Rural Commuter Rail

[White Pine]

The thing that makes commuter rail awkward in Ottawa is that there's no central point to drop them off. What they could do, maybe is make the quebec tracks dead end at Bayview, and make that a mini hub, and end the rest at VIA, which isn't so different than the MOOSE proposal. It wouldn't really work now, but once the Confederation line is in, it would actually work quite well. This is where we need a train to the airport. I have this fantasy (almost impossible now I admit) of taking a train from Pembroke to Ottawa, and the O-train to the airport, and then out! Of course there is the small matter of the Pembroke tracks being gone.

I do think, though that Commuter rail along the VIA line would mean adding a lot of extra track. And I imagine that it (commuter rail) must have the support of the Provincial government at least.

[Aylmer]

Very much agreed about the lack of a central station - once the confederation line joins together Bayview and Tremblay, it won't really be that much of an issue anymore. In fact, if they were to go with low-floor tram-trains like in Den Haag, you could even have them run through the tunnel as LRT and operate as diesel trains after that.

Of course, my own fantasy is that they build a cut&cover rail tunnel under the Nicholas to get to a shallow underground station at the old Union Station, allowing passengers on regional and intercity rail to entre the centre of Ottawa directly.

But until then, a transfer to a world-class quasi-metro system will have to do.

Originally Posted by White Pine

I do think, though that Commuter rail along the VIA line would mean adding a lot of extra track. And I imagine that it (commuter rail) must have the support of the Provincial government at least.

Actually, VIA agreed to share the tracks a couple of years ago, so I'd imagine that, if anything, only a passing track or two would be necessary in additional tracks.

[1overcosc]

Another thing that complicates commuter rail is that unfortunately of the all the rural towns in the area, the ones growing fastest--Rockland, Embrun/Russell, Kemptville, Carleton Place--are the ones that require new/restored tracks. Ideally we'd refocus growth on those communities that are already on existing rail tracks (like Casselman, Smiths Falls, etc.) but good luck doing that.

[1overcosc]

I think there'd be some merit to attempting to restore the old ONY rail corridor out to Cornwall as a commuter line. Cornwall's got 50,000 people and a high unemployment rate with a depressed local economy. More and more people from there are commuting to Ottawa as a result. You actually see substantial traffic congestion on the 138 now. A fast commuter line to Ottawa could get lots of customers. Looking longer-term, if the line was two-way and accepted freight as well, it could even lead to a revitalization of industry in both Ottawa & Cornwall as it could give Ottawa industry easy access to a seaport in Cornwall.

Two things sweeten the deal:
1) You could service Embrun & Russell along the way--they have a combined population of about 10,000 and growing
2) Travel time would be very competitive with driving, as the ONY line travels in more or less a straight line to Cornwall, whereas the highway route (417->138) is circuitous:



A quick examination of the ONY corridor with Google Maps shows me that most of the route could be restored with little difficulty, as almost all of it is intact, save for some sections near Embrun that seem to have been completely obliterated (but a new corridor could easily be punched in through the farmers fields). Highway 417 crosses it several times as it exits Ottawa (it was built after the ONY was removed) but that could fixed by rerouting the ONY to always stay on the south/west side of the 417.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

I think there'd be some merit to attempting to restore the old ONY rail corridor out to Cornwall as a commuter line. Cornwall's got 50,000 people and a high unemployment rate with a depressed local economy. More and more people from there are commuting to Ottawa as a result. You actually see substantial traffic congestion on the 138 now. A fast commuter line to Ottawa could get lots of customers. Looking longer-term, if the line was two-way and accepted freight as well, it could even lead to a revitalization of industry in both Ottawa & Cornwall as it could give Ottawa industry easy access to a seaport in Cornwall.

Two things sweeten the deal:
1) You could service Embrun & Russell along the way--they have a combined population of about 10,000 and growing
2) Travel time would be very competitive with driving, as the ONY line travels in more or less a straight line to Cornwall, whereas the highway route (417->138) is circuitous:



A quick examination of the ONY corridor with Google Maps shows me that most of the route could be restored with little difficulty, as almost all of it is intact, save for some sections near Embrun that seem to have been completely obliterated (but a new corridor could easily be punched in through the farmers fields). Highway 417 crosses it several times as it exits Ottawa (it was built after the ONY was removed) but that could fixed by rerouting the ONY to always stay on the south/west side of the 417.

When Greyhound had to recently cut service to Cornwall (I think to one round trip a day), how is it possible to relay track that distance and restart passenger rail service? I don't believe there is much commuter traffic between the two cities.

This is the dilemma regarding commuter rail in general. None of the surrounding towns have sufficient size to make commuter rail viable. Rockland has demonstrated to be the most likely candidate with several commuter bus trips but is the most difficult to service because not even the former rail right of way still exists.

In order to consider commuter rail service a possibility, good quality commuter bus service must prove to be viable and growing over several years.

[1overcosc]

Commuter rail service != commuter bus service. They are very different things. It has been proven time and time again that the former has much higher ridership potential than the latter. There are lots of people who would take a Cornwall-Ottawa train but would never even consider taking a bus. The same logic applies to all the rural areas actually. Rail bias is a very powerful thing when you're talking about longer distance commutes.

A Cornwall-Ottawa train could make the trip in 45 minutes. Driving takes 60 minutes even without rush hour traffic factored in, and the commuter buses run by Greyhound and Delaney take 90 minutes.

There is substantial commuter demand between the two cities, as traffic congestion on the 138 demonstrates.

I do agree that lots of this is hypothesizing, and there is no guarantee of substantial ridership (although I do believe it's likely), for a large cost. For this reason, I'd say the ONY reinstatement should, as a first phase, restore service only as far as Embrun. If that proves successful enough the line could then be extended to Cornwall.

Service to Embrun-Russell would definitely be viable, as they have 4500 Ottawa-bound commuters of whom 300 already take transit.

[Aylmer]

Exactly the point I wanted to make: people who might ride the rails might very well not take the bus for practical reasons and cultural, irrational reasons:

Practical: the bus uses all the same, congested infrastructure as you would use with your car, but it has the extra annoyance of not beginning or ending exactly where you'd like it to as well as stopping along the way. Rail, on the other hand, has its own, dedicated infrastructure, so it can be more reliable and, in most cases, faster than a commuter bus.

Emotional/Irrational: As things are, there's less 'stigma' associated with rail infrastructure than with buses. I hate it when people tell me that they'd never take a bus, but that they would take a train because, in my opinion, a seat is a seat. But it just is the way things are: many a paper has shown that, given the option, more people will take rail than a bus even if it isn't any faster - 34% to 43% in fact if the service is equivalent. And in this case, we can assume that not needing to go through 417 or 416 traffic will make it more than equivalent.

Bonus! Development: Though I don't have any studies off-hand to quote, I do know that rail, if well-done (i.e: not surrounded by seas of parking in god-forsaken areas) structures development much better than regular buses do (and it's hard to justify building BRT through these small communities). Towns like Richmond, Casselman and Carp might be small now, but we live in a reality of urban growth here in Canada and they will grow along with us. Without rail infrastructure to condense and concentrate that development, it will sprawl in subdivisions built around the automobile.
Just as it's wiser to provide the trellis before the vines grown, it's better to provide structuring elements before the development happens.

And plus, the rails are there. All you need are a handful of Talent-type DMU trains, some basic platforms and coordination with VIA and CN and bob's your uncle. In this day and age (am I old enough to be able to say that?) of high wages and work standards, it's often hard to justify the cost of building new rails, but these are ours for the taking. So let's.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

Exactly the point I wanted to make: people who might ride the rails might very well not take the bus for practical reasons and cultural, irrational reasons:

Practical: the bus uses all the same, congested infrastructure as you would use with your car, but it has the extra annoyance of not beginning or ending exactly where you'd like it to as well as stopping along the way. Rail, on the other hand, has its own, dedicated infrastructure, so it can be more reliable and, in most cases, faster than a commuter bus.

Emotional/Irrational: As things are, there's less 'stigma' associated with rail infrastructure than with buses. I hate it when people tell me that they'd never take a bus, but that they would take a train because, in my opinion, a seat is a seat. But it just is the way things are: many a paper has shown that, given the option, more people will take rail than a bus even if it isn't any faster - 34% to 43% in fact if the service is equivalent. And in this case, we can assume that not needing to go through 417 or 416 traffic will make it more than equivalent.

Bonus! Development: Though I don't have any studies off-hand to quote, I do know that rail, if well-done (i.e: not surrounded by seas of parking in god-forsaken areas) structures development much better than regular buses do (and it's hard to justify building BRT through these small communities). Towns like Richmond, Casselman and Carp might be small now, but we live in a reality of urban growth here in Canada and they will grow along with us. Without rail infrastructure to condense and concentrate that development, it will sprawl in subdivisions built around the automobile.
Just as it's wiser to provide the trellis before the vines grown, it's better to provide structuring elements before the development happens.

And plus, the rails are there. All you need are a handful of Talent-type DMU trains, some basic platforms and coordination with VIA and CN and bob's your uncle. In this day and age (am I old enough to be able to say that?) of high wages and work standards, it's often hard to justify the cost of building new rails, but these are ours for the taking. So let's.

I don't buy this. A lot of the rail preference relates to cultural and racial issues specific to the United States. I will agree that rail will get better ridership if it actually delivers the same or faster service than a bus. That is only natural, but if we can generate only enough ridership to run one commuter bus from Embrun each day, it seems to me a big risk to invest in new rail without massive losses per passenger. Also remember that Embrun may have a population of only 5,000. What is the real potential market for commuter rail? Even if the majority commute into Ottawa, how many are actually travelling downtown? I see the need to build ridership with buses first to demonstrate an adequate demand for a commuter train.

I also don't buy that this will significantly change development patterns in rural communities served by commuter rail. Commuter Rail is not designed to greatly affect travel patterns. It is there to give a commute option but the vast majority of transportation will still be by private vehicle. We are only talking about one or two round trips per day.

I am no expert on such things, but would Talent type trains be allowed to share the same track as Via Rail heavy passenger trains? Aren't there strict safety rules concerning the mixing of heavy and light rail trains?

My comment about the viability of commuter rail from the rural Ottawa area relates to comparisons with Toronto where each commuter rail line serves 100,000s of population. I believe the same applies to Montreal and most North American cities that offer this kind of service. How can we succeed with a population base of perhaps 25,000 on a commuter rail line especially when we lack a downtown rail station?

I recently saw a comment that the commuter rail service in southern Florida only attracts 15,000 passengers per day with trains operating all day. This is with a population base likely exceeding 1,000,000 in the rail corridor. They also lack a downtown rail station, and require transfers to reach downtown. Don't kid yourself if that doesn't impact ridership.

I think there is good reason why there has been a lot of talk about commuter rail but no action. The market simply isn't there at the present time.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I don't buy this. A lot of the rail preference relates to cultural and racial issues specific to the United States. I will agree that rail will get better ridership if it actually delivers the same or faster service than a bus. That is only natural, but if we can generate only enough ridership to run one commuter bus from Embrun each day, it seems to me a big risk to invest in new rail without massive losses per passenger. Also remember that Embrun may have a population of only 5,000. What is the real potential market for commuter rail? Even if the majority commute into Ottawa, how many are actually travelling downtown? I see the need to build ridership with buses first to demonstrate an adequate demand for a commuter train.

I also don't buy that this will significantly change development patterns in rural communities served by commuter rail. Commuter Rail is not designed to greatly affect travel patterns. It is there to give a commute option but the vast majority of transportation will still be by private vehicle. We are only talking about one or two round trips per day.

I am no expert on such things, but would Talent type trains be allowed to share the same track as Via Rail heavy passenger trains? Aren't there strict safety rules concerning the mixing of heavy and light rail trains?

My comment about the viability of commuter rail from the rural Ottawa area relates to comparisons with Toronto where each commuter rail line serves 100,000s of population. I believe the same applies to Montreal and most North American cities that offer this kind of service. How can we succeed with a population base of perhaps 25,000 on a commuter rail line especially when we lack a downtown rail station?

I recently saw a comment that the commuter rail service in southern Florida only attracts 15,000 passengers per day with trains operating all day. This is with a population base likely exceeding 1,000,000 in the rail corridor. They also lack a downtown rail station, and require transfers to reach downtown. Don't kid yourself if that doesn't impact ridership.

I think there is good reason why there has been a lot of talk about commuter rail but no action. The market simply isn't there at the present time.

There's actually 4 commuter bus trips from Embrun-Russell each day on the Russell Transpo system, and it has a 75% farebox recovery rate with about 180 monthly pass holders. There's also a large number of people from the Embrun area who use the Vars Park & Ride on OC Transpo route 232. In total, according to Statscan there are 340 people there who take transit to work. Pretty impressive for a high-income exurban area with a total population of only 15,000.

The transit demand is there, and rail could grow it.

[Aylmer]

Almost all S-Bahn tracks in Germany are also used by heavy rail and I don't personally see how it would be such a big problem, but I can't pretend to know much about rail regulation.

As for ridership, there are several systems with daily ridership under 2 000, including one in Denton with all-day service at only 1 900 trips per day. I think that there are at least 950 people from Alexandria, Maxville, Casselman and Vars and definitely more from Smith Falls, Richmond and Barrhaven; Arnprior Carp and North Kanata; Wakefield, Chelsea and Ironside; and Buckingham, Masson-Angers, l'aéroparc, Cheval Blanc and Templeton.

Even at 900 people per rush hour, that's still 8 full Talents per direction, or one every 15 minutes for a two-hour period. It's not that ludicrous an idea.
And I hate to bring out the history card, but there was a time when there were 15 daily train departures from Ottawa to the then-village of Maniwaki. We can probably permit ourselves to aspire to do half that between areas four times larger, even with the competition of the automobile.

I do agree that the transfer is unfortunate, but I would call it fatal either. At the headways of OLRT, you probably won't have to break your stride in the 100m from platform to platform.

_____________________________________________________________________


But more than that, I think that this is an important step towards the future: we know that people are driving less as a whole and that the same group of young adults who had a licence ownership rate of over 98% in 1986 has now dropped below 70% and their driving rates don't seem to be bouncing back with age.
In an urban world and a very urban country, it is essential for these towns to have easy access to urban centres. For the longest time and even now, that means highways and roads, but culture, economy and environment are all telling us that we have to find some alternative means because we won't have the money, the luxury nor the desire to continue driving in the coming years and decades.

Areas that will put all their eggs in the automobile basket will probably go the way of the old mining and lumber towns, realizing that something will have to change decades after something should have been done.

Places that take the step of seeking out alternatives now will remain relevant and healthy places, able to attract the investment, the population and the workforce needed in a healthy town or city by means of transportation.

It might seem a small little toy train now, but you should never underestimate the power of transportation to transform a place or define an era as it has so many times and will continue to do.

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

Of course, my own fantasy is that they build a cut&cover rail tunnel under the Nicholas to get to a shallow underground station at the old Union Station, allowing passengers on regional and intercity rail to entre the centre of Ottawa directly.

*sigh*

I wish Ottawa and the government showed some leadership and started implementing such a plan.

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Another thing that complicates commuter rail is that unfortunately of the all the rural towns in the area, the ones growing fastest--Rockland, Embrun/Russell, Kemptville, Carleton Place--are the ones that require new/restored tracks. Ideally we'd refocus growth on those communities that are already on existing rail tracks (like Casselman, Smiths Falls, etc.) but good luck doing that.

You know, we could also include our "Big Three" suburbs in such a scheme. In a lot of cases, the tracks or at least the ROW is there, and could take some pressure off the Transitway.

There's very little stopping us from putting some time, money, and effort into a commuter rail pilot project similar to the O-Train. You could even start it small, going only to places where the tracks currently exist, as well as putting a handful of stops in the Big Three suburbs and inner city. Then, expand it according to demand and viability. Slowly grow the system, the way we've been doing with the O-Train.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Jamaican-Phoenix

*sigh*

I wish Ottawa and the government showed some leadership and started implementing such a plan.



You know, we could also include our "Big Three" suburbs in such a scheme. In a lot of cases, the tracks or at least the ROW is there, and could take some pressure off the Transitway.

There's very little stopping us from putting some time, money, and effort into a commuter rail pilot project similar to the O-Train. You could even start it small, going only to places where the tracks currently exist, as well as putting a handful of stops in the Big Three suburbs and inner city. Then, expand it according to demand and viability. Slowly grow the system, the way we've been doing with the O-Train.

Before we ever consider going beyond the city limits, we better first consider running trains on existing tracks within the city. It gets a lot more complicated going beyond the city limits concerning funding. In the GTA, this is provincial jurisdiction and of course that is why they have Metrolinx.

As I have said, build demand first to justify rail infrastructure and this will be up to the individual municipalities if they really want to make a go of this.

As far as trains to Maniwaki, I am very surprised that there were 15 trains per day. I find that hard to believe. However, I do know that there was only one or two passengers on the train when it was cancelled in the early 1960s. Anybody who has taken the steam train to Wakefield knows that it will be very difficult to make a train competitive because of the curvy route and the tremendous number of level crossings to give access to private residences.

I am not pooh-poohing the idea. I am just being realistic.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Before we ever consider going beyond the city limits, we better first consider running trains on existing tracks within the city. It gets a lot more complicated going beyond the city limits concerning funding. In the GTA, this is provincial jurisdiction and of course that is why they have Metrolinx.

As I have said, build demand first to justify rail infrastructure and this will be up to the individual municipalities if they really want to make a go of this.

As far as trains to Maniwaki, I am very surprised that there were 15 trains per day. I find that hard to believe. However, I do know that there was only one or two passengers on the train when it was cancelled in the early 1960s. Anybody who has taken the steam train to Wakefield knows that it will be very difficult to make a train competitive because of the curvy route and the tremendous number of level crossings to give access to private residences.

I am not pooh-poohing the idea. I am just being realistic.

Major portions of the Hull-Wakefield also appear to be quite prone to washouts during heavy rain storms. It's happened twice in recent years and repairs have been slow and costly.

There is also talk at the moment of a steam train route from Gatineau to Montebello. Not sure if this is to replace the Wakefield line or if it will be a second route.

[Aylmer]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Before we ever consider going beyond the city limits, we better first consider running trains on existing tracks within the city. It gets a lot more complicated going beyond the city limits concerning funding. In the GTA, this is provincial jurisdiction and of course that is why they have Metrolinx.

As I have said, build demand first to justify rail infrastructure and this will be up to the individual municipalities if they really want to make a go of this.

As far as trains to Maniwaki, I am very surprised that there were 15 trains per day. I find that hard to believe. However, I do know that there was only one or two passengers on the train when it was cancelled in the early 1960s. Anybody who has taken the steam train to Wakefield knows that it will be very difficult to make a train competitive because of the curvy route and the tremendous number of level crossings to give access to private residences.

I am not pooh-poohing the idea. I am just being realistic.

Well, it should be noted that the steam train is a sightseeing tourist train - its goal is the trip much more than actually getting somewhere.

As for Maniwaki, I wish I could find the picture - if I find it, I'll post it here.

The complexities of intermunicipal operations is why I'm optimistic about private solutions such as MOOSE, though I'm weary about the lack of requirement of transparency or accountability. However, it doesn't require much cooperation between governments in the same way that a municipal operation would.

And I still very much disagree with the idea of people first, infrastructure later. I dislike reactionary decisions where a situation must become a problem before we do anything about it. As the saying goes, a stich in time is worth nine. If we continue to wait for dense, walkable development to pop up along neat corridors which might, maaaybe be used for transit eventually, we'll be waiting until it's too late and we'll be stuck with having to figure out how to efficiently get people from their sprawling subdivisions to somewhere when they can no longer drive.
I'm a strong believer in prevention and providing a corridor of sustainable, efficient and cost-effective transportation now is the best way of solving a great deal of today's problems (lack of access, congestion, sprawl, automobile-dependence, etc.) all while positioning ourselves advantageously in order to solve the problems of tomorrow (high driving costs, energy insecurity, incapacity to maintain extensive automobile infrastructure, unpopularity of car commuting, etc.).

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Before we ever consider going beyond the city limits, we better first consider running trains on existing tracks within the city. It gets a lot more complicated going beyond the city limits concerning funding. In the GTA, this is provincial jurisdiction and of course that is why they have Metrolinx.

True, but this is why we would (theoretically) start a pilot project and work with various municipalities to determine implementation. Basically, have the-Train, and two initial lines; Kanata North and Barrhaven. One or two stops in each of those major suburbs, and a couple within the greenbelt with the line ending at Tremblay Via Rail Station. If this works and other areas/municipalities express interest, then you expand it accordingly.

Next thing you know, you can secure provincial and federal funding on top of municipal and private investment and the lines grows outward as is easier to maintain than roads and won't affect road traffic except in a positive manner. As far as I can tell, the most likely cases for expansion would be into Quebec (I recall Pontiac and Quyon being interested in commuter rail) and places like Arnprior and Smiths Falls.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

Almost all S-Bahn tracks in Germany are also used by heavy rail and I don't personally see how it would be such a big problem, but I can't pretend to know much about rail regulation.

Short answer: European rail regulation is intended to allow things to happen and enable economic activity. Canadian regulation is intended to prevent and inhibit. And it works!

[rocketphish]

Pontiac loses bid to buy, save CN line through Ottawa Valley

STEPHEN UHLER, QMI Agency
First posted: Thursday, December 05, 2013 11:05 AM EST | Updated: Thursday, December 05, 2013 11:11 AM EST

PEMBROKE - Pontiac County has lost its court challenge to keep the CN Rail tracks in place, but will fight on.

Late last month, a Quebec Superior Court judge ruled against MRC Pontiac in its effort to get a permanent injunction to prevent the railway from ripping up 40 miles of track running through the West Quebec municipality.

Back in March, the county had passed a bylaw which designated the land within the railway's vicinity for "rail use only," which made it illegal to remove or alter the rails within its municipal borders, and enforced that in August with a blockade when CN crews were spotted digging up the lines.

Quebec Superior Court Judge Martin Bédard ruled the bylaw overstepped the MRC's jurisdiction, adding CN followed proper procedure under the federal Transportation Act.

The MRC voted to appeal that ruling at its Nov. 27 council meeting.

Across Eastern Ontario and into Quebec, both CN and CP railways have been dismantling the tracks along what they feel are underused railway corridors, shipping the steel rails out west and other places where the demand is higher. This followed earlier efforts to sell the tracks.

MRC Pontiac, which has been struggling to rebound since the forestry crisis in 2008, feels losing the rails would be another blow which they can not afford to take.

Former Pontiac County Warden Michael McCrank has stated he sees the railway as an key factor in attracting business to the area and providing a way to ship goods to larger centres. The rail would allow industry in the Pontiac to transport goods to Ottawa in 45 minutes, and from there, give them access to North American markets.

It is feared if CN is successful in removing the rails, it would be a death sentence for local communities because businesses won't be able to survive without effective transportation out of the community.

http://www.ottawasun.com/2013/12/05/pontiac-loses-bid-to-buy-save-cn-line-through-ottawa-valley

[lrt's friend]

I think the fight to save the rail line is pointless. The reason why CN and CP have wanted to lift rail lines in the Ottawa valley is because there are simply no customers left. If rail service was so important then why aren't companies using it?

I realize that this may compromise the future in some respects but no business can continue with zero customers.

Realistically, commuter rail to the Pontiac is not likely to be successful either because of the very low population base.

If the day comes when driving becomes unaffordable for a large segment of the population, then there will be an economic incentive to rebuild the rail lines.

[rocketphish]

Ottawa places potential purchase of railway line on hold

By Carys Mills, Ottawa Citizen January 29, 2014 7:01 PM

Buying part of a railway line between Ontario and Quebec isn’t worth it for Ottawa, according to city staff, so Ottawa will hold off on a potential purchase until the railway is decommissioned.

After a surplus portion of the Beachburg Subdivision line was slated to be ripped by the Canadian National Railway, Ottawa’s transportation committee wanted to know how much it would cost to buy part of the line. The price for the whole line and its tracks is $21.7 million.

The city also wrote a letter requesting a delay in the tracks being scrapped, to help Quebec communities in the Pontiac that were hoping to save the freight tracks to boost the economy.

But a report from Ottawa’s deputy city manager Nancy Schepers, bound for the city’s transportation committee next week, declares staff will not pursue a purchase while the tracks remain.

Costs “measured in the millions of dollars” and responsibilities of running a rail line wouldn’t benefit the city enough, Schepers wrote.

“Furthermore, the purchase of active railways would require these expenditures to be made with little or no benefit in return for the City and residents,” she said.

The Pontiac lost a court injunction application late last year that would have bought more time to find a buyer. The line’s Renfrew County tracks have already been ripped up and no potential buyers had come forward for the rest as of December, the report said.

If the Pontiac isn’t successful in finding a partner or operator of the railway, and CN approaches Ottawa about the portion here, the city “will move to reach a purchase agreement for the corridor lands,” the report states.

Locally, the line runs from near western Carling Avenue in Ottawa and extends to Pembroke. It crosses the Ottawa River twice.

[email protected]

twitter.com/CarysMills
© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/ottawa...ase+railway+line+hold/9446130/story.html

[J.OT13]

I understand the City's need to balance the needs of Ottawa and those of surrounding municipalities, but sometimes Ottawa needs to take initiative in building the metropolitan region as opposed to only looking at helping itself. Buying those railway tracks (or at least the rights of way) could eventually generate money for the big city and benefit the smaller municipalities around by providing proper public transit between them and the city.

That said, not that it has anything to do with commuter rail, I completely agree with the City's decision to delay the widening of the 174 indefinitely. IMO, that would only benefit Rockland, attracting more people to a car friendly suburb far from Ottawa's employment areas.