It's not trackwork, and it's not signalling that's the issue.
The issue is a CTA decree about the accessibility of the tracks from the local neighbourhoods.
I don't know if simply building/improving the fencing through there is sufficient, or if it will require a full-blown grade separation to resolve it.
By signalling I was thinking crossing protection as much as track signals. If they have been calibrated to only 30 mph I don't know how much tweaking would be needed to permit higher speeds.
I have too much faith in CN's ability to pinch pennies to assume that that segment is in shape to handle 60 mph today.... one has to assume that some things might have to be tweaked a bit to bring them from 30 mph compliant to 60 mph compliant. Possibly just some ties and surfacing, possibly the crossings themselves. I'm erring on the side of not assuming everything is good to go.
It's quite a paradox how politicians are all raving about accessibility and transit yet their own laws prevents that from happening
I am all for a regulatory regime that keeps us safe from things, but one has to agree that the regulator's gaze is strangely inconsistent.
That stretch of right of way needs a good defoliation, and as noted some fencing might be needed, but it is wide and straight and the sightlines at crossings are as good as much of the Kingston Sub which permits 100 mph. Vehicular and pedestrian volume is not greater than other crossings that have higher limits.
I'm not sure if CN approves of ML's pedestrian deterrence pads (or if they even work!) Certainly it's a zone that local residents treat as walkway, but the crossings are a lot more benign than Guelph. If we are saving Hamiltonians from themselves - I have only so much sympathy.
Someone likely asked for that slow order, possibly the City of Hamilton itself. Can't blame the CTA for that. But if we are going to invest a whack of money in GO to Confederation, we shouldn't undermine that investment with an arbitrary slow order.