[nfitz]

Except that it's not that simple. There was an electrification study back in the early 90s. They talked about it in the 70s, too. It's not like it's simply a waiting game. If people don't organize to push it, it ain't gonna happen.

Fair enough. Except that electrification is being used as yet another reason to not build Georgetown, by a group of people who have gone through many, many, many excuses not to build it, including it's impact to surface traffic on a couple of sidestreets. The electrification discussion should be separate to Georgetown discussion.

 

[unimaginative2]

Fair enough. Except that electrification is being used as yet another reason to not build Georgetown, by a group of people who have gone through many, many, many excuses not to build it, including it's impact to surface traffic on a couple of sidestreets. The electrification discussion should be separate to Georgetown discussion.

Why? If it's protecting their Weston that motivates them to push for electrification, why not use that energy to make something good happen? I'm not hearing "Don't build Georgetown" from them. What I'm hearing is electrify the line, and I can't argue with that.

 

[nfitz]

That's how Nimby groups work. You don't sit there saying no. You throw up all sorts of obstacles, many being real issues that reasonable people will get their teeth into. It's a well-known, and well documented strategy.

Don't play into it.

 

[Dan416]

That's how Nimby groups work. You don't sit there saying no. You throw up all sorts of obstacles, many being real issues that reasonable people will get their teeth into. It's a well-known, and well documented strategy.

Don't play into it.

I don't agree. If what they're pushing for is a good thing, why not play into it? So far the things they've asked for have been pretty sensible. Keeping local roads open and not severing their community in half is sensible. Asking that the line be electified is sensible. They aren't outrageous demands. They cost money, yes, but just because we're so used to accepting second-best doesn't mean we always should. I'm not saying Georgetown improvements shouldn't come online until we're electrified. Indeed, I think the whole GO system should be electrified. And GO is looking into it.

 

[nfitz]

Hang on ... are you saying that when they objected to the plan to build at-grade bridges at Church and King, and only closeJohn (but still replace it with a pedestrian crossing) they were being sensible? Even though John was only about 150 metres from King? The onlyreasonable complaint was that a car would have to drive an extra 300 metres, and still they complained.

 

[Dan416]

Hang on ... are you saying that when they objected to the plan to build at-grade bridges at Church and King, and only closeJohn (but still replace it with a pedestrian crossing) they were being sensible? Even though John was only about 150 metres from King? The onlyreasonable complaint was that a car would have to drive an extra 300 metres, and still they complained.

IIRC they were originally going to close more of them until Weston people complained. But I could be wrong.

 

[nfitz]

IIRC they were originally going to close more of them until Weston people complained. But I could be wrong.

You are correct, and those complaints were valid. Even I complained at that point.

But that they made a new round of complaints about the current plan, with the only loss being the conversion of John to a pedestrian crossing was where it became clear that there was a group of Nimbys hiding in all of this.

 

[TOareaFan]

You are correct, and those complaints were valid. Even I complained at that point.

But that they made a new round of complaints about the current plan, with the only loss being the conversion of John to a pedestrian crossing was where it became clear that there was a group of Nimbys hiding in all of this.

And, IIRC, it was only after the "splitting our community" argument/delay ran its course that they raised electrification (there may have even have been a delay tactic in between). It may all be legit community activism......but its effect on me is that I am left wondering "what will they come up with if they get the wires!"

 

[unimaginative2]

Yeah, but everybody here seems to recognize that they've made the project a better project through their activism. What's wrong with that? Why should we actively support doing a half-assed job? A giant tunnel through Weston might be excessive but why not let them push Metrolinx to do a three-quarter-assed job?

 

[Justin10000]

I don't agree. If what they're pushing for is a good thing, why not play into it? So far the things they've asked for have been pretty sensible. Keeping local roads open and not severing their community in half is sensible. Asking that the line be electified is sensible. They aren't outrageous demands. They cost money, yes, but just because we're so used to accepting second-best doesn't mean we always should. I'm not saying Georgetown improvements shouldn't come online until we're electrified. Indeed, I think the whole GO system should be electrified. And GO is looking into it.

Whoa. I actually agree with you on something!

If I recall, I believe GO's last report on electrification showed electrification would pay for itself within a decade.

 

[CDL.TO]

At the meeting at City Hall on Tuesday, Mike Sullivan (head of Weston Community Coalition/Clean Train Coalition) called for the cancellation of the ARL, the construction of no new tracks, AND the electrification of the line (which according to him would cost only $150 million). He stated that since GO is only planning to add 10 more trains a day to Brampton, they can and should operate that with the existing trackage.

I honestly believe the people he surrounds himself are a bit more pragmatic and forward-looking (there were plenty of Clean Train folks at the microphone, and by and large came across as reasonable but sometimes misguided), but after that meeting it seemed clear to me that Mike Sullivan's ultimate goal is still to get this project cancelled using whatever means possible.

 

[unimaginative2]

You're probably right and I hope he doesn't succeed in those efforts. Still, he has a good point in drawing attention to the divergence between Metrolinx's plans for an 8-track mega-corridor and GO's stated plans to run worse-than-hourly service on the corridor in the long term.

 

[Mapleson]

I don't agree. If what they're pushing for is a good thing, why not play into it? So far the things they've asked for have been pretty sensible. Keeping local roads open and not severing their community in half is sensible. Asking that the line be electified is sensible. They aren't outrageous demands. They cost money, yes, but just because we're so used to accepting second-best doesn't mean we always should. I'm not saying Georgetown improvements shouldn't come online until we're electrified. Indeed, I think the whole GO system should be electrified. And GO is looking into it.

While I support pushing for a first-class solution, we have to be careful not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Any additional capital works will divert money from other projects, so some rationalization needs to be undertaken. For a grade-seperation, this is generally a rail-road cross-product in excess of 400,000 (trains x cars) justifies the cost of a $100-150m grade seperation. Until foot traffic is added to the equation, minor road connectivity will continue to be sacraficied.

Georgetown would not start construction work until 2012, if it had waited for electrification findings, and would not be complete in time for the Pan Am Games.

 

[unimaginative2]

You bring up another good point. It shouldn't take years to study something, especially if it's already been studied in detail and the technology and requirements are basically unchanged. They should be able to polish off a quick update to the 90s study in a couple months and then be able to start construction. The process has become horribly bloated and no doubt makes some people a lot of money.

I'm still curious about that $5 billion figure for electrifying the Lakeshore. If it's real, then something is truly profoundly wrong with the study.

 

[Mapleson]

A lot has changed since the 1990s. First, we have the EPA emission standards that came into effect in 2000. Tier 2 trains (current technology) have half the emissions (NOx and particulate matter) than we did then. Tier 4 trains will have under 10% of the emissions. This is a dramatic reduction in the environmental impacts. Toronto has amalgamated and gotten over it, affecting property values. Metrolinx swallowed GO along with a larger mandate. I could continue, but any one of those reasons is enough to invalidate the findings and cost estimates. I haven't read any 1990-era GO reports, but in generally a 'Study' is a high level overview that sets the parameters for preliminary design. Many assumptions must be made to complete the Study that either will change or do not account for specific mile-by-mile issues/complications.

With current legislation, a Transit EA takes a minimum of six months to undertake without allow time for consultants to actually do any work.

The $6b figure comes from http://www.metrolinx.com/Docs/general/GO_Lakeshore_BCA_Report.pdf