Alto - High Speed Rail (Toronto-Quebec City)

[zang]

A well planned placement can be both great for those that would need to drive to it and for those that could take transit. It could even spur high density growth around it.

How well has that worked out for GO? And obviously, those are lines that are used on a daily basis. Alto isn't going to be priced at a commuter's price level, guaranteed.

 

[micheal_can]

Quebec is #7, but Hamilton, KW, London, St. Catherines/Niagara and Windsor are #9, 10, 11, 13 and 14, so connecting that grouping would bring much more utility than Quebec City. But we all know the politics involved, so Quebec City will be in no matter what.

Another problem with SWO is one line is not going to be enough. You almost need 3 or more.

One going to Niagara Falls to be eventually connected to an Amtrak HSR.
Another going to London thru KW.
Another going to London thru Hamilton.
And then, from London, at least one to Windsor, and maybe to Sarnia.
That is about 600-700km

 

[evandyk]

Sure, but it's 10+ million people.

 

[T-Bor]

And? Should personal retirement growth trump functional passenger rail in this country?

No, but the argument of 'the railway corporations should just suck it up' hasn't really worked that well in the past, as there are many negative trickle-down impacts

 

[kEiThZ]

Like? My points are that there's little east of Quebec, and a lot more people just west of Toronto than east of Montreal.

Are you being intentionally misleading?

Quebec is #7, but Hamilton, KW, London, St. Catherines/Niagara and Windsor are #9, 10, 11, 13 and 14, so connecting that grouping would bring much more utility than Quebec City. But we all know the politics involved, so Quebec City will be in no matter what.

Sure, but it's 10+ million people.

Yes theres more people West of Toronto than there are East of Montreal. But that population is more diffuse and requires at least two lines to serve as the places listed. And here's the most important part: the cost to do so is massive. Way more expensive to go West of Toronto than East of Montreal.

In any event, this tangent started with the assertion that this June was not designed to serve the largest population centres. Y'all should be able to concede that is a patently ridiculous assertion regardless of how you feel about Quebec City being prioritized over London.

 

[micheal_can]

How well has that worked out for GO? And obviously, those are lines that are used on a daily basis. Alto isn't going to be priced at a commuter's price level, guaranteed.

Is that a feature or a bug?
If we use GO as the example we want to follow, we are not going to learn from mistakes. GO did not plan around transit. They just put the station on the lines they could access. They then built massive parking lots. Then they built massive parking garages. All the wile, never truly working locally to make transit better. The reality is, if they did work with transit agencies better their ridership would be a lot higher. Proof? Look how long it took for fare integration that is still not as good as it could be,.

 

[innsertnamehere]

Yes theres more people West of Toronto than there are East of Montreal. But that population is more diffuse and requires at least two lines to serve as the places listed. And here's the most important part: the cost to do so is massive. Way more expensive to go West of Toronto than East of Montreal.

In any event, this tangent started with the assertion that this June was not designed to serve the largest population centres. Y'all should be able to concede that is a patently ridiculous assertion regardless of how you feel about Quebec City being prioritized over London.

This is ignoring the problem of how to get east of Montreal without a large detour westward. REM taking the Mount Royal tunnel necessitates a new, very expensive tunnel access.

This isn't the case in Toronto. We have the benefit of the failed provincial HSR initiative of about a decade ago to look at.. A Toronto-KWC-London Line, assuming you are willing to use non-high-speed tracks to Brampton or so, is actually not remarkably expensive. Metrolinx already operates a high quality corridor that is almost entirely grade separated to there.

Remember this?

A Toronto-KWC-London line would be shorter than Montreal-Quebec, would likely be cheaper (more reliance on existing infrastructure, no new tunnels needed, 75km shorter overall), and serve more people. Undoubtably it makes more sense than Montreal-Quebec.

Montreal-Quebec will happen regardless as it's politically more favourable - but the Feds should be looking southwest too eventually.

 

[micheal_can]

This is ignoring the problem of how to get east of Montreal without a large detour westward. REM taking the Mount Royal tunnel necessitates a new, very expensive tunnel access.

This isn't the case in Toronto. We have the benefit of the failed provincial HSR initiative of about a decade ago to look at.. A Toronto-KWC-London Line, assuming you are willing to use non-high-speed tracks to Brampton or so, is actually not remarkably expensive. Metrolinx already operates a high quality corridor that is almost entirely grade separated to there.

What is the point of HSR if you are not having them move at high speeds for a large part of the journey?

 

[nfitz]

In any event, this tangent started with the assertion that this June was not designed to serve the largest population centres. Y'all should be able to concede that is a patently ridiculous assertion regardless of how you feel about Quebec City being prioritized over London.

Regardless of how I feel? It's the correct decision, despite the pathway there.

 

[kEiThZ]

Do we want to repeat the mistakes of the past, or learn from them? Airports need clear approaches. Railways do not. They can go under or around things. So,having stations that can be accessed by as many means as possible is key. I would say that Union has that. So does Central. However, for Quebec City, Levis would need to expand their transit to the station.

Or, we do not learn and just build massive parking garages. I'd prefer that we learn and make this as successful as possible.

You're doing your gish gallop thing as usual. It's just not relevant. They are going to Quebec City because it's a large city (by Canadian standards), politically important and relatively easier to do than anything West of Toronto. The nitpicking is ridiculous.

Also, we're talking about London, Ontario in comparison. It's a city that is car centric to the point of absurdity. They passed up building light rail for basically half a light BRT. And as of Spring this year, they were still talking about a $400M road widening project which would be the largest transportation project in their history:

Exploring a ring road and six-lane Wonderland Road to address traffic woes

London’s future mobility plans may take a page from the city’s past.

www.ctvnews.ca

And quite frankly until the dog's breakfast that is Metrolinx and their whole regional rail plan gets fixed, the feds should stay far away from any plan West of Toronto. It's inevitably going to become a way for Ontario to get the feds to pay for all the infrastructure they should be building right now.

 

[micheal_can]

You're doing your gish gallop thing as usual. It's just not relevant. They are going to Quebec City because it's a large city (by Canadian standards), politically important and relatively easier to do than anything West of Toronto. The nitpicking is ridiculous.

Also, we're talking about London, Ontario in comparison. It's a city that is car centric to the point of absurdity. They passed up building light rail for basically half a light BRT. And as of Spring this year, they were still talking about a $400M road widening project which would be the largest transportation project in their history:

Exploring a ring road and six-lane Wonderland Road to address traffic woes

London’s future mobility plans may take a page from the city’s past.

www.ctvnews.ca

And quite frankly until the dog's breakfast that is Metrolinx and their whole regional rail plan gets fixed, the feds should stay far away from any plan West of Toronto. It's inevitably going to become a way for Ontario to get the feds to pay for all the infrastructure they should be building right now.

I think you and I are agreeing without knowing it.

 

[kEiThZ]

This is ignoring the problem of how to get east of Montreal without a large detour westward. REM taking the Mount Royal tunnel necessitates a new, very expensive tunnel access.

This isn't the case in Toronto. We have the benefit of the failed provincial HSR initiative of about a decade ago to look at.. A Toronto-KWC-London Line, assuming you are willing to use non-high-speed tracks to Brampton or so, is actually not remarkably expensive. Metrolinx already operates a high quality corridor that is almost entirely grade separated to there.

A Toronto-KWC-London line would be shorter than Montreal-Quebec, would likely be cheaper (more reliance on existing infrastructure, no new tunnels needed, 75km shorter overall), and serve more people. Undoubtably it makes more sense than Montreal-Quebec.

Montreal-Quebec will happen regardless as it's politically more favourable - but the Feds should be looking southwest too eventually.

1) A detour is really not the showstopper anybody here makes it to be. It adds a few minutes. But probably also suburban stops. Montreal-Quebec City will still be competitive with flying downtown to downtown. And Trois Rivieres is about to have an insane boom.

2) The Feds have never, not even once, said that they'd stop in Toronto. The whining here is because London isn't in the first phase. I think some of you haven't learned enough lessons about scope creep killing projects, so you're determined to have another go of it this time. Honesty, it's bad enough that Quebec was included this time.

 

[micheal_can]

1) A detour is really not the showstopper anybody here makes it to be. It adds a few minutes. But probably also suburban stops. Montreal-Quebec City will still be competitive with flying downtown to downtown. And Trois Rivieres is about to have an insane boom.

2) The Feds have never, not even once, said that they'd stop in Toronto. The whining here is because London isn't in the first phase. I think some of you haven't learned enough lessons about scope creep killing projects, so you're determined to have another go of it this time. Honesty, it's bad enough that Quebec was included this time.

Adding going west would almost double the total track distance.

 

[innsertnamehere]

What is the point of HSR if you are not having them move at high speeds for a large part of the journey?

Trains would probably still be doing 90-100mph through there. We are talking about having to invest tens of billions to cut 5 minutes of run time. Alto is likely going to have reduced speed run zones in and out of Toronto and Montreal so they don't need to tunnel 50km of new tunnel to shave a few minutes of travel time.. it's not a huge deal.

 

[smallspy]

What is the point of HSR if you are not having them move at high speeds for a large part of the journey?

You realize that this is how almost every single other HSR works around the world, right?

You think that a TGV runs every single mile of its journey on high speed lines? A couple do, but most do not.

Dan