Confederation Line (Stage 1) | In Service 1.0

[acottawa]

Forgive me if I've missed something, but I haven't seen any commitment from Wynne to fund the second phase. She has promised 14B over 10 years for non-GTA transit and transportation projects. Ottawa would have to get in line with other promises the Liberals are making (bullet train to London, new highway between Kitchener and Guelph, more four-laning projects in Northern Ontario, widening the 417 in Ottawa, etc.). And given that Ottawa doesn't have many contested ridings, and the Mcgingty-Wynne government has massively underspent here for more than a decade (paying 100% of Toronto LRT projects and less than 30% of ours, for example) I would highly doubt Ottawa's share of 14B would be anywhere near what would be necessary to fund the mayor's plan.

[hwy418]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Forgive me if I've missed something, but I haven't seen any commitment from Wynne to fund the second phase. She has promised 14B over 10 years for non-GTA transit and transportation projects. Ottawa would have to get in line with other promises the Liberals are making (bullet train to London, new highway between Kitchener and Guelph, more four-laning projects in Northern Ontario, widening the 417 in Ottawa, etc.). And given that Ottawa doesn't have many contested ridings, and the Mcgingty-Wynne government has massively underspent here for more than a decade (paying 100% of Toronto LRT projects and less than 30% of ours, for example) I would highly doubt Ottawa's share of 14B would be anywhere near what would be necessary to fund the mayor's plan.

The campaign literature from the candidate in Ottawa-Orleans specifically mentions funding for Ottawa's Phase II LRT plans. I also recall Wynne referring to Ottawa's plans when speaking about the "other" $14B outside the GHTA. I too am really pissed about the 1/3-1/3-1/3 funding we keep on getting for transit vs the 2/3 ontario - 1/3 fed funding they get down there. In Ottawa, funding should be 2/3 feds and 1/3 ontario because its good for all Canadians

[Kitchissippi]

The business case for Phase 2 won't be hard to push for because it will make economic sense. With the maintenance facility already built and most of the train sets in hand, the savings in operating budget by replacing the costly bunching up of express routes from the west and southwest of the city isn't that hard to calculate.

It brings up the question, do they actually produce "business plans" for highway expansion? It seems like transit projects have to produce reams of justification whereas the government just seems to pull out the big credit card when certain constituents whine about traffic

[Innsertnamehere]

As I have said before, they are different sets of circumstances and Ottawa is far from under serviced by the Liberals. McGuinties riding was in Ottawa for christs sake, and the 416 ridings that the Eglinton crosstown runs through are far from contested ridings, they are liberal strongholds.


The phase 2 of the LRT would be obvious to fund (presumably at 100%) from the $14 billion. Stuff like the London BRT would also likely get money.

Highway expansion is largely non political and is done by MTO. (some portions are political, but most aren't) They look at how many people use the road daily, congestion, freight traffic percentages, and come up with economic benefit cases to see which project should get the money from the annual capital that comes from gas taxes. This is largely the same model the Liberals want to use with providing so many dollars annually to Metrolinx and MTO and letting them determine which projects get the best bang for the buck so to speak. (thus the vague talk on what they would fund)

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Forgive me if I've missed something, but I haven't seen any commitment from Wynne to fund the second phase. She has promised 14B over 10 years for non-GTA transit and transportation projects. Ottawa would have to get in line with other promises the Liberals are making (bullet train to London, new highway between Kitchener and Guelph, more four-laning projects in Northern Ontario, widening the 417 in Ottawa, etc.). And given that Ottawa doesn't have many contested ridings, and the Mcgingty-Wynne government has massively underspent here for more than a decade (paying 100% of Toronto LRT projects and less than 30% of ours, for example) I would highly doubt Ottawa's share of 14B would be anywhere near what would be necessary to fund the mayor's plan.

The bullet train to London is going to mostly financed by the private sector, so the government only needs to pay $500M for it. The new Kitchener-Guelph highway is already paid for out of general revenues. All highway widenings in Southern Ontario are going to be paid for out of MTO's existing $3B budget, not the $29B promised (remember that the new $29B fund is NEW money, not repurposed capital budgets from elsewhere).

The Wynne government has explicitly confirmed on numerous occasions that Phase 2 will be funded as part of the $14B non-GTHA fund. It's even been implied on several occasions that the Liberals will fund 100% of it, although 1/3 is more likely.

The only committed projects from the $14B are:
-Ottawa LRT
-Bullet train to London
-Northern Highway widenings, likely worth about $5B
Other things likely to go there are London BRT, Phase 2 of Waterloo Region LRT, GO service to Niagara, and the Kingston 3rd crossing. All of which are way under $1B each. $14B is a very generous amount for non-GTHA Ontario.

[1overcosc]

Also, Ottawa is actually quite the battleground this election, with 3 Liberal held seats at severe risk of being flipped blue (Ottawa-Orleans, Ottawa West-Nepean, and Glengarry-Prescott-Russell) the former two of which are very well served by Phase 2.

In any case though, transportation funding does not correlate with electoral chances. Otherwise, the Liberals would have never funded Highway 7 to CP (Conservative seat not about to switch), or been unwilling to fund 174 to Rockland (Liberal seat at risk), or funded massive highway widenings through Kingston (Liberal safe seat), or funded massive GO expansions to Durham (PC safe seats).

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

The business case for Phase 2 won't be hard to push for because it will make economic sense. With the maintenance facility already built and most of the train sets in hand, the savings in operating budget by replacing the costly bunching up of express routes from the west and southwest of the city isn't that hard to calculate.

It brings up the question, do they actually produce "business plans" for highway expansion? It seems like transit projects have to produce reams of justification whereas the government just seems to pull out the big credit card when certain constituents whine about traffic

MTO does justify highway widenings. In their grand plan for the 417, they produced a large amount of literature justifying the need for a 8-lane highway all through the city.

[McC]

Apparently, the

Liberal platform specifically mentions infrastructure money for “next phase” of #Ottawa LRT. #onpoli

https://twitter.com/jchianello/status/470626814662955008n

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Hudak's announcement to offer to reduce income taxes means that he puts priority of people buying more junk at the dollar store instead of investing in public infrastructure with its long-term benefits to society. This is certainly the death knell to Phase 2, if he gets his way. In any event, which actually provides more good jobs? It seems to me, that with most merchandise manufactured off-shore, investing in public infrastructure will actually generate more good jobs for Ontario residents.

What was it, Friday, he said that cutting income taxes by 10% would create 46,000 jobs. How!?

Also, considering that taxes in Ontario aren't that bad, why the heck would you reduce them by 10% when the province is in a huge hole?

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

The bullet train to London is going to mostly financed by the private sector, so the government only needs to pay $500M for it. The new Kitchener-Guelph highway is already paid for out of general revenues. All highway widenings in Southern Ontario are going to be paid for out of MTO's existing $3B budget, not the $29B promised (remember that the new $29B fund is NEW money, not repurposed capital budgets from elsewhere).

The Wynne government has explicitly confirmed on numerous occasions that Phase 2 will be funded as part of the $14B non-GTHA fund. It's even been implied on several occasions that the Liberals will fund 100% of it, although 1/3 is more likely.

The only committed projects from the $14B are:
-Ottawa LRT
-Bullet train to London
-Northern Highway widenings, likely worth about $5B
Other things likely to go there are London BRT, Phase 2 of Waterloo Region LRT, GO service to Niagara, and the Kingston 3rd crossing. All of which are way under $1B each. $14B is a very generous amount for non-GTHA Ontario.

When? Where? Who? How?

Doubt it, but I would love to know more details if possible.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

When? Where? Who? How?

Doubt it, but I would love to know more details if possible.

Some of Glen Murray's tweets have made it sound like 100% funding.

Never once have the Liberals definitively stated what % of funding they will give. Indeed, the entire Moving Ontario Forward fund (the $29B) has been very unclear on that point: will the fund provide full funding or partial funding for its projects?

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

The bullet train to London is going to mostly financed by the private sector, so the government only needs to pay $500M for it.

When was the last time any major rail project anywhere was primarily financed by the private sector? If the private sector is willing to do this then why hasn't anyone proposed it in the decade the Liberals have been in power? Also, if it is so easy to get private sector funding for high speed rail, why cant Ottawa get such a project (much bigger population than London).

They couldn't even get a private sector partner for the Pearson airport link which will probably charge $20 for a 20km trip.

Or by private sector financing you mean it will be a leaseback arrangement? (hiding more debt as operating money).

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by acottawa

When was the last time any major rail project anywhere was primarily financed by the private sector? If the private sector is willing to do this then why hasn't anyone proposed it in the decade the Liberals have been in power? Also, if it is so easy to get private sector funding for high speed rail, why cant Ottawa get such a project (much bigger population than London).

They couldn't even get a private sector partner for the Pearson airport link which will probably charge $20 for a 20km trip.

Or by private sector financing you mean it will be a leaseback arrangement? (hiding more debt as operating money).

By private sector financing, they mean profit from ticket sales. The beautiful thing about HSR is that, despite being very expensive to build, they cost almost nothing to operate. A Toronto-London HSR could easily yield a healthy operating profit. The idea is a private-sector investor would keep all the operating profit in exchange for paying most of the construction cost.

There is plenty of precedent for investor-owned and paid-for HSR. In the UK, a consortium of pension plan investors paid the UK government CAD$3.4 billion for the right to retain profits on the London-Dover HSR line for 30 years. Based on the estimated ridership of the Toronto-London HSR, a similar "retain-profit-for-30-years-deal" could yield about $2.5 billion. The entire Toronto-London HSR project would only cost about $3B to build, due to its easy geology and the fact that the existing railway ROWs are well suited to HSR already.

The same logic wouldn't really work for a Toronto-Ottawa HSR, as that line is much more expensive due to geography. Toronto-Ottawa HSR would require a completely new ROW for almost the entire route (only the Ottawa-Smiths Falls and Toronto-Oshawa segments of the existing VIA track are straight enough for HSR), and the new ROW from Kingston to Smiths Falls would have to pass through the Rideau Lakes which would be a very expensive corridor. We'd be looking at something like $10B to build that line. Suppose ridership is twice that of the London route, private sector financing would yield $5B, requiring a $5B government contribution. Ten times more government expenditure.

Union Pearson Express probably could have been P3 financed. It's charging $20 because Metrolinx is charging enough to make back all the construction costs. P3s are unpopular in Canada and it takes a lot of political capital to get one in place, so only now with fiscal resources low and infrastructure needs high are we starting to hear about things like this.

[SF Thomas]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Forgive me if I've missed something, but I haven't seen any commitment from Wynne to fund the second phase. She has promised 14B over 10 years for non-GTA transit and transportation projects. Ottawa would have to get in line with other promises the Liberals are making (bullet train to London, new highway between Kitchener and Guelph, more four-laning projects in Northern Ontario, widening the 417 in Ottawa, etc.). And given that Ottawa doesn't have many contested ridings, and the Mcgingty-Wynne government has massively underspent here for more than a decade (paying 100% of Toronto LRT projects and less than 30% of ours, for example) I would highly doubt Ottawa's share of 14B would be anywhere near what would be necessary to fund the mayor's plan.

Originally Posted by J.OT13

When? Where? Who? How?

Doubt it, but I would love to know more details if possible.

Its now official that the Liberals have released their platform and promised to help fund Ottawa LRT phase 2 (I'd assume around 1/3 of it). It is included in the campaign plan highlights under 'infrastructure' on their website: http://ontarioliberalplan.ca/infrastructure/

[1overcosc]

I expect Wynne to make a speech on this next time she's in Ottawa. Probably doing so in a giant photo op with Jim Watson. Watson's endorsement, if anyone gets it, will be a powerful one as Watson is so popular here.

[eternallyme]

If all three of those ridings flip blue, while the Liberals solidify in the GTA and stay in power, then expect Ottawa to really get the shaft in the next legislature.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

By private sector financing, they mean profit from ticket sales. The beautiful thing about HSR is that, despite being very expensive to build, they cost almost nothing to operate. A Toronto-London HSR could easily yield a healthy operating profit. The idea is a private-sector investor would keep all the operating profit in exchange for paying most of the construction cost.

There is plenty of precedent for investor-owned and paid-for HSR. In the UK, a consortium of pension plan investors paid the UK government CAD$3.4 billion for the right to retain profits on the London-Dover HSR line for 30 years. Based on the estimated ridership of the Toronto-London HSR, a similar "retain-profit-for-30-years-deal" could yield about $2.5 billion. The entire Toronto-London HSR project would only cost about $3B to build, due to its easy geology and the fact that the existing railway ROWs are well suited to HSR already.

The same logic wouldn't really work for a Toronto-Ottawa HSR, as that line is much more expensive due to geography. Toronto-Ottawa HSR would require a completely new ROW for almost the entire route (only the Ottawa-Smiths Falls and Toronto-Oshawa segments of the existing VIA track are straight enough for HSR), and the new ROW from Kingston to Smiths Falls would have to pass through the Rideau Lakes which would be a very expensive corridor. We'd be looking at something like $10B to build that line. Suppose ridership is twice that of the London route, private sector financing would yield $5B, requiring a $5B government contribution. Ten times more government expenditure.

Union Pearson Express probably could have been P3 financed. It's charging $20 because Metrolinx is charging enough to make back all the construction costs. P3s are unpopular in Canada and it takes a lot of political capital to get one in place, so only now with fiscal resources low and infrastructure needs high are we starting to hear about things like this.

I'm sorry for going off topic, but I'm trying to make the point that the premier has massively overcommitted the 1.4B/y non-GTA fund (Ring of Fire, Northern 4 laning, "A permanent roads and bridges fund for municipalities" Waterloo LRT, Niagara GO, Kingston bridge, plus of course the bullet train) which would likely leave Ottawa with a paltry share (or at least one insufficient for the Mayor's plans).

The "London-Dover HSR" you're talking about a) was a concession for an already-built line (i.e. a financing scheme, not an infrastructure project) and b) is the line to the chunnel, I'm not sure how a high speed train connecting 2 major world cities with metro areas of 10+M each would be comparable to a train to London and KW (a little over 300k each). Moreover, the existing infrastructure is terrible (mostly single track, in guelph it goes down a residential street): the London-TO Via train through Kitchener takes almost 1.5 hours more than the train through Brantford (which uses the CN mainline). Bringing that route up to usual GO standards is probably a multi-billion dollar project and bringing it up to a standard capable of making that 200km trip in 71 minutes the Liberals are promising would require a massive investment on top of that.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I'm sorry for going off topic, but I'm trying to make the point that the premier has massively overcommitted the 1.4B/y non-GTA fund (Ring of Fire, Northern 4 laning, "A permanent roads and bridges fund for municipalities" Waterloo LRT, Niagara GO, Kingston bridge, plus of course the bullet train) which would likely leave Ottawa with a paltry share (or at least one insufficient for the Mayor's plans).

The "London-Dover HSR" you're talking about a) was a concession for an already-built line (i.e. a financing scheme, not an infrastructure project) and b) is the line to the chunnel, I'm not sure how a high speed train connecting 2 major world cities with metro areas of 10+M each would be comparable to a train to London and KW (a little over 300k each). Moreover, the existing infrastructure is terrible (mostly single track, in guelph it goes down a residential street): the London-TO Via train through Kitchener takes almost 1.5 hours more than the train through Brantford (which uses the CN mainline). Bringing that route up to usual GO standards is probably a multi-billion dollar project and bringing it up to a standard capable of making that 200km trip in 71 minutes the Liberals are promising would require a massive investment on top of that.

The $3B cost of the London-Toronto line and the $2.5B private sector financing were both determined by the MTO in a detailed analysis. Murray approached MTO about a year ago asking for numbers as he was curious how fiscally feasible HSR to London was, and they gave an answer. These aren't numbers Wynne pulled out of her hat, they're numbers MTO gave after professional analysis, and MTO is very good at estimating costs. I trust their word.

It's a very easy project, London-Toronto HSR. The upgrades needed for easternmost quarter of the line (from Georgetown westward) is already being paid for as part of the GTHA fund. The fact that the current route is single track is completely irrelevant, as HSR would need entirely new track anyway (it needs concrete tracks instead of the traditional wooden ones). What drives HSR costs up is corridor requirements, and those are minimal. The $3B quote is also consistent with EcoTrain report from a few years ago (the last major federal HSR study for QC-Windsor).

The John Counter extension bridge in Kingston has not yet been committed by anybody. The City of Kingston is still deciding whether or not they even want it as there's a concern by its municipal planners that the bridge would promote too much growth in the expensive-to-service east end of the city.

The $14B rest-of-Ontario fund is going to have the exact opposite problem--it's going to be difficult finding enough projects to spend it all. Let's assume that all local transit projects (ie. not GO or MTO) are being 1/3 paid through Moving Ontario Fund.
-Ottawa wants 1B for its LRT.
-Waterloo Region wants 200M for the next phase of its LRT.
-London wants 100M for its BRT.
-The HSR will need 500M.
-Ring of Fire roadway is about 1B.
-Niagara GO, who knows, but fairly cheap as the track past Hamilton is fine, and everything up to Hamilton is already being upgraded as part of the GTHA fund. Let's be very generous and say it will cost 1B. (In reality it will be probably be a lot less).
That's $3.8B. Throw in another 2 billion for other local projects that might prop up. That leaves a whopping $8.2B for northern 4-laning & overall bridges. Especially considering that a lot of highway capital work can be funded within MTO's existing $3B a year budget that's completely separate from the Moving Ontario Fund. It almost makes me think the government is planning more than 1/3 funding for local transit projects.

We're going a bit off topic. Waterloowarrior, care to move these last few posts to a more relevant thread?

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

The City of Kingston is still deciding whether or not they even want it as there's a concern by its municipal planners that the bridge would promote too much growth in the expensive-to-service east end of the city.

If it's expensive to service, there's a solution: have any new development bear the true cost of the sprawl.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

The $3B cost of the London-Toronto line and the $2.5B private sector financing were both determined by the MTO in a detailed analysis. Murray approached MTO about a year ago asking for numbers as he was curious how fiscally feasible HSR to London was, and they gave an answer. These aren't numbers Wynne pulled out of her hat, they're numbers MTO gave after professional analysis, and MTO is very good at estimating costs. I trust their word.

It's a very easy project, London-Toronto HSR. The upgrades needed for easternmost quarter of the line (from Georgetown westward) is already being paid for as part of the GTHA fund. The fact that the current route is single track is completely irrelevant, as HSR would need entirely new track anyway (it needs concrete tracks instead of the traditional wooden ones). What drives HSR costs up is corridor requirements, and those are minimal. The $3B quote is also consistent with EcoTrain report from a few years ago (the last major federal HSR study for QC-Windsor).

Scenario 1
MTO has come up with a way a)to build high speed rail for $15-20M per km, which would be among the cheapest high speed rail projects in the world, even though much of the corridor goes through urban areas (and sections look like this) and b) for the private sector to pay 5/6 of the cost, so the cost to taxpayer is only about $2-3M per km. If true then this MTO discovery is a huge breakthrough that will make high speed rail projects viable all over North America. It is odd though that they didn't tell their own consultants, which didn't even consider the GEXR corridor in their 2011 study. And they didn't tell Metrolinx, which paid 1.2B to increase capacity on the 20km toronto section of the Kitchener line (conventional speed only).

Scenario 2
This proposal was written by political staff, without checking facts too hard (as happened with the gas plants) who are underestimating the costs, overestimating the private sector contribution and more concerned with the announcable than the details. And if the liberals win will face a choice between keeping their SW Ontario promises (mostly swing ridings) or their Ottawa promises (some of the least competitive ridings in the province).

Since almost no collaborating information was released with the bullet train announcement and no breakdown was provided with the 14B non GTA announcement, I guess people will have to decide for themselves what they believe.