Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthVader_1961
Options based on VIA and CN not having to share tracks, options include:
1 - VIA rail could run faster on tracks it did not have to share with existing rolling stock.
2 - you could rip up existing VIA rail tracks and do the whole high speed rail in the corridor that VIA currently uses.
|
lol at least you tried and followed up with “options”. With that said:
Option 1 gains you 10-15% efficiency and speed with very substantival costs to reroute the cargo network - which your fellow NIMBYs would just as well protest against
Option 2 - shut down rail travel in the busiest corridor of Canada for years to all Canadians to perform an upgrade in place. I’m sure you can see the selfish problematic approach to this. Not to mention the existing corridor is not wide enough, or straight enough to accommodate HSR…
Appreciate the deep thinking on these options!
I too was in lanark /Frontenac county last week and saw the many anti alto signs as well as a protest on the highway near Westport. As noted above, some rural v urban divide. The greater good for many is obvious and well outweighs the bad. This how democratic societies operate and progress.
The point above about well informed and uninformed stands out. Hearing the protesters arguments and signs on the weekend makes it very clear that they are driven by fear mongering and NIMBY self entitlements.
I have some (little) patience for nimbys in general as it relates to urban development and high rises near SFH. But the level of selfish entitlement on a nation building transportation project is just one bridge too far me.
The route shall be where it is optimal, and we shall take into account property rights and easements to the best of our collectivity abilities. Beyond that no one deserves a personal veto card on a project of this scale and significance… IMHO…
Threaded Mode