging overpass on a highway in the Montreal region left five people dead in 2006, prompting a public inquiry and major reforms in the management of the province's transportation network.


But one of the biggest tragedies struck in May of 2000, when a failure in the drinking water system in Walkerton, Ont., led to Canada's worst outbreak of E. coli contamination. Seven people died, while dozens wound up in the hospital and hundreds suffered from the gastro-intestinal symptoms of the illness.


Despite the multi-billion dollar pledges from the Harper government, a leading engineering expert says the federal plan simply isn't good enough.


"The government of Canada has not acknowledged that we do face a crisis right now - a crisis in terms of deteriorating infrastructure," said Saeed Mirza, a McGill University civil engineering professor who wrote the federation's study on the infrastructure deficit.


Mirza said that the longer governments take to refurbish infrastructure, the higher the cost of repairs.


"What is happening is we are coming to issues after the fact - after a disaster. I'd like to see (instead) the governments saying: 'Yes. We do face a grave problem and it needs to be addressed.' "


The federation argues that the current global economic turmoil represents a tremendous opportunity for new investments.


A study by economic forecasting firm Informetrica estimated that every billion dollars invested in infrastructure would create the equivalent of 11,000 jobs, including 5,500 in the construction sector. At the same time, the study estimated that better infrastructure could translate into savings for the private sector of up to $0.17 for every public dollar invested. The manufacturing sector, for example, could see reduced maintenance costs if delivery trucks are travelling on better roads.


The Quebec government announced plans last year to invest $12 billion over four years to build and maintain its roads and bridges - many of which were built decades ago. The provincial government has also created an autonomous agency specifically assigned to oversee that work.



Roads and bridges are only one facet of the colossal infrastructure investment needed in Canada's cities.


A confidential Environment Canada briefing note released to Canwest News Service said governments need to invest up to $20 billion to clean up waste water treatment facilities across the country, or risk dire public health consequences.


"The environmental performance of many waste water systems is not adequate, putting human and environmental health at risk," reads the briefing note, released under the Access to Information Act. "To address the existing infrastructure deficit, the waste water sector in Canada is in need of a sustained and significant investment over the coming decades."


Eight years after heavy rains overloaded water treatment facilities causing the fatal outbreak in Walkerton, the town now offers some of the safest drinking water in Canada. But its residents are still suffering lingering and chronic effects from the bacteria, which causes complications in the intestines or kidneys.


"It's still very prevalent in the community," said Bruce Davidson, who helped organize a grassroots group of concerned citizens in the aftermath of the tragedy. "What you'd find is that there are people who still struggle and still have health concerns from which really they have never recovered and in many cases never will recover."


His wife was left with irritable bowel syndrome; at the time of the E. coli outbreak, his 10-year old son suffered gout-like symptoms.


Davidson believes that the water quality problems had plagued the local residents for years, but the breakdown was only clearly identified after the tragic deaths. He said it's an example of how many communities rush to fix visible problems such as potholes, but often overlook more serious problems they can't see, such as leaks in underground pipes or overloaded water treatment systems.


"That's the nature of tight budgets these days, where we put out the current fire."


Public transit agencies across the country have also estimated they need billions of dollars in new investments to upgrade aging fleets of buses, trains, subways and supporting infrastructure for a growing number of riders.


"We don't want to get to the point where we're pushing people on to trains like they do in China or Japan," said Michael Roschlau, president and CEO of the Canadian Urban Transit Association. "To me that's mass transit, not public transit . . . We want to provide people with comfort, not turn it into a hellish experience."


The federal government is providing billions to the cities and communities through a slate of programs that include a transfer of a portion of gas tax revenues and a complete refund of GST paid by the municipalities.


It has also begun a research project to develop a new criteria for measuring the lifespan and state of existing infrastructure.


"We talk a lot about the infrastructure deficit but there is a more serious issue - the knowledge deficit," said Zoubir Lounis, an engineer from the National Research Council, a federal research and development organization.


"We have a deficit in knowledge of the state of our assets - our critical assets, bridges, waters and sewers - that has serious consequences on safety and health."


The government announced last spring that it would spend $815,000 for the NRC, along with Engineers Canada, a professional engineering association, to develop a scientific method of evaluating infrastructure needs and identifying critical points when facilities must be replaced. Developing the formula is expected to take up to five years, but once in hand it should enable cities and communities to assess their needs more precisely than they do today.


"It's not clear what defines the end of life," said Lounis. "When do you say that this asset has its ended its service life? It's all over the map."


Perrault, from the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, said all levels of government must get together and hammer out solutions quickly to protect economic competitiveness and quality of life in cities across the country before it's too late.


"I don't want to see another Laval bridge fall down, I don't want to see another Walkerton, and I don't think anybody wants to see an event like this," Perrault said. "Infrastructure is so urgent."


© 2008 Canwest Publishing Inc. (http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/rebuilding-canada/Billions+flow+into+Canada+infrastructure/1058799/story.html)

O-tacular
Dec 15, 2008, 6:14 PM
Interesting article. I would have to agree. Here in Calgary infrastructure has yet to meet the demand. We definitely need billions to catch up with transit and road networks. Apparently our water and waste treatment is one of the best there is though. Whereas cities like Montreal face the need to replace aging infrastructure. It is appalling to see how old and cracked all their fly-overs look. They've been plagued with problems ranging from the bridge collapse, to the more recent parkade collapse and fear of the underground malls being unsafe.

Coldrsx
Dec 15, 2008, 6:31 PM
how about:

-a national highway program
-an expanded grant program for mass transit


Edmonton desperately needs another 2-4 billion for LRT expansion as well as
an upgraded yellowhead.

raggedy13
Dec 15, 2008, 6:39 PM
I've been hoping some major infrastructure investment would come from this economic downturn.

Perrault's federation estimates that cities would need at least $123 billion to bring essential public infrastructure up to acceptable levels and an additional $115 billion to build infrastructure to meet the needs of a growing population.

That's $238 billion. If it was dished out in terms of population, Metro Vancouver would get about $16 billion. :slob:

Considering the province just invested billions in water treatment, road, bridge, and public transit infrastructure in the last few years, $16 billion would really help move along our current billions of dollars worth of rapid transit plans that are just waiting for funding. I'd also like to see some upgrades to our waste water treatment systems and I'm sure some would be put to use on such things as replacing aging infrastructure like the Pattullo Bridge mentioned in the article.

Investment in community, recreational, cultural and social infrastructure would be nice too. We could give the new Vancouver Art Gallery a little financial boost as well as invest in other institutions planned for our cultural precinct. Thanks to the Olympics our recreational and community infrastructure has already got a bit of a shot in the arm luckily.

I really hope this investment into our cities happens.

vid
Dec 15, 2008, 6:41 PM
More money to hire more bus drivers would be a start, it's a well paying job, and the extra service will come in handy since more people will have to use public transit as cars become more expensive to maintain.

This would also be a great opportunity to four-lane the TCH through Northern Ontario and finish the freeway system in Thunder Bay which was barely started before Harris cancelled the whole thing. :(

Thunder Bay's infrastructure really isn't too bad. Our sewage and water treatment systems are the best in the country, all major facilities are less than five years old, IIRC we have the lowest amount of lead pipes in Ontario (virtually 0%), and our public transit was scaled back due to decreasing ridership and needs to be scaled up again (which requires more drivers but is otherwise a simple thing to do), bridges are all in pretty good condition as well, we just replaced the worst ones and have a programme to replace 2 or 3 a year (we have over 100 bridges in the city limits). Roads are a perennial issue. Aside from not being wide enough (our widest roads are only 4 lanes) the materials they're built with is the source of all their problems. Asphalt doesn't last.

Quebec's infrastructure is a national tragedy. :no:

Rathgrith
Dec 15, 2008, 6:56 PM
This is great news but I don't believe anything until I see a shovel in the ground. (And yes, I am always this cynical)

DHLawrence
Dec 15, 2008, 7:12 PM
It's the best way to do it; an improved economy through creating jobs to build what people need anyway. That's where the Tennessee Valley Authority came from during the Depression--a need to create jobs.

Once the money starts flowing, we'll just need workers from other sectors willing to make a career change.

SteelTown
Dec 15, 2008, 7:33 PM
This is the time spend money on infrastructure as there will be more competitive bids. With less demand and more skill trade jobs available the cost will decrease since vendors are desperate for contracts.

Also the interest rate is the lowest since 1950's so it's a good time to go into a deficit.

240glt
Dec 15, 2008, 7:44 PM
^ Lack of competitive bids drives up pricing typically, not the other way around.

Doug
Dec 15, 2008, 7:59 PM
There is a big difference between today and the 1930's. Back then, obstacles like environmental reviews, competitive bidding processes and consultation with local residents were almost non-existent. If funding came through today, shovels would be unlikely to break ground for at least 2 years, by which time the downturn will be over. Infrastructure improvements definitely deliver economic benefit, but mostly in terms of long term promotion of commerce, not immediate term employment.

There is also a risk of being sloppy in throwing money around. The orgy of infrastructure spending in Alberta has caused short-sighted planning, rapidly escalating costs and excessive disruption from too much construction. An economic downturn is a great time to invest in infrastructure because governments should get more bang for their buck. However, if the main goal is to appear to deliver short term economic stimulus, there is huge potential for waste.

SteelTown
Dec 15, 2008, 8:18 PM
Any funding for public transit in Ontario, especially from MoveOntario 2020, has the maximum of 8 months for EA assessment. Dalton changed the process to make the whole EA assessment shorter, instead of 2 years.

Coldrsx
Dec 15, 2008, 8:50 PM
^ Lack of competitive bids drives up pricing typically, not the other way around.

Indeed :tup: :cheers:

we are finally starting to see some 'competitive bids'

0773|=\
Dec 15, 2008, 9:41 PM
how about:

-a national highway program
-an expanded grant program for mass transit


Edmonton desperately needs another 2-4 billion for LRT expansion as well as
an upgraded yellowhead.

We have a designated National Highway System, but it's left up to provinces to upgrade them to an acceptable standard. Some don't do anything about it, while others do. We need the federal funding on the same level as the US provided to build their Interstates, but it has to be planned out better... less emphasis of freeways through major cities (with the exception of key routes), and bypasses of towns that don't destroy them (better signage for services, closer proximity to the town, more "business" routes).

If the feds started a larger national rail program, they should tie it into regional commuter rail systems, and perhaps manage the metro-rail systems in cities (heavy rail, leave light-rail to the province or municipality to run if they see the additional need).

Doug
Dec 15, 2008, 10:21 PM
Any funding for public transit in Ontario, especially from MoveOntario 2020, has the maximum of 8 months for EA assessment. Dalton changed the process to make the whole EA assessment shorter, instead of 2 years.

Believe it when you see it.

cdnklc
Dec 15, 2008, 10:47 PM
i'm not sure if fixing our crumbling cities will save the economy but i'm *&^% sure that not fixing them will ultimately kill them and the economy...

graupner
Dec 16, 2008, 1:31 AM
This is great news but I don't believe anything until I see a shovel in the ground. (And yes, I am always this cynical)

you're right, that's how it works in Canada.

They're gonna announce a 15 billion plan, spend 3 months arguing about it, waste half of the money promoting the plan, and finally use the rest to repay debt.

Move along.

Metro-One
Dec 16, 2008, 2:17 AM
Well in British Columbia we have the evergreen skytrain line that could move at any moment, all we need is about 100 million more for the feds, we also have two other skytrain extensions that i am sure could progress faster than anticipated if the feds were to send a present our way, not to mention rebuilding the interurban rail network in the Fraser Valley where the old rail beds still exist! Also i am sure the freeway by pass in Vernon is pretty well planned out, as are freeway expansions in Victoria and Kelowna, also the #1 Kamloops to at least Salmon Arm should be upgraded to freeway standard (if not the entire way to Golden) so we could actually have at least 1 true "inter-province" in BC. Also we got the 3 km tunnel project all planned out east of Golden (part of converting the #1 to freeway standard). I know the idea of creating a true north-south rail service on Vancouver island is a hot topic (and the rail line already exists), not to mention countless other rail and road infrastructure projects being discussed in this province.

My point being there are countless needed infrastructure projects in BC alone that with some federal spending could have shovels in the ground in the immediate future. Especially the Evergreen Line and the tunnel project near Golden which could probably start in 10 minutes if given the money. This is the perfect time to begin work on our countless needed projects nation wide, i hope they don't piss all the money and savings away on studies that have already been done 10 times :tup:

As a side note, what a perfect time for the US to fix up its aging freeway network, maybe they planned the recession, haha.

Mille Sabords
Dec 16, 2008, 3:00 AM
Instead of a highway program, I'd rather have a high speed rail program. There's no excuse in this day and age for a trip from Ottawa to Montreal to take 2 hours when it could take 40 minutes. Same for Ott-Tor, Mtl-Tor, Cal-Edm, etc.etc.

DHLawrence
Dec 16, 2008, 4:46 AM
With population increases, we'll probably need to do both to reduce congestion. Much as I hate to say it, high speed rail can't go everywhere; it's probably going to be a looooong time before Canada embarks on an AlpTransit-style tunnel project to enable a Calgary-Vancouver high speed run!

NetMapel
Dec 16, 2008, 6:10 AM
This is the perfect time to start high speed rail constructions between major Canadian cities.

1) Montreal - Ottawa - Toronto - London - Windsor
2) Edmonton - Calgary
3) Seattle - Vancouver - Kelowna - Calgary

As Nike would say: Just do it !

mr.x
Dec 16, 2008, 6:58 AM
Transportation minister expects fast track for Evergreen Line

By Kelly Sinoski
December 15, 2008 9:01 PM

METRO VANCOUVER - Transportation Minister Kevin Falcon is optimistic the $1.4-billion Evergreen Line will be one of the projects to be accelerated under a federal government scheme to stimulate the economy and create jobs in 2009-10.

The 11-kilometre rapid transit line, which would link Burnaby, Port Moody and Coquitlam, is part of the B.C. government's wish list presented to federal Transport Minister John Baird, who was in Vancouver Monday to meet with Falcon, Premier Gordon Campbell and premiers from Alberta, Manitoba and Saskatchewan.

Baird will meet premiers of the Atlantic provinces today, then Ontario's premier. The aim, he said, is to hear what projects are ready to go and determine how government can cut red tape and change policy to speed things up.

Projects could range from the Evergreen Line to broadband for rural communities, wastewater treatment plans and ring roads in Alberta, he said. Smaller projects would provide a huge boon to municipalities, he said.

"The prime minister has given me a mandate to make things happen," Baird told The Sun in an interview Sunday. "The Evergreen Line is supposedly in the planning stage. That's understandably one of the biggest projects we're working on with B.C. We'll be looking at what we can do to speed things up."

Falcon said Monday the province is in negotiations with the federal government for funding for the project. It plans to open a construction office in January ahead of signing off on the deal.

The B.C. government has already committed $410 million and TransLink $400 million to the long-awaited Evergreen Line so the federal funding is the "missing piece," Falcon said.

The federal government, which is required to pay a third of the project, has provided $67 million so far and Falcon said he's confident Ottawa will match Victoria's contribution. That would leave the project $200 million short, which Falcon has previously suggested would likely be covered by a private-sector partner. The Evergreen line is expected to be completed in 2014.

Without federal funding, the project is at risk of being scrapped as TransLink struggles to boost revenues to maintain the status quo by 2011.

Falcon wouldn't say what other projects B.C. is pitching for fast-track funding, but noted there is still work to do on plans to replace the aging Pattullo Bridge in Surrey and to extend the Expo and Millennium lines to Guildford and UBC before they are eligible for fast-tracking.

Port Moody Mayor Joe Trasolini said he's been told since spring that the funding has been approved and will wait to see what happens. "I'm not getting encouraged and over-excited with promises any more," he said.

ksinoski@vancouversun.com
© Copyright © The Vancouver Sun

mr.x
Dec 16, 2008, 7:03 AM
Well, it won't save the crumbling economy but it'll provide a cushion for the impact.




Transportation minister expects fast track for Evergreen Line

By Kelly Sinoski
December 15, 2008 9:01 PM

METRO VANCOUVER - Transportation Minister Kevin Falcon is optimistic the $1.4-billion Evergreen Line will be one of the projects to be accelerated under a federal government scheme to stimulate the economy and create jobs in 2009-10.

The 11-kilometre rapid transit line, which would link Burnaby, Port Moody and Coquitlam, is part of the B.C. government's wish list presented to federal Transport Minister John Baird, who was in Vancouver Monday to meet with Falcon, Premier Gordon Campbell and premiers from Alberta, Manitoba and Saskatchewan.

Baird will meet premiers of the Atlantic provinces today, then Ontario's premier. The aim, he said, is to hear what projects are ready to go and determine how government can cut red tape and change policy to speed things up.

Projects could range from the Evergreen Line to broadband for rural communities, wastewater treatment plans and ring roads in Alberta, he said. Smaller projects would provide a huge boon to municipalities, he said.

"The prime minister has given me a mandate to make things happen," Baird told The Sun in an interview Sunday. "The Evergreen Line is supposedly in the planning stage. That's understandably one of the biggest projects we're working on with B.C. We'll be looking at what we can do to speed things up."

Falcon said Monday the province is in negotiations with the federal government for funding for the project. It plans to open a construction office in January ahead of signing off on the deal.

The B.C. government has already committed $410 million and TransLink $400 million to the long-awaited Evergreen Line so the federal funding is the "missing piece," Falcon said.

The federal government, which is required to pay a third of the project, has provided $67 million so far and Falcon said he's confident Ottawa will match Victoria's contribution. That would leave the project $200 million short, which Falcon has previously suggested would likely be covered by a private-sector partner. The Evergreen line is expected to be completed in 2014.

Without federal funding, the project is at risk of being scrapped as TransLink struggles to boost revenues to maintain the status quo by 2011.

Falcon wouldn't say what other projects B.C. is pitching for fast-track funding, but noted there is still work to do on plans to replace the aging Pattullo Bridge in Surrey and to extend the Expo and Millennium lines to Guildford and UBC before they are eligible for fast-tracking.

Port Moody Mayor Joe Trasolini said he's been told since spring that the funding has been approved and will wait to see what happens. "I'm not getting encouraged and over-excited with promises any more," he said.

ksinoski@vancouversun.com
© Copyright © The Vancouver Sun

urbanfan89
Dec 16, 2008, 7:03 AM
I doubt it.

Cities in general don't vote Conservative except for in Alberta, so they won't get funding.

Though I hear they're planning a Transrapid maglev line from Barrie to Peterborough.

Nathan
Dec 16, 2008, 7:20 AM
I doubt it.

Cities in general don't vote Conservative except for in Alberta, so they won't get funding.

Though I hear they're planning a Transrapid maglev line from Barrie to Peterborough.

I think the Liberals are now talking with the Conservatives about stimulating the economy, and both parties have been saying the talks are going well... so this could be the end of the NDP coalition deal... and also would mean money for cities that don't vote conservative.

mersar
Dec 16, 2008, 8:03 AM
Cities in general don't vote Conservative except for in Alberta, so they won't get funding.

Usually its the other way around actually. Cities that don't vote conservative get funding to try to buy votes while cities that do vote conservative get squat. Case in point, the federal funding for Toronto's transit expansions while Calgary and Edmonton got nothing.

However, I'd hope this won't be the case. Theres numerous projects in all cities that should be funded on their merits, not on political leanings of the people there.

someone123
Dec 16, 2008, 8:19 AM
I agree that this is a good time to be tackling infrastructure projects. I do not believe the theory that increasing federal government spending right now will result in net benefits for the economy over the long term compared to the status quo, totally regardless of where the funds are directed.

There are lots of potential infrastructure projects across the country but I'm not sure which ones are "ready to go".

For Halifax, some of the planning has already been done for a new highway (113) and a third suspension bridge over the harbour (which would have a toll, as the other two do). There's no large-scale transit plan comparable in relative terms to the billion dollar projects in Toronto or Vancouver.

Interestingly, I was looking at the Highway 113 project site - the environmental assessment began in Oct 2006, was supposed to finish in Oct 2008, and has been extended to Oct 2009. Probably totally normal but also absurd.

graupner
Dec 16, 2008, 10:55 AM
By the time any of that money is put to good use, oil will be back at 200$ a barrel and pretro-dollars will start to flow again.

SteelTown
Dec 16, 2008, 3:24 PM
Believe it when you see it.

Metrolinx to fast-track airport link

GO Transit relinquishes control of transit project
Dec 16, 2008 04:30 AM
http://www.thestar.com/News/GTA/article/554335

Metrolinx is taking control of the proposed rail link between Union Station and Pearson International Airport, removing the controversial project from GO Transit's jurisdiction.

The project has been stalled for years, stuck between downtown policy planners and opposition from Weston residents on the Georgetown GO line, who would see increased rail traffic that they fear would split the neighbourhood.

"We're going to be meeting with the communities all along the corridor and we're going to be looking at the preliminary studies that have been done on the previous project, so we will not be starting from scratch," said Colleen Bell, Metrolinx's manager of community relations.

Ontario's Ministry of Transportation ordered the move.

It permits Metrolinx – the provincial agency charged with integrating regional transportation – to utilize a faster environmental assessment process designed for transit projects.

A "Transit Environmental Assessment" would begin next spring and take six months – much less than the original process.

But Mike Sullivan, chair of the Weston Community Coalition, a group founded to oppose the project, still has reservations.

He said Metrolinx should use electric trains instead of diesel, bury the tracks in tunnels through residential neighbourhoods, and make local stops instead of running express to the airport.

highdensitysprawl
Dec 16, 2008, 3:45 PM
There's no excuse in this day and age for a trip from Ottawa to Montreal to take 2 hours when it could take 40 minutes. .

I've flown from Ottawa to Montreal...now that is decadent all 23 minutes of it, following the landmarks along the 417.....Casselman, Herb's, Rigaud etc.

All kidding aside a quick way to get to Mtl from Ottawa would be great.

Wooster
Dec 16, 2008, 3:53 PM
Usually its the other way around actually. Cities that don't vote conservative get funding to try to buy votes while cities that do vote conservative get squat. Case in point, the federal funding for Toronto's transit expansions while Calgary and Edmonton got nothing.

However, I'd hope this won't be the case. Theres numerous projects in all cities that should be funded on their merits, not on political leanings of the people there.

Exactly.

Although I hope SE LRT and the 8th avenue subway in Calgary are fastracked as part of this. Much of the planning work, at least for the SE line is already done and the City recently commissioned a study for the subway downtown.

Keep in mind that part of the 'stimulation of jobs' is in the design and planning process, not just construction! Robots aren't planning and designing this infrastructure, real people with real jobs are.

wild wild west
Dec 16, 2008, 3:54 PM
I doubt it.

Cities in general don't vote Conservative except for in Alberta, so they won't get funding.

You mean except for Alberta, the suburban ring around Vancouver, Ottawa, Quebec City and Winnipeg.

Anyways, I digress...the Conservatives are still trying to make inroads in Montreal and Toronto in particular, so I would expect if anything more money will go towards cities where they are hoping to improve their standing in future elections.

Riise
Dec 16, 2008, 4:41 PM
This is the perfect time to start high speed rail constructions between major Canadian cities.

1) Montreal - Ottawa - Toronto - London - Windsor
2) Edmonton - Calgary
3) Seattle - Vancouver - Kelowna - Calgary

As Nike would say: Just do it !

I'd probably use the Vancouver to Calgary line more often than the Calgary - Edmonton line, but I just can seem the demand justifying the prohibitive costs of tunnelling the line through the Rockies.



Anyways, I digress...the Conservatives are still trying to make inroads in Montreal and Toronto in particular, so I would expect if anything more money will go towards cities where they are hoping to improve their standing in future elections.

To be honest, with overpasses crumbling and falling down I wouldn't begrudge Montreal getting more money; the really need it!

Wooster
Dec 16, 2008, 4:54 PM
^ It's a pretty quick flight to Vancouver. HSR seems to work best for trips that would normally take about 3-6 hours to drive and are too short to justify the cost and incovenience of flying - Vancouver is out of that range. Flying still would be the best option regardless of the prohibitive geography between the two cities. Once Calgary has a LRT connection to the airport like Vancouver is opening the convenience will also be improved travelling from city to city.

MolsonExport
Dec 16, 2008, 5:08 PM
I've flown from Ottawa to Montreal...now that is decadent all 23 minutes of it, following the landmarks along the 417.....Casselman, Herb's, Rigaud etc.

All kidding aside a quick way to get to Mtl from Ottawa would be great.



But you would then miss all that beautiful highway 417 scenary (herbs, caselman et al.). ;)

flar
Dec 16, 2008, 5:14 PM
Anyways, I digress...the Conservatives are still trying to make inroads in Montreal and Toronto in particular, so I would expect if anything more money will go towards cities where they are hoping to improve their standing in future elections.

That would be the smart thing to do, but for some reason the Conservatives have yet to realize it.

MonkeyRonin
Dec 16, 2008, 5:21 PM
Case in point, the federal funding for Toronto's transit expansions

What?

boden
Dec 16, 2008, 5:43 PM
Absolutely not. It may help in the short term, but that is all. Most people do not have a concept of what is coming. Do you think the government has an endless supply of money?

Wooster
Dec 16, 2008, 6:00 PM
What?

I believe the federal government gave about $700 million towards the subway expansion up to Vaughan, also about $300 million recently for transit vehicles.
http://www.thestar.com/News/GTA/article/467117
http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/March2008/18/c5115.html


So far, no federal money for either the WLRT line, NW or NE expansions, SELRT line, downtown subway or transit vehicles in Calgary or other cities like such as Edmonton or Winnipeg.

Greco Roman
Dec 16, 2008, 6:00 PM
This is the perfect time to start high speed rail constructions between major Canadian cities.

1) Montreal - Ottawa - Toronto - London - Windsor
2) Edmonton - Calgary
3) Seattle - Vancouver - Kelowna - Calgary

As Nike would say: Just do it !

If you are going to go this distance, I say do it from Vancouver through Calgary (up to Edmonton) through Winnipeg (maybe from here through the States or Ontario, whichever is more efficient and viable) to TO to Ottawa to Montreal up through QC and out to Halifax. It's time to get this country connected in a real way, and high speed rail is primo for the task!

240glt
Dec 16, 2008, 6:05 PM
HSR between Van & Cal will never happen within any of our lifetimes.

Cal- Edm would be the likely candidate in the west.

Tony
Dec 16, 2008, 6:17 PM
Believe it when you see it.

What do you mean? It's been changed and EA's are going on the new schedule right now. Several Transit City (Toronto) lines are already in the final phases of the EA process right now.

Bassic Lab
Dec 16, 2008, 8:29 PM
HSR between Van & Cal will never happen within any of our lifetimes.

Cal- Edm would be the likely candidate in the west.

While it might not be likely in any of our life times I wouldn't flat out reject the possibility. I don't know about you but I plan on living for quite a while and who knows what could happen in fifty plus years.

That said, I could easily see a system spreading out of Alberta to the east, Calgary-Medicine Hat-Regina-Winnipeg and Edmonton-Saskatoon-Regina, long before an attempt was made to connect to the coast. An HSR line to Vancouver would need to have significant portions tunneled and could easily cost upwards of 100 billion dollars, Winnipeg might cost a tenth of that.

The one segment of HSR that I simply can't see being built would be a connection between Winnipeg and the Windsor-Quebec City line. The distance is perfect for planes, almost no one (sorry Vid) lives between them, and the cost would be astronomical.

MonkeyRonin
Dec 16, 2008, 8:46 PM
I believe the federal government gave about $700 million towards the subway expansion up to Vaughan, also about $300 million recently for transit vehicles.

Wow, so much. Now how about that $6 billion they're supposed to contribute for MoveOntario 2020? Nowhere to be seen of course. :rolleyes:

Riise
Dec 16, 2008, 9:03 PM
That said, I could easily see a system spreading out of Alberta to the east, Calgary-Medicine Hat-Regina-Winnipeg and Edmonton-Saskatoon-Regina, long before an attempt was made to connect to the coast. An HSR line to Vancouver would need to have significant portions tunneled and could easily cost upwards of 100 billion dollars, Winnipeg might cost a tenth of that.

With the relative costs considered that makes sense, but do you think that we'll see enough population growth to warrant the less expensive but still large investment? I can see the Van-Cal-Edm corridor growing enough in the, distant, future to justify the cost of the section but to be honest, I can't see that with the Calgary-Winnipeg or Edmonton-Regina corridors.



Wow, so much.

That's a billion more than we got! I'd rather have a seventh than none.

Wooster
Dec 16, 2008, 9:05 PM
Wow, so much. Now how about that $6 billion they're supposed to contribute for MoveOntario 2020? Nowhere to be seen of course. :rolleyes:

Of course they should be contributing more to Toronto. The $6 billion would be a good start to get the Metrolinx plan/Transit City rolling. The point was that at least Toronto has gotten some money, as opposed to other cities, like Calgary that have big transit projects planned (several billions worth), that have gotten jack squat - $0.

Is it that they were supposed to give $6 billion and haven't yet, or is that what the Province and cities are requesting from the federal government. There's a big difference.

National Transit Strategy Please!!!

Bassic Lab
Dec 16, 2008, 9:37 PM
With the relative costs considered that makes sense, but do you think that we'll see enough population growth to warrant the less expensive but still large investment? I can see the Van-Cal-Edm corridor growing enough in the, distant, future to justify the cost of the section but to be honest, I can't see that with the Calgary-Winnipeg or Edmonton-Regina corridors.





That's a billion more than we got! I'd rather have a seventh than none.

Well, if Winnipeg manages to have a third of the population of the Lower Mainland and Regina-Saskatoon manages to have a quarter that is significantly more than the ten percent figure that I pulled out of my ass for how much a HSR route to Winnipeg would cost in relation to one to Vancouver. So yeah, I could definitely see trains heading east before they head very far west. Fifty years ago Calgary and Edmonton weren't much different in size from Saskatoon and Regina today.

I also imagine that Alberta money would see a more extensive system in the province long before routes go else where. If Alberta already has a line from Calgary through Brooks to Medicine Hat, then expansion to Regina starts to look attractive. Of course I doubt Alberta would have such an extensive system, Medicine Hat would be behind Fort McMurray, Lethbridge, and likely other locales on a list that probably wouldn't be started on for decades, but I do see it happening long before a line to Winnipeg, which would be long before a line to Vancouver. I just can't see the capital expense of a true HSR route to Vancouver being justified any time soon. Renewed Via service for the trip, definitely, even some improvements to the current tracks to speed things up, sure, but HSR would be prohibitively expensive.