(11-12-2015, 11:03 AM)kps Wrote: [ -> ]CTC signals seem to be active in Kitchener now, since Wednesday I believe.
(You know what I'd do with CTC? Two trains at the same time, man.)
I figure that cities with CTC can hook that up, given trains dig cities with CTC.
(11-12-2015, 11:03 AM)kps Wrote: [ -> ]CTC signals seem to be active in Kitchener now, since Wednesday I believe.
(You know what I'd do with CTC? Two trains at the same time, man.)
Forgove me for not knowing how, how can you tell CTC signalling is working ?
More GO trains 'not a real solution:' Thalmic CEO Stephen Lake
Quote:"We're talking about this intermediate step to be a big, huge thing to celebrate," he said. "Two-way all-day GO train service, again, is still two-hour train service, which really doesn't help the whole link between Toronto. You might as well hop on the 401 for a two-hour drive."
"We need trains that are going to be a reasonable time to get back and forth. Four hours each day if you're commuting back and forth, that's crazy."
I'm inclined to agree with him. Four hours may be tolerable for occasional visits but it's got to be a great hardship to regular commuters, especially if they need another half hour each to get to the train, then get to their office, then get back to the train, then get home. That's six hours a day.
Quote:Lake's comments come after Kitchener Centre Liberal MPP Daiene Vernile said Monday that the two-way, all-day GO train service originally promised by the Liberals by 2019, likely wouldn't be a reality until at least 2026 because of an ongoing dispute between the province and the Canadian National Railway over the use of company-owned track.
This is unacceptable. Why can't the province use expropriation, even just the threat of it, to force CN's hand?
Quote:Lake said the province needs a reasonable goal that's what he calls "a real solution."
"That goal should be real solution which is not two-way, all-day GO. It's how do we have a reasonably high speed link from Toronto to Kitchener-Waterloo, two-way, in a reasonable time frame."
ISTM that once we have "a reasonably high speed link from Toronto to Kitchener-Waterloo" the incremental cost of offering all-day vs. rush hours only would be small. The issue is getting priority on the track.
I believe the province can't expropriate the CN corridor because CN is federally regulated, and therefore rail corridors aren't included in the province's power of expropriation. I doubt that's the issue though, I'm sure there's some number of billions that would get CN to move, it's just that that number is far larger than anyone wants to pay.
I agree and disagree with what Stephen Lake is saying. He's right that two hours each way is unacceptable, he's wrong with the conclusion that GO trains are therefore bad. GO trains are fine, they're capable of making it to Toronto in an hour, it's the track that's not.
It's also silly to compare a 2 hour GO trip with a 2 hour car trip.
There are lots of times the 2 hour train trip is going to be significantly better.
(11-18-2015, 02:17 PM)taylortbb Wrote: [ -> ]I believe the province can't expropriate the CN corridor because CN is federally regulated, and therefore rail corridors aren't included in the province's power of expropriation. I doubt that's the issue though, I'm sure there's some number of billions that would get CN to move, it's just that that number is far larger than anyone wants to pay.
We're missing a honeymoon opportunity with Justin. Moreover Kathleen has a special relationship with Justin. Both see the need to improve transportation infrastructure and to promote high technology in the KW-Toronto corridor. What are we waiting for?
It seems to me that Daiene and her new fellow federal MPs, including a minister, should stop all the "buts," get off their butts, and get improved commuter rail service back on track.
Quote:I agree and disagree with what Stephen Lake is saying. He's right that two hours each way is unacceptable, he's wrong with the conclusion that GO trains are therefore bad. GO trains are fine, they're capable of making it to Toronto in an hour, it's the track that's not.
The issue isn't that "GO trains" are bad. After all GO trains on other lines do move at acceptable speeds and do provide a viable commuter service.
The issue is access to tracks, whether we lean on CN or build our own set. It seems ludicrous that resolving this fundamental issue is going to need another decade. We can't wait. And it makes no sense to spend more $millions on short-term stop-gap measures like expanding the 401 that probably won't be effective in any case.
(11-18-2015, 02:10 PM)ookpik Wrote: [ -> ]Quote:Lake's comments come after Kitchener Centre Liberal MPP Daiene Vernile said Monday that the two-way, all-day GO train service originally promised by the Liberals by 2019, likely wouldn't be a reality until at least 2026 because of an ongoing dispute between the province and the Canadian National Railway over the use of company-owned track.
This is unacceptable. Why can't the province use expropriation, even just the threat of it, to force CN's hand?
(11-18-2015, 02:17 PM)taylortbb Wrote: [ -> ]I believe the province can't expropriate the CN corridor because CN is federally regulated, and therefore rail corridors aren't included in the province's power of expropriation. I doubt that's the issue though, I'm sure there's some number of billions that would get CN to move, it's just that that number is far larger than anyone wants to pay.
taylorbb is correct. It's a constitutional division of powers issue. 92(10)a of the Constitution Act excludes inter-provincial railroads from provincial jurisdiction. The province does likely need the federal government's help on this one. Although as mentioned above, we've never had a closer aligned set of governments in Ottawa and Toronto. Let's make it happen!
Are there options aside from expropriation?
I'm not necessarily against it, but it seems like a poor message to private companies that might be considering investing in large scale infrastructure projects.
HSR likely will need a new line. Why expropriate an old line which will need to be replaced anyways?
(11-18-2015, 03:55 PM)SammyOES Wrote: [ -> ]Are there options aside from expropriation?
I said "expropriation,
even just the threat of it." There's also the principle of "moral suasion" that Ottawa uses to persuade chartered banks to do things they may not be keen to do followed by legislation if that's not sufficiently persuasive.
As for 92(10)a of the Constitution Act presumably Ottawa could enact legislation that would compel CN to improve access to passenger rail operators.
Quote:it seems like a poor message to private companies that might be considering investing in large scale infrastructure projects
I don't know the history of this rail line but if federal money was used to build it then Ottawa has a stronger case in exerting pressure on its current owners on how it's used.
A similar situation exists with telephone lines. Although Bell owns them, they got federal subsidies many years ago when they put them up. The CRTC uses that in part to justify forcing Bell (and the other telcos) to make those lines available to third-party carriers like Primus and TekSavvy on a tariffed basis.
So, admittedly naively, I don't see why Ottawa couldn't make CN "play nice" with MetroLinx, at least in principle. If so, just the threat of their intention to get involved might be enough to take Queen's Park more seriously.
(11-18-2015, 04:05 PM)BuildingScout Wrote: [ -> ]HSR likely will need a new line. Why expropriate an old line which will need to be replaced anyways?
My question, related to this one, is whether there is room for a second, parallel, set of tracks on the CN right-of-way? Or is it too narrow to be able to add more capacity? If there is room, then it should be possible to negotiate.
ookpik, that all makes sense.
Although, I think the issue might be that its not possible for CN and metrolinx to play nicely (in terms of getting what they both 'need') in the medium-long term.
(11-18-2015, 05:24 PM)tomh009 Wrote: [ -> ] (11-18-2015, 04:05 PM)BuildingScout Wrote: [ -> ]HSR likely will need a new line. Why expropriate an old line which will need to be replaced anyways?
My question, related to this one, is whether there is room for a second, parallel, set of tracks on the CN right-of-way? Or is it too narrow to be able to add more capacity? If there is room, then it should be possible to negotiate.
The way I understand it the CP line isn't straight enough for HSR.
(11-18-2015, 05:56 PM)BuildingScout Wrote: [ -> ] (11-18-2015, 05:24 PM)tomh009 Wrote: [ -> ]My question, related to this one, is whether there is room for a second, parallel, set of tracks on the CN right-of-way? Or is it too narrow to be able to add more capacity? If there is room, then it should be possible to negotiate.
The way I understand it the CP line isn't straight enough for HSR.
It isn't. But it's straight enough for GO, if GO has dedicated track.