From the Executive Summary of Metrolinx Electrification Study From the December 10 2010
"OVERALL CONCLUSION
There are transportation and economic benefits to electrification. There are also small environmental, social and community benefits. Health benefits are expected to be marginal. Electrification of any option would involve a significant capital investment, but would result in some operations and maintenance cost savings."
This report mirrors many of the points that I have made and in fact is where I get many of my conclusions. This study shows that Metrolinx has finally started to catch up with technology which is great but amazing since GO recommended going electric in 1991.
It is clear from the report that an electric system is a superior choice and that having more stops that serve more people is something that Metrolinx thinks is a good idea. The long term cost savings and increased ridership revenue is made clear in this report.
Being a technical report it's frame of reference does not address the lost of opportunity and added costs due to the government stalling on the issue nor does it include in its economic model the future conversion to electric costs again created by political stalling. It does make clear that had electrification been part of the mix from day one the there would have been integration efficiencies and cost savings for the entire GO network ---and that it is still not too late to realize them. One does not have to be an engineer to see that going electric as soon as possible still provides overall savings and a better served community. This is not a business, it is a public service whose benefits will not be measured only by fairbox return.
Transit Action's own exhaustive study adds to and challenges some of Metrolinx's numbers but agrees on electric as the best choice, and in the end, the most cost effective choice and they say with even greater economic spinoffs. The people involved in its writing are not just locals, they are people who have worked at GO or or other transit systems and they know what they are talking about. It also details the decades of political foot dragging by all parties that leads us to where we are today and more recently the foot dragging that will cost us money because they saw the benefit of electric AFTER they had started to bulldoze. Pretty sad really. http://www.transport-action.ca/dc/NoLittlePlan_Summary.pdf
Every point I have made is in these 2 reports. Its getting hard to love diesel and this flawed plan when two groups were initially were opposed to each other now essentially agree. I encourage people to read both studies to get clear on the facts and see whether candidates in the current election know the issue or are just continuing to drag their feet.
Against my better judgement I will respond to your points. If anyone had showed me that courtesy I might not now be inclined to use the term nimby. But in many cases there is no answer and that I guess is the issue. I will repeat however that while you may not understand the significance, the operating savings are so low that they would never cover the capital cost. That means that strictly speaking electrification is not financially viable. Arguably nuclear power isn't either politicians may not care about that point any more than you do.
Of course Mertolinx would be happy to operate an electric system if someone else pays for it. They do not have the money so it's not a meaningful point.
Of course Metrolinx position this as a premium service. Otherwise they would face accusations of having an incompetent marketing direction. Look at the way Porter is positioned, you may not like it but they position their service as a premium service. People who use it seem to feel the pricing is competitive and the service is good. Commercially they have been very successful. It's not priced to be used daily by a family of four, it would be nice if they could make some accommodation but this is not the time to worry about that. Actual pricing is a decision to be made as they enter service. The connection between a city rail hub and the airport is not directly analogous to any other transit route. I was at a meeting at city hall where a transit professor tried to explain this to the clean train group, I don't think anyone was listening.
Out of nowhere you raise some reference to 1.5 million cars. If the topic of discussion is electrification or diesel power they car displacement is not relevant. Perhaps you feel that if you can prove that Metrolinx has fabricated something than you should also have a similar licence. In that case the entire discussion is pointless.
"An electric system would be cheaper than diesel" - that is not valid. Repetition does not make it valid. The operating costs are a little lower but not by enough that they would ever cover the capital costs. This is a matter of very simple math. Metrolinx is happy to patronize you. That stands to reason but proves nothing.
Two additional stops would not be advantageous. The link between the rail hub and the airport is not the same as other lines. The reduction in value of the main service overwhelms any advantage again regardless of how you are powering the train. That is why they do not factor in the additional access. Again, this was explained but a U of T professor. Nobody was listening but I can't help that.
You don't need to worry about what I don't understand.
I avoided the use of the word nimby for a year but as simple questions go unanswered it is foolish to avoid the conclusion that many other people can see. When you ignore the arguments made it is spurious and meaningless to say there is no real argument.
Perhaps they would make decisions differently now. The context of the decisions was a province where rail service has been talked about for decades but funding has not shown up. Even worse, the previous incarnation of the Eglington Subway was filled in after being started and Go was forced to sell off equipment. If they went with anything but the cheapest option they faced a very real treat that a subsequent government would pull the plug. If you look at the design of the Transit City proposals they are so rigorous about being as cost effective as possible that it is mind boggling. This was a cheap option. There was a reason for it.
Again you are determined to prove that Metrolinx was misleading. That is interesting.
I don't really like the Pan-Am games, but it's not the only time infrastructure building has been tied to this kind of thing. You don't like Martins assessment. I get that. It sounds like the service was designed for the ongoing traffic not the peak load of the games, that seems reasonable to me.
The Mobility Hub will happen regardless of whether the system is electric or diesel, and you don't like Martins confusing the issue. If you don't want Martins to raise points that are not affected by the choice of motive power you should hold this standard to yourself first. No big deal, all people do this kind of thing but you have kind of thrown your own point out haven't you?
"page 8 includes an unqualified recommendation of the air rail link". Yes it's the Transit City plan that uses ELECTRIC TRAINS, not diesel!
Toronto's Medical Officer of Health Dr. David McKeown has always insisted that the only acceptable mitigation to protect human health is the electrification of the service. That despite Metrolinx's attempts to mislead and distort his words (which they were nailed for).
Electric Trains were also part of Metrolinx's Big Move before they quietly disappeared in early 2009.
Metrolinx has said that electric is a better option providing more service at a lower cost. Metrolinx's cost projections have tumbled by billions since they first said that electric was too expensive and not feasible. Now they trumpet diesel conversion to electric and are starting an electric EA. So Metrolinx has slowly moved its position to be in line with favoring an electric system and are looking at electrifying the entire system. They have had a change of technical heart.
Metrolinx and the government have called the service a premium service, their words not mine, placing it out of the budget of many and a higher cost than comparative systems. 100$ for a family of 4 to use the service one way? That doesn't sound like public transit to me.
Metrolinx ackowldged at a public meeting this year that their "1.5" million cars trips off the road claim is not based on a credible data and promised to stop using it.
An electric system would be cheaper than diesel in the long run according to Metrolinx's data AND would allow at least 2 additional stops on the route. That's good for users and for taxpayers (this additional access is not factored into Metrolinx's data but a system that could serves thousands more at basically the same price sounds like a good deal to me).
You seem unable to understand that people are FOR expanded commuter rail, rail that serves the most, is greener, and cost effective in the long run. Nimbyism? That accusation is the last refuge of those with no real argument given that thousands are demanding expanded electric service. I have yet to find one person who is against expanded electric rail service in the corridor. You fail to notice that some of these "facts" are now agreed on by Metrolinx. Metrolinx has moved towards the position of those who think an electric system day one is better. If they had not been so pig headed and trapped in an outdated mindset at the outset we might actually be on the road to electric right now. You speak about honesty but I remind you that Metrolinx initially 100% refused to even consider an electric system citing unfounded issues that they themselves have now backtracked on after their own studies backed up what the public was saying. I also remind you that Metrolinx was chastised by the Ad Standards Council for being misleading. I actually dont blame MX, they are forced to toe a position that is political and not even in line with their own evolving position.
When a candidate shows up and doesnt have a working knowledge of the issue is not a waste of time, it is actually sadly enlightening.
Lets look at a a quote from Martins. In the Bloordale Press she says:
"“These are not huge trains, they aren’t cargo trains,” Martins said. “I think it’s important that we implement them this way so that we can actually make the commitment to the Pan-American games, which will bring many, many jobs to Ontario, it will bring a lot of money to Ontario, about 250,000 tourists are expected.”
First off the jobs created are mostly short term and most have nothing do with the rail line. Buying electric trains from Bombardier in Ontario would have provided solid jobs for years (including maintenance ) instead of jobs in Japan.
The vast majority of Pan Am visitors and athletes will be bused and wont use the premium service (It says so in the Pan Am Games own literature). The airlink cannot possibly come even near moving 250,000 thousand people so it is somewhat dubious to use that large number as a way of defending the limited service.
We were promised that the games would be the greenest ever. But we are getting buses and diesel trains, hardly a link that serves thousands of people. After the games we will be stuck with a line that underserves the city and will need additional money for electric conversion.
I would add that Martin's comments as said by Tawnya also are an attempt to tie two unrelated issues together.Improvements to Bloor station and Weston station are part of the "Mobility Hub" plan and will happen regardless of whether the system is electric or diesel; remember that an electric system would easily allow at least 2 additional hubs at Queen and St. Clair and that STRENGTHENS the "Mobility Hub" vision ---which is according to Metrloinx "where different modes of transportation – from walking to biking to riding transit – come together seamlessly and where there is an intensive concentration of working, living, shopping and/or playing." I think Queen Street and St. Clair would be all for that and the long term jobs that would create. Too bad diesel cannot achieve this. Electric would have allowed the engineering and EA work for St. Clair and Queen to be done at the same time; a saving of money and the delivery of an economic boost to those additional stations right now when it is needed.
Martins also says in the Bloordale Press: "Martins said that these trains, which can be electrified, are the cleanest available, and if elected she will ensure that there will be no delay in converting them to electric."
The sad part of this quote is that we could be electric today if the Liberal government had not stuck its head in the sand. As a taxpayer I dont really like the idea that we bought diesel trains from Japan just for a 15 day event and that suddenly we will change the trains to electric at an additional cost. This is the kind of insanity that only politics can create.
I dont see much in her statement that is good for people who attend the games, for people who live here, or for taxpayers. I dont see anything from her that directly addresses how the people who actually live in the ward feel.Its just the same out of date PR spin we got 3 years ago.The Pan Am games is a pretty poor reason to waste money on a system that will have to be changed anyway. An all hybrid bus system (as used at other games) on HOV lanes while taking the time to build a good system would have made a lot more sense and if it was not for the fear of loosing face about the Pan Am games Metrolinx would have decided to wait and go electric. The Pan Am games have become a convenient excuse to continue a flawed idea rather than pursue a better plan.
Metrolinx in many ways has evolved and moved to what the pro transit public wants. Its evident when you talk with them and evident in their actions and off the record they all think electric is better . Its too bad that the government is concerned about loosing face.
I can't imagine why anyone would fixate on the Pan Am games, perhaps the conversation looked like a waste of time.
If memory serves the internal rate of return on electrification was less than one percent. For that to save money you would have to be on time, on budget, and be able to borrow money at close to zero interest. In short, it is not really honest to say electric trains are cheaper. To then accuse the diesel option as being "premium" is nonsensical.
As for selectively listening to the medical officer of health, or feigning concern over being poisoned by diesel toxins lets look at this report from 2008:
page 8 includes an unqualified recommendation of the air rail link. The proposals from 1998 reaffirmed in 2005 are the diesel service currently under construction. No concern is expressed over train pollution. It's not that this was not considered. In November 2007 he released an extensive report on air pollution caused by traffic.
But of course that was before the project was embroiled in nimbyism.
Replacing the center lanes of Jane street with a light rail line would make a far bigger improvement for local transit and pollution.
The bottom line is that for anyone genuinely concerned with air quality active transport, and Transit City must be far higher priorities.
@Scott D - That's the exact impression I got when talking to someone from her office named Christine who identified herself as Cristina's campaign manager for my upcoming blog post about the diesel issue for the Toronto Star. They were woefully unaware of the facts and the background of the issue, with Christine basically saying that the needs of the community will be served by an improvements at the Bloor Station and that our neighbourhood will benefit from the increases in traffic. Convenient to forget that in addition to all these "traffic increases" that the neighbourhood will be poisoned by the diesel toxins. Every other party I spoke to was in full support of electrification now and seemed willing to work hard with the community to make that happen. Hopefully Cristina and her team will better educate themselves before the upcoming debates - it will be interesting to see what happens if they don't.
Not surprised. She just came to my house today and showed that she completely doesn't understand the electric train issue at all. She seemed unaware that the vast majority of people arriving for the Pan Am games will actually be bused into Toronto, that Electric Trains would offer cheaper long term service with more stops for residents in our riding, that the diesel plan is a "premium" plan too expensive for many in our riding. She seemed unaware that every anti-electric statement that Metrolinx has ever made has been shown to be incorrect (often by Meterolinx themselves). She suggested that asking for electric trains now was "shortsighted". Huh? This would fly in the face of what every modern transit system in the world thinks. As I listed publicly available facts she finally ran away.
I dont mind debating an issue with somebody that has an opinion and facts but this candidate is staggeringly ignorant of the issue and should have had the courtesy to do some homework before coming to my door near the rail corridor spouting generic PR answers. This candidate is not ready for prime time.
an aside: Her leader Dalton McGinty said last week in terms of protests about turbines that he trusted the Medical Officer of health rather than citizens. Too bad he did not trust the Toronto Medical Officer of health on the diesel issue.
The Toronto Star has published a map today showing the results of their major election poll with riding by riding results.
The results for Davenport show Jonah Schein with a substantial lead:
Leading Party: NDP
Leading by 16.2%
Trailing Party: Liberal
finally had the chance to hit cafe neon yesterday with some friends and our little ones. the latte's were great, there is one great big table at the back that had room for all of us plus some strollers and the staff were really nice. i believe we'll be making it a weekly trip!
I can't wait for the clean energy revolution to take hold (sarcasm).
Also, Scott, you forgot to mention the fact that the Liberals are planning to offer all day Diesel train Go service. Not sure how that works with air quality either..... I guess it is a good thing they are committed to the future of health care.
Having had the experience of candidates who toe the party line, I'm certainly not intersted in that. Looking forward to the debate tomorrow night.
September 20, 2011 - Ward 9 Education Day
Education Day: Provincial Candidates Meeting
Tuesday, September 20, 2011, Beginning at 7:00 p.m.
Bloor Collegiate Institute - Auditorium
1141 Bloor Street West
Before they take a seat at Queen's Park, see where your candidates stand on public education. Coordinated by Trustee Maria Rodrigues and the Ontario Public School Boards' Association, Education Day in Davenport is a non-partisan event where the local candidates from the major provincial parties share their views and answer questions on the issues affecting public education.
The following nominated candidates for the Davenport Riding have been invited to participate – Cristina Martins (Liberal), Kirk Russell (Progressive Conservative), Jonah Schein (NDP) and Frank de Jong (Green).
Have you checked at New Horizon's Tower at the corner of Dufferin and Bloor? I am not sure if they still do it but I know in the past that they did short term rentals. I know that it is a seniors residence but they also have students in there. It is on the subway line too. The operations director just retired so I am not sure of the policies put out by the new person. No harm in trying. 416-536-6111
"Hi everyone
Unfortunately, the Davenport MPP Candidates Meeting will not happen tonight.
We are looking at September 26 as a new date to re-schedule it. We will inform you on the new day and time soon.
Apologies for any inconvenience."
The debate is at 6:30 pm. Also, there was an article in the Star yesterday about our riding. It was in the Greater Toronto section. They were talking about Schein's odds of winning. Kirk never responded.
From the Executive Summary of Metrolinx Electrification Study From the December 10 2010
"OVERALL CONCLUSION
There are transportation and economic benefits to electrification. There are also small environmental, social and community benefits. Health benefits are expected to be marginal. Electrification of any option would involve a significant capital investment, but would result in some operations and maintenance cost savings."
http://www.gotransit.com/estudy/en/current_study/docs/ElectricificationS...
This report mirrors many of the points that I have made and in fact is where I get many of my conclusions. This study shows that Metrolinx has finally started to catch up with technology which is great but amazing since GO recommended going electric in 1991.
It is clear from the report that an electric system is a superior choice and that having more stops that serve more people is something that Metrolinx thinks is a good idea. The long term cost savings and increased ridership revenue is made clear in this report.
Being a technical report it's frame of reference does not address the lost of opportunity and added costs due to the government stalling on the issue nor does it include in its economic model the future conversion to electric costs again created by political stalling. It does make clear that had electrification been part of the mix from day one the there would have been integration efficiencies and cost savings for the entire GO network ---and that it is still not too late to realize them. One does not have to be an engineer to see that going electric as soon as possible still provides overall savings and a better served community. This is not a business, it is a public service whose benefits will not be measured only by fairbox return.
Transit Action's own exhaustive study adds to and challenges some of Metrolinx's numbers but agrees on electric as the best choice, and in the end, the most cost effective choice and they say with even greater economic spinoffs. The people involved in its writing are not just locals, they are people who have worked at GO or or other transit systems and they know what they are talking about. It also details the decades of political foot dragging by all parties that leads us to where we are today and more recently the foot dragging that will cost us money because they saw the benefit of electric AFTER they had started to bulldoze. Pretty sad really. http://www.transport-action.ca/dc/NoLittlePlan_Summary.pdf
Every point I have made is in these 2 reports. Its getting hard to love diesel and this flawed plan when two groups were initially were opposed to each other now essentially agree. I encourage people to read both studies to get clear on the facts and see whether candidates in the current election know the issue or are just continuing to drag their feet.
Against my better judgement I will respond to your points. If anyone had showed me that courtesy I might not now be inclined to use the term nimby. But in many cases there is no answer and that I guess is the issue. I will repeat however that while you may not understand the significance, the operating savings are so low that they would never cover the capital cost. That means that strictly speaking electrification is not financially viable. Arguably nuclear power isn't either politicians may not care about that point any more than you do.
Of course Mertolinx would be happy to operate an electric system if someone else pays for it. They do not have the money so it's not a meaningful point.
Of course Metrolinx position this as a premium service. Otherwise they would face accusations of having an incompetent marketing direction. Look at the way Porter is positioned, you may not like it but they position their service as a premium service. People who use it seem to feel the pricing is competitive and the service is good. Commercially they have been very successful. It's not priced to be used daily by a family of four, it would be nice if they could make some accommodation but this is not the time to worry about that. Actual pricing is a decision to be made as they enter service. The connection between a city rail hub and the airport is not directly analogous to any other transit route. I was at a meeting at city hall where a transit professor tried to explain this to the clean train group, I don't think anyone was listening.
Out of nowhere you raise some reference to 1.5 million cars. If the topic of discussion is electrification or diesel power they car displacement is not relevant. Perhaps you feel that if you can prove that Metrolinx has fabricated something than you should also have a similar licence. In that case the entire discussion is pointless.
"An electric system would be cheaper than diesel" - that is not valid. Repetition does not make it valid. The operating costs are a little lower but not by enough that they would ever cover the capital costs. This is a matter of very simple math. Metrolinx is happy to patronize you. That stands to reason but proves nothing.
Two additional stops would not be advantageous. The link between the rail hub and the airport is not the same as other lines. The reduction in value of the main service overwhelms any advantage again regardless of how you are powering the train. That is why they do not factor in the additional access. Again, this was explained but a U of T professor. Nobody was listening but I can't help that.
You don't need to worry about what I don't understand.
I avoided the use of the word nimby for a year but as simple questions go unanswered it is foolish to avoid the conclusion that many other people can see. When you ignore the arguments made it is spurious and meaningless to say there is no real argument.
Perhaps they would make decisions differently now. The context of the decisions was a province where rail service has been talked about for decades but funding has not shown up. Even worse, the previous incarnation of the Eglington Subway was filled in after being started and Go was forced to sell off equipment. If they went with anything but the cheapest option they faced a very real treat that a subsequent government would pull the plug. If you look at the design of the Transit City proposals they are so rigorous about being as cost effective as possible that it is mind boggling. This was a cheap option. There was a reason for it.
Again you are determined to prove that Metrolinx was misleading. That is interesting.
I don't really like the Pan-Am games, but it's not the only time infrastructure building has been tied to this kind of thing. You don't like Martins assessment. I get that. It sounds like the service was designed for the ongoing traffic not the peak load of the games, that seems reasonable to me.
The Mobility Hub will happen regardless of whether the system is electric or diesel, and you don't like Martins confusing the issue. If you don't want Martins to raise points that are not affected by the choice of motive power you should hold this standard to yourself first. No big deal, all people do this kind of thing but you have kind of thrown your own point out haven't you?
just empty claims with no links, no references, no evidence as usual.
"page 8 includes an unqualified recommendation of the air rail link". Yes it's the Transit City plan that uses ELECTRIC TRAINS, not diesel!
Toronto's Medical Officer of Health Dr. David McKeown has always insisted that the only acceptable mitigation to protect human health is the electrification of the service. That despite Metrolinx's attempts to mislead and distort his words (which they were nailed for).
Electric Trains were also part of Metrolinx's Big Move before they quietly disappeared in early 2009.
Adam Gorley has posted his notes from last week's education debate on his Toronto Star blog:
http://speakyourmind.thestar.com/experts/get-talking/davenport-candidate...
Metrolinx has said that electric is a better option providing more service at a lower cost. Metrolinx's cost projections have tumbled by billions since they first said that electric was too expensive and not feasible. Now they trumpet diesel conversion to electric and are starting an electric EA. So Metrolinx has slowly moved its position to be in line with favoring an electric system and are looking at electrifying the entire system. They have had a change of technical heart.
Metrolinx and the government have called the service a premium service, their words not mine, placing it out of the budget of many and a higher cost than comparative systems. 100$ for a family of 4 to use the service one way? That doesn't sound like public transit to me.
Metrolinx ackowldged at a public meeting this year that their "1.5" million cars trips off the road claim is not based on a credible data and promised to stop using it.
An electric system would be cheaper than diesel in the long run according to Metrolinx's data AND would allow at least 2 additional stops on the route. That's good for users and for taxpayers (this additional access is not factored into Metrolinx's data but a system that could serves thousands more at basically the same price sounds like a good deal to me).
You seem unable to understand that people are FOR expanded commuter rail, rail that serves the most, is greener, and cost effective in the long run. Nimbyism? That accusation is the last refuge of those with no real argument given that thousands are demanding expanded electric service. I have yet to find one person who is against expanded electric rail service in the corridor. You fail to notice that some of these "facts" are now agreed on by Metrolinx. Metrolinx has moved towards the position of those who think an electric system day one is better. If they had not been so pig headed and trapped in an outdated mindset at the outset we might actually be on the road to electric right now. You speak about honesty but I remind you that Metrolinx initially 100% refused to even consider an electric system citing unfounded issues that they themselves have now backtracked on after their own studies backed up what the public was saying. I also remind you that Metrolinx was chastised by the Ad Standards Council for being misleading. I actually dont blame MX, they are forced to toe a position that is political and not even in line with their own evolving position.
When a candidate shows up and doesnt have a working knowledge of the issue is not a waste of time, it is actually sadly enlightening.
Lets look at a a quote from Martins. In the Bloordale Press she says:
"“These are not huge trains, they aren’t cargo trains,” Martins said. “I think it’s important that we implement them this way so that we can actually make the commitment to the Pan-American games, which will bring many, many jobs to Ontario, it will bring a lot of money to Ontario, about 250,000 tourists are expected.”
First off the jobs created are mostly short term and most have nothing do with the rail line. Buying electric trains from Bombardier in Ontario would have provided solid jobs for years (including maintenance ) instead of jobs in Japan.
The vast majority of Pan Am visitors and athletes will be bused and wont use the premium service (It says so in the Pan Am Games own literature). The airlink cannot possibly come even near moving 250,000 thousand people so it is somewhat dubious to use that large number as a way of defending the limited service.
We were promised that the games would be the greenest ever. But we are getting buses and diesel trains, hardly a link that serves thousands of people. After the games we will be stuck with a line that underserves the city and will need additional money for electric conversion.
I would add that Martin's comments as said by Tawnya also are an attempt to tie two unrelated issues together.Improvements to Bloor station and Weston station are part of the "Mobility Hub" plan and will happen regardless of whether the system is electric or diesel; remember that an electric system would easily allow at least 2 additional hubs at Queen and St. Clair and that STRENGTHENS the "Mobility Hub" vision ---which is according to Metrloinx "where different modes of transportation – from walking to biking to riding transit – come together seamlessly and where there is an intensive concentration of working, living, shopping and/or playing." I think Queen Street and St. Clair would be all for that and the long term jobs that would create. Too bad diesel cannot achieve this. Electric would have allowed the engineering and EA work for St. Clair and Queen to be done at the same time; a saving of money and the delivery of an economic boost to those additional stations right now when it is needed.
Martins also says in the Bloordale Press: "Martins said that these trains, which can be electrified, are the cleanest available, and if elected she will ensure that there will be no delay in converting them to electric."
The sad part of this quote is that we could be electric today if the Liberal government had not stuck its head in the sand. As a taxpayer I dont really like the idea that we bought diesel trains from Japan just for a 15 day event and that suddenly we will change the trains to electric at an additional cost. This is the kind of insanity that only politics can create.
I dont see much in her statement that is good for people who attend the games, for people who live here, or for taxpayers. I dont see anything from her that directly addresses how the people who actually live in the ward feel.Its just the same out of date PR spin we got 3 years ago.The Pan Am games is a pretty poor reason to waste money on a system that will have to be changed anyway. An all hybrid bus system (as used at other games) on HOV lanes while taking the time to build a good system would have made a lot more sense and if it was not for the fear of loosing face about the Pan Am games Metrolinx would have decided to wait and go electric. The Pan Am games have become a convenient excuse to continue a flawed idea rather than pursue a better plan.
Metrolinx in many ways has evolved and moved to what the pro transit public wants. Its evident when you talk with them and evident in their actions and off the record they all think electric is better . Its too bad that the government is concerned about loosing face.
I can't imagine why anyone would fixate on the Pan Am games, perhaps the conversation looked like a waste of time.
If memory serves the internal rate of return on electrification was less than one percent. For that to save money you would have to be on time, on budget, and be able to borrow money at close to zero interest. In short, it is not really honest to say electric trains are cheaper. To then accuse the diesel option as being "premium" is nonsensical.
As for selectively listening to the medical officer of health, or feigning concern over being poisoned by diesel toxins lets look at this report from 2008:
www.toronto.ca/health/hphe/pdf/air_pollution_airports.pdf
page 8 includes an unqualified recommendation of the air rail link. The proposals from 1998 reaffirmed in 2005 are the diesel service currently under construction. No concern is expressed over train pollution. It's not that this was not considered. In November 2007 he released an extensive report on air pollution caused by traffic.
But of course that was before the project was embroiled in nimbyism.
Replacing the center lanes of Jane street with a light rail line would make a far bigger improvement for local transit and pollution.
The bottom line is that for anyone genuinely concerned with air quality active transport, and Transit City must be far higher priorities.
@Scott D - That's the exact impression I got when talking to someone from her office named Christine who identified herself as Cristina's campaign manager for my upcoming blog post about the diesel issue for the Toronto Star. They were woefully unaware of the facts and the background of the issue, with Christine basically saying that the needs of the community will be served by an improvements at the Bloor Station and that our neighbourhood will benefit from the increases in traffic. Convenient to forget that in addition to all these "traffic increases" that the neighbourhood will be poisoned by the diesel toxins. Every other party I spoke to was in full support of electrification now and seemed willing to work hard with the community to make that happen. Hopefully Cristina and her team will better educate themselves before the upcoming debates - it will be interesting to see what happens if they don't.
Not surprised. She just came to my house today and showed that she completely doesn't understand the electric train issue at all. She seemed unaware that the vast majority of people arriving for the Pan Am games will actually be bused into Toronto, that Electric Trains would offer cheaper long term service with more stops for residents in our riding, that the diesel plan is a "premium" plan too expensive for many in our riding. She seemed unaware that every anti-electric statement that Metrolinx has ever made has been shown to be incorrect (often by Meterolinx themselves). She suggested that asking for electric trains now was "shortsighted". Huh? This would fly in the face of what every modern transit system in the world thinks. As I listed publicly available facts she finally ran away.
I dont mind debating an issue with somebody that has an opinion and facts but this candidate is staggeringly ignorant of the issue and should have had the courtesy to do some homework before coming to my door near the rail corridor spouting generic PR answers. This candidate is not ready for prime time.
an aside: Her leader Dalton McGinty said last week in terms of protests about turbines that he trusted the Medical Officer of health rather than citizens. Too bad he did not trust the Toronto Medical Officer of health on the diesel issue.
The empanadas are the best
The Toronto Star has published a map today showing the results of their major election poll with riding by riding results.
The results for Davenport show Jonah Schein with a substantial lead:
Leading Party: NDP
Leading by 16.2%
Trailing Party: Liberal
Respondant Summary (% of poll):
Liberal: 34.1%
PC: 9.7%
NDP: 50.3%
Green: 4.5%
Other: 1.4%
You can see the full map at http://www.thestar.com/staticcontent/1058980
The Villager posted this article today:
http://www.insidetoronto.com/news/local/article/1107583--dozens-of-poets...
finally had the chance to hit cafe neon yesterday with some friends and our little ones. the latte's were great, there is one great big table at the back that had room for all of us plus some strollers and the staff were really nice. i believe we'll be making it a weekly trip!
I just noticed on that there's a knitting club at the Perth - Dupont library too:
http://www.torontopubliclibrary.ca/detail.jsp?Entt=RDM7077&R=7077
Adult Knitting Club
6:30 p.m. - 7:30 p.m. on recurring dates listed below
60 mins
Perth/Dupont Program Room
Come and learn to knit or work on your project. Come with your own supplies.
Categories:
Adult
Hobbies Crafts & Games
Upcoming Dates:
Tue Oct 25
Tue Nov 01
Tue Nov 08
Tue Nov 15
Tue Nov 22
Tue Nov 29
According to the Toronto Star, at today's Executive Committtee meeting Mayor Ford stated that he does not support closing libraries as a way to meet the City's projected budget shortfall http://www.thestar.com/news/torontocouncil/article/1056360--ford-looks-f... Sounds a lot like good news!
I can't wait for the clean energy revolution to take hold (sarcasm).
Also, Scott, you forgot to mention the fact that the Liberals are planning to offer all day Diesel train Go service. Not sure how that works with air quality either..... I guess it is a good thing they are committed to the future of health care.
Having had the experience of candidates who toe the party line, I'm certainly not intersted in that. Looking forward to the debate tomorrow night.
BlogTO posted a review this morning:
http://www.blogto.com/cafes/cafe-neon-toronto
Thanks, Katie. I heard about that place. Thanks for the info!
September 20, 2011 - Ward 9 Education Day
Education Day: Provincial Candidates Meeting
Tuesday, September 20, 2011, Beginning at 7:00 p.m.
Bloor Collegiate Institute - Auditorium
1141 Bloor Street West
Before they take a seat at Queen's Park, see where your candidates stand on public education. Coordinated by Trustee Maria Rodrigues and the Ontario Public School Boards' Association, Education Day in Davenport is a non-partisan event where the local candidates from the major provincial parties share their views and answer questions on the issues affecting public education.
The following nominated candidates for the Davenport Riding have been invited to participate – Cristina Martins (Liberal), Kirk Russell (Progressive Conservative), Jonah Schein (NDP) and Frank de Jong (Green).
Have you checked at New Horizon's Tower at the corner of Dufferin and Bloor? I am not sure if they still do it but I know in the past that they did short term rentals. I know that it is a seniors residence but they also have students in there. It is on the subway line too. The operations director just retired so I am not sure of the policies put out by the new person. No harm in trying. 416-536-6111
BlogTO is covering the mural today:
http://www.blogto.com/arts/2011/09/artist_starts_work_on_replacement_for...
The Globe and Mail has a detailed report today about potential library closings that is worth reading http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/toronto/toronto-libraries-n...
FYI... From Gabrielle and Marcelo at the DPNC:
I don't see why Jonah was up on the stage with Cash, DiNovo and Bailao (Photo in the Bloordale Press).
He isn't a politician, only a candidate. Was this about Jeff's Docu or are we promoting Jonah and the NDP?????
The debate is at 6:30 pm. Also, there was an article in the Star yesterday about our riding. It was in the Greater Toronto section. They were talking about Schein's odds of winning. Kirk never responded.