407 Rail Freight Bypass/The Missing Link

[TOareaFan]

"News" is not a contract.
So would announcing your marriage by Twitter make it legal? How about announcing you're going to buy someone's house? Announcing a death?

Look, when I see an MOU in writing, then I'll start to believe Wynne et al. Here's what "Agreement in Principle" means:

http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/A/AgreementinPrinciple.aspx

Some people believe anything...

Have the contracts for any of the track purchases ever been released in public? Have the MOUs (more likley LOIs but that is a small point) that led to those purchases been released?

I don't think they have.....but it does not mean they did not happen.

 

[steveintoronto]

Mmm..yes TO. And the Martians have not been proven to not have landed either...but that does not mean that it did not happen.

C'mon, how naive and gullible are you folks? If a contract was signed, THAT would have been the announcement. Or does QP now do everything in secret? Over to you.

Edit to Add: Even the press is completely hoodwinked by the terms of reference of some posters:
[Although Sandals told the Mercury Tribune that the deal announced Tuesday puts the province on schedule to deliver two-way, all-day GO trains to Guelph and Kitchener by 2024, this isn’t specified in the government news release. Instead, the release just says the deal brings two-way, all-day train service “one step closer.”]

The arrogance of reporters! Judging people by what they state...*exactly* Why can't they just believe everything they're told?

 

[crs1026]

*sigh* This is getting a bit silly.

Would any sensible business try to manage its public face in 2016 without using Twitter? Not on your life. (I'm citing personal experience here).

Would someone as slick as Wynne (and I'm no fan) make a public statement about having an agreement with CN without there actually being one? Not likely.

So Ontario makes its announcement and CN puts out a tweet that simply purrs, yeah, we have agreed to something. Pretty standard, and likely all prearranged.

Can we read any more into a tweet than that ? Absolutely not. Even if CN vigorously disagreed with something Wynne said, we'll never know.

- Paul

 

[TOareaFan]

Mmm..yes TO. And the Martians have not been proven to not have landed either...but that does not mean that it did not happen.

C'mon, how naive and gullible are you folks? If a contract was signed, THAT would have been the announcement. Or does QP now do everything in secret? Over to you.

you've got me...I have to admit...til just now I really didn't see the similarity between Martian landings and, you know, actual purchases of rail corridors which were announced (but contracts not made public). I really hadn't noticed how incredibly alike the two matters were and that CN announcing a partnership with Ontario....and Ontario announcing an agreement in principal with CN really was no different than, well, an X Files episode.

Since there is no talking to you, really, we will cease talking. Welcome to "the list"...occupant #2.

 

[steveintoronto]

you know, actual purchases of rail corridors which were announced (but contracts not made public)

Really? Exactly which "purchase" was announced?

Edit to Add: Here's what's really going on, and CN is having a Tweet love fest with QP because stocks are tanking and Wynne needs every friend she can get at this point in time.

CN Rail could cut 2017 spending by $400-million amid declining carloads
Subscribers Only
Eric Atkins - RAILWAY INDUSTRY REPORTER

The Globe and Mail

Published Wednesday, Jun. 15, 2016 6:54PM EDT

Last updated Wednesday, Jun. 15, 2016 6:55PM ED
The incoming chief executive officer of Canadian National Railway Co. said the freight carrier could slash spending for a second year in a row as it faces a plunge in carloads.

Luc Jobin, currently CN’s chief financial officer, said the Montreal-based freight carrier might cut 2017 spending on locomotives and other equipment by as much as $400-million.

The company has more than 400 locomotives in storage, but this year will spend $500-million on 90 new locomotives, “which were on order and not cancellable, unfortunately,” Mr. Jobin said at an investors’ conference in Boston on Wednesday.

The company is continuing to invest in fail-safe train controls – $400-million in 2016 – mandated by U.S. regulators. These and other technology investments should help the company improve productivity and service, said Mr. Jobin, 57, who last week was named the next CEO of CN when Claude Mongeau retires for health reasons at the end of June.

In the current quarter, Mr. Jobin said carloads are down by 12 per cent, about one-quarter of which is because of a decrease in iron ore shipments. Revenue per ton-mile is down by 10 per cent, he said.

“Clearly, this is the most difficult quarter of the year for us,” Mr. Jobin said.

In the first quarter, CN cited weak freight markets and the stronger dollar when it reduced its forecast for 2016 profit growth to flat from an increase of about 5 per cent. CN cut the 2016 capital expenditure budget to $2.75-billion from $2.9-billion and forecast carloads would fall by about 5 per cent.

The company has laid off about 2,400 people – 10 per cent of its work force – including 1,200 train operators. “We hope to call back some of those conductors as attrition moves through our system,” Mr. Jobin said.

CN’s “disciplined” spending, a share buyback worth $2-billion and a dividend that has risen by an average of 17 per cent a year are signs the company is “mindful” of returning capital to shareholders, said Christian Wetherbee, an analyst at Citi Research.

Mr. Wetherbee said the big North American railways have too many locomotives and reducing their fleets is an obvious way to slash expenses. With the exceptions of Canadian Pacific Railway Ltd. and Kansas City Southern Railway Co., all the large carriers have been boosting the size of their fleets, he said.

“The Class 1 locomotive fleet [excluding BNSF Railway Co.] has increased by 5 per cent since 2006, in spite of slightly negative volumes, and currently roughly 11 per cent of this fleet is in storage,” Mr. Wetherbee said.

CP has idled 665 locomotives, laid off 1,300 people and warned more could be out of work. CP has slashed 2016 capital expenditures by $400-million to $1.1-billion but is standing by a forecast of “double-digit” profit growth in 2016, a prediction that is threatened by weak demand for shipments of bulk commodities.

[...]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repo...lion-amid-declining-carloads/article30478699/

So what was the "purchase" TO? C'mon, you like to talk big..."really big". Show me the money...

 

[Allandale25]

Really? Exactly which "purchase" was announced?

The purchases of the other corridors was announced through press releases and other methods. The CP Canpa Sub was confirmed as sold in an email to someone that was shared here I believe.

In this case, the Bramalea to Georgetown section hasn't been "sold" yet by CN, but I would assume it will be part of the deal that will be signed after the study. The fact that CN is publicly stating, for the first time, that they are participating in the study and references are being made by the government that this will involve a bypass, is a good sign. The issue it appears some are having is that there is no RFP released yet for the bypass study. I would assume that the agreement-in-principle is "commercially sensitive" and won't be made public. Someone could email Metrolinx and ask. Someone could FOI Metrolinx to get it. Someone could appeal the FOI to the Information and Privacy Commissioner if Metrolinx rejected the FOI request. I won't be taking those steps because I've seen enough progress to believe that progress is being made to getting all-day, two-way, electrified commuter rail between Bramalea and Kitchener.

In addition to a bypass study, I would assume that Metrolinx can now extend the study area for the Kitchener Line electrification EA. Previously it was going to stop at Bramalea and now it can be extended to Kitchener. So they will either have to change the contracts with the EA (which someone could ask about) and hold public meetings from Bramalea to Kitchener (which someone could ask about). I would assume we'll hear specific information on that EA extension at some point in 2016. That should provide the assurances to those who would like to see more evidence.

Of course, I suppose it's possible that the bypass study and the Kitchener Line (Bramalea to Kitchener/UP Express Spur to Kitchener) study could be combined into one study. I'll let others with more experience speculate on whether it'll be two separate studies with two separate contracts for consultants and timelines, or just one.

If they want to have service up and running by 2024, I think it's safe to assume the RFP would be made public in 2016. That should also provide assurances to those who would like to see move evidence.

 

[mdrejhon]

Tick tock.

The 407 Freight Bypass has a very massive carbon-offset value attached to it.

Whether you agree or disagree with the environment stuff, all these infrastructure projects (GO, freight, electrification, LRT, etc) are tied into this all as well, and the Feds are playing along. They just need to re-flavour this as irresistible infrastructure like an European-style rail network clusters around the major Canadian centers (especially the Corridor). Metrolinx, Caisse, VIA, whomever, they're trying to glue it all together rather quickly behind the scenes.

 

[Platform 27]

Mmm..yes TO. And the Martians have not been proven to not have landed either...but that does not mean that it did not happen.

How about video footage of the Martians in question. Will that meet your threshold of belief?

 

[steveintoronto]

Tick tock.
The 407 Freight Bypass has a very massive carbon-offset value attached to it.

Doubtless, I'm a huge supporter of the Missing Link. Some posters have a completely wrong idea on my stance. I *highly* favour it. Unfortunately, there's no sign of any concrete action.

Something to note for "Transportation Emissions" is the new culprit, a former 'saviour': Diesel emissions:
SPECIAL REPORT: Truck News investigation finds widespread tampering of emissions systems
TORONTO, Ont. -- An investigation by Truck News has found that engine tampering to defeat emissions controls mandated on new trucks over the past decade is widespread and easily attainable.
[...]
http://www.trucknews.com/regulation...ad-tampering-of-emissions-systems/1002145949/


The Mayors of 20 European cities including Madrid, Paris and Copenhagen - but excluding London - have called for more stringent regulations to be put in place across the continent to tackle the deadly levels of air pollution caused by diesel vehicles.
[...]
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/europes-major-cities-excluding-london-call-diesel-emissions-qadir

Unfortunately, many rail vehicles stated to be "Tier 4" don't meet the claim. They might initially, but we all now know how static testing gives very misleading results.

 

[steveintoronto]

How about video footage of the Martians in question. Will that meet your threshold of belief?

Ummm...no. But neither do tweets. That's exactly the point. All that's been stated is an "Agreement in Principle"...which means nothing...literally. I've quoted the legal definition. Btw: I watched that live on Youtube, commented on exact quotes, and mentioned how even the reporters present had to get him to point-blank answer "Bramalea to Milton" by querying it. All been discussed here last few days. You're a bit late.

There's still nothing up on CN's news website. And what print news that has been reported also points out that there's nothing substantial save for Wynne stating "one step closer".

 

[crs1026]

I won't be taking those steps because I've seen enough progress to believe that progress is being made to getting all-day, two-way, electrified commuter rail between Bramalea and Kitchener.

If they want to have service up and running by 2024, I think it's safe to assume the RFP would be made public in 2016. That should also provide assurances to those who would like to see move evidence.

Here's the view of the universe that we trusted seven years ago. this was a presentation to their Board on July 13, 2009. One would think that the ML Board did some followup after a while to ensure that these were getting attended to. We trust them, they are our appointed overseers.

http://www.metrolinx.com/en/docs/pd...pansion_Plans_and_Capital_Projects-P_Deck.pdf

Trust but verify, that's the best way.

EDiT - PS - there was an EA done for the full Kitchener line. It was done by Burnside, IIRC, but never formally approved. GO pulled it off their website but copies are available elsewhere http://www.regionofwaterloo.ca/en/gettingAround/resources/1_App-A_2009_G2K_Rail_Expansion_ESR.pdf

- Paul

 

[steveintoronto]

GO pulled it off their website

Yeah...they seem to pull a lot off their website...and by what possible rationale? They don't have room? Phhhh...

I've downloaded the Waterloo Region copy for later study, if for nothing else, to see what ML might find sensitive, albeit those docs are always interesting when you're in the mood, it gives an insight into their corporate mindset.

One aspect of the "Missing Link" that offers me more hope, far more hope than utterings from slippery lips, is the *private finance* aspect. With CN presently on hard times, the Province tweeting in the treetops, and Ontario retirement funds brimming with cash and looking to invest it (and stating that they can't find enough to invest in domestically, so it goes overseas), there's real opportunity for someone to play polka with actual money on the table, not promises of money that they're "one step closer" to having. The Link could be the Golden Goose for an investment fund. Not in terms of profit, which would be fixed in the agreement, but in terms of stability, reliability and always able to be sold for more than it cost later. I can understand the Province doing a dance every time the lights come on, we're used to that (or at least we seasoned ones), but conspicuous by their silence isn't CP so much, they're hurting big-time too, and both CN and CP are going through management shuffles, but if a third party investor stepped in the ring (and many *connector* railroads have been done like this in the past, Chicago is full of them) the Feds, Province and the two Class 1s would be in a like a dirty spike. Someone in a position of power is needed to make this work.

And they could do it in a relatively short time-line. (couple to three years). CN could *then* divest the North Main segment they own, CP could divest their TO properties (a huge sum to be had there, not just rail RoW), their coffers replenished to affect rebuilding for efficiency, and everyone comes out a winner.

Since so many other posters are claiming a dream with no written substance, I'll lay claim to this one. A good question is whether the Ont Electricity Act which states (gist) "Xmssn corridors must be shared use where-ever practical" applies equally to private ownership. If not, the Act might be re-written, or the Feds might even have the power under the Transportation Act to over-rule the provincial act. Whatever, with all parties looking to make this happen (and CP will be onboard presented with the right offer) it's begging for a White Knight with Gold to ride onto the scene.

Edit to Add: Just scanning through the report, and even though it is dated, I've found some 'anomalies' to rote thinking, and something I sensed living in Guelph, and this undermines the case for HSR stopping in Guelph:

The travel demand generated by the Waterloo Region and Guelph urban areas in the study
corridor tends to decrease as it approaches the central area of Toronto. Nevertheless, there is
still strong inter-regional travel demand generated by the Waterloo Region and Guelph area
destined to the Halton and Peel Regions.
[...]
The low ridership estimates are consistent with the other estimates of ridership estimated in a
report on this same rail corridor prepared by Dillon Consulting (February 2006). The high
estimates may be somewhat optimistic, but it should also be recognized that the Guelph-
Kitchener/Waterloo/Cambridge is a unique economic growth area that appears to have
significant potential for considerable inter-regional transit ridership.
[...]
The
estimated passenger demands for 2011 and 2031 in the am peak period, pm peak period and
all day period are illustrated in Tables 2.2 and 2.3. Of note is the relative high passenger
demand for commuter rail trips between Guelph and Kitchener.
[...]

PDF page 15

This study is seven years dated, but it identifies the insular nature of Guelph. With two trains going from K/W to Guelph and back in the evening, I can tell you, only a *handful* transit between K/W and Guelph. Whether that's to do with time of travel or cost is another question, but it buttresses my point on the need for *local buses* to connect between the two centres, something identified in at least two reports for Guelph Transit.

There's been talk of a rail shuttle between the two, but it would run almost empty much of the day. There's more pressure for Guelph to have a GO bus down to Hamilton, but again, ridership numbers on AboutTown buses (the last ones to run the Canada Coach franchise) weren't enough to pay the costs.

This is an interesting report in ways. I wonder if a repeat study (yet another) of this corridor would reach the same observations/conclusions? Still reading this...

 

[Allandale25]

On page 3 of that document for the Kitchener Line, it just has EA dates. It doesn't say when construction would start or if it was funded. It doesn't list the "opening date" of service. Or is it assumed that it would have been 2020? My sense is that GO/Mlx wanted to get the Georgetown South stuff out of the way. Who knows? Maybe there were on-and-off discussions with CN Rail over the last number of years. Either way, unlike previous documents, CN is now more formally at the table with the agreement-in-principal. Further, the province is being more specific with timelines and technology for RER/electrification. Electrification wasn't as clearly stated before the 2014 election promise, but feel free to present a different view if I'm missing something. It appears the GO 2020 documents are now outdated and there is a more aggressive timeline and plan which I think is good news.

Here's the view of the universe that we trusted seven years ago. this was a presentation to their Board on July 13, 2009. One would think that the ML Board did some followup after a while to ensure that these were getting attended to. We trust them, they are our appointed overseers.

http://www.metrolinx.com/en/docs/pd...pansion_Plans_and_Capital_Projects-P_Deck.pdf

Trust but verify, that's the best way.

EDiT - PS - there was an EA done for the full Kitchener line. It was done by Burnside, IIRC, but never formally approved. GO pulled it off their website but copies are available elsewhere http://www.regionofwaterloo.ca/en/gettingAround/resources/1_App-A_2009_G2K_Rail_Expansion_ESR.pdf

- Paul

 

[crs1026]

On page 3 of that document for the Kitchener Line, it just has EA dates. It doesn't say when construction would start or if it was funded. It doesn't list the "opening date" of service. Or is it assumed that it would have been 2020? My sense is that GO/Mlx wanted to get the Georgetown South stuff out of the way. Who knows? Maybe there were on-and-off discussions with CN Rail over the last number of years. Either way, unlike previous documents, CN is now more formally at the table with the agreement-in-principal. Further, the province is being more specific with timelines and technology for RER/electrification. Electrification wasn't as clearly stated before the 2014 election promise, but feel free to present a different view if I'm missing something. It appears the GO 2020 documents are now outdated and there is a more aggressive timeline and plan which I think is good news.

I guess it depends on whether one is comfortable with a planning process that executes and files EA's against future needs, versus one that completes an EA with an eye to moving on it promptly thereafter, or declaring otherwise.

I would not have expected to find hard target dates in an EA document, but I would expect to find them here http://www.metrolinx.com/en/regionalplanning/rer/rer_kitchener.aspx
The Bramalea service component and the express-from-Bramalea KW train aspects do not need CN approval, so there is no reason to hedge on these if discussions with CN weren't productive. The base 7x2WAD hourly Bramalea service was a GTS deliverable that is still incomplete. When and where was it deferred? If electrification changed the timeline, when and where was that change declared? Does the bypass initiative change things again?

GO 2020 and The Big Move were both extremely ambitious documents - more of a "shopping catalogue" of projects than an achievable strategy. Thats not bad in itself, but it demands some hard decisions about priorities and needs. It's not unreasonable for ML to be declaring these as they are made. Until one creates what-by-when statements, a strategy is just paper.

- Paul

 

[Allandale25]

I guess it depends on whether one is comfortable with a planning process that executes and files EA's against future needs, versus one that completes an EA with an eye to moving on it promptly thereafter, or declaring otherwise.

I would not have expected to find hard target dates in an EA document, but I would expect to find them here http://www.metrolinx.com/en/regionalplanning/rer/rer_kitchener.aspx
The Bramalea service component and the express-from-Bramalea KW train aspects do not need CN approval, so there is no reason to hedge on these if discussions with CN weren't productive. The base 7x2WAD hourly Bramalea service was a GTS deliverable that is still incomplete. When and where was it deferred? If electrification changed the timeline, when and where was that change declared? Does the bypass initiative change things again?

GO 2020 and The Big Move were both extremely ambitious documents - more of a "shopping catalogue" of projects than an achievable strategy. Thats not bad in itself, but it demands some hard decisions about priorities and needs. It's not unreasonable for ML to be declaring these as they are made. Until one creates what-by-when statements, a strategy is just paper.

- Paul

1. Not sure when it was deferred or why. Maybe it's because they were hoping for a bigger improvement which is now possible. Mid-day trains were brought back and weekend/evening trains are apparently starting in April 2017 (one month later than what was promised.

2. I think the timeline was changed through the electrification promise, and the "10 year timeline" of the present provincial government and their subsequent election in June 2014. The challenge is that we don't have specific and exact language, or a complete written history, of all the nuanced changes. I could be wrong, but I don't think the Big Move contemplated in 2009 electrification as quickly as that. Plans change.

3. Yes, the bypass should and will change things because now they can run more service west of Bramalea. The current documents and maps will need to be updated on the Metrolinx website (either in anticipation of the completed study or after it's done).

4. I'd assume that ML can only declare these changes when the government allows them to. They are an agency. They have to take direction from the Minister's office who makes the ultimate decisions.

5. Fully agree that it'd be great to get more definitive statements but unfortunately that's the world we live in and I don't see politicians giving agencies more room to be independent, publish information, and provide the level of detail members of this forum want all of the time.