Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftCoaster
1. CP should be compensating the city  You just don't get it do you. Why in the world would they trench, they have ROW already. They can sit their trains in the way of the street all they want, they don't care. They can double track it much more easily, quickly, and cost effectively without trenching it, so their wanting to double the track is irrelevant.
2. There is only 259 m from Venables/prior to the shunting yard. 600m takes you all the way to Grant St, halfway through the yard. Once again why would CN go for this?
3. So Union? Are we just blocking off the road here too? If not the trench now needs to extend as far north as Raymuir, causing yet another road conflict, Should we shut down Raymuir too? How many roads are we closing so we can build this super easy trench?
All this to save a right turn in the road, when the current configuration forces you to take a hard turn at either Clark or Commercial already! |
(1) And does the city enjoy having the trains sit in there and impede traffic flow? Doesn't the city want something of a win-win? I thought a meeting between feds and local government to solve problems is what governments are supposed to do?
(2) No, it won't be halfway into their yard: it would encroach the yard at around William Street but not halfway. Plus since the trench is relatively narrow, there is still ample storage space on both sides of the yard.
(3) Union is close enough to Venables to not render any longer trench. Look at the map! The two streets are only 55m apart.
. So yeah, no additional roads will be closed don't be so dramatic.
(4) This is not to save just one right turn, but a couple of turns, and also to save the costs of having a new road bridge while other roads still have on-grade railway crossings that can be made worse once double tracking occurs.
Threaded Mode