SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Transportation & Infrastructure (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=166)
-   -   Heavy Rail, Commuter Rail, & Intercity Transportation (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=164316)

twoNeurons Apr 7, 2019 2:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698 (Post 8532016)
Just to be clear, these are maps of "railways in BC", not maps of "BC Rail". "BC Rail" is a crown corporation that used to run trains, but no longer has any track outside of the Roberts Bank subdivision. The former BC Rail track has been leased to CN for 999 years and CN is the entity that operates trains on it.

Why would anyone sign a 999 year lease? Presumably so that you could break the lease? Why not just sell the tracks.

Vin Apr 7, 2019 3:04 AM

See Toronto's busy GO and VIA trains in action....

Video Link


And soon the very busy Quebec City/Windsor corridor will get this VIA rail high speed commuter train: similar to UK's high speed virgin trains or the Great Western Railway high speed commuter trains serving London and beyond for years:

Video Link


Exciting times for Ontarians indeed.


UK's GWR high speed train:

Video Link

Kisai Apr 7, 2019 6:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by twoNeurons (Post 8532312)
Why would anyone sign a 999 year lease? Presumably so that you could break the lease? Why not just sell the tracks.

They probably can not sell the tracks in any legal way. A lease >150 years is effectively "long enough that nobody will be alive will remember it."

Likewise, it probably puts some conditions on the lease, like not tearing the rails up so they can build condos.

It's actually kinda sad how you can see where rail used to run around the lower mainland because of the shape the buildings are along side the previous ROW's, and they were either replaced with pavement, or buildings were allowed to encroach onto them.

Had anyone had the foresight to see that commuter rail might be viable, they would never have torn up all the rail lines. Now it would be too-expensive to re-lay tracks and they may as well go straight to grade-separated rail options.

Migrant_Coconut Apr 7, 2019 7:50 AM

The Province does have an option to buy back all its assets from CN once the sixty years are up, and every sixty years after that... so, rail to Squamish by 2063?

In case nobody else says it, Gordon Campbell can go hump a cactus.

fredinno Apr 7, 2019 5:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut (Post 8532391)
The Province does have an option to buy back all its assets from CN once the sixty years are up, and every sixty years after that... so, rail to Squamish by 2063?

In case nobody else says it, Gordon Campbell can go hump a cactus.

There's no passing Rails on the Squamish ROW, especially in West Van, though. Not to mention, the corridor is used to supplement the congested 2nd Narrows Bridge and the North Shore ports, so you can't conceivably reserve all its capacity for passenger rail (like you can with the Fraser Valley SRY interurban).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kisai (Post 8532381)
They probably can not sell the tracks in any legal way. A lease >150 years is effectively "long enough that nobody will be alive will remember it."

Likewise, it probably puts some conditions on the lease, like not tearing the rails up so they can build condos.

It's actually kinda sad how you can see where rail used to run around the lower mainland because of the shape the buildings are along side the previous ROW's, and they were either replaced with pavement, or buildings were allowed to encroach onto them.

Had anyone had the foresight to see that commuter rail might be viable, they would never have torn up all the rail lines. Now it would be too-expensive to re-lay tracks and they may as well go straight to grade-separated rail options.

That's not true- most of the rough corridors remain, at least of the mainline interurban:

https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-9-Y1yNUNX...52811%2529.gif

Central Park Line: Even though it was converted to the Expo, sections are wide enough that rail can (and did) run on the corridor beside the Expo (though very infrequently).

CN lists it as an SRY-owned rail line for some reason, though the rails have mostly been ripped up at this point: http://cnebusiness.geomapguide.ca/

As CN shows, the ROW is preserved up to Central Park, and actually has sufficient space up to Joyce St, before the interurban goes into a trench (and loses its ROW).

Though I doubt it'd ever be used even if it was preserved unless it was put into a trench (to avoid conflicts with pedestrians around the Expo).


Burnaby Lake: Not preserved, paved over by the Trans-Canada. Not a big loss though, since it follows pretty much exactly the route of the AMTRAK/CN mainline (it would be worse to use, as it skips Brentwood and Production Way-University.

Marpole-Marine Dr: Preserved as a rail line, though not well used.

Arbutus -Steveston:Preserved on Arbutus- there USED to be a rail connection to the ROW in Steveston (not the original one shown here, closer to the water), but Richmond paved it over. :hell:

However, from JN Burnett to Steveston, the ROW has been preserved, so thankfully, we can still line commuter rail on Sea Island to get to Steveston (However, the only possible Richmond Station is Bridgeport, which SHOULD have been built with Spanish solution in mind.:hell:)

Fraser Valley: Kept as a Freight ROW railway with passenger rail ROW.

The thing is, this was probably not much worse than what could have happened (except the Richmond-Steveston Line, Brodie you cheap-ass).


I'd like to point out that the interurbans generally turned into streetcars once they entered Downtown. Most of the rail lines in Downtown have NOT been well-preserved. Granted, you'd need to grade-separate here anyways to avoid congestion (as is being done with the Burrard Inlet Spur, and was the original purpose of the Dunsmuir Tunnel).

Most of the destroyed Railway ROWs were either downtown (Yaletown yards), were horrible to use (GNR Murrayville), or redundant.

Migrant_Coconut Apr 7, 2019 8:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fredinno (Post 8532569)
There's no passing Rails on the Squamish ROW, especially in West Van, though. Not to mention, the corridor is used to supplement the congested 2nd Narrows Bridge and the North Shore ports, so you can't conceivably reserve all its capacity for passenger rail (like you can with the Fraser Valley SRY interurban).

If the Province got it back though, they could twin, maybe triple-track it. What're the odds that CN's not going to just have the one track and sit on it for the next four decades?

swimmer_spe Apr 7, 2019 8:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut (Post 8532747)
If the Province got it back though, they could twin, maybe triple-track it. What're the odds that CN's not going to just have the one track and sit on it for the next four decades?

Or, they could just take it to the Seabus terminal. Then, to get downtown, or to the Skytrain, they take the Seabus.

Migrant_Coconut Apr 7, 2019 8:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe (Post 8532752)
Or, they could just take it to the Seabus terminal. Then, to get downtown, or to the Skytrain, they take the Seabus.

By the time the first sixty-year option comes around, there'll likely be a SkyTrain to North Van as well. Lower Lonsdale's going to be big in the future.

swimmer_spe Apr 7, 2019 8:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut (Post 8532756)
By the time the first sixty-year option comes around, there'll likely be a SkyTrain to North Van as well. Lower Lonsdale's going to be big in the future.

Which makes a WCE from Squamish to Lonsdale make even more sense.

Migrant_Coconut Apr 8, 2019 2:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe (Post 8532760)
Which makes a WCE from Squamish to Lonsdale make even more sense.

Should we do it? Damn straight. Can we do it? Check back in 44 years.

Oh, fun fact - since the sale, CN has donated over $221k to the BC Liberals. I'm not sure whether I'm upset at the bribe, or how low the bribe is.

swimmer_spe Apr 8, 2019 2:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut (Post 8533005)
Should we do it? Damn straight. Can we do it? Check back in 44 years.

Why would it take so long? Why is it that a place that is supposed to be the greenest part of our country cannot expand their commuter rail service?

Migrant_Coconut Apr 8, 2019 2:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe (Post 8533009)
Why would it take so long? Why is it that a place that is supposed to be the greenest part of our country cannot expand their commuter rail service?

Scroll up and reread the last two pages. CN's likely not going to do anything with the ex-BCR track except the occasional freight hauling, so any passenger rail requires a provincial buyback. The first option to do that, courtesy of the Libs, is in 2063.

swimmer_spe Apr 8, 2019 2:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut (Post 8533017)
Scroll up and reread the last two pages. CN's likely not going to do anything with the ex-BCR track except the occasional freight hauling, so any passenger rail requires a provincial buyback. The first option to do that, courtesy of the Libs, is in 2063.

I have been reading the last 2 pages of excuses. Fact is, if the government wanted to run trains, they could. As I see it, there isn't enough public want for it. And that really is sad.

Migrant_Coconut Apr 8, 2019 2:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe (Post 8533028)
I have been reading the last 2 pages of excuses. Fact is, if the government wanted to run trains, they could. As I see it, there isn't enough public want for it. And that really is sad.

With what, a genie and unlimited wishes? Exactly how is Victoria supposed to dictate to CN how to run their track?

Metro-One Apr 8, 2019 2:45 AM

Exactly, it has all been excuses. 25 years, no service expansion despite the fact that the WCE has the highest fare recovery of all transit modes in Metro-Van.

Also just want to correct a few mistakes said on here earlier.

The first phase of the Calgary commuter rail will include the laying down of track. CP along much of that stretch is single tracked and just as within Metro-Van has no interest in sharing freight with more passenger rail. So no, the excuse that we don’t have our own rail being the factor preventing us from running more trains is mute. A new rail bed could be built along the CP corridor between Coquitlam and Maple Ridge (and eventually Mission). Unlike along Burrard Inlet and the Port this stretch is pretty much straight and has a wide ROW, making it relatively inexpensive. Maybe the government could even do this as a partnership with CP, allowing them to use this new track for some freight operations as well!

Even the cities that do own their own rail corridors still lay down new tracks for expansions and upgrades...

Migrant_Coconut Apr 8, 2019 3:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metro-One (Post 8533035)
Exactly, it has all been excuses. 25 years, no service expansion despite the fact that the WCE has the highest fare recovery of all transit modes in Metro-Van.

Also just want to correct a few mistakes said on here earlier.

The first phase of the Calgary commuter rail will include the laying down of track. CP along much of that stretch is single tracked and just as within Metro-Van has no interest in sharing freight with more passenger rail. So no, the excuse that we don’t have our own rail being the factor preventing us from running more trains is mute. A new rail bed could be built along the CP corridor between Coquitlam and Maple Ridge (and eventually Mission). Unlike along Burrard Inlet and the Port this stretch is pretty much straight and has a wide ROW, making it relatively inexpensive. Maybe the government could even do this as a partnership with CP, allowing them to use this new track for some freight operations as well!

Even the cities that do own their own rail corridors still lay down new tracks for expansions and upgrades...

SkyTrain has the highest fare recovery, if anything. I think we both know that.

Okay, Calgary's Banff route isn't owned by the city. But it does require a twin/triple-tracking of about $600-700 million; applying $9M/km to Coq-Port Haney means $117M, or about one SFU Gondola. Once we're done with UBC and Langley and SFU and all the bus expansions, then we can take a serious look at funding a double-tracked WCE segment. In the meantime, the Evergreen and the B-Line to Maple Ridge should do the job just fine.

swimmer_spe Apr 8, 2019 3:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut (Post 8533056)
SkyTrain has the highest fare recovery, if anything. I think we both know that.

Okay, Calgary's Banff route isn't owned by the city. But it does require a twin/triple-tracking of about $600-700 million; applying $9M/km to Coq-Port Haney means $117M, or about one SFU Gondola. Once we're done with UBC and Langley and SFU and all the bus expansions, then we can take a serious look at funding a double-tracked WCE segment; in the meantime, the Evergreen and the B-Line to Maple Ridge should do the job just fine.

How busy is the line between Lonsdale and Squamish? I bet even with the current traffic, it would not need to be twinned to run 5 trains each way. The real challenge would be to find a spot for a layover facility.

Tetsuo Apr 8, 2019 11:00 AM

You know what's funny, down in Florida, the private Florida ECR actually funded private passenger rail service (subsidized via grants) in order to have an excuse and reason to twin/triple their existing freight line and added more grade separation.

Too bad the three raillines in the region are all Class Is and it might not be worth the effort/expense/time to propose such an endeavor here just to get government subsidies and public image help to improve their existing rail lines via the method

fredinno Apr 8, 2019 4:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut (Post 8533005)
Should we do it? Damn straight. Can we do it? Check back in 44 years.

Oh, fun fact - since the sale, CN has donated over $221k to the BC Liberals. I'm not sure whether I'm upset at the bribe, or how low the bribe is.

I don't know the sale was really that bad, considering the rail spur would require significant investment to host both freight and passenger rail, and the Whistler run was way ahead of its time, and never made a dime.

Realistically, I think they may just settle with adding a second track, because there's no reason to not expect freight and commuter rail traffic are going to conflict if we keep the one.
Quote:

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe (Post 8533058)
How busy is the line between Lonsdale and Squamish? I bet even with the current traffic, it would not need to be twinned to run 5 trains each way. The real challenge would be to find a spot for a layover facility.

Layover facilities can be blasted into the mountains up sea-to-sky. Finding a good spot is another story. The bigger concern is putting passing tracks in West Van. ;)

CN lists it as one of their mainlines, so fairly significant?

Migrant_Coconut Apr 8, 2019 6:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fredinno (Post 8533337)
I don't know the sale was really that bad, considering the rail spur would require significant investment to host both freight and passenger rail, and the Whistler run was way ahead of its time, and never made a dime.

Realistically, I think they may just settle with adding a second track, because there's no reason to not expect freight and commuter rail traffic are going to conflict if we keep the one.

Crown Corps don't necessarily have to turn a profit - can you imagine the consequences of TransLink or BC Ferries getting privatized?

That's probably the best option. It's about half a billion though, so it'll likely have to wait.

Quote:

Originally Posted by fredinno (Post 8533337)
Layover facilities can be blasted into the mountains up sea-to-sky. Finding a good spot is another story. The bigger concern is putting passing tracks in West Van. ;)

Yeah, if the B-Line was "the worst thing that ever happened," a WCE is going to cause literal organ failures.


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:12 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.