407 Rail Freight Bypass/The Missing Link

[allengeorge]

If the provincial and federal governments are serious about going ahead with the 413, then they should talk to CPKC about running a freight bypass parallel to it.

I’m fairly confident in saying (with absolute ignorance) that that will not happen.

Doug Ford and his government has not demonstrated much forward thinking in terms of land-banking etc. and I haven’t seen them really push either of the railways hard - or consistently! - on making improvements for passenger service. The only recent railway-related announcement was a performative “we’ll fund the Milton line, but only if you do” driven by Bonnie Crombie’s leadership.

 

[lenaitch]

If the provincial and federal governments are serious about going ahead with the 413, then they should talk to CPKC about running a freight bypass parallel to it. Doug Ford achieves two of his goals. Construct the 413 and improve service on the Milton line. The 413 goes from between Milton and Lisgar GO stations all the way to CP's Intermodal yard.

Ford and Trudeau governments ‘come to an agreement’ on Highway 413 | Globalnews.ca

Ontario's attorney general says the federal and provincial governments have 'come to an agreement' over the future of Highway 413.

globalnews.ca

View attachment 550183

I would imagine either of the Class 1 railways would do all sorts of things - if somebody else was willing to pay for it. Governments can expropriate for a public works project, not on behalf of a private company (although I imagine there is some manner of land acquisition legislation regarding railways) and there is no acquired or even identified corridor east of 404. If you think there is howling about 413 running through the Oak Ridge Moraine, imagine the push back, from residents, activists and host municipalities, if it was for a train stringing a couple of kilometres of hazardous goods along its length.

The EA if for a highway; change the parameters and it starts all over again. I doubt Ford would want the added albatross of a rail line slowing down his shiny new highway.

Since discussion has rekindled in other threads, I thought I would bump this thread to help move the discussion back where it belongs.

And I thought it would be helpful to offer these clippings, just to demonstrate how clear the original concept was that the Bypass was meant to free up the Lakeshore lines and downtown rail yards for other things.... and how long ago that concept was laid out.

The point being, people who now look at the York Sub and say "hey, there's a rail corridor there, maybe we can put a GO line on it" may not have the full picture of what was intended and agreed to a long time ago. CN has a lot of justification (and possibly legal precedent) to say, the Lakeshore is yours, but the Bypass is ours, and let's keep it that way.

- Paul

View attachment 543966

View attachment 543967

Interesting history. The one thing that jumped out at me was the Premier and the Leader of the Opposition working together to get government business done. Maybe they should resurrect that concept.

 

[innsertnamehere]

Not sure how the 413 corridor would help CPKC, to be honest, as it wouldn't connect them to the east side of the city. They would still be running most trains through midtown Toronto.

The 413 corridor is more than just the Highway as well, FYI. Ontario Hydro is planning a hydro corridor to parallel it as well.

 

[Bojaxs]

Not sure how the 413 corridor would help CPKC, to be honest, as it wouldn't connect them to the east side of the city. They would still be running most trains through midtown Toronto.

Yeah, CP would still use the midtown. A 413 bypass would be purely for the benefit of the Milton line.

I think a CP train traveling around Brampton would be quicker than currently having their trains go all the way down to the Junction and then travel north along Islington towards CPKC's Intermodal yard. Sorry, don't know the name of the sub that travels North-South between the Junction and Bolton. The 413 bypass would reduce the amount of north-bound traffic on this sub, which I believe is a single track. That would be a benefit to CPKC, no?

Is it not possible for MTO, CPKC and Ontario Hydro to work together?

 

[crs1026]

The 413 bypass would reduce the amount of north-bound traffic on this sub, which I believe is a single track. That would be a benefit to CPKC, no?

Not really. CP's existing routing is not capacity challenged. Someone would have to fund any change to the status quo. The amount of freight that comes south on the Mactier and turns west onto the Galt Sub is not such as to incent CP to find other routings. And since the amount of freight that needs to pass through Toronto and on to the east is substantial, there is no incentive to CP to head up the 413.... across the North Toronto is a far more direct route to Oshawa and beyond.

Is it not possible for MTO, CPKC and Ontario Hydro to work together?

Nobody is working together - or apart - until somebody brings money. Drawing lines on a map does not deliver funding.

- Paul

 

[Bojaxs]

CP's existing routing is not capacity challenged. Someone would have to fund any change to the status quo. The amount of freight that comes south on the Mactier and turns west onto the Galt Sub is not such as to incent CP to find other routings. And since the amount of freight that needs to pass through Toronto and on to the east is substantial, there is no incentive to CP to head up the 413.

Maybe there's no justification for such an endeavor today. I wonder what the predictions are for the amount of freight CP will be moving in the near and long term future? I guess my thinking is that with the recent purchase of KCS and now CP's mainline stretching down to Mexico, we may see an increase in trains heading to and from Chicago. Which means more freight traffic on the Galt subdivision/ Milton GO line. More freight trains leaving the Toronto intermodal facility, heading south on Mactier and turning west onto the Galt subdivision coming into conflict with trains coming from Montreal on the midtown corridor looking to head north onto Mactier towards the Toronto intermodal facility.

Maybe the province can set aside some land running parallel to the 413 if CP should change their mind.

Looking at Google maps, CP's track on the Mactier, south of their Intermodal facility is only single track. And with all the work MX is doing on the Kitchener line, it doesn't look like CP has room to setup a second track running parallel to the Kitchener GO line. So if CP is predicting their freight volumes to increase on the Galt subdivision, maybe then a 413 bypass makes more sense???

 

[lenaitch]

Maybe there's no justification for such an endeavor today. I wonder what the predictions are for the amount of freight CP will be moving in the near and long term future? I guess my thinking is that with the recent purchase of KCS and now CP's mainline stretching down to Mexico, we may see an increase in trains heading to and from Chicago. Which means more freight traffic on the Galt subdivision/ Milton GO line. More freight trains leaving the Toronto intermodal facility, heading south on Mactier and turning west onto the Galt subdivision coming into conflict with trains coming from Montreal on the midtown corridor looking to head north onto Mactier towards the Toronto intermodal facility.

Maybe the province can set aside some land running parallel to the 413 if CP should change their mind.

Looking at Google maps, CP's track on the Mactier, south of their Intermodal facility is only single track. And with all the work MX is doing on the Kitchener line, it doesn't look like CP has room to setup a second track running parallel to the Kitchener GO line. So if CP is predicting their freight volumes to increase on the Galt subdivision, maybe then a 413 bypass makes more sense???

I'm not sure how the merged ownership will change traffic all that much. CP has been running to and through Chicago for years. The amount of traffic on Canadian trackage reflects the size of our market and/or traffic in and out of our container ports. Any increase from west coast ports won't likely come through Toronto and I can't see a significant increase from the east coast. Railways have been trying market 'coast-to-coast' service between Asia and Europe to avoid the Panama Canal but I don't know how successful that has been.

If CPKC wants to protect a corridor, that sounds like a problem for Metrolinx, not CPKC.

 

[Bojaxs]

Any increase from west coast ports won't likely come through Toronto and I can't see a significant increase from the east coast. Railways have been trying market 'coast-to-coast' service between Asia and Europe to avoid the Panama Canal but I don't know how successful that has been.

I was discussing the Galt subdivision which goes between Detroit and Montreal. An increase in 53" containers coming up from Mexico and through Chicago. Has nothing to do with ports on the west coast with goods coming from Asia.

 

[lenaitch]

I was discussing the Galt subdivision which goes between Detroit and Montreal.

Well, part of it.

An increase in 53" containers coming up from Mexico and through Chicago.

But that was my point. I don't see a straight line between between Mexico or even Chicago and significantly increased traffic on our side of the border, simply because of the merger. Traffic will increase because we either produce and export more or we consume and import more, or as a result of bridge traffic; i.e. just passing through.

 

[drum118]

As a note for CP track capacity, I watched an CP train departing London on Saturday for the US with 131 cars on it. Long CP trains means less trains are needed to be on the line.

I caught a few CSX trains in the US the were 143 and 155 cars long with most CFCO trains at 100 long.

 

[crs1026]

As a note for CP track capacity, I watched an CP train departing London on Saturday for the US with 131 cars on it. Long CP trains means less trains are needed to be on the line.

I caught a few CSX trains in the US the were 143 and 155 cars long with most CFCO trains at 100 long.

The point that gets overlooked is that long trains use the track differently. There are fewer places where one train can be held to clear another without blocking crossings. So trains need an "end to end" routing. In the case of the Galt Sub, once GO is running its current service the line effectively becomes single track with freights unable to pass each other between Milton and Dixie. That was not the case when the service was first initiated in the 1980's.

Adding even a single counterflow GO train effectively blocks the line for freight in one direction, which is why that isn't done.

What that means for CP is that even the peak service uses a lot of track capacity. CP currently has a roadswitcher that needs to work in the Streetsville area in the mornings - that ties up that second track. It's not true that longer trains gives GO more opportunity....actually it's the reverse. The solution on the Galt Sub is adding more grade separations as much as adding more track.

- Paul

 

[Allandale25]

I see a YouTuber has done a new video on the bypass concept.

 

[Aplus23]

I see a YouTuber has done a new video on the bypass concept.

So did I listen to this correctly. What looked to be a small segment of new dedicated freight tracks would open up an vast amount of existing freight tracks for GO only purposes?

 

[Bojaxs]

So did I listen to this correctly. What looked to be a small segment of new dedicated freight tracks would open up an vast amount of existing freight tracks for GO only purposes?

Except, CN will never allow it. The idea is to allow CP to run trains alongside CN trains in the York sub. CN isn't going to let CP trains run right in front of their Brampton Intermodal facility and their second largest switching yard in Canada. CN often has trains parked right on the York sub when they're building or splitting up trains into the Brampton yard. Once CN finishes building a train, the yard crew parks the head end of the train just west of the Goreway crossing, essentially blocking traffic on the York sub. Then someone from the Brampton yard has to drive the engineer and conductor to the Goreway crossing to get them onto the locomotive.

I doubt CP would be content to let their trains sit and wait while all this is happening.

The "missing link" only works for getting CN trains off the Kitchener line. CN would never agree to the "missing link" if it meant having to share a line/tracks with CPKC.

 

[crs1026]

So did I listen to this correctly. What looked to be a small segment of new dedicated freight tracks would open up an vast amount of existing freight tracks for GO only purposes?

No, while it would only take a small segment of new line from Lisgar to Halwest, it also would take a large amount of additional freight track along the existing CN corridor from Halwest to Scarborough. And then the author suggests even more trackage on that corridor for GO's use.

The video is factually accurate and thorough - but doesn't add any new information to the 83ish pages in this thread (which I hope we don't cycle through without first reading up). And it doesn't speak to what leverage might be necessary to convince a range of stakeholders to change institutionally and buy in. Nor does it identify how to fund in parallel to other projects on the books.

It might well happen around 2050.... but some of us may not plan to be riding very often by then.

- Paul