VIA Rail

[crs1026]

The Guelph situation is easily fixed with some grade separation, at a cost far less than a bypass route. It's just a matter of someone committing to pay for it. For obvious reasons, Guelph isn't going to step up. They will rag the puck until the Province or the Feds need to find the money.

The bypass was floated in a hastily prepared proposal just before a provincial election. The Premier who won the election has demonstrated a talent for forgetting or rewriting election promises post hoc. It may have been real for a day or two, but events have moved on. Fixing up the line that exists is the better place to put one's energies.

- Paul

 

[mdrejhon]

I do indeed think upgrading Kitchener-Guelph would actually be a great way to bring a very quick rail shuttle between the two centres. The corridor is pretty straight for the most part -- it's the condition and grade separations that restrict the train speeds. One difficult section is the tracks that run through the middle of a nearly-residential street (Kent Street) then directly onto an overpass. You're gong to have to trench/bury this line, while solving the Gordon St-Waterloo Ave intersection. Community engagement is going to be notoriously tricky too. The challenges of these grade-separation problems are so incredible that it's almost easier to just build the bypass. But, it should not be the excuse.

Better GO service to Guelph is desired too, and having all-day-2-way shuttle service between Kitchener and Guelph can be pretty quick (a train going back and fourth in 15 minutes) could be a good result of a twin-track grade-separation initiative. A Georgetown Corridor megaproject, but for the Kitchener-Waterloo area.

 

[steveintoronto]

Paul: Agreed on "hastily prepared proposal". Schabas' name has become toxic on a number of "reports" he is responsible for, not least the UPX debacle. "The Guelph situation is easily fixed with some grade separation". The problem for the section affected is that it is already on a steep gradient, and I wrote and erased a paragraph on that in my lengthy post, superseded by the article from the Merc. Since Metrolinx owns that RoW now (the Georgetown to K/W section) and the second track through there has just been lifted last year, it *may* be possible to trench and cover, a la Weston, albeit the neighbourhood will go ballistic. It's a higher-income area, high in granola and yoghurt consumption. They love to talk of progress, but protest when it happens. Ironically I was looking at the trackbed just yesterday, walking through there, wondering if they planned to move the present track over, or lay heavier rail with concrete ties. There's no sign though of the re-asphalting at the many grade level crossings taking that into account. And as much as it's rarely brought up in these forums, and perhaps I'm far more aware of this being an electronic tech, but 25kV AC running that close to adjacent residences is going to cause massive EMI problems. It's bad enough (for anyone old enough to remember AM radio in your car) with streetcar overhead 600V DC (albeit very 'dirty', huge number of spikes, hash and chatter) as to the consequences for near-by receivers, so running that stretch electrified is in itself, hugely problematic, not to mention it's not walled or fenced off, so anyone can wander across the tracks, or walk down them as I used to do with the dogs. There's so many level crossings securing it is nigh impossible.

 

[steveintoronto]

Better GO service to Guelph is desired too, and having all-day-2-way shuttle service between Kitchener and Guelph can be pretty quick (a train going back and fourth in 15 minutes) could be a good result of a twin-track grade-separation initiative. A Georgetown Corridor megaproject, but for the Kitchener-Waterloo area.

Excellent Google satellite view. You can see the rail contractors still on site after lifting the siding (which always struck me as valuable as an independent track into Guelph station to have a shuttle to Cambridge, mentioned, btw, in a report on Guelph Transit some years back).

Better GO service to Guelph is desired too, and having all-day-2-way shuttle service between Kitchener and Guelph can be pretty quick (a train going back and fourth in 15 minutes) could be a good result of a twin-track grade-separation initiative.

That makes perfect sense to you, me and almost everyone on this forum, and probably to most in K/W...but there's a very strange...*odd*...prevailing attitude in Guelph. I'm an outsider, glad to be back in Toronto, I'm right back in the 'action' of what my specialty is, but Guelph loves to *talk* about how progressive and modern they are, until it might impinge their little world. Guelph is the largest village I've ever lived in. I've even had conversations with MPPs on this. Best I stop there....

Guelph is highly resistant to any change that may disturb their zen of perfection in their little lives. And that includes the "Go Slow" order on that stretch of track.

Further to the K-W/Guelph shuttle idea. The new GM of Guelph Transit, a man with excellent ideas and vision, took over the reins of Guelph's exceedingly poorly run bus system (they've actually retracted Metrolinx Co-Fare arrangements). One of his first ideas to promulgate was moving Guelph to a Spine and Grid system. "Council: "No can do". He promoted the idea of 'interconnecting with GRT (the excellent regional bus system for Waterloo Region) Council: "No can do". He suggested re-arranging routing on Sundays to maintain service levels and usage with less drivers: "No can do". Council insisted on slashing service. It might affect the tax-rate.

Guelph is the mistress of her own misfortune when it comes to progress. Bypass! Btw: I expect Mr Meagher (GM Guelph Transit) to leave soon in disgust. He could get a better job elsewhere where change is good, and his talents rewarded.

 

[steveintoronto]

Googling to get more background and reference for my claimed "Bombardier favoured" claim, found it, will post later, but this report is stunning in detail and authority, apologies if it's already been discussed here:

[...][5.2.4 Shannonville-Newcastle Line Consolidation The largest corridor infrastructure project would consolidate and expand the capacity of the parallel CN and CP Montreal-Toronto lines from Shannonville, just east of Belleville, to the east side of Newcastle, at the CP siding known as Lovekin. The result would be a 71-mile, passenger-only line for VIA and an adjacent, freight-only line shared by CN and CP; both would be double-tracked. This project would also allow for the elimination of CP’s route along Belleville’s waterfront, shifting the CP freight traffic to the CN corridor north of downtown and eliminating 18 grade crossings within the city limits. Combined with the triple-tracking VIA funded on the CN Kingston Subdivision as part of the 2007-2012 capital program, this project would greatly reduce freight conflicts and remove several speed restrictions. With the separation of the passenger and freight traffic, and the elimination of all grade crossings, VIA would operate at 110 mph. In combination with the previous improvements to the Kingston Subdivision and those to be undertaken elsewhere under The VIA 1-4-10 Plan, the Shannonville-Newcastle project would greatly assist in reducing VIA’s Toronto-Ottawa and Toronto-Montreal running times by up to 30 minutes, making them much more air competitive.][...]
http://www.transport-action.ca/dc/VIA_1-4-10_Plan_Feb2016.pdf

The report is written by Greg Gormick last year, a name most of you will be familiar with. It details almost all of the points recently discussed in this thread.

 

[nfitz]

The problem for the track through Guelph is the *Go Slow* order on it. It is one step away from street running, having a 1 metre concrete retaining wall each side of the (former) double track RoW with residential (and up-scale!) streets running directly parallel with houses facing the tracks.

If necessary expropriating both sides of that fairly short street will be cheaper than the amount of stuff that they'd have to expropriate for a long curve ...

I didn't read past that in your ridiculously long post. If you can't distill your thoughts into something short, don't bother - I'm not reading an essay!

 

[steveintoronto]

If necessary expropriating both sides of that fairly short street will be cheaper than the amount of stuff that they'd have to expropriate for a long curve ...

I didn't read past that in your ridiculously long post. If you can't distill your thoughts into something short, don't bother - I'm not reading an essay!

No-one asked you to, fitz. I realize it must have been a tad taxing when the answer is just to bulldoze a neighbourhood. That will really get Guelphites onside. I was quoting a study...but silly me, you had the answer all along. Lowest vacancy rate for housing in Ontario, and valuable neighbourhoods bulldozed. It's an odd thing though, the OMB will no longer permit replacing those houses outside of the Places to Grow legislated areas.

 

[nfitz]

No-one asked you to, fitz. I realize it must have been a tad taxing when the answer is just to bulldoze a neighbourhood. That will really get Guelphites onside. I was quoting a study...but silly me, you had the answer all along. Lowest vacancy rate for housing in Ontario, and valuable neighbourhoods bulldozed. It's an odd thing though, the OMB will no longer permit replacing those houses outside of the Places to Grow legislated areas.

I'm simply telling you - what you being a newbie and all, that if you want to be taken seriously, that you avoid massively long essays, and simply distill your point simply.

No one is talking neighbourhoods - a few houses, is all. All low density; nothing unusual - you see similar for road widenings. Don't see why one would want to get Guelphites (is that what they call them?) onside ... there's no approvals necessary from Guelph - and it's not like they are going to be voting for the Cons.

Besides, I'd expect most Guelphites would be objecting if they found out that the railway was going to bypass the city. It's only a few along the tracks that are going to be the issue - but if you expropriate them, they won't be around.

There's other options too. Elevate. Build a tranch. All much cheaper than building a large unnecessarily long curve around the city.

 

[steveintoronto]

Yes, very impressive fitz. Just build a trench, that's all. Having lived right next to the tracks myself, I can tell you it's a well-off neighbourhood in the heart of the old city. And it's a hell of a lot more than "a few houses". Did you look at the map link MD posted?

Meantime, there's other issues:
[CTC is expected to increase capacity on the line, allowing VIA and Metrolinx to increase train frequencies. Metrolinx plans to add two more departures to/from Kitchener by 2016 or 2017. VIA Rail initially planned to add up to three departures when the project was planned some 8 years ago, but delays due to disagreements with freight operator Goderich-Exeter, and the recent addition of GO Transit departures out of Kitchener may curtail VIA's plans.]
http://www.railwayage.com/index.php/communications/guelph-subdivision-upgraded-to-ctc.html

It's a "bottleneck". And it's a stiff gradient coming west out of Guelph. For some odd reason, there's been an emphasis on freight barreling down hills into a city centre lately. And you just want to "trench" after crossing a bridge into an already very steep gradient? If you wish to take the study mentioned to task, then by all means, do so. But shouldn't you at least read it before dismissing it with 'bulldozers are the answer?'

[Don't see why one would want to get Guelphites onside ... there's no approvals necessary from Guelph - and it's not like they are going to be voting for the Cons.]

Fascinating. So Metrolinx (provincial) would be violating Places to Grow (provincial) and other planning legislation (The Planning Act)(Heritage Act)(provincial) to build a trench and destroy housing, some of it historical and heritage protected all because "they're not voting Con anyway?". Btw: Liz Sandals barely managed to squeak in last election. Perhaps you should have a word with Ms Wynne and Del Duca on the matter?

 

[nfitz]

Elevate it then. Obviously they aren't going to build a bypass around the city, so the solution has to be there somewhere. Looked like less than 20 houses to me, when I used to take the train regularly, before the Conservatives axed many of the trains.

 

[ShonTron]

I'm simply telling you - what you being a newbie and all, that if you want to be taken seriously, that you avoid massively long essays, and simply distill your point simply.

No one is talking neighbourhoods - a few houses, is all. All low density; nothing unusual - you see similar for road widenings. Don't see why one would want to get Guelphites (is that what they call them?) onside ... there's no approvals necessary from Guelph - and it's not like they are going to be voting for the Cons.

Besides, I'd expect most Guelphites would be objecting if they found out that the railway was going to bypass the city. It's only a few along the tracks that are going to be the issue - but if you expropriate them, they won't be around.

There's other options too. Elevate. Build a tranch. All much cheaper than building a large unnecessarily long curve around the city.

More houses were taken down along Weber Street in nearby Kitchener for a road widening than what would have to be demolished along Kent Street (likely the south side) to improve speeds along this section, add a second mainline track, and even grade separate 2-3 crossings (Dublin, Glasgow and/or Edinburgh).

 

[dowlingm]

From my recollection and a look at streetview, isn't the issue with why those N-S streets aren't already separated the fairly decent slopes those roads are on?

 

[kEiThZ]

Now imagine how much more difficult it will be for the Trudeau government to dismiss the results of the forthcoming HFR studies if VIA simply asks to be allowed to have the private sector finance the infrastructure for them, which would allow them to free the federal government of its operational subsidies (currently $300 million annually with rising tendency due to deteriorating on-time-performance and trip times driving operational costs while revenues decline, amplified by the incapability to offer reasonable any adequate frequency on CN's infrastructure). Budget 2017 will therefore be the moment of truth for the Trudeau government and I don't see how the government could obstruct HFR if the private investors still want to go ahead with it

Private investment doesn't mean the end of VIA Rail subsidies. Just the end of subsidies for Corridor operations. There's no way private investors will agree to profit sharing which is substantial enough that VIA won't need any subsidies anymore.

Exaggerated expectations, through which what would be the by far most significant milestone in passenger rail renewal since basically WWII

What renewal are we talking about? A $3 million study isn't renewal.

The HFR funding cycle may yet come later.

You guys are far more optimistic than me. I see can kicking and a faint hope that they can maybe attract some private sector capital for the HFR proposal.

But that ignores political realities. What happens if private sector capital does come, and it's for the Peterborough route and VIA will be substantially cutting back on current Corridor ops between Toronto and Ottawa/Montreal? Will that still be a viable plan?

 

[steveintoronto]

Here's the study, argue all you like with it, it's the opinion of the local MPP, Liz Sandals, Education Minister, that the more doable option is to bypass Guelph. She took counsel on the matter before stating that. It's cheaper and better for a number of reasons to build a bypass than gouge a trench on a steep incline through an historical neighbourhood heritage protected adjacent to the noted church that defines Guelph. Weber St in Kitchener doesn't even come close in a number of ways, it's flat land, poor neighbourhood and hardly historical.

http://www.mto.gov.on.ca/english/pu...ontario-high-speed-rail-feasibility-study.pdf

Also interesting:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/kitch...ail-bypass-line-to-boost-go-service-1.3127599

 

[kEiThZ]

Steve,

You're assuming a lot of us haven't read all these studies. You'd probably find virtually every study on HSR posted in this forum (on this thread and others).

As for what happens in Guelph, there's no point debating it at this stage. There's no real concrete proposal. Schabas was a quick and dirty, to help the Liberals get elected. We'll have to see what comes out of Collenette's work.

Personally, I think the situation in Guelph will be decided by what wins the Liberals votes. Though, for the life of me, I can't figure out how the Liberals could actually gain votes bypassing Guelph. That would be an economic blow to Guelph. Why would Guelph voters want that? But if that's what they want....