Alto - High Speed Rail (Toronto-Quebec City)

[Ward8]

I'm not arguing that; I'm saying that at least in the case of Spain there are other cultural factors at play that make the comparison much harder. Humanity isn't homogenous

Ill just say I disagree with this. For one, the effect of HSR mode share is consistent cross culturally, so cultural idiosyncrasies don't appear to have any impact. For two, if I accepted your generalization about Spanish punctuality, which I don't, it would only strengthen the case for rail. If those that don't care about the time savings they get through hsr still flock to it, then surely a culture that is obsessed with productivity would be even more inclined to travel on the faster option.

Madrid-Barcelona is a sensible comparison because the time savings and build-out trajectory are similar to what we should see with alto.

 

[MisterF]

When all else fails, opponents of high speed rail or any other non-car based transport always invoke culture as to why those things would never work. If I had a dollar for every time I've been told "we're not Europe" or "we're a car culture" I'd be retired by now. But people who say stuff like that are always wrong.

Wherever we have good trains or public transit or walkable cities or cycling infrastructure it's successful and well used. We're not a car culture, we're a culture of people who get around by whatever way makes sense. If we build high speed rail it will almost immediately become dominant over flying in the Corridor. The masses aren't going to put up with the inconvenience, cramped conditions, noise, and unreliability of flying when high speed rail is available. No amount of "culture" will change that.

 

[cryogen]

When all else fails, opponents of high speed rail or any other non-car based transport always invoke culture as to why those things would never work. If I had a dollar for every time I've been told "we're not Europe" or "we're a car culture" I'd be retired by now. But people who say stuff like that are always wrong.

Wherever we have good trains or public transit or walkable cities or cycling infrastructure it's successful and well used. We're not a car culture, we're a culture of people who get around by whatever way makes sense. If we build high speed rail it will almost immediately become dominant over flying in the Corridor. The masses aren't going to put up with the inconvenience, cramped conditions, noise, and unreliability of flying when high speed rail is available. No amount of "culture" will change that.

Ask yourself this question, would a family of 4, on a weekend trip to Montreal from Toronto, take a the (fast) train or enjoy the flexibility of their car?

 

[crs1026]

Ask yourself this question, would a family of 4, on a weekend trip to Montreal from Toronto, take a the (fast) train or enjoy the flexibility of their car?

There is no simple answer to this one. As a parent of a family of 4, I can say that the car allows a certain flexibility especially around bringing teddy bears and amusements for the trip, without the risk of leaving any behind on the train. And bringing the family pet along. And having mobility at the other end of the drive.
However....amusing two youngsters on a long drive can be, well, tiring. And the drive itself is definitely harder on the parents, ie the drivers. The tradeoffs will not drive everyone to the same solution. Some will, some won't.

I think this discussion may be missing the point, and the foreign comparisons while insightful don't offer a clear definitive answer. What is clear is that a faster train between Toronto and Ottawa, and Toronto and Montreal, does move us a quantum in terms of time and energy expended over today's trains. That quantum may or may not push the train ahead of other modes (personally I believe it will, maybe not for everybody, but for enough). It especially rivals or betters air travel for business travellers looking for a one-day round trip, which is a very common use of airplanes at present. A round trip in one day for business by train is a very long trip today, whereas air may mean rising early but likely getting home in time to watch the end of hockey or baseball before going to bed. And for non-business travellers, it changes the need to plan a day in the itinerary for the train trip versus getting good use out of the day and getting there as well.

And the walk-on, walk-off nature of the train, assuming very high schedule reliability, is far better than airport security, uncertainty over when flights actually leave, bouts of delays on tarmac before takeoff, and waiting for luggage at the other end.

So modal share is likely assured. Maybe not 80% as elsewhere, but close enough to make the value proposition generally favourable. At this point, in the absence of better data, we are just approximating. I would not overthink this at this point.

- Paul

 

[KhalilHeron]

Ask yourself this question, would a family of 4, on a weekend trip to Montreal from Toronto, take a the (fast) train or enjoy the flexibility of their car?

My family of 4 used to opt for the slow train on such trips. Not everyone will make the same choices you would.

 

[ash_iwn95]

Ask yourself this question, would a family of 4, on a weekend trip to Montreal from Toronto, take a the (fast) train or enjoy the flexibility of their car?

Its interesting you credit the car for its flexibility, but you dont think that having multiple modes of transport with differing benefits is a good thing

 

[Ward8]

Ask yourself this question, would a family of 4, on a weekend trip to Montreal from Toronto, take a the (fast) train or enjoy the flexibility of their car?

I have a family of four with two young kids. Unless the trip involves a side quest to Tremblant or something, the train would be the obvious choice for us. In fact the trip is incredibly difficult in the car, and I would say we have a lot of latent demand baked into our household as we don't get to visit family as often as we like. A shorter door to door trip combined with the ability to get up and walk around is night and day when you have little kids.

 

[micheal_can]

When all else fails, opponents of high speed rail or any other non-car based transport always invoke culture as to why those things would never work. If I had a dollar for every time I've been told "we're not Europe" or "we're a car culture" I'd be retired by now. But people who say stuff like that are always wrong.

Wherever we have good trains or public transit or walkable cities or cycling infrastructure it's successful and well used. We're not a car culture, we're a culture of people who get around by whatever way makes sense. If we build high speed rail it will almost immediately become dominant over flying in the Corridor. The masses aren't going to put up with the inconvenience, cramped conditions, noise, and unreliability of flying when high speed rail is available. No amount of "culture" will change that.

It is also our culture to whine about gas prices too. The thing is, if we had a robust rail network including HSR, that part of our culture would disappear.

Ask yourself this question, would a family of 4, on a weekend trip to Montreal from Toronto, take a the (fast) train or enjoy the flexibility of their car?

... Rental car?

As someone who frequently goes to Montreal,I'd rather park somewhere and take transit. Heck,I have done a trip using the train between Montreal and Sudbury with a weekend layover in Toronto. Cities like Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal are quite easy to navigate with transit and Google Maps.

Now,I do not want to speak on parenting, but I am sure it may be a little more challenging with kids. Realize though, for the last few pages we have been discussing business professionals. Anything with kids is hard. Last summer, My extended family went to the Hockey Hall of Fame. They are die hard Leafs fans. I offered to show them the ACC (Or whatever it is now). They were shocked at how close it was. We also walked there and they were surprised how easy it was to get to. We also happened to walk through Union during rush hour. I don't think those kids had ever seen so many people in one spot in their life before. We didn't lose anyone. It does go back to a theory I have had for a long time - Kids are usually not the problem, it is their parents that are the problem. Case in point, the kids stayed with us and listened to us and the adults were freaking out.

I do like the "but what about..." as it shows how scared some people are of change. It is funny, most of today's problems, the solution is trains.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

Having a car can pose a problem when looking for a hotel with parking in the downtown core.

 

[urbanclient]

but the reaction in Quebec doesn't seem as intensely negative or organized.

They're culturally different than non-Quebecers to say the least. Better for Alto.

 

[lenaitch]

They're culturally different than non-Quebecers to say the least. Better for Alto.

It could also be that they haven't been presented with study corridors yet. Other than the project mentioning that it will extend to Quebec City, I don't think folks east of Montreal have been given enough bones to chew on. Both shores are fairly agricultural. Once they post study corridors and people think their family farms are in jeopardy, we may see similar reactions to eastern Ontario. Interestingly, I don't see much feedback from the Toronto-Peterborough area or closer around Ottawa. I am possibly missing it.

 

[urbanclient]

It could also be that they haven't been presented with study corridors yet. Other than the project mentioning that it will extend to Quebec City, I don't think folks east of Montreal have been given enough bones to chew on. Both shores are fairly agricultural. Once they post study corridors and people think their family farms are in jeopardy, we may see similar reactions to eastern Ontario.

I get what you're saying, but my feeling is Québécois are more pro-state, pro-European stuff (like HSR), their land values are also lower (edit).

Interestingly, I don't see much feedback from the Toronto-Peterborough area or closer around Ottawa. I am possibly missing it.

If I am hearing you correctly, is that possibly because those areas are more urbanized?

 

[lenaitch]

I get what you're saying, but my feeling is Québécois are more pro-state, pro-European stuff (like HSR), their land values have also appreciated less.

Perhaps so. They do seem to be more comfortable with state intervention, but I think when it comes down to a project map with your community on it things may change. Some things are universal.

If I am hearing you correctly, is that possibly because those areas are more urbanized?

Part of it is - or getting there - out to about Brooklin.

 

[zang]

It does go back to a theory I have had for a long time - Kids are usually not the problem, it is their parents that are the problem. Case in point, the kids stayed with us and listened to us and the adults were freaking out.

I don't even think it's that—though I agree kids can often see the value of walkability.

Our downtown teen daughter is a champ and thinks nothing of a 2 or 3 km walk just to get somewhere. But, I also have suburban twin teen nephews and a niece who have gotten into the habit of thinking driving is the only acceptable way of getting anywhere.

I think the problem is suburbia in general. I've had friends who lived in the city for long periods and who just became lazy, fearful and ignorant once they lived in car-dependent suburbs for a while. Able-bodied people who once walked or took the subway everywhere now complain if they can't get parking within a half block of a destination. It's insane how much a car requirement makes that kind of mindset develop so quickly. I have other friends who won't even think about coming downtown because they both don't want to drive because it's a hassle, but also see public transit as much as hassle.

People will always equate cars as being "freedom", but they're more a sometimes-convenient, but mostly social/monetary/travel shackle than anything else these days.

 

[urbanclient]

It speaks to poor management regarding how they managed to turn a profitable parcel delivery situation to an unprofitable one. I don't buy the narrative that a flood of cheap labour is the only reason Canada Post failed to compete against Amazon-adjacent couriers.

Canada Post is a great example. We see how we need low wage workers, driving questionable vehicles, driving poorly, and running when they get out to drop of something to be successful. So, that is not an improvement.
The real problem with the free market is when a big guy buys up all the little guys instead of actually competing with them.

I do not think there is a way HSR could be successful if it also had to be profitable.

Forgot to reply to this earlier.

Not sure this was the point I was making. Competent management is key for an SOE to compete against private companies. Canada Post cannot and should not be a black hole for taxpayer dollars. It turned a profit from riding the e-commerce wave before, it can turn a profit again.

HSR will probably never pay off its capital costs, but operating profit is possible. Financial profit/loss aside, the net economic return to society should be positive.