Palma
Senior Member
what is so heritage about 71, 73, 81, 81?
|
|
|
High Speed Rail: London - Kitchener-Waterloo - Pearson Airport - Toronto
- Thread starter ehlow
- Start date
TOareaFan
Superstar
Count me as confused by the oxymoronic nature of the comments "it's a heritage neighbourhood" and "those houses have been replaced in the last 2 years".
crs1026
Superstar
Under Ontario's Heritage Act, a municipality has two choices. It can designate a particular structure for heritage conservation, or it can designate an entire area as a Heritage Conservation District. Guelph appears to have chosen the first approach.
There is no such thing as a "heritage neighbourhood" in the eyes of the Ontario Heritage Act - unless you designate a Heritage Conservation District. What you have in Guelph is some protected structures within an otherwise motley neighbourhood. There are legal precedents that limit what you can do when you have multiple designated buildings adjacent to each other, but that's not the same as designating the whole area.
To digress, it's the structure that is protected, not the property. If you move the structure (which the Act discourages, but sometimes it's the only choice) the protection goes with the building when it moves.
- Paul
EDIT - Postscript - the interesting conundrum in heritage preservation is - when you designate a structure for conservation, what time period do you preserve? If we designate Toronto City Hall as a heritage structure, do we have to maintain it in its 1965 condition? If so, the Henry Moore and the Toronto sign have to vanish. In the case of Guelph, if we argue that the heritage value of the area has to be respected, then we arguably need to put the second track back in, because that's how the area looked in 1900. I'm not arguing for that, I'm just pointing out that heritage arguments are not absolute.
Last edited:
nfitz
Superstar
Do federally-regulated railroads, even have to pay attention to the Ontario Heritage Act? Metrolinx would certainly look bad ignoring it - but does it have any legal bearing?
crs1026
Superstar
Good question. In the Guelph instance, the heritage properties are't owned by the railway nor are they on railway property. I doubt that the law could be skirted by selling them to the railway and then claiming federal jurisdiction. The federal heritage statutes might actually be more onerous....the Union Station trainshed being an example of this.
I doubt that either the province or the feds could expropriate without the heritage considerations coming into play.
At the end of the day, no one has suggested demolishing or modifying the designated buildings. So long as the buildings aren't harmed, they can be worked around.
- Paul
kEiThZ
Superstar
This is actually an excellent point. With the HSR/HPR/faster train/whatever you want to call it, it'll be feasible to commute from say Brampton to UWaterloo.
kEiThZ
Superstar
Why are people assuming demolition? I see plenty of room to double-track through Guelph. Sure, some streets might go down to one lane. And you'll have sound walls and other barriers. But there is room.
Worst case scenario would be a covered trench.
Now, some Guelph residents could rise up in opposition. But just like Westonites weren't able to stop the GO RER and UPE, there's no way these Guelph residents could forestall a plan to bring more trains there.
I wouldn't even be worried about public support. Other than those living near the rail line, having HSR and frequent GO service would be a boon to Guelph that most residents aren't likely to pass up.....
Worst case scenario would be a covered trench.
Now, some Guelph residents could rise up in opposition. But just like Westonites weren't able to stop the GO RER and UPE, there's no way these Guelph residents could forestall a plan to bring more trains there.
I wouldn't even be worried about public support. Other than those living near the rail line, having HSR and frequent GO service would be a boon to Guelph that most residents aren't likely to pass up.....
mdrejhon
Senior Member
Even if HSR does not stop there, we may need three tracks to combine all-day RER 2-way and HSR expresses. That may be difficult. Are there two-track scenarios that can fit both RER and HSR through Kitchener-to-Guelph?
Ultimately it may end up being a HPR RER (GO high speed lite ~200kph) running an express stopping plan, interleaved with slower all stop RER EMUs at station passing tracks until a triple track section east of Guelph. This is doable with just two tracks west of Guelph, the trains would just run slower the rest of the way to KW.
The 300kph compatible ROW will only have significant time savings if it is mostly express (no stops until Pearson) and skipping the Guelph Bypass probably requires trenching through Guelph. Sections of corridor after the Guelph curve appears straight enough to be nursed to be able to reach a 300kph sprint once or twice until Pearson Station (Malton/Woodbine) but would probably need to build ridership through RER/HPR first before justifying true HSR.
Last edited:
TOareaFan
Superstar
If we are going to use Weston as an example, the last objection they threw up that was appeased was the lack of a UP stop.......so if that is the template.....maybe this HSR does/has to stop in Guelph
mdrejhon
Senior Member
Not all HSR trains have to have identical stopping plans.If we are going to use Weston as an example, the last objection they threw up that was appeased was the lack of a UP stop.......so if that is the template.....maybe this HSR does/has to stop in Guelph
It could just be one or two stops a day, to appease places such as Brampton and Guelph.
It doesn't have to be consistent like UPX needs to be.
Other routes such as Lakeshore West has 4 different stopping plans.
steveintoronto
Superstar
The bridges were all built in the last decade. The one built in the sixties on that stretch, albeit to the east of the Speed, over Stephenson, was single. All the original bridges left from the twenties (when the grades were separated) were twinned years ago.
It's not their decision, is it? It's for Queen's Park and the courts if the decision is appealed under the Railway Act and some associated ones. If any MPP wants to win an election in Guelph ( one of only a few ridings that represents a city in the legislature) then they're not going to rip up the centre of the city.
Why is that so difficult for so many of you to understand? This isn't *MY* feeling on matters, I don't have the vote in this nation, it's THEIRS! Not to mention that the costs and logistics are untenable. How are you going to trench one track at a time to allow the other to continue running? Or do you plan to shut the line down to do it, contrary to the contracts w/ VIA and Goderich and Exeter?
I'll locate the prevailing grades and post them later. No shortage of broken knuckles in the ditches when walking the tracks up those hills. I guess some have better memories than others? Oddly, I don't see any broken knuckles walking and cycling up the Dundas Valley on the old TH&B RoW. Perhaps that wasn't such a steep grade either, even though they had helpers assigned at loops top and bottom.
[...][Ajay Woozageer, spokesperson for the Ontario Ministry of Transportation, wrote in an email the specific route for the high-speed rail line within the London-to-Toronto corridor has not been determined yet.
Asked about the effects the construction of such a line would have on Guelph or the surrounding area, he wrote the impacts will be identified during the environmental assessment process. He added that stage of the process will likely take four to six years to complete.
Paul Langan, of the rail advocacy group High Speed Rail Canada, said it will be difficult to solve the problem of having to slow down in Guelph on the high-speed line.
But he said the province should make improvements to the existing lines to make GO trains more reliable and faster on the Toronto route.][...]
http://www.guelphmercury.com/news-story/5233025-high-speed-rail-line-likely-to-skip-guelph-report/
I repeat, albeit it seems impossible for Train-Heads to comprehend...given the choice between HSR (or much more likely, enhanced speed rail) and having the core of their city ripped apart the *average Guelph voter* would overwhelmingly stay with status quo. Even the local bus service, something Guelphites resent supporting with their tax base (taxes are a massive issue in Guelph, thus the present mayor's election, he's well to the Right) barely serves the morning GO trains. And *there is no integrated co-fare with GO!*.
Guelph *wants to be left isolated*. Get it through your skulls, "you can be like we are" doesn't mean dick for them. In fact, they resent people with that attitude. Bad enough with the schism between "old Guelph" and the 'newbies' in the southern burbs who drive to Toronto every day. Put a station there!
Sandals know which side the toast is buttered on the this:
[...][
Guelph MPP Liz Sandals said the final route for the proposed high-speed rail line will be determined during the environmental assessment process but she said it seems likely Guelph is just too close to Kitchener for a stop to make sense.
"I would consider it a huge bonus if it happened that it was possible to stop in Guelph, but I think it's unlikely," she said in a phone interview.
Sandals said in order for a train to really be high-speed it needs to have a restricted number of stops.
"I think that what they're likely to find is that it slows the service too much to have to be speeding up and slowing down," she said.][...]
http://www.guelphmercury.com/news-story/5233025-high-speed-rail-line-likely-to-skip-guelph-report/
A carefully managed message. She wasn't about to start throwing dirt from the trenching about.
Last edited:
crs1026
Superstar
The documentation I have is from 2002. It indicates the elevation at MP 57 (Breslau) is 1060 feet. MP 49 (Glasgow St) is 1062. MP 45.6 (east of Watson Rd) is 1090. From there the line climbs to 1218 at MP 40.25 (Rock Cut) and then down to 1201 at Acton. East of Acton is marked as moderate grade. The zone from 49 to 40.25 is marked as gentle grade.
- Paul
steveintoronto
Superstar
Once the track reaches the top of the hill just east of County 32, it's downhill grade to Kitchener, your numbers mean nothing unless you have the cresting height of the divide. Take a look at a map at water flow.
Btw: That grade would be virtually neutralized by the by-pass. I keep reading nattering about "climbing the Escarpment" but even up to Acton from the quarry is only a fraction of the Escarpment's elevation. Most of it in that particular region is well to the south-east of there, albeit it undulates in spots where the CP climbs it to Cambridge, ironically right past Kelso, one of the highest promontories/outcrops. The quarry is already up on the Escarpment, thus mining limestone there. From there over to the west side of Guelph is relatively flat, which is why the Guelph Junction was run up through there.
Last edited:
kEiThZ
Superstar
If we are going to use Weston as an example, the last objection they threw up that was appeased was the lack of a UP stop.......so if that is the template.....maybe this HSR does/has to stop in Guelph
I wouldn't have an issue with that. I think it's moronic not to stop in Guelph.
Stop it with the hysterics. Guelph isn't having "the core of the city" ripped apart. There may even be no demolitions at all. Just some construction and road lane restrictions. The whole thing could be trenched and covered.
You think the province is going to allow Guelph to trip up a major and vital economic link for the region?
They'll bypass Guelph if the business case and operational assessments lead that way. If not, they'll do to Guelph what they did to Weston.
crs1026
Superstar
Considering that they come from data that CN used to instruct running trades and determine how many tons a locomotive could pull over the line, I'd say they have validity.
Elevation at Silver MP 29.98 is 867 feet. At Acton MP37.0 is 1201. That's 334 feet rise in 7 linear miles.
There's a more significant hump west of Kitchener, from
1094 at 63.70 to
1281 at 66.65 and then down to
1191 at 67.10
Anyways, we're down in the weeds. You seem to feel that grades make the bypass preferable. I can't see how the grades change any with a bypass route, they hit the same 1200 foot crest just a little further south of Acton.
The point is a) the speed restriction through Guelph can be addressed for a certain sum of money - far less than a bypass - including double tracking the line through central Guelph, albeit with impacts in a very limited zone and b) There are no operationally challenging grades on the line between Acton and Kitchener.
We can't predict how Guelph Council would vote, but we know there will be both opposers and supporters in each direcction. If you count the number of residents affected, it's a couple of small blocks, nowhere near the scope of say the Davenport project. It's a valid role for the Province to have an overriding mandate that overreaches parochial local decisions. I don't think we have to seize the bypass as the only reasonable solution here.
- Paul