News   Apr 25, 2024
Wyse Meter Solutions Encouraging Sustainability Through Submetering Technology
 435     0 
News   Apr 25, 2024
News Roundup for April 25, 2024
 448     0 
News   Apr 25, 2024
How It Started
 662     0 

407 Rail Freight Bypass/The Missing Link

drum118 said:
Its over a Billion dollars to 4 track the Milton line and far far cheaper than trying to do this bypass.
Click to expand...
Plus how much for (HSR/HFR/RER/express/dedicated) freight-separated corridor through Brampton while keeping freight -- the cost of associated grade separations?

One more billion dollars or so?
Probably still cheaper, I am curious.

From the Metrolinx RER business case, some wild guessing can be had from the Metrolinx "full" RER $19bn versus $13.5bn optimized scenario, a cost difference of 5.5 billion. Subtract the Richmond Hill cost, and the EMU fleet scaleback, a wild guess is roughly about 3 billion total for dedicated all-day Kitchener and Milton solutions, totalled?
 
Last edited:
I grew up in Thornhill near the York Sub and from my experience there is basically no impact on the community, save for the noise/vibration affecting people who directly back onto the rail line. The line is almost entirely grade-separated, largely on embankments and in trenches.

The whole point of that line was to bypass the densely populated lakeshore corridor. It was built outside of the urban area at the time, suburban development came there a few years later. It was always supposed to be the main line for freight, including dangerous goods, so any nearby resident who has a problem with freight trains on the freight railway was simply negligent when they made the decision to live there.

As for the actual risks, I'm not concerned. According to the Railway Association of Canada, most freight train derailments occur on shortlines and branch lines, generally due to track defects. The York Sub is CN's main line, so it is probably maintained to their highest standard.

Given that there are already plenty of freight trains passing through the neighbourhood, if residents were actually concerned about safety, they would be better off campaigning for strict inspections of track maintenance. But as with most transportation-related arguments in Thornhill, it is likely a red herring. People just don't like the noise. It's like how the last municipal election issue was the Viva Rapidway on Centre Street, where the argument was supposedly that the bus lanes would kill children (I'm not entirely sure how), but in fact people just didn't want to do a U-turn to get to a destination on the other side of the street.
 
^ Sounds about right to me. I studied at York for two years and much of the rail line seems to be hidden behind embankments and trenches etc. There's also the 407 corridor paralleling much of the railway so there's added space there too. This strikes me as NIMBYism as well.

That said, if the costs of double tracking Milton and rebuilding Kitchener through Brampton are as low as drum118 suggests then a rethink of the Missing Link is definitely in order. If the only major benefits of the Missing Link are removing CP from the midtown corridor (and maybe a couple others?) but for many times the cost of just upgrading the choke points, surely it would be better to just upgrade?
 
Actually, the Missing Link does not necessarily remove CP from midtown Toronto. The version that takes CP through Halwest to Humber, but then down the Mactier to West Toronto, achieves everything GO needs. The only residents who benefit are Mississaugans and Etobicokans, and arguably the former had their inferno in 1979, so they have done their share.
If you meausure the number of people within 1 km of the tracks on each line, the northern line impact far fewer people than the midtown line however, so on pure numbers the full missing link benefits the greatest number of folks. And, like I said before, those who bought homes in York did so with the tracks already there. Cry me a river.

- Paul
 
reaperexpress said:
The whole point of that line was to bypass the densely populated lakeshore corridor. It was built outside of the urban area at the time, suburban development came there a few years later. It was always supposed to be the main line for freight, including dangerous goods, so any nearby resident who has a problem with freight trains on the freight railway was simply negligent when they made the decision to live there.
Click to expand...

The blame should be placed on a) the municipality for zoning the area as residential and granting development applications, and b) the feds for not ratcheting up land use regulations in the vicinity of mainline freight corridors. Those areas should be re-zoned now and establish those hoods as legal non-conforming uses.

crs1026 said:
Actually, the Missing Link does not necessarily remove CP from midtown Toronto. The version that takes CP through Halwest to Humber, but then down the Mactier to West Toronto, achieves everything GO needs.
Click to expand...

The rationale to continue CP along the York sub to their Toronto Yard and the Belleville sub is to free up the midtown corridor for a new GO line. Sending them back down MacTier creates additional north-south traffic in the vicinity of more residences south of the 401 (which again, shouldn't have been built so close) and forgoes that opportunity.
 
I can't remember if the maps from this September 2015 Town of Milton report on the Missing Link were posted here so just in case, here they are. They show pretty clearly what Milton/Mississauga/KW/Brampton (although they didn't contribute to the study)/and Toronto want to do.

town-of-milton-map-of-missing-link-1.png


Also, this 2009 map (several changes since then/pre-RER reports) from the Big Move shows GO's interest in putting passenger service on the CP line running through Toronto (line "7"):

2009_03_15bigmove15yearplan640a.jpg


Finally, just for fun, here's another version of the Greater Toronto Hamilton Area (GTHA) railway ownership map with the subdivision names listed.

gtha-railway-ownership-map-railway-association-of-canada-1april16.png
 
Allandale25 said:
I can't remember if the maps from this September 2015 Town of Milton report on the Missing Link were posted here so just in case, here they are. They show pretty clearly what Milton/Mississauga/KW/Brampton (although they didn't contribute to the study)/and Toronto want to do.

town-of-milton-map-of-missing-link-1.png
Click to expand...

Can't imagine CP being too thrilled about that huge zig zag in north Scarborough. Are any of the freight companies on board with this proposal?
 
salsa said:
Can't imagine CP being too thrilled about that huge zig zag in north Scarborough. Are any of the freight companies on board with this proposal?
Click to expand...

Is there the potential for CP to relocate their yard elsewhere? I'm thinking in the vicinity of the Pickering Airport lands, so that they have easier access to the freight corridor, and would have good access to the 407 and the 412. The Feds may be willing to work out a land deal if it helps the Missing Link's case.

If their freight yard land in Scarborough was sold off and redeveloped, they could make a pretty penny, especially if the main line through there becomes a GO line.
 
DonValleyRainbow said:
^
Click to expand...

I can't say for certain (though I'm sure others here could) but aren't a lot of these marshaling yards way overbuilt for the needs of freight companies today? I feel like that's what I've read in the past. So maybe CP would be cool with being able to sell this land and build a modern and smaller yard outside of the city? Though conversely, CP seem to be opposed to any kind of cooperation with government unless they're paid a small fortune and have their asses kissed for it it seems...
 
wolfewood said:
I can't say for certain (though I'm sure others here could) but aren't a lot of these marshaling yards way overbuilt for the needs of freight companies today? I feel like that's what I've read in the past. So maybe CP would be cool with being able to sell this land and build a modern and smaller yard outside of the city? Though conversely, CP seem to be opposed to any kind of cooperation with government unless they're paid a small fortune and have their asses kissed for it it seems...
Click to expand...

Yes, they are overbuilt. With so much freight travelling by container, the number of loose-car movements that have to be switched is much smaller than when these yards were built. Hump yards are expensive to operate, delay cars for long periods, and create potential for damage to loads through rough coupling. Flat switching and "block swapping" is still needed but this takes a different size and shape of yard, especially with today's much longer trains.

I'm sure CP would love to divest itself of this property altogether. The impediment is the cost of remediatiing the soil contamination and the need to find and build a smaller yard somewhere else ( can you spell NIMBY? ).

There have been many suggestions that the North Toronto Sub would make a good transit line. I'm not so sure it's actually needed, so close to the Line 2 subway. There is an astronomical property value which CP would leverage to the maximum.

What I like about doing only the west part of the Missing Line, leaving CP with the Mactier-North Toronto routing, is it leaves CP with the problem of how to get itself out of this expensive real estate.... as opposed to government approaching CP on bended knee and paying a king's ransom to "convince" CP to divest it. The optimum deal down the road, if it is really needed, is to tunnel the transit and then sell the air rights for development. That's 2050 or beyond, if it happens at all. Let's let CP ponder the prospect of having to pay property tax on that line for the next 35 years, and see how eager they are to sell.

- Paul
 
Wasn't there talk about CP building a new yard to the east of Toronto??

The new yard would be a fraction of the current yard and would allow for longer trains there. Toronto yard is like a lot of yards in NA that are out dated and needing rebuilding.

The need for large hump yard is in the past with more longer cars that can't be hump and running in block section or unit trains these days.

One only has to go to Buffalo to see how CSX Frontier yard has been down graded as well NS. CP yard doesn't exist anymore there. There are yard that are miles long now to handle the longer train today compare to the past

CP will make a ton of money selling this yard.

There will be a need for hump yards, but the number of tracks it will be needed will be a fraction that exist today.

Its possible that CP is rebuilding part of the existing hump yard and putting in longer tracks.

Didn't CP sold some of the north yard to Metrolinx, as it been years since I have done any rail fanning out there??

North Toronto Sub has been in GO Transit expansion book for decades, that would see the Old Summerhill Station becoming a station again. Could be a branch line for the Milton Line AKA Crosstown Line.
 
mdrejhon said:
I see the dark parts of soil where the fanning-out to C yard is.
Is that contaminated soil from decades of oiling the switching/crossovers?
Click to expand...

No doubt lubricant, yes, but also heavy metal from the retarders making contact with the wheels. Brake dust, in effect. And lots of goop that leaked out of the bottom of hopper cars over the years.

The diesel shop and car shop areas will have similar issues - fuel, lubricant, welding products, grinding products, coolant, etc etc.

Not as badly contaminated as steam-age shops, but much of the environmental systems were retrofitted to the yard as standards were raised over the years.

- Paul
 
crs1026 said:
No doubt lubricant, yes, but also heavy metal from the retarders making contact with the wheels. Brake dust, in effect. And lots of goop that leaked out of the bottom of hopper cars over the years.

The diesel shop and car shop areas will have similar issues - fuel, lubricant, welding products, grinding products, coolant, etc etc.

Not as badly contaminated as steam-age shops, but much of the environmental systems were retrofitted to the yard as standards were raised over the years.

- Paul
Click to expand...

So this will be a good point when CP tries to sell the land: it won't be pristine. An assessment will be required before it is developed. The question is whether or not CP will want to do the assessment beforehand and remediate themselves, or try to sell it on condition of the buyer assuming all environmental liability.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top