News   Jan 09, 2025
The Naked City
 193     0 
News   Jan 08, 2025
50 Scollard Tops Off as Cladding and Glazing Installation Continues
 1K     0 
News   Jan 08, 2025
Quintet of High-Rises Proposed on Kingston Road in Pickering
 1.5K     2 

VIA Rail

Urban Sky said:
If you check 10 weeks or 82* pages back:



*Guys, we really need to stop the spamming here! More than one page per day is an insane average over such a long period...
Click to expand...

Thats if the current tracks and alignment were used. Im proposing a complete rebuild through the area, and no connection to Gare Centrale. Its own station.

As an alternative to the above post that mentioned tunneling a new level under Gare Centrale, if we are using the costs of that as a starting point to what kind of funding would be available to do this.

Especially now that the REM East is proposed through the area
 
robmausser said:
Thats if the current tracks and alignment were used. Im proposing a complete rebuild through the area, and no connection to Gare Centrale. Its own station.
Click to expand...
Building a new station which is completely disjointed from existing rail networks (exo, VIA, REM, Metro) is a complete non-starter. It’s already bad enough with the distance between Gare Centrale and both Metro stations (Bonaventure on the orange line and McGill on the green light), but at least if is accessible...

As an alternative to the above post that mentioned tunneling a new level under Gare Centrale, if we are using the costs of that as a starting point to what kind of funding would be available to do this.
Click to expand...
Underneath the Gare Centrale are streets (Rue Saint-Antoine, Saint-Jacques, Notre Dame) and then the various arms of the Ville-Marie Highway tunnel, which make the construction of an underground station an insanely expensive fantasy. if you refer to my post from August 2019 (to which you even reacted):

Urban Sky said:
So what about going above or below the current ROW? Above, forget it, as there are buildings on top of Gare Centrale and the green line above the existing Mont-Royal tunnel (refer to the picture of McGill station further above).

As for going below the current ROW, there is the slight problem that the Autoroute Ville-Marie (think of the Gradiner Highway, but well hidden in a tunnel) happens to be the most complex just at the eastern end of Gare Centrale:
1564844867731-png.197448

Adapted from: World Road Association

Just to give you an idea of how deep you would have to dig to avoid the Ville-Marie and Viger tunnel complex, it reaches until 42 meters under street level only 200 meters north of where VIA passengers leaving Gare Centrale view the daylight for the first time (exact location here):
1564845604720-png.197449

Source: World Road Association

And we haven't even touched the question of where and how you want to build a full-size intercity terminal railway station anywhere underground and near Gare Centrale...
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Urban Sky said:
Building a new station which is completely disjointed from existing rail networks (exo, VIA, REM, Metro) is a complete non-starter. It’s already bad enough with the distance between Gare Centrale and both Metro stations (Bonaventure on the orange line and McGill on the green light), but at least if is accessible...
Click to expand...

But I am proposing connecting it to REM East...
 
robmausser said:
But I am proposing connecting it to REM East...
Click to expand...
Just that your proposed station location might connect with the REM East (what do we actually know about its exact routing and station locations at this point?) doesn’t change the fact that it wouldn’t connect with all the other rail networks I listed (including the core REM network currently under construction)...
 
Allandale25 said:
In my view, it will be easier to evaluate whether the JPO work is preliminary or extensive once they release any work. Once it's released, we can compare it to other big projects, like GO Electrification/OnCorr/Expansion and its material.
Click to expand...
It's concerning because we were supposed to have more details by the end of 2020, but there was silence. It seems the government has been humouring VIA and never had any intention to build it.

HFR as a concept isn't going to survive past the next budget. If there is an election in 2021, HFR is going to be buried even deeper.
 
2transpo said:
It's concerning because we were supposed to have more details by the end of 2020, but there was silence. It seems the government has been humouring VIA and never had any intention to build it.

HFR as a concept isn't going to survive past the next budget. If there is an election in 2021, HFR is going to be buried even deeper.
Click to expand...

I re-read the update I provided here: https://urbantoronto.ca/forum/threads/via-rail.21060/post-1621928

I don't think the VIA CEO confirmed in her remarks the JPO's work would be made public by the end of the year. She may have meant that it would be given to the Minister. So I don't think there's been any public commitment that "we were supposed to have more details by the end of 2020". The Minister may have it, but the public aka "we" may have to wait a bit.
 
jelbana said:
Also note that the we now have a new Minister of Transport which may have/had some impact.
Click to expand...
Comments I have seen have said nothing negative, but have pointed out that he has absolutely no prior experience on the transport file. He is from Mississauga, which one might hope would make him aware of public transportation issues. I wonder how he has been accustomed to commuting to Ottawa.

There is no point in speculating (or fearing the worst). Too much political water will go under the bridge before COVID ends. The current crisis may force government to spend so much on health and social assistance that the public becomes fiscally fearful....in which case many future projects could be at risk.... or there may be an appetite for shovel-ready stimulus projects, which HFR will be by then. And who knows where stimulus money will be spent - Ontario/Quebec vs Alberta vs..... ?

I am eagerly awaiting the JPO reports, simply to put data on the table towards some of our armchair analysis and speculation.

All we can do is.....wait. (and remain optimistic)

- Paul
 
roger1818 said:
Where would you place a new "station downtown" that solves "the issue of continuing trains through to Quebec?"
Click to expand...
Under de la Gauchetiere. Though the new Forum makes that more difficult. Though wouldn't need to be a new station.
 
Last edited:
Can anyone comment on windows in VIA’s fleet? Fifteen years ago a train I was on in the corridor hit an animal which resulted in a rock hitting my outside window. I think that the fact that the window consisted of many sheets of glass resulted in no shattering and no damage to a 9 year old. Are all windows on VIA’s fleet (present and future) designed like this?
 
Re: whether HFR needs to be in the budget

It does not in all circumstances. If the JPO comes back with a freestanding project, or with a scope that is freestanding plus elements which require a subsidy, the CIB can proceed with the freestanding elements without additional legislation. All that is needed is a Treasury Board approval to transfer funds that are already legislatively authorized, and which Treasury Board has already approved as a program.

Now sure, that means a government can stop HFR. But since the process is not dependent on legislation, it is not dependent on the supply bill for the budget passing in ~June.

Whether this really matters for this spring I doubt it. I suspect to dot Is and cross Ts for the ea and FNMI consultation will take until at least fall as by design those things need to take place if not in the public eye, in a way that activity is visible. TBH they’ve already missed the window to approve the project by cabinet by April. And transferring funds before approval is a good way to complicate any potential legal challenges. (The funding was already approved by Parliament years ago).
 
Darwinkgo said:
Re: whether HFR needs to be in the budget
Click to expand...

If funding is from the CIB one would think it may not be decided within the budget process.... ironically, if the funding were by way of the budget, the whole laborious routing through the CIB would be a bit of a sham.

The bigger question is when the feds intend to declare their commitment to the project One might see this included in a budget document, simply so there is one more paragraph outlining the good things the government is doing. Or it might have its own separately timed announcement and hoopla. I would predict the latter, .....I’m not sure the upcoming budget will bring down the government, so there’s no rush to lay out election goodies yet.

The short term complications that I see are a) as noted, consultation isn’t far enough along yet, and b) the government will likely have to announce its plans to rescue the airlines first and deal with VIA second. I just can’t see backing VIA without addressing the dire state of the airline industry. There are so many laid off airline workers out there.

All of this is political ball gazing, and I’m never much good at that....but I do think the context has less to do with the JPO getting its work done and more with the broader politics. I’m not holding my breath for the budget.

- PAUL
 
Last edited:
crs1026 said:
The short term complications that I see are a) as noted, consultation isn’t far enough along yet, and b) the government will likely have to announce its plans to rescue the airlines first and deal with VIA second. I just can’t see backing VIA without addressing the dire state of the airline industry. There are so many laid off airline workers out there.
Click to expand...
On the upside, airlines will hardly be in a position to publicly lobby against allocating any public money for HFR simply on the grounds that it would undermine market forces...
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top