Since we are talking about maps, I don't see MOOSE going with anything more than their conceptual sketch of a map at this time. The more vague it is kept the easier it is for them to explain away any specific issues or discrepancies.
I just want to comment on how I feel about the MOOSE use of a City of Ottawa map in their Section 40 Petition. Unfortunately I don't know how to link directly to the image, but it's on page 7 at the following
link.
In the Petition to Transport Canada, MOOSE (Joseph Potvin) uses what is obviously a conceptual drawing by the City to demonstrate how the City would likely reconnect the rail line between the Bayview Station and the POW Bridge. Zooming in it can be seen that the proposed line does not exactly meet the old line when it goes under the Parkway. The petition goes on to say " It does show that the bridge at Sir John A. Macdonald Parkway, owned by the NCC, would need to be modified or replaced. It also shows a relatively tight curve in the track right by the riverbank, just before the Prince of Wales Bridge. Railway infrastructure safety professionals generally avoid placing curves in railways immediately ahead of bridges. This image also shows that the original approach track of the Ellwood Sub, which the City has dismantled and obstructed, did approach the Prince of Wales Bridge at a safer angle."
I find this to be rather disingenuous and somewhat petty attempt by Joseph Potvin to try and confuse the issues and discredit the City. The drawing is obviously conceptual and is clearly labelled as "Preliminary: Not for Construction". I don't think anyone actually believes that the fact that the yellow line doesn't quite line up with the underpass suggests that the City intends to specifically follow that path and need to rebuild the bridge on the Parkway. The comment about 'safety professionals' in my opinion is intended to imply that the City is unprofessional and unsafe.
There is plenty of space between the Bayview Station and the Parkway Bridge for the new alignment to reconnect with the old line. In fact, MOOSE in a previous submission to the CTA proposed several bypass routes (page 2 of
link). One of those proposed bypasses is in fact the same alignment as the current Bayview Station, and another one is even another 100m to the east, and both are able to make the turn to properly align with the bridge.
It's little issues like this that I find unsettling about MOOSE. Whatever valid arguments they may have had are diminished with these petty issues. I get the sense that MOOSE's case is based on slinging enough mud and hoping that something might stick.
Prev
Linear Mode
