Rail Ways to the Future Committee Report for 2008

A RWTF project undertaken in 2003 came to fruition in 2008. In June of 2003, member Mary Kainer and myself requested that the Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO) be made subject to the Environmental Bill of Right. This, if granted, would permit residents of Ontario to request reviews of Ministry of Transportation policies and prescribed Acts, regulations, and instruments and as well ask MTO to review the need for new acts, regulations and policies. The matter then proceeded to the Ontario Ministry of the Environment (MOE) for determination. In September of 2005 the MOE recommended prescribing MTO for the purposes of application for review. The request was addressed in the 07/08 Annual Report of the Environmental Commissioner of Ontario, Mr. Gord Miller, (available ECO website: www.eco.on.ca). It was passed by cabinet in June of 2008.

The Environmental Bill of Rights gives the people of Ontario the right to participate in decisions that effect the environment made by ministries prescribed under the Act. Transport 2000 and RWTF are currently considering how to make use of this new tool. Of course it is a tool available to all residents of Ontario.

Mary and I made a second application for review in February of 2006 requesting that Provincial Policy Statements intended to protect the continuous linear characteristics of abandoned rail rights-of-way be re-made into strong, clear and enforcible provincial legislation. Three ministries play a role in transportation planning and development: Ministry of Transportation (MTO), Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal (MPIR) and the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH). Our application went to MMHA alone, since only MMAH was prescribed for the purposes of applications for review and EBR. Our application was rejected. This remains a key RWTF issue to be solved.

Last July RWTF wrote to Hon George Smitherman MPP of the new combined Energy and Public Infrastructure Renewal Ministry, suggesting that abandoned rail corridors would be useful as transmission corridors connecting wind, solar, hydro, geothermal power generating sources as they develop to the provincial grid. But in so doing it is important to allow for the return of rail service, including double tracking. Our letter has been acknowledged, but we have yet to follow up. This is a proposal developed by member Bob Weare. Member Phil King put together a list of abandoned rail lines requiring protection and replacement for improved and renewed rail freight and passenger services. This was included in the letter to the minister, and is often otherwise used. We also suggested that hydro corridors might be used for rail transportation purposes.

RWTF had a letter to the editor of The (Owen Sound ) Sun Times published last September and October recommending the return of Rail service to Owen Sound, describing the Ohio Rail Hub Plan and suggesting pressing for the same concept in Ontario. Rail to Owen Sound could be a test bed. The October printing included a front page introduction to our letter.

In our ongoing effort to encourage light rail transit (LRT) development with all levels of government, especially as an economic stimulus, this year RWTF produced three LRT related papers : A Unifying Transit Strategy for the GTTA and Beyond, Ontario Light Rail Spine Line Proposal, and Typical Differences Between Streetcars and Light Rail Vehicles (and their functions), We also reproduced our Light Rail Vision for Ontario brochure, and a paper entitled, Sir Adam Beck May Ride Again, which deals with the possible rebirth of the interurban era in terms of light rail or variant. ( See the Professor C. Kennedy background study for, Ontario in the Creative Age)

RWTF made a written submission regarding the 407 East EA recommending that the “transitway” only portion proceed in term of LRT.

We believe it vital that LRT undertakings in Ontario be compatible technically and operationally, in order to achieve economies of scale and service interoperability/ flexibility. This would be very useful as traffic flow requirements change: seasonally, for special events, weather events, evacuation needs etc. Being built to the North American standard track gauge of 56.5 inches is critical. Many U.S. LRT lines share trackage with lightly used freight railways. LRT and freight trains are normally temporally separated. Eventually extending diesel LRT services along lightly used or presently abandoned rail lines to locations more distant from the GTA would assist smaller communities in becoming attractive to heavy haul location seeking industries, cottage country and ski slopes would become easier to reach and provincial connectivity is greatly improved. (See the Roger Martin and Richard Florida Report)

One good thing about Ontario being late in LRT development, is that we are starting from scratch and are in a position to do it right. The only LRT line presently in Ontario is the standard gauge diesel powered O line in Ottawa. Standard gauge for the TTC Transit City LRT lines should not be a problem for the TTC as the Transit City LRT units will surely have their own new storage and maintenance facilities and except for the possibility of the now dedicated St. Clair streetcar line, Transit City LRT vehicles, not being streetcars, will not likely venture onto TTC odd gauge streetcar lines or similarly gauged subway tunnel tracks, but are more likely to interchange with the bigger GTA and beyond picture as it develops.

.

Ross Snetsinger March 12/09 draft.