News   Apr 24, 2024
Latest Iteration of 50 Eglinton West Proposes 46- and 58-Storey Towers
 709     1 
News   Apr 24, 2024
Sustainability Month: Mass Timber Construction Showing Long-Term Economic Benefits
 938     1 
News   Apr 24, 2024
Aspen Ridge Freehold Townhomes at Crosstown in Master-Planned Community
 561     0 

VIA Rail

jelbana said:
Which is why I stated that for public transit, the norm is user fees, I'm not sure why you are bringing up appetite for road tolls in a conversation about being able to generate cash flow from rail transportation infrastructure. No one bats an eyelid at having to pay for using the TTC or any other form of public transportation. The increase in TTC fares is more of a discussion about low income users and not about the average user who pays far less than the equivalent cost in automobile transportation.
Click to expand...
I was discussing the cost of transportation in general, including the cost of VIA tickets.. It's very common that I hear things like "VIA is too expensive, what's the point of taking it?" from people. And expanding that into a discussion about this countries' lack of willingness to pay for transportation, and it's impact on the ability to finance projects, which comes back to the discussion that was occurring regarding the CIB.
 
At an event today, the Minister of Transportation highlight the budget funding for HFR. He specifically, again, referenced "high frequency rail" and noted "dedicated tracks".
 
^ https://www.bramptonbot.com/events/...able-omar-alghabra-minister-of-transport-5844

Further, a HFR question was asked and here is the response by the Minister via an audio file:

VIA HFR Question and Answer.m4a

drive.google.com drive.google.com

Note: you might get this but I downloaded it and it plays.

1619716044820.png
 
Last edited:
Allandale25 said:
^ https://www.bramptonbot.com/events/...able-omar-alghabra-minister-of-transport-5844

Further, a HFR question was asked and here is the response by the Minister via an audio file:

VIA HFR Question and Answer.m4a

drive.google.com drive.google.com

Note: you might get this but I downloaded it and it plays.

View attachment 315978
Click to expand...
Q: "How and when [...] will that be rolled out, is there a plan to move [HFR] forward"
A: "Yes, so let me just say that some of the groundwork has been worked on for the last couple of years, our government has established a joint office between the CIB, Transport Canada and VIA Rail on studying this concept, and they've done a lot of excellent work on preparing the groundwork for this. We first need to get the budget approved, get the funds flowing, and then we're going to start doing the engineering work, we're going to start doing the profile work, so it's going to roll out as quickly as possible. I'm not able to give you yet the milestones or the [toll gates?] because that work is going to be of course important. It's very important for Canadians to understand that again, this is a significant amount of money that we're investing in this, it reflects how serious we are about this project and how valuable we see it will be for passengers and goods. I say goods because even though this is a high-frequency train for passengers, it will remove some of the traffic from the shared railway that currently exists from CN and CP. So this is a good project for everyone, certainly the busiest corridor in the country between Quebec, Ottawa, Montreal, Toronto, so it makes a lot of sense. I'm looking forward to hitting the ground running as quickly as possible."

(disclaimer edited a tiny bit to make it more readable)
 
^ And for context, the typed submitted is below. The moderator paraphrased it a bit.

"Minister, Budget 2021 made important investments in VIA Rail and the High Frequency Rail Project between Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal-[Quebec]. Can you provide more specifics on the $491 million and how/what/where it will be spent over 6 years?"

Also, I wonder what "profile work" means? Is that a rail/civil engineering term of track profile (aka alignment/grading)? cc @crs1026 @reaperexpress @Northern Light @smallspy
 
^"Track profile" is a term, but I suspect the Minister was talking more generally than that, ie the "outline" of the project - station locations, etc.

The reference to "gates" is likely not tolls, but project decision points, which are often referred to as "gates".

- Paul
 
jelbana said:
I agree with this, but don't think it is particular arcane or contrived, it's simply adopting best practices from infrastructure investment that goes on everyday at similar institutions around the world (see the World Bank, European development funds, as well as private sector infrastructure investment funds). I think there is merit to quantifying exactly what needs to be subsidized because it delivers "social" benefit (offsets environmental, congestion or other forms of externalities) and what does not because the cash flow it generates can directly repay the capital invested. I see the CIB as doing exactly that, by clearly separating what is a question of simply raising capital, and what needs subsidy to deliver less objectively measurable benefits (in terms of revenue) for which they can turn to the government for.
Click to expand...

I absolutely agree with making decisions using synthetic ROI style measures that factor in both direct market-driven cost/revenue as well as social value. Especially for infrastructure and public works.

But in practical space, if the $1B investment generates $5M in net farebox revenue annually after direct operating cost, while offsetting the need for $2B in highway investment and avoiding another $1B in environmental and social impacts (measured in some non-revenue based, but perfectly valid metric)....the CIB will be investing perhaps $200M on the business proposition while government is investing $800M on the social benefit proposition. (All hypothetical numbers just to demonstrate the point).

At that scale, the case for the investment is compelling, but applying the accounting too literally to profit/loss or ROI is a bit of a game.

- Paul
 
With transportation infrastructure though in particular, one thing that's become increasingly well established academically is the massive directly economic externality capitalized in the land values near the infrastructure. This has been obvious at a pragmatic level since the days of the CPR, but it is unfortunate that thus far, no government has been able to devise a mechanism that would enable this to directly finance infrastructure expansion. An example that you can directly see on this website is the rapid increase in proposed and constructed development along the Eglinton LRT route. Some of the development is endogenously due to policies that relax zoning and permitting restrictions near transit corridors, but the underlying value of the land has dramatically increased too, not just the amount of built construction.
 
A bit of a diversion, but I'm sitting here with my morning coffee and watching a re-run of the 'Mighty Trains' episode of Australia's 'Ghan', their north-south cross country version of the Canadian. I've often wondered why the Canadian doesn't offer an auto rack service for end-to-end tourists. Logistical challenges for sure .
 
lenaitch said:
A bit of a diversion, but I'm sitting here with my morning coffee and watching a re-run of the 'Mighty Trains' episode of Australia's 'Ghan', their north-south cross country version of the Canadian. I've often wondered why the Canadian doesn't offer an auto rack service for end-to-end tourists. Logistical challenges for sure .
Click to expand...
It’s done elsewhere so I can’t naysay the idea, but I have to think that it would be hard for VIA to offer at a price that’s less than the cost of a rental at the other end. Plus, I bet few travellers actually do a round trip by land.....although driving one way and taking the train the other strikes me as a great travel experience.

If I were VIA I would be worried about the liabilities....unlike Auto Train, which is a single overnight, a picnic cooler left in the trunk of a car for four days could be pretty ripe at the other end. Inevitably, someone will try to hide their cat in a car witha supply of food. Add in the labour costs for loading/unloading, the scratch and dent prevention (and proof thereof), the need for a compound and terminal somewhere close to downtown.....the need to lift/setoff the auto transporter to/from the head end (or sacrifice the view from the Prestige Park Car).... not trying to be negative but I can sure think of logistical challenges

- Paul
 
crs1026 said:
It’s done elsewhere so I can’t naysay the idea, but I have to think that it would be hard for VIA to offer at a price that’s less than the cost of a rental at the other end. Plus, I bet few travellers actually do a round trip by land.....although driving one way and taking the train the other strikes me as a great travel experience.

If I were VIA I would be worried about the liabilities....unlike Auto Train, which is a single overnight, a picnic cooler left in the trunk of a car for four days could be pretty ripe at the other end. Inevitably, someone will try to hide their cat in a car witha supply of food. Add in the labour costs for loading/unloading, the scratch and dent prevention (and proof thereof), the need for a compound and terminal somewhere close to downtown.....the need to lift/setoff the auto transporter to/from the head end (or sacrifice the view from the Prestige Park Car).... not trying to be negative but I can sure think of logistical challenges

- Paul
Click to expand...

I wasn't thinking so much as tootling around at the other end, more of, say, an easterner wanting the 'Canadian experience' then driving back. As it stands, the only realistic option is to fly (which is what my brother did). If a lot of their tourist clientele is foreign, maybe it's not a a big deal.

The Australian 'Ghan' is three days. For sure there would be logistical issues. The passenger would have to get their vehicle to Willowbrook or wherever.
 
CN used to offer the service from Toronto to Edmonton back in the early 1970s.

It was a flop however. It regularly only required 1 autorack per train and sometimes not even. So although 10 cars were modified for the service, they regularly sat around not doing much.

At the time the logistics were much easier - CN had facilities that allowed them to load and unload the autoracks quite close to the respective stations. Today, however....it would be much harder to figure that out. Would VIA be responsible for busing people from the stations to the loading ramps?

Dan
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top