Re: [Vic] Freight return to Cold stream??

["HXP1" <hxp1@bigfoot.com>]

James C. <james_ccj@my-deja.com> wrote in message
8fu2he$t6a$1@nnrp1.deja.com">news:8fu2he$t6a$1@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <YMuU4.172$YF4.26462@nsw.nnrp.telstra.net>,
>   "HXP1" <hxp1@bigfoot.com> wrote:

> > As others have observed, what's in it for Hillside? A whole lotta
> > risk & minimmal return.

> No effect at all to Hillside since there will be AT MOST 1 train a day.

Indeed, no effect at all *providing* the train doesn't break down or run
late.  If it does, then it starts costing PWM's.

> > Reading the paper "Discussion Paper - Proposals for the
> > Implementation of the Victorian Rail Access Regeime",
> > the government is currently proposing not to declare
> > any of the Hillside network for any purpose.  Whereas
> > it is proposed to declare Bayside for freight.  So
> > Hillside is well within their right to tell FA to go
> > away, with the confidence that FA won't have any
> > comeback.

> > Of course I may be wrong...  |-)

> Really?? I though Victrack owns all the intrastate tracks within
> Victoria, inlucding Burley/Lilydale line, Hillside have no rights ban
> freight trains

Indeed, VicTrack owns all the track assets in Victoria.  They then lease the
portions over which Hillside & Bayside operate to the Director of Public
Transport (therefore the Government is leasing it to itself) who in turn
leases it to the 2 metro operators AFAIK as part of the franchise.

Now unless there are provisions within the Franchise Agreement which force
Hillside to provide 3rd party access when directed by the DPT (which there
*may* be), 3rd party access is not mandatary.  That's the subject about
which the above mentioned paper is currently calling for submissions in
regard to the FA Victorian Country intrastate network, Dynon terminals, and
the Bayside network.

Hillside may decide that they like freight traffic to Coldstream, and make
available the paths for the freight traffic, but they may not.

--
HXP1
(now with v6.08 software)