Commuter rail could run on single track

Re: “Temporary rail service dubious,” editorial, July 29.

Your editorial asks important questions about E&N rail and makes critical points about track rebuilds and bus connections that should be answered in an in-depth examination.

Unfortunately, your piece contains, in my opinion, statements that make the E&N option to appear more expensive and less feasible than may be the case.

You wrote that: “A commuter rail service would require two tracks.” But there are many single-track commuter rail lines with passing sidings, such as the Pascack Valley Line and the RiverLINE, or in some cases none at all, such as the Princeton Junction-Princeton “Dinky,” all in New Jersey. There are also light-rail lines that are similarly configured.

You also stated that light rail “can’t run on the current E&N tracks.” But there are light-rail and hybrid light commuter-rail systems that share railway tracks. Examples include the RiverLINE and rail lines in Austin, Texas, Baltimore, Maryland, San Diego, California, and also in Ottawa.

Interestingly the Ottawa service, known as the Trillium Line, provides a useful precedent for the E&N. It began as a pilot project enabled by Transport Canada and launched in 2001, also on a mostly singletrack ex-CPR rail line that had carried Via Dayliner trains.

The Trillium Line operates every 12 minutes in each direction. It serves a key intermediate market, Carleton University, just as the E&N would serve the Esquimalt dockyards. And it, too, requires onward bus connections to reach the city centre and other destinations. Brendan B. Read Belmar, New Jersey