|
|
|
RBT is exactly right about trenching, and the grade already indicates doing the opposite. All grade separation along that stretch that's been done have been underpasses, for good reason.
Perhaps...I haven't had the time to read the article, but Guelph Transit had been driven into the mud through no fault of successive managers. Guelph is an odd place in many respects, I lived there for five years. They brag about being a leading model for being Green et al, but ran one of the most inefficient and underfunded transit systems I'm aware of. The local model to copy would be GRT, who also have oddities, but offer incredibly good value in terms of distance per fare and serviced routes. Where both Guelph and Waterloo Region fall short is in integrating co-fare with GO.
Muddy yes, but less muddy than the last few decades of HSR.
Since this isn't the most apt string (there is a Guelph Transit one) I'll give short answer: Present Mayor (and a friend, we've jammed together, he was also helpful and effective as a councillor) was elected on a 'conservative' platform, which included being stingy with Guelph Transit.
#Guelph Transit Ridership Up 44%. That’s Right. 44%!
by Cam Guthrie
Guelph, Ont., October 6, 2017 – Guelph Transit’s boarding and ridership numbers for September show an overall increase of 44 per cent over 2016.
Last month, 759,053 trips were taken compared to 524,694 during the same time last year. There was also a 15 per cent increase in fare paying riders.
“The numbers clearly show that last month’s route realignment is off to an impressive start and that we’re meeting our goal to put buses where and when people need them the most,” says Mike Spicer, Guelph Transit general manager.
“This is great news for Guelph Transit and the entire city,” adds Mayor Cam Guthrie. “I’m thankful for the leadership at Guelph Transit, being able to achieve these results within the existing 2017 budget. I’m excited for what 2018 and beyond will bring for current and new riders. When more people take transit, it eases traffic congestion, reduces smog and creates a more connected city.”
On September 3, Guelph Transit realigned its routes to increase the frequency of buses in areas where there is a greater demand for the service.
Since the changes were made, ridership has increased in most areas of the city, including north end routes that weren’t significantly impacted by the route realignment. In fact, routes 10, 11 and 12 are up about 40 per cent, and Route 20 is up 53 per cent. Ridership on the main University express routes has doubled on three out of four routes while the new 99 Mainline—running north and south along the Gordon/Norfolk/Woolwich corridor—had 25 per cent of last month’s ridership.
Looking ahead, Spicer says further data analysis and feedback from the public and transit operators will help to determine where system adjustments might be needed.
“We’ll continue to look for ways to improve the service as we work toward building an efficient and effective transit system for Guelph.”
Media contact:
Colleen Clack
Deputy CAO Public Services
City of Guelph
519-822-1260 extension 2588
colleen.clack@guelph.ca
I was digging to find out what has been tendered in the past on this, and why Guelph is still stuck with the infamous 10 mph Go Slow section:
http://www.railwayage.com/index.php/communications/guelph-subdivision-upgraded-to-ctc.htmlGuelph Subdivision upgraded to CTC
Written by Steve Host, for Railway Age
Steve Host
VIA Rail on Nov. 14, 2015, commissioned CTC (centralized traffic control) on its entire North Mainline (Guelph Subdivision) between Georgetown and London, Ontario.
In conjunction with the Genesee & Wyoming’s Goderich-Exeter Railway, which leases the right-of-way from CN for freight service, and GO Transit/Metrolinx, which recently purchased the Kitchener-Georgetown section of the line from CN, VIA Rail fully funded the C$25 million upgrade program. PNR Railworks contracted to perform the work.
The CTC project includes new wayside signals; new crossing protection (conforming to Transport Canada regulations), upgrading all crossings to automatic warning devices; automatic remotely controlled switches; and switch heaters at three passing sidings (Kellys, Stratford, Kitchener). Railterm will continue to dispatch the line.
CTC is expected to increase capacity on the line, allowing VIA and Metrolinx to increase train frequencies. Metrolinx plans to add two more departures to/from Kitchener by 2016 or 2017. VIA Rail initially planned to add up to three departures when the project was planned some 8 years ago, but delays due to disagreements with freight operator Goderich-Exeter, and the recent addition of GO Transit departures out of Kitchener may curtail VIA's plans.
CTC also has the potential to increase safety. In 1999, a deadly accident caused by a misaligned switch occurred at Thamesville, Ontario, in what was then dark territory on the CN Chatham Subdivision. As a result, upgrades to busy passenger lines in Ontario were quickly completed to avoid a repeat, but the North Mainline remained dark territory. In 2006, two near misses, both involving freight and passenger trains, occurred on the North Mainline. They are the likely catalyst to finalize funding and construction of this project.
That certainly appears to be the case. What I find curious (I'm being diplomatic) is that the tenders implied that road crossing safety was being addressed. Host's Railway Age article states: "new crossing protection (conforming to Transport Canada regulations)". He may also have been misled, his pieces I've read have always been based on reference, so there appears to be either 'sleight of hand' in the releases, or something on TC's part not being divulged.
https://www.guelphmercury.com/news-story/5862223-development-will-see-new-look-silvercreek-parkway/
http://guelph.ca/wp-content/uploads...and-Rail-and-Vibration-Noise-Impact-Study.pdf
[...]
http://www.bst-tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-reports/rail/2006/r06h0013/r06h0013.asp[...]
Other Factual Information
On 06 June 2006, westward VIA Rail Canada Inc. (VIA) train 87 (train 87), en route from Toronto, Ontario, to Sarnia, Ontario, was proceeding at 30 mph (over a temporary slow order) near New Hamburg, Ontario, on the Goderich-Exeter Railway Company (GEXR) Guelph Subdivision (Figure 1). At 1931 eastern daylight time,1 GEXR train 518 (train 518), working on the main track at Mile 75, heard an automated radio broadcast report originating from the hot box detector (HBD) located at Mile 73.7. The automated report indicated that a train had just passed that location. Realizing that a train collision could be imminent, the crew of train 518, using the train radio, immediately requested the approaching train to stop. Upon hearing the radio broadcast from train 518, the crew of train 87 applied a full service brake application and the train came to a stop at approximately Mile 74.
Figure 1. Incident location on the Guelph Subdivision (Source: Railway Association of Canada, Canadian Railway Atlas)
The crew of train 87 then called train 518 over the radio and asked for their cellular telephone number. After receiving the telephone number, train 87 contacted train 518 by cellular telephone. During this conversation, an agreement was made that train 87 would back up clear of the siding switch at Mile 73.85 (Alpine). Train 518 would then enter the siding to allow the passenger train to continue westward. After conducting these movements, both trains then completed their tours of duty. This incident was not reported to the appropriate personnel (at VIA and GEXR) at the time of the incident, nor upon completion of the crews' tours of duty.
Before departing Kitchener, Ontario, train 87 had received a clearance to proceed from Mile 64 (Kitchener) to the west siding switch at Stratford (approximately Mile 88.5). This clearance contained a restriction to protect against train 518 between Mile 72 and the west siding switch at Stratford. At 1924, approximately seven minutes before reaching Mile 72, the conductor2 on train 87 used the assigned cellular telephone to contact train 518 to obtain permission and instructions through the restricted limits. However, the conductor inadvertently dialed the wrong telephone number, resulting in a call to GEXR train 433 (train 433) that was working in London Yard (Mile 119.9). At that time, train 433 was performing a switching operation. With the conductor on the track at the rear of the train, the locomotive engineer answered the call.
The conductor of train 87 immediately recognized the locomotive engineer's voice and thought that he was speaking to train 518. During the conversation, proper identification was not established and the misidentification was not detected. When train 87 requested permission to travel through the work limits, the crew of train 433 reasoned that train 87 would go through their work limits before they would return to foul the main track. While it was unusual that train 87 had called so early, train 433 did not foresee any problems with providing permission to the VIA train to travel through their work limits. Upon receiving permission, a clear understanding in writing of this permission given by train 433 to train 87 was not copied by all required crew members.
As a result of the conversation, the crew members of train 87 believed that they had obtained permission through the limits of the clearance held by train 518. It was not until receiving the urgent request to stop and then speaking with the crew of train 518 that the crew members of train 87 realized that they did not have permission to enter the limits.
[...]
