VIA Rail

[roger1818]

That was the easy part - at least before they build the new Forum. The idea was that you'd be under the road, and Place du Canada and tunnel under the existing Windsor station and existing platforms, with a portal near Lucien L'allier.

The problem is, you can't just wave a magic wand and pretend the Bell Centre was never built. Building under it likely won't be so easy and so now you need to get around it, unless you are planning on waiting for the Bell Centre to be replaced.

 

[Urban Sky]

The problem is, you can't just wave a magic wand and pretend the Bell Centre was never built. Building under it likely won't be so easy and so now you need to get around it, unless you are planning on waiting for the Bell Centre to be replaced.

The whole discussion about building a second station anywhere in downtown Montreal is a fantasy discussion at this point, as there is neither the need nor the political will to fund and build such a station within any foreseeable timeframe...

 

[KevinT]

Every time you push a VIA fantasy to a new thread in order to keep this one's growth in check, a new one rears its ugly head. :-(

 

[2transpo]

Every time you push a VIA fantasy to a new thread in order to keep this one's growth in check, a new one rears its ugly head. :-(

I wonder if it might be wise to put HFR in its own thread. It doesn't really seem to be more than a fantasy.

 

[Urban Sky]

Every time you push a VIA fantasy to a new thread in order to keep this one's growth in check, a new one rears its ugly head. :-(

At least this was a VIA fantasy and thus less off-topic than discussions about camping in the Algonquin Park, the effect of fast and frequent rail service on property prices and recent developments in battery technology. However, if I’m going to open another thread it would most probably be called “Fantasy rail discussions” and will hopefully be able to absorb most digressions of Micheal and others in this thread...

I wonder if it might be wise to put HFR in its own thread.

Okay, that would be the opposite approach: call it “VIA Rail: Corridor services and HFR” and keep this thread for all the unfocussed digressions. That was the only way on Skyscraper Page to get rid of the fore-mentioned spammer, as he thankfully doesn’t participate in threads I’ve created.


***


I don’t think this forum supports polls, but what do the people here think: outsource the boring discussions or spin-off the interesting ones?

 

[sacred]

At least this was a VIA fantasy and thus more on topic than discussions about camping in the Algonquin Park, the effect of fast and frequent rail service on property prices and recent developments in battery technology. However, if I’m going to open another thread it would definitely be be called “Fantasy rail discussions” and will hopefully be able to absorb most digressions of Micheal in this thread...


Okay, that would be the opposite approach: call it “VIA Rail: Corridor services and HFR” and keep this thread for all the unfocussed digressions. That was the only way on Skyscraper Page to get rid of the fore-mentioned spammer, as he thankfully doesn’t participate in threads I’ve created.


***


I don’t think this forum supports polls, but what do the people here think: outsource the boring discussions or spin-off the interesting ones?

Out source the boring stuff like hypothetical new stations. It’s ridiculous to say that HFR is a “fantasy” until it’s removed from VIA’s website. This thread should be for discussion of things VIA does, has the ability to do, or has mentioned doing, in my opinion.

 

[Allandale25]

^ In addition to being on VIA's website, it has also been covered by the media. Further, it was mentioned at a conference by the VIA CEO in November 2020. So I'm going to continue to post about VIA's HFR efforts here.

 

[lenaitch]

At least this was a VIA fantasy and thus more on topic than discussions about camping in the Algonquin Park, the effect of fast and frequent rail service on property prices and recent developments in battery technology. However, if I’m going to open another thread it would most probably be called “Fantasy rail discussions” and will hopefully be able to absorb most digressions of Micheal in this thread...


Okay, that would be the opposite approach: call it “VIA Rail: Corridor services and HFR” and keep this thread for all the unfocussed digressions. That was the only way on Skyscraper Page to get rid of the fore-mentioned spammer, as he thankfully doesn’t participate in threads I’ve created.


***


I don’t think this forum supports polls, but what do the people here think: outsource the boring discussions or spin-off the interesting ones?

But m-o-o-o-m, he started it.

Seriously fair point. It's easy to get caught up.

 

[crs1026]

^ I’m as guilty as anyone of digressing, and don’t set out to be annoying, but some of the recent desire for thread-splitting seems to be aimed at just stifling people who express (or don’t move on from) unpopular views that people are tired of rebutting. Splitting the thread seems like overkill when maybe sometimes we just have to agree to disagree. Or check out for a couple pages.

There are topics that can easily be discredited as Fantasy but that are more meaningful in the context of VIA than on their own. Calgary-Edmonton HFR is a good example - so far it’s only a fantasy, but a more realistic one than some, has been studied in some detail, and like the real-world variables that may drive or prevent an investment decision closely parallel HFR..

Is reequipping the long distance VIA fleet a fantasy discussion ?

If the discussion is limited to only things that are currently in VIA’s business plan or VIA’s active requests of government, that’s pretty narrow. Especially since government and public policy place such harsh limits on what VIA can attempt.

I value this forum because, compared to others on the interweb, it has way more insight into the breadth of actual real world considerations than many rail enthusiast discussions, where people just want to see stuff painted differently or just want someone to bring back the Cannonball. The breadth of discussion is a strength, sometimes it just goes awry.

- Paul

 

[micheal_can]

I look at this forum as 2 things. Via Rail and Toronto. If the discussion has to do with both of them, or will implicate both of them, then it should be fair game.

HFR, electrification and new rolling stock for the Corridor makes sense.

But, some want to forget that Union Station serves more than just the Corridor for Via. We also have the Maple Leaf and the Canadian. That means discussing new or replacement or additional rolling stock for the Canadian and potentially keeping the current 2 trains that do not go to Toronto, once the return of the Full Canadian is sort of in line with it too.

A train to Algonquin PP from Toronto? Sounds like a potential discussion to as the former Northlander service used to be Northland under Via.

HSR within the Corridor also is fair game. Comparing it to the HSR study in AB is a good discussion too.

The problem might be that some do not want to discuss anything outside of existing or planned stuff within Via Rail. Some of us want better out of Via Rail, while others would like to see it disappear outside the Corridor.

 

[Darwinkgo]

The bigger question is when the feds intend to declare their commitment to the project

The HFR booster community is about to get a taste of what seemed to make pro-pipeline people so mad. As the regulator you have to play coy. Even if you really want to say yes. Perhaps even more so.

The short term complications that I see are a) as noted, consultation isn’t far enough along yet

and until they’re completed to satisfaction cabinet isn’t going to approve an EA. And submitting the EA as part of the JPO work to the Minister(s) will start a ticking clock to decision.

We could see a roundabout way to allocate more funding to a bucket which HFR could access without attaching it to specific projects.

 

[SFO-YYZ]

Usually not a fan of the Post, but this is a fairly decent interview with Ehren Cory from a week ago (CEO of Canada Infrastructure Bank) on the recent policy restructuring at CIB, and how the CIB, going forward, be able to operate with more autonomy and shorten investment decision timelines. VIA Rail and HFR weren't mentioned explicitly in the interview, but several memorable quotes that I think will likely apply to VIA's future projects in regards to CIB:

Ehren Cory, who was named chief executive officer late last year, says the bank will be announcing new investments on “a very regular basis” in 2021 as part of Ottawa’s economic stimulus efforts.

One senior government official confirmed to the National Post that the federal government will now approve CIB investments on a broader sectoral level rather than project-by-project.

This is a very interesting reform (and I think also the right reform), because that means the federal government will no longer be directly making investment decisions on individual projects like the HFR (should the HFR be funded by CIB), therefore giving CIB more autonomy to make its own decisions and timelines that are not tied to federal budget cycles.

“We do see hard dollars going out the door, the velocity of deals going up, and those [deals] leading directly to investment,” he said (CEO of CIB)

He also urged patience from the public on what some perceive as a tardiness in approving major projects, saying the developments happen on long timelines that can’t easily be trimmed down.

Although HFR was not mentioned, I think the new policy direction at CIB (announced last Oct 2020) is a step in the right direction, especially when CIB will be involved in funding major VIA-related projects. Although we don't know if CIB will eventually be involved in the actual funding of HFR, we do know that the $71 million JPO is being funded by the CIB, so I do see a dominant CIB role in HFR going forward - and if the CIB is now able to make its own investment decisions without prior approval from the cabinet, as indicated by Ehren Cory, all the better.

New head of Canada Infrastructure Bank promises more investments after Ottawa loosens reins

Cory's comments come after the CIB underwent a policy change late last year that eliminated a requirement for the bank to secure approval directly from Finance Cana…

nationalpost.com

 

[Darwinkgo]

The newer projects the CIB is looking at are much smaller at minimum $50 million instead of needing to clock in at at least $500 million.

and once again, no approval is needed tied to budget cycles. It is treasury board approvals to transfer money into CIB. The legislative approvals happened years ago.

The HFR is frankly too large to approve as within a bucket. You should not read those statements as applying to HFR.

Where this is much better for VIA isn’t HFR. It is smaller projects which might self support - fleet renewal for long distance trains? Contributing to grade separations and rail capacity upgrades and capabilities in useful places (sidings anyone) along side the freight railways perhaps?

 

[robmausser]

^ I’m as guilty as anyone of digressing, and don’t set out to be annoying, but some of the recent desire for thread-splitting seems to be aimed at just stifling people who express (or don’t move on from) unpopular views that people are tired of rebutting. Splitting the thread seems like overkill when maybe sometimes we just have to agree to disagree. Or check out for a couple pages.

Totally agree. You can really tell who the engineering types are on here; they see this less as a forum for debate and discussion and digression and more as a place where they think its their podium to express their "facts".

The only place for that is the news section of the site, this is a forum.

 

[2transpo]

I feel as if we are grasping at straws here. Looking for hints at upcoming funding and approval where there are none. HFR is a tool used by the current government to have a commitment. Commitments look good. Commitments are more politically useful than actually following through with something because projects are messy, go overbudget and run late. If we have another election in 2021 which seems likely, the can will be kicked further down the road. If the Conservatives win, they will kill the project to appeal to special interests in automotive and airlines as well as their base in rural and western Canada.

HFR is and always has been political theatre. While VIA wants to see the project complete, the government has no intention to fund it. There is no realistic path to see it constructed which is why it would better fit in a fantasy thread.