High Speed Rail (HSR)

[Aylmer]

Just like soviet bread lines or traffic jams, indeed.

Plus, a per-km model can sometimes end up with tickets which are way too cheap because of short distances. For example, a train trip with a $0.15/km model from Dorval to Montreal would cost less than a bus ticket (about $2.50).
That said, I would just like ticket prices to be based on the price of driving, but with adjustments up and down depending on demand.

The point, in the end, should be to COMPETE WITH THE CAR FOR COST AND THE PLANE FOR TIME.

[1overcosc]

Yep, agreed. I'd make a 'baseline' fare be 80% of the average driving cost with adjustments applied to that.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

The travel time along the rail corridor Pearson to Union, if going straight through, is 14 minutes post-upgrade. The reason why the UPX travel time is 25 minutes is because UPX goes down a long spur to Pearson, and it stops twice en route. There's discussion about it on UT, and some GO drivers popped in with this explanation.

As for the rest, I trust MTO. They have worldwide renown as one of the best transportation ministries out there (they're like Statscan in this respect).

The plans that were drawn up for the HSR corridor do indicate a new greenfield ROW to London. I don't see how that's a huge issue, we expropriate rural land all the time for transportation projects. I'm not sure what you mean by 'hasn't been done since the early 20th century'. It's been done many times much more recently. Just a few years ago, a big swath was expropriated for the 407 East project. And huge chunks of rural land were expropriated for the 400-series highway builds back in the middle of the last century. If they're smart they'll run it along a concession line(s) to minimize impact (like what was done with one of the freeways out there--I believe it was the 403).

Two all way GO is coming to K-W, too. The huge amount of infrastructure work that has to happen to make that reality is what makes HSR within reach. Between K-W and Toronto, the only piece of additional infrastructure HSR will require that GO RER will is a bypass of Guelph. Everything else--grade separations, electrification--is happening from the RER project. Essentially, it's not really a 200km HSR project at all (though you can bet the government will insist that it is). It's simply a limited stop express GO RER from Toronto to K-W with a Guelph bypass, and then a greenfield HSR to London. GO already comes very close to cost-neutral on its current network (I believe farebox return is something like 90%-95% on the GO Rail network), so it's not unreasonable to expect full farebox return for a service that will be even faster and won't actually cost anymore to operate.

A big part of the HSR push from the tech industry is about competing internationally. A lot of people don't realize just how significant it is to K-W, or indeed to the entire province. There's a common idea that IT is just some sort of fringe industry that survives on corporate welfare which is simply untrue. It's a huge industry, and Waterloo is one of the biggest centres of it in the entire world. A list of the top 20 cities for tech innovation in the whole damn world was compiled, and Waterloo made the list. By far and way the smallest city to do so, all the others were the biggies like Tokyo, San Fran, Tel Aviv, London, etc. But the difficulty of international access due to distance from Toronto makes it harder for K-W to compete, especially from Japanese and Europeans who expect/want to take trains instead of having to rent a car. As the low-skill manufacturing that Ontario's economy has long had at its bedrock has no future left in the developed world, it is absolutely imperative that Ontario nurture its tech industry, and follow in the path of countries like Japan & Israel whose economies are technology & R-D oriented. It is also imperative that Ontario's IT scene is urbanized to prevent IT-induced sprawl like what happened in west Ottawa in the 1990s. This is already happening in Ontario, especially in Toronto, and HSR will help. Google is locating its main Canadian office in downtown Kitchener, and the train station was the main reason why Google chose downtown.

MTO has decades of experience in the highway business, they have limited experience in the railway business (and certainly none in the HSR business). As well, there are several things about this process that hint it didn't go through a normal transportation planning process, including the use of a British consultant (whose website http://www.firstclasspartnerships.com/ is currently defunct) whose main client appeared to be the Ontario government and the fact that the first thing anyone heard of this was in the budget (which at least in the federal government is often a sign the project comes from staffers and not the bureaucracy).

Google relocated to downtown Kitchener in 2010 - long before anyone started talking about high speed rail this year.

Unless you count the Go line that parallels the 401 in Durham region, nobody has built a greenfield railway in Ontario in decades (probably since before WWI). Railways are an exclusive federal jurisdiction and I suspect the legislation for greenfield railways are probably out of date, and there is a lot of incentive in Oxford and Wellington counties to fight it. MTO has built lots of greenfield highways, but they tend to bank land decades in advance so they usually own most of the needed land before the bulldozers show up.

Very little about RER "lays the groundwork" for HSR. RER is commuter rail running at conventional speeds, they are planning to run a at a higher frequency than is common in the GTA (although par for the course for much of the world) but it is still commuter rail. The way you're describing it, it sounds like they're planning to buy some very expensive HSR rolling stock, run it at conventional speeds until just east of Guelph (sharing track at various points with freight, Go, Via, Smart Track and UPE trains), speed it up a little for the Guelph bypass (although it isn't enough space to build up a lot of speed), slow it down to conventional speeds through Waterloo Region and then run it at high speed to London. A high speed train takes 11km to accelerate to top speed and 7km to stop, so it is really only going at top speed for about 50-60 km or so.

sigh

[eternallyme]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

As for Ottawa-Toronto and Ottawa-Montreal, I instead favour the current approach of continually improving the conventional rail services with an eye to HSR as the eventual end goal. VIA has done a very good job steadily improving Toronto-Kingston-Ottawa service, ridership on that route has more than doubled since 2009, including a 30-something percent increase in 2013 alone, and the number of trains per day is constantly growing (in 2011, there were only 10 trains a day between Toronto & Ottawa on a Friday, now there's 16), travel times are dropping (some trains are now down to less than 4 hours), and fares are actually getting cheaper (you can get $40 for Toronto-Ottawa now if you book in advance, you used to never be able to do that, ever). If VIA can keep the momentum growing that's honestly enough IMO.

As of 2013, if YOW-YYZ passengers connecting to a destination further afield in YYZ are excluded, VIA now has a larger share of the Toronto-Ottawa market than the airlines do, although both are dwarfed by the number of automobile trips.

I'm not sure what the automobile traffic specifically between the GTA and the Ottawa region is, but the 416 south of Kemptville draws about 15,000 vehicles each day (although some is local and some is US-bound though). It is higher north of Kemptville but much of that is commuter traffic.

The 401 between Prescott and Kingston generally has about 30,000 vehicles travelling it each day, and between Kingston and Cobourg about 40,000. In both cases, only a small proportion is travelling between Ottawa and Toronto, many are heading between Montreal and Toronto, or local destinations.

[Aylmer]

I found the cost/passenger-km in the EcoTrain study from a couple of years ago: Page 48 in the Operating Costs section.

So for the 300km/h option from Windsor to Quebec, it comes out to 15¢/pass-km in 2025 and 13¢/pass-km in 2055. Assuming that's correct, the AFT would need to be subsidized, but I don't think that's a reason not to do it, especially since even the best-used HSR systems run at under 80% total capacity (50% in Germany, 75% in Japan), so filling the other 20-30% doesn't cost more to operate than if they were empty.

Assuming the average group ticket user is in a group of 3, that allows for more than 10% of the ticket purchasers to bring others along. With variable pricing and a requirement for advanced group booking and identification (to avoid reselling, spontaneous ticket sharing between strangers or just general overuse of the group ticket), I'm certain we could keep to 10% and still provide families and friends with a viable alternative to automobile travel.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by acottawa

MTO has decades of experience in the highway business, they have limited experience in the railway business (and certainly none in the HSR business). As well, there are several things about this process that hint it didn't go through a normal transportation planning process, including the use of a British consultant (whose website http://www.firstclasspartnerships.com/ is currently defunct) whose main client appeared to be the Ontario government and the fact that the first thing anyone heard of this was in the budget (which at least in the federal government is often a sign the project comes from staffers and not the bureaucracy).

MTO did work on the EcoTrain report in conjunction with the MTQ in Quebec and the federal government (I believe TC). Somebody on UT noted the costing methodology appeared almost identical to the EcoTrain report methods, so I imagine a lot of the work from that report was recycled. (Although EcoTrain report did propose a different route not via Kitchener, factors like cost estimate methodology, rolling stack info, etc. almost certainly was borrowed).

Originally Posted by acottawa

Google relocated to downtown Kitchener in 2010 - long before anyone started talking about high speed rail this year.

Yes, but when they made the decision to put up in the Breihaupt Block, it was specifically because of the GO/VIA station right there. Yes, long before HSR came up, but certainly when 2WAD GO was in the discussion.

Originally Posted by acottawa

Unless you count the Go line that parallels the 401 in Durham region, nobody has built a greenfield railway in Ontario in decades (probably since before WWI). Railways are an exclusive federal jurisdiction and I suspect the legislation for greenfield railways are probably out of date, and there is a lot of incentive in Oxford and Wellington counties to fight it. MTO has built lots of greenfield highways, but they tend to bank land decades in advance so they usually own most of the needed land before the bulldozers show up.

Railways are exclusive federal jurisdiction, but I believe the MTO (or more appropriately, the province in general) still has the power to expropriate land irregardless of what they're planning to build... they can exprop the ROW and then get federal approval for a railway in the land they exproped.

Originally Posted by acottawa

Very little about RER "lays the groundwork" for HSR. RER is commuter rail running at conventional speeds, they are planning to run a at a higher frequency than is common in the GTA (although par for the course for much of the world) but it is still commuter rail.

RER provides the exclusive ROW (free of freight interference), the grade separations, and the electrification infrastructure. A lot of the infrastructure required is common to the two, that is required by RER even without HSR. The government's accounting assumed any common infrastructure would be considered part of RER's budget, which is why the HSR budget cost is rather low. I highly suspect the HSR plan was born when somebody at Metrolinx realized how heavy the work required for two way all-day commuter infrastructure was, and how much more 'marginal' HSR became as a result. (Though, there are anecdotes that MTO began analyzing HSR in the late 1990s that were tossed around on UT, which I have a lot of difficulty believing).

Originally Posted by acottawa

The way you're describing it, it sounds like they're planning to buy some very expensive HSR rolling stock, run it at conventional speeds until just east of Guelph (sharing track at various points with freight, Go, Via, Smart Track and UPE trains), speed it up a little for the Guelph bypass (although it isn't enough space to build up a lot of speed), slow it down to conventional speeds through Waterloo Region and then run it at high speed to London. A high speed train takes 11km to accelerate to top speed and 7km to stop, so it is really only going at top speed for about 50-60 km or so.

That's actually pretty much exactly what the plan is, or at least more specifically that's what the feasibility study assumed. Nothing more substantial than a RER express east of Guelph (or Kitchener, really). The tracks will be widened to the point of allowing all these uses of the track, as part of the GTS project within Toronto substantial allowances were made to allow additional tracks. With the exception of the middle segment between Bramalea-ish and Georgetown-ish (which will almost certainly require dedicated parallel tracks, again as part of RER anyway), freight traffic on this route is extremely low. The forumers on UT calculated that based on the documents, the trains will never exceed 200km/h between Kitchener and Toronto. The conventional railway itself will be upgraded to 200km/h standards between Kitchener and Georgetown-ish (which is possible with concrete ties & grade separations) as part of the RER project. Another reason why the cost is pretty low. The government is certainly lying when they say this will be true HSR.

On the Canada forum, it was reported that the MTO is planning on releasing a whack of documents related to the HSR project next week. More deets are coming. In any case, we'll know all the deets whenever the EA finishes.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by eternallyme

I'm not sure what the automobile traffic specifically between the GTA and the Ottawa region is, but the 416 south of Kemptville draws about 15,000 vehicles each day (although some is local and some is US-bound though). It is higher north of Kemptville but much of that is commuter traffic.

The 401 between Prescott and Kingston generally has about 30,000 vehicles travelling it each day, and between Kingston and Cobourg about 40,000. In both cases, only a small proportion is travelling between Ottawa and Toronto, many are heading between Montreal and Toronto, or local destinations.

I have no idea what the numbers are. VIA was bragging about their topping of the airlines at one of their press conferences this year, and when somebody asked them 'ya, but are you beating car traffic counts' or something like that, and the guy chuckled and said no way.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

I found the cost/passenger-km in the EcoTrain study from a couple of years ago: Page 48 in the Operating Costs section.

So for the 300km/h option from Windsor to Quebec, it comes out to 15¢/pass-km in 2025 and 13¢/pass-km in 2055. Assuming that's correct, the AFT would need to be subsidized, but I don't think that's a reason not to do it, especially since even the best-used HSR systems run at under 80% total capacity (50% in Germany, 75% in Japan), so filling the other 20-30% doesn't cost more to operate than if they were empty.

Assuming the average group ticket user is in a group of 3, that allows for more than 10% of the ticket purchasers to bring others along. With variable pricing and a requirement for advanced group booking and identification (to avoid reselling, spontaneous ticket sharing between strangers or just general overuse of the group ticket), I'm certain we could keep to 10% and still provide families and friends with a viable alternative to automobile travel.

I don't see why it wouldn't be subsidized. Highways are subsidized (buses & cars use them for free), so HSR would have to be subsidized too for a fair level playing ground.

[GoTrans]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

I don't see why it wouldn't be subsidized. Highways are subsidized (buses & cars use them for free), so HSR would have to be subsidized too for a fair level playing ground.

Buses, cars and trucks do pay for the use of highways through driver license fees, vehicle license fees and fuel taxes but these funds are not necessarily dedicated to to highways as they go into general revenue unlike in the US. Even at that highways are massively subsidized. The level of government funding for infrastructure improvements is unbalanced. As an example when John Baird was the Minister of Transport he held a press conference at the Ottawa station highlighting the federal government's funding of $10 million for improvements of the Ottawa to Montreal line, approx. 200 km or50,000 $/km. The same day the MTO awarded contracts for the extension of 5.5 km of Hwy 417 in Arnprior for $550 million or $100 million /km. To this day the federal government has not completed improvements to the rail line in Coteau, QC resulting in train delays between Gare Centrale and Coteau. In addition further delays are caused by the level crossing of the CP mainline a few km north of Coteau. There is little double track between Ottawa and Coteau so late trains remain late. The line between Coteau and Ottawa and Smiths Falls is owned by Via so it is not the case of the federal government subsidizing the railway companies but a case of not providing funding to eliminate slow points.

[eemy]

Out of curiousity, are gas taxes the same for buyers who are not using it to fuel road vehicles? I'm thinking of airlines and railways, but also industrial users.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by jeremy_haak

Out of curiousity, are gas taxes the same for buyers who are not using it to fuel road vehicles? I'm thinking of airlines and railways, but also industrial users.

Jet Fuel is taxed at a separate rate than other fuels. I would assume heavy diesel used by trains would also have a different rate.
Farmers (and maybe others?) can purchase fuel tax free for use by machinery etc.

[Innsertnamehere]

Pricing works differently for boat gasoline too, its not allowed to be used in cars so they artificially colour the gas to prevent illegal use. (They can check if its boat gas)

[1overcosc]

The details of the feasibility study for the Toronto-KW-London HSR were released today as well as a bunch of info from the consultants. The consultants say the deadline was rushed to have an answer by April 2014 ahead of the budget announcement, and as such they were unable to survey the route manually which is apparently their typical approach and relied on satellite imagery and municipal data. They did say that it appears to be 'the easiest and least disruptive route they've ever imagined' in terms of community impacts and ease of construction.

Some info from the CBC article:

Between 150 and 200 farm fields near Kitchener and London could be severed by a proposed high speed rail line.

Somewhere between 20 and 50 businesses could potentially need to be displaced in order to make room for a high speed rail station in downtown Kitchener.

The March 11 report recommends a direct route through downtown Guelph. The March 18 report recommends skipping Guelph entirely to keep costs down and shorten the length of the route. Instead the route would cut south of the city, through the Niagara Escarpment across a quarry.

A suggested transfer station could be built near Woodbine Racetrack in Toronto to facilitate access to Pearson International Airport.

Approximately 20 houses in Georgetown may need to have their backyards appropriated during construction in order to widen the rail lines, but the land would be returned once construction is finished.

Fewer than 25 homes and farm buildings could be demolished, depending on the route selection.

The report and addendum did not address expanding the rail line to Windsor.

Several routes are proposed into London, and two overpass bridges along the final stretch of the route are suggested for Egerton and Rectory streets.

[Aylmer]

A particular gem from page 8:

[HSR] Trains might eventually run through to Peterborough, and perhaps Kingston, Ottawa, Montréal and Québec City

[eemy]

So the HSR station in Kitchener wouldn't be at the transit centre? I'm a bit curious about that.

[eternallyme]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

The details of the feasibility study for the Toronto-KW-London HSR were released today as well as a bunch of info from the consultants. The consultants say the deadline was rushed to have an answer by April 2014 ahead of the budget announcement, and as such they were unable to survey the route manually which is apparently their typical approach and relied on satellite imagery and municipal data. They did say that it appears to be 'the easiest and least disruptive route they've ever imagined' in terms of community impacts and ease of construction.

Some info from the CBC article:

Skipping Guelph? I could understand express trains skipping that city, but why the entire line?

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by eternallyme

Skipping Guelph? I could understand express trains skipping that city, but why the entire line?

HSR will be express trains only, running Toronto-Pearson-Kitchener-London. The 'non-express' is the GO train, that will continue stopping in Guelph. The GO line and the HSR line will share corridors wherever feasible but some cases, like with Guelph, they won't.

[1overcosc]

Read through the HSR documents. There are some redactions, mostly about infrastructure requirements along the parts of the GO Kitchener line still owned by CN/CP... and a big one. There's a 15 page section on HSR east of Toronto which is almost entirely redacted. All that is left is a criticism of the EcoTrain report's proposed route along Lake Ontario, already-known info about GO's operating model, and a recommendation for the Lakeshore East GO line to be extended to Kingston using DMU trains.

[Kitchissippi]

The Highway 407 east expansion has a parallel "Future Transitway" corridor which could easily be a high-speed capable railway, away from the busy lakeshore route. Both ends have links to existing/underused or abandoned railways that can be dedicated to passenger rail. Following the 407 corridor also provides an option for the train to make a beeline for Pearson before or after downtown Toronto via the UPX route.

[acottawa]

So they hired a foreign-based consultant, who may or may not have set foot in Canada and in a few weeks they did a "feasibility study" using google maps and the wikipedia for a multi-billion dollar project. I can think of at least several people on this forum that have demonstrated better analytical skills (and use of graphics software) than that. Hell, they could have have students do a better feasibility study as part of a class project.

No review of the legal regime necessary to build the line, origin-destination studies or surveys to make accurate projections of ridership and demand, no consultations with local businesses, no consultations with local municipalities, no consultations with the railways to find out what is needed to use their land, no discussions with the feds (who regulate railways), no figuring out how the millions of projected riders would get to downtown Kitchener or London even if they really wanted to take the train (or what they would do when they go there), not even checking what might have been built since google maps was last updated or what projects have been planned or received permits. It doesn't appear they even consulted with Metrolinx, because their understand of RER seems to differ considerably from Metrolinx's plans.

There are vague references of other jurisdictions, but no specific examples that one might be considered a comparable situation (i.e. an existing high speed line that connects a city of similar size to Toronto to a city that connects to cities comparable to Kitchener and London at similar distances), no examples of high speed rail in low-density, North American cities.

Interesting to compare to what would be considered a feasibility study in other jurisdictions

https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/ra...ed/phase1.aspx

This is why Ontario can't have nice things.