Why Rails To Trails May Not Be The Answer

Sloganeering and artist's renditions are the big growth industries in Windsor. We should have someone count the number of slogans that our last two mayors have created over the last three years and how many pretty pictures and Powerpoint presentations their staffs and consultants have produced for public consumption. However, we won't ask the tough question: what are the results achieved.

I found a copy of this newspaper article published 20 years on the subject of Rails to Trails. It's not a new concept but one which Eddie obviously found and now so has ex-mayor Mike. Scary that they are thinking along the same lines isn't it!

There is nothing wrong with Eddie learning about what works in other areas and adopting the concept for Windsor. Why re-invent the wheel. BUT, he needs to examine the idea first in depth before he latches on to it and tries to impose it on us!

The phrase makes a nice slogan but it looks like the issues raised in that story may be the same today. Issues it appears that our sloganeering Mayor and ex-Mayor have not considered. I already raised a couple of concerns raised by Ward 4 Candidate, John Middleton previously:

• "...if the DRTP corridor is tunnelled, all of the many KMs of it, then who will be responsible for policing it? Who will be responsible for maintaining it? The city?
  
  If we do not have enough money for policing now, and we are struggling with finding tax money for essential services, is this a "gift" that we really want? If we can get rid of Superior Park, to get money from the sale surplus park assets as Councillor Zuk claims, why would we now take-on more park-space.
  
  In fact, Chris Schnurr in Ward 2 suggests that we NOT remove the rails since they will never be put back in but that we ought to look at all of our rail lands in the City and County for public transit services eg like a GO Transit-type service perhaps to get cars off the roads!"

The article above points out other problems:

• who pays the cost to buy the trail in the first place
• who pays to build the trail
• how long would it take before a trail was really opened

Ward 2 Candidate Schnurr also sent me this article that I found of great interest. You may want to think about it before you fall for the latest Francis/Hurst slogan:

• Preserving Urban Rail Corridors
  
  The terms of reference asked the Panel to consider "the advisability of specific measures designed to preserve urban corridors for future mass transit use in the rail line abandonment process." The Panel's interest in this issue was reinforced by several parties that came forward to discuss related topics, including access to urban rail lines and railway access pricing practices. In addition, some interveners expressed concern that unless the federal government provides funding, useful mass transportation corridors may be lost if the railways choose to discontinue lines in urban areas.
  
  For many years CN and CPR, provided commuter rail services in several Canadian cities, in particular Montreal and Toronto. Over time, however, the railways found they were losing substantial amounts of money. As Canada became more urban and cities continued to grow, increasing the demand for better commuter services, railway-operated services gradually gave way to operations managed by local commuter or transit authorities, established and funded in part by provincial governments. As the railways' commuter services were terminated, some of the corridors used for those commuter trains remained in service for freight. In some instances commuter service has now been reintroduced.
  
  In other cases, however, urban and ex-urban corridors not used for commuter services were abandoned. Some were acquired by a provincial or municipal government for current or potential use as a transportation corridor (e.g., part of Ottawa's bus Transitway operates in a former CPR rail corridor). But commuter authorities and municipalities remain concerned that no more rail corridors with transit potential be discontinued without their having the option to acquire them.
  
  Today, the commuter and transit authorities — Montreal's Agence Métropolitaine de Transport (AMT), the Toronto area's GO Transit, and the Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority (TransLink) — have a mandate to provide commuter services. GO was Canada's first interregional public transit system, established to link Toronto's local bus, streetcar and subway services with the suburbs of the Greater Toronto Area. AMT is responsible for developing and operating a commuter rail system and for co-ordinating the efforts of transit operators on the Island of Montreal and in the surrounding areas. TransLink provides ferry, bus and commuter rail systems through subsidiary organizations, including West Coast Express.
  
  Transit authorities receive operating funds from a variety of sources. Some, such as AMT and TransLink, receive funding from fuel taxes collected in their respective metropolitan areas, while GO Transit receives funding from the Greater Toronto Services Board. All receive money from the fare box as well, but revenue shares from fares vary considerably among service providers.
  
  Fare box revenues are insufficient to allow commuter authorities to fund capital projects, which means that acquisitions of capital assets such as property must be funded by other means. Market borrowing would be circumscribed by the inability even to cover operating costs. Accordingly, the ability to acquire capital assets without assistance is limited.
  
  Continued urbanization will bring greater traffic congestion in the next 20 years, with continued growth at suburban and ex-urban nodes also contributing to commuter demand. Several Canadian cities anticipate that commuter rail will become an increasingly attractive option as population and traffic volume rise. In order for the option to be available, existing rail corridors might need to be preserved from abandonment and redevelopment. The Alberta government, for example, recommended protecting urban corridors where needed for mass public transit. TransLink recommended designating urban rail corridors as general transportation corridors. In the city cores, rail corridors are one of the few options available for expanding urban transit or developing it where it does not yet exist.